Macaulay's Minute on Education, February 2, 1835
Minute by the Hon'ble T. B. Macaulay, dated the 2nd February 1835.
As it seems to be the opinion of some of the gentlemen who compose the Committee
of Public Instruction that the course which they have hitherto pursued was strictly
prescribed by the British Parliament in 1813 and as, if that opinion be correct, a
legislative act will be necessary to warrant a change, I have thought it right to refrain
from taking any part in the preparation of the adverse statements which are now before
us, and to reserve what I had to say on the subject till it should come before me as a
Member of the Council of India.
It does not appear to me that the Act of Parliament can by any art of contraction be
made to bear the meaning which has been assigned to it. It contains nothing about the
particular languages or sciences which are to be studied. A sum is set apart "for the
revival and promotion of literature, and the encouragement of the learned natives of
India, and for the introduction and promotion of a knowledge of the sciences among the
inhabitants of the British territories." It is argued, or rather taken for granted, that by
literature the Parliament can have meant only Arabic and Sanscrit literature; that they
never would have given the honourable appellation of "a learned native" to a native who
was familiar with the poetry of Milton, the metaphysics of Locke, and the physics of
Newton; but that they meant to designate by that name only such persons as might have
studied in the sacred books of the Hindoos all the uses of cusa-grass, and all the mysteries
of absorption into the Deity. This does not appear to be a very satisfactory interpretation.
To take a parallel case: Suppose that the Pacha of Egypt, a country once superior in
knowledge to the nations of Europe, but now sunk far below them, were to appropriate a
sum for the purpose "of reviving and promoting literature, and encouraging learned
natives of Egypt," would any body infer that he meant the youth of his Pachalik to give
years to the study of hieroglyphics, to search into all the doctrines disguised under the
fable of Osiris, and to ascertain with all possible accuracy the ritual with which cats and
onions were anciently adored? Would he be justly charged with inconsistency if, instead
of employing his young subjects in deciphering obelisks, he were to order them to be
instructed in the English and French languages, and in all the sciences to which those
languages are the chief keys?
The words on which the supporters of the old system rely do not bear them out, and
other words follow which seem to be quite decisive on the other side. This lakh of rupees
is set apart not only for "reviving literature in India," the phrase on which their whole
interpretation is founded, but also "for the introduction and promotion of a knowledge of
the sciences among the inhabitants of the British territories"-words which are alone
sufficient to authorize all the changes for which I contend.
If the Council agree in my construction no legislative act will be necessary. If they
differ from me, I will propose a short act rescinding that I clause of the Charter of 1813
from which the difficulty arises.
, The argument which I have been considering affects only the form of proceeding.
But the admirers of the oriental system of education have used another argument, which,
if we admit it to be valid, is decisive against all change. They conceive that the public
faith is pledged to the present system, and that to alter the appropriation of any of the
funds which have hitherto been spent in encouraging the study of Arabic and Sanscrit
would be downright spoliation. It is not easy to understand by what process of reasoning
they can have arrived at this conclusion. The grants which are made from the public purse
for the encouragement of literature differ in no respect from the grants which are made
from the same purse for other objects of real or supposed utility. We found a sanitarium
on a spot which we suppose to be healthy. Do we thereby pledge ourselves to keep a
sanitarium there if the result should not answer our expectations? We commence the
erection of a pier. Is it a violation of the public faith to stop the works, if we afterwards
see reason to believe that the building will be useless? The rights of property are
undoubtedly sacred. But nothing endangers those rights so much as the practice, now
unhappily too common, of attributing them to things to which they do not belong. Those
who would impart to abuses the sanctity of property are in truth imparting to the
institution of property the unpopularity and the fragility of abuses. If the Government has
given to any person a formal assurance-nay, if the Government has excited in any
person's mind a reasonable expectation-that he shall receive a certain income as a teacher
or a learner of Sanscrit or Arabic, I would respect that person's pecuniary interests. I
would rather err on the side of liberality to individuals than suffer the public faith to be
called in question. But to talk of a Government pledging itself to teach certain languages
and certain sciences, though those languages may become useless, though those sciences
may be exploded, seems to me quite unmeaning. There is not a single word in any public
instrument from which it can be inferred that the Indian Government ever intended to
give any pledge on this subject, or ever considered the destination of these funds as
unalterably fixed. But, had it been otherwise, I should have denied the competence of our
predecessors to bind us by any pledge on such a subject. Suppose that a Government had
in the last century enacted in the most solemn manner that all its subjects should, to the
end of time, be inoculated for the small-pox, would that Government be bound to persist
in the practice after Jenner's discovery? These promises of which nobody claims the
performance, and from which nobody can grant a release, these vested rights which vest
in nobody, this property without proprietors, this robbery which makes nobody poorer,
may be comprehended by persons of higher faculties than mine. I consider this plea
merely as a set form of words, regularly used both in England and in India, in defence of
every abuse for which no other plea can be set up.
I hold this lakh of rupees to be quite at the disposal of the Governor-General in
Council for the purpose of promoting learning in India in any way which may be thought
most advisable. I hold his Lordship to be quite as free to direct that it shall no longer be
employed in encouraging Arabic and Sanscrit, as he is to direct that the reward for killing
tigers in Mysore shall be diminished, or that no more public money shall be expended on
the chaunting at the cathedral.
We now come to the gist of the matter. We have a fund to be employed as
Government shall direct for the intellectual improvement of the people of this country.
