# Minutes on Education In India, Written in the Years 1835, 1836 and 1837/Education in India

Education in India.
The Indian career of Lord Macaulay extends from the close of 1834 to the beginning of 1838. During these years he was the means of reforming the education, and simplifying the law of the land. Few men have set their stamp so broadly and deeply on the history of a nation’s progress. By his educational reforms, the whole course of instruction was directed into new channels, which more or less it still occupies. His Penal Code, after lying under consideration for nearly twenty-four years, has recently become the law of India. Seldom, does it fall to one man to be at once the chief Educator and the chief Lawgiver of a vast nation. Besides all this, his latest efforts in establishing the Civil Service Competitive Examination for India have contributed powerfully to stimulate native industry and ability by opening to young men of ambition a prospect of sharing in the government of their country. True it is, that no native student has yet gained a footing in the Civil Service, but the feeling that such a position is possible, and can be attained by merit, has exercised much influence, and will exercise more. Already two young Hindoos of high connexions have started for England, and others are eager to follow them. The restrictions which caste lays on travelling are felt by Hindoos of education with intense and increasing bitterness. It is highly probable that the Competitive Examination will bring to a head in Bengal some grand social outburst against caste, and thus Macaulay’s name may become connected with one of the greatest benefits this country can receive—the overthrow of caste.
​The first attempt for the enlightenment of the natives of India in the science and literature of Europe was the establishment in 1816 of the Hindu College. This celebrated institution owes its origin to the exertions of Sir Edward Hyde East, David Hare, and Raja Rammohun Roy. When the native community of Calcutta were roused to consider the plan for the establishment of a Maha Bidyálaya (i.e. great seat of learning) as the Hindu College was originally termed, it was found that many of the orthodox Hindus held aloof from the plan, and refused to cooperate in any movement with Raja Rammohun Roy. Rammohun Roy accordingly, with a magnanimity worthy of his noble character, retired from the management of the proposed institution. Self-denial such as this is almost unknown in Calcutta, for he was the earliest advocate of the establishment of the College, and was eminently fitted by the gifts of nature, by his high position, wise discretion, deep learning, and earnest patriotism, to develop and carry out his own project. He was willing nevertheless to be laid aside, if by suffering rather than by acting he could benefit his country.
The Hindu College was for many years under native management. In 1823, the funds were so low that application was made to Government for aid, which was liberally conceded. The capital of the College moreover was reduced to Rupees 21,000, by the failure in 1827 of Baretto’s house in which it was deposited. The income accordingly fell to less than Rs. 100 a month. Government supplemented the rest with ever increasing liberality, but till 1841, when its contribution was Rs. 30,000 a year, took but little share in the management. The Hindu College therefore is seldom mentioned in the controversies which raged in the Committee of Public Instruction concerning the management of Government schools.
This Committee was established in 1823 by the Governor-General in Council, and in the instructions addressed to its members, the object of their appointment is stated to be the “considering and from time to time submitting to Government the suggestion of such measures as it may appear expedient to adopt with a view to the better instruction of the people, to the introduction of useful knowledge, including the sciences and arts of Europe, and to the improvement of their moral character.”
The institutions placed under its charge were the Arabic College at Calcutta, and the Sanscrit College at Benares. The Calcutta College was established in 1,781 by Warren Hastings, who at his own expense supplied a school house. Government gave lands yielding about Rs. 30,000 a year, and designed the ​college for instruction in the principles and practice of Mahomedan law. The Benares College was projected by Mr. Jonathan Duncan, the Resident at that city, in 1791, with a view to “endear our Government to the native Hindus, by our exceeding in our attention to them and their systems the care ever shown by their own native princes.” Lord Cornwallis in 1791 assigned for the support of the College, Rupees 14,000 a year, afterwards increased to Rupees 20,000.
On their foundation the Colleges at Calcutta and Benares were placed under native management, and abuses of the grossest kind soon became universal. Mr. Lushington says in his work on the Charities of Calcutta that “The Madrussa was almost useless for the purposes of education;” and that “its ample resources were dissipated among the superior and subordinate drones of the establishment.” In 1820, Dr. Lumsden was appointed Secretary and, under his charge, abuses were checked and many reforms in discipline and study were introduced.
After the departure of Mr. Duncan, the early years of the Benares College were remarkable only for an utter absence of instruction and order. Gigantic misappropriations of funds were made by the first Rector, styled by the wonderful name of Sero Shastri Gooroo Tarkalankar Cashinath Pundit Juder Bedea Behadur. Mr. Brooke, the Governor-General’s Agent suggested improvements which were with some amendments carried out by Mr. W. W. Bird in 1812. In 1820, Captain Fell was appointed Secretary and Superintendent, and under him the College attained the reputation for Sanscrit learning that it has since maintained.
With these two institutions the General Committee of Public Instruction commenced its labours. The Sanscrit College at Calcutta was opened by it in 1824; the Delhi College was opened in 1825, for instruction in Arabic, Persian and Sanscrit. The Allahabad School was opened in 1884, and encouragement was given to private Schools at Bhagulpore, Sagar, Midnapore, &c.
