John Morley

It must also be borne in mind that the ordinary man or lad in India has not too much courage, and that the loyal are terrorised by the ruthless extremists.

There is no fear of anything in the nature of a rising, but if murders continue, a general panic may arise and greatly increase the danger of the situation.

There are growing indications that the native population itself is alarmed, and that we shall have the strong support of native public opinion.

The view of important persons in the Government of India is that in substance the position of our Government in India is as sound and as well-founded as it has ever been.

Quite early after my coming to the India Office, pressure was put on me to repeal the Regulation of 1818, under which men are now being summarily detained without trial and without charge, and without intention to try or to charge.

But I said to myself then, and I say now, that I decline to take out of the hands of the Government of India any weapon that they have got, in circumstances so formidable, so obscure, and so impenetrable as are the circumstances that…

One is to regard all Indian matters, Indian procedure and Indian policy, as if it were Great Britain or Ireland, and to insist that all the robes and apparel that suit Great Britain or Ireland must necessarily suit India.

The other is to think that all you have got to do is what I see suggested, to my amazement, in English print--to blow a certain number of men from guns, and then your business will be done.

Either of these paths of folly leads to as great disaster as the other.

I do not ignore, and I do not believe that Lord Lansdowne opposite, or anyone else can ignore, the frightful risks involved in transferring in any form or degree what should be the ordinary power under the law, to arbitrary personal…

Again, I do not for an instant forget, and I hope those who so loudly applaud legislation of this kind do not forget, the tremendous price that you pay for all operations of this sort in the reaction and the excitement that they provoke.

But there are situations in which a responsible Government is compelled to run these risks and to pay this possible price, however high it may appear to be.

It is like war, a hateful thing, from which, however, some of the most ardent lovers of peace, and some of those rulers of the world whose names the most ardent lovers of peace most honour and revere--it is one of the things from which…

You must protect peaceful and harmless people, both Indian and European, from the blood-stained havoc of anarchic conspiracy.

We deplore the necessity, but we are bound to face the facts.

I myself recognise this necessity with infinite regret, and with something, perhaps, rather deeper than regret.

I am sick of all the retrograde commonplaces about the weakness of concession to violence and so on.

Reforms that we have publicly announced, adopted, and worked out for more than two years--how is it a concession to violence, to persist in those reforms?

I do not agree that any organised society has ever subsisted upon either of those principles, or that brutality is always present as a fundamental postulate in the relations between rulers and ruled.

Which would be the more flagrant sign of weakness--to go steadily on with your policy of reform in spite of bombs, or to let yourself openly be forced by bombs and murder clubs to drop your policy?

For a man holding such a position to make such a statement at that moment, is all the corroboration that we need for persisting in our policy of reform.

We are trying an experiment never yet tried in the world--maintaining a foreign dominion by means of a native army; and teaching that army, through a free Press, that they ought to expel us, and deliver their country.

A tremendous revolution may overtake us, originating in a free Press.

Supposing you abolish freedom of the Press or suspend it, that will not end the business.

I would use my best endeavours to make these States independent in matters of administration.