The simple question is, what is the most useful way of employing it?
Minute by the Hon'ble T. B. Macaulay, dated the 2nd February 1835.
As it seems to be the opinion of some of the gentlemen who compose the Committee
of Public Instruction that the course which they have hitherto pursued was strictly
prescribed by the British Parliament in 1813 and as, if that opinion be correct, a
legislative act will be necessary to warrant a change, I have thought it right to refrain
from taking any part in the preparation of the adverse statements which are now before
us, and to reserve what I had to say on the subject till it should come before me as a
Member of the Council of India.
It does not appear to me that the Act of Parliament can by any art of contraction be
made to bear the meaning which has been assigned to it. It contains nothing about the
particular languages or sciences which are to be studied. A sum is set apart "for the
revival and promotion of literature, and the encouragement of the learned natives of
India, and for the introduction and promotion of a knowledge of the sciences among the
inhabitants of the British territories." It is argued, or rather taken for granted, that by
literature the Parliament can have meant only Arabic and Sanscrit literature; that they
never would have given the honourable appellation of "a learned native" to a native who
was familiar with the poetry of Milton, the metaphysics of Locke, and the physics of
Newton; but that they meant to designate by that name only such persons as might have
studied in the sacred books of the Hindoos all the uses of cusa-grass, and all the mysteries
of absorption into the Deity. This does not appear to be a very satisfactory interpretation.
To take a parallel case: Suppose that the Pacha of Egypt, a country once superior in
knowledge to the nations of Europe, but now sunk far below them, were to appropriate a
sum for the purpose "of reviving and promoting literature, and encouraging learned
natives of Egypt," would any body infer that he meant the youth of his Pachalik to give
years to the study of hieroglyphics, to search into all the doctrines disguised under the
fable of Osiris, and to ascertain with all possible accuracy the ritual with which cats and
onions were anciently adored? Would he be justly charged with inconsistency if, instead
of employing his young subjects in deciphering obelisks, he were to order them to be
instructed in the English and French languages, and in all the sciences to which those
languages are the chief keys?
The words on which the supporters of the old system rely do not bear them out, and
other words follow which seem to be quite decisive on the other side. This lakh of rupees
is set apart not only for "reviving literature in India," the phrase on which their whole
interpretation is founded, but also "for the introduction and promotion of a knowledge of
the sciences among the inhabitants of the British territories"-words which are alone
sufficient to authorize all the changes for which I contend.
If the Council agree in my construction no legislative act will be necessary. If they
differ from me, I will propose a short act rescinding that I clause of the Charter of 1813
from which the difficulty arises.
, The argument which I have been considering affects only the form of proceeding.
But the admirers of the oriental system of education have used another argument, which,
if we admit it to be valid, is decisive against all change. They conceive that the public
faith is pledged to the present system, and that to alter the appropriation of any of the
funds which have hitherto been spent in encouraging the study of Arabic and Sanscrit
would be downright spoliation. It is not easy to understand by what process of reasoning
they can have arrived at this conclusion. The grants which are made from the public purse
for the encouragement of literature differ in no respect from the grants which are made
from the same purse for other objects of real or supposed utility. We found a sanitarium
on a spot which we suppose to be healthy. Do we thereby pledge ourselves to keep a
sanitarium there if the result should not answer our expectations? We commence the
erection of a pier. Is it a violation of the public faith to stop the works, if we afterwards
see reason to believe that the building will be useless? The rights of property are
undoubtedly sacred. But nothing endangers those rights so much as the practice, now
unhappily too common, of attributing them to things to which they do not belong. Those
who would impart to abuses the sanctity of property are in truth imparting to the
institution of property the unpopularity and the fragility of abuses. If the Government has
given to any person a formal assurance-nay, if the Government has excited in any
person's mind a reasonable expectation-that he shall receive a certain income as a teacher
or a learner of Sanscrit or Arabic, I would respect that person's pecuniary interests. I
would rather err on the side of liberality to individuals than suffer the public faith to be
called in question. But to talk of a Government pledging itself to teach certain languages
and certain sciences, though those languages may become useless, though those sciences
may be exploded, seems to me quite unmeaning. There is not a single word in any public
instrument from which it can be inferred that the Indian Government ever intended to
give any pledge on this subject, or ever considered the destination of these funds as
unalterably fixed. But, had it been otherwise, I should have denied the competence of our
predecessors to bind us by any pledge on such a subject. Suppose that a Government had
in the last century enacted in the most solemn manner that all its subjects should, to the
end of time, be inoculated for the small-pox, would that Government be bound to persist
in the practice after Jenner's discovery? These promises of which nobody claims the
performance, and from which nobody can grant a release, these vested rights which vest
in nobody, this property without proprietors, this robbery which makes nobody poorer,
may be comprehended by persons of higher faculties than mine. I consider this plea
merely as a set form of words, regularly used both in England and in India, in defence of
every abuse for which no other plea can be set up.
I hold this lakh of rupees to be quite at the disposal of the Governor-General in
Council for the purpose of promoting learning in India in any way which may be thought
most advisable. I hold his Lordship to be quite as free to direct that it shall no longer be
employed in encouraging Arabic and Sanscrit, as he is to direct that the reward for killing
tigers in Mysore shall be diminished, or that no more public money shall be expended on
the chaunting at the cathedral.
We now come to the gist of the matter. We have a fund to be employed as
Government shall direct for the intellectual improvement of the people of this country.
The simple question is, what is the most useful way of employing it?