In 1834, the operations of the Committee were brought to a stand by an irreconcileable difference of opinion as to the principles on which Government support to education should be administered. Half of the Committee called the “Orientalists” were for the continuation of the old system of stipends tenable for twelve or fifteen years to students of Arabic and Sanscrit, and for liberal expenditure on the publication of works in those language. The other half called the a “Anglicists” desired to reduce the expenditure on stipends held by “lazy and stupid school boys of 30 and 35 years of age,” ​and to cut down the sums lavished on Sanscrit and Arabic printing. At this juncture, Government requested the Committee to prepare a scheme of instruction for a College at Agra. The Committee were utterly unable to agree on any plan. Five members were in favour of Arabic, Persian, and Sanscrit learning, and five in favour of English and the Vernacular, with just so much of the Oriental learned languages as would be necessary to satisfy local prejudices.
The Orientalist party consisted of The Hon’ble H. Shakespear, Messrs. H. Thoby Prinsep, James Prinsep, W. H. Macnaghten, and T. C. C. Sutherland, the Secretary of the Committee. The Anglicists were Messrs. Bird, Saunders, Bushby, Trevelyan, and J. R. Colvin.
Of this Committee, Sir W. H. Macnaghten became Envoy in Afghanistan and was assassinated there, and the Hon’ble J. R. Colvin died during the mutinies at Agra. James Prinsep is immortalized by his Sanscrit discoveries, and Sir Charles Trevelyan still remains alive, beloved and honored. He deserved, though he did not obtain, for his zealous educational labours in Bengal, the love he has won for his Government at Madras.
Over this Committee, Macaulay on his arrival in India was appointed President, but he declined to take an active part in its proceedings, till the decision of the Supreme Government should be given on the question at issue. The letters of the two parties in the Committee setting forth at great length their opinions, and bearing date the 21st and 22nd January, 1835, came before Macaulay in his capacity of Legislative Member of the Supreme Council, and on them he wrote his minute of the 2nd February, which, was followed on the 7th March by Lord Bentinck’s decision of the case in favour of the English language. Soon after this decision many new Members were added to the Committee, among whom may he mentioned Sir Edward Ryan, Mr. Boss D. Mangles, Mr. C. H. Cameron, Colonel James Young, Baboo, now Raja Radha Kant Deb, Baboo Russomoy Dutt, Mr. C. W. Smith, Captain, now General Sir J. R. H. Birch, and Dr. Grant. Sir Benjamin Malkin was added at a later time.
​Should some of the opinions of Macaulay concerning expenditure appear unnecessarily harsh and niggardly, it must be remembered that the sum available for English education was but the pittance that could be saved by reductions in the Oriental assignments, and that it was right for him to spend with strict frugality, what was gained at the cost of many painful struggles.
It is often said that if a person cannot write five lines of English without blots and corrections, he must be a very poor scholar indeed. Now, there is no doubt that neatness and accuracy are highly desirable, and that the clear and beautiful writing and the finished style of Lord Dalhousie and of Lord Canning indicate a wonderful power in the use of language. Yet it is a great mistake to imagine that the absence of a habit of writing without corrections is a sure mark of inferiority. Scarcely five consecutive lines, in any of Macaulay’s minutes will be found unmarked by blots or corrections. He himself in a minute, dated 3rd November, 1835, says, “After blotting a good deal of paper I can recommend nothing but a reference to the Governor-General in Council.” No member of the Committee of Public Instruction in 1835, wrote so large and uneven a hand as he, and my copyist was always able instantly to single out his writing by the multiplicity of corrections and blots which mark the page. These corrections are now exceedingly valuable, more valuable than the minutes to which they belong. They are themselves a study, and well deserve a diligent examination. When the first master of the English language corrects his own composition, which appeared faultless before, the correction must be based on the highest rules of criticism.
The great minute of the 2nd February, combines in a small compass the opinions which are expressed in nearly the same words through a score or two of detached remarks in the records. This minute was published in England in 1838, but is difficult to obtain in India. I could not find it in any one of the four great Libraries of Calcutta, in the Public Library, nor in the Libraries of St. Paul’s Cathedral, of the Asiatic Society, and of the Presidency College. Mr. Arbuthnot, the Director of Public Instruction in Madras, has conferred an obligation on all interested in the preservation of valuable papers by including it in one of his Reports. To rescue it from the oblivion into which it has fallen in Bengal, I add it to these unpublished minutes.
Macaulay's unpublished educational minutes are scattered among some twenty volumes of the records of the General Committee. Four of these volumes are now lost. Some of the ​books were circulated among the fourteen or fifteen members of the Committee, others were sent only to Sub-committees, containing five or six members. There were Sub-committees on finance, on books, on the selection of schoolmasters, on the Medical College, and on the Hooghly College. Of the books which went the round of the whole Committee, two were reserved for particular subjects, one marked G. was for the selection and printing of books, and another marked I. for Medical College questions. The other books were kept in constant circulation, and as they came back to the Secretary, were started afresh with precis of new topics for discussion. The same matter is consequently discussed at its different stages in different books. The General Committee seldom met. All business was transacted by the books. Several of the Members urged their opinions with greater warmth and earnestness than is now customary in official correspondence. Lord Auckland in his elaborate educational minute of the 24th November, 1839, remarks concerning their discussions, “Unhappily I have found violent differences existing upon the subject of education, and it was for a time (now I trust past or fast passing away,) a watchword for violent dissension and in some measure of personal feelings. I judged it best, under these circumstances, to abstain from what might have led me into unprofitable controversy, and to allow time and experience to act with their usual healing and enlightening influence upon general opinion.”