attacked; and that if the peace of India was to be safeguarded from internal commotion and foreign aggression, the army must be made strong enough to overawe enemies either within or without its boundaries. They accordingly advocated large increases in the permanent British Army stationed in the country; the formation of a powerful Navy; a wholesale reduction of the Native Army, which was best fitted, they argued, for police duties; an entire rearmament of batteries, forts, and fortified positions; and a complete remodelling of all civil and military institutions.
Another school of experts would have none of these things. We should hold India, they contended, not by the sword, but by winning the love and affection of conquered races, and by inviting all classes to take a larger share in the civil and military government of the country. There was much to be said in favour of both schools. The arguments of each were submitted to the verdict of public opinion with considerable ability and earnestness ; and were in due course recorded in those ponderous Blue Books and voluminous reports which are the delight of Governments and Royal Commissions of the present century.
To make a proper use of the opportunity was more difficult than to win the battle. For there was an East India Company to dispose of; a Company which boldly asserted that, as a governing body, it was 'not only one of the purest in intention, but one of the most beneficent in act ever known among mankind.'
