Page:Gandhi - Young India, Viking Press, 1924-1926.pdf/741

Rh Ram Mohun Rai’s name. That was in connection with Western education. This was on the Cuttack’s sands now four years ago. What I do remember having said was that it was possible to attain highest culture without Western education. And when some one mentioned Ram Mohun Rai, I remember having said that he was a pygmy compared to the unknown authors say of the Upanishads. This is altogether different from looking upon Ram Mohun Rai as a pygmy. I do not think meanly of Tennyson if I say that he was a pygmy before Milton or Shakespeare. I claim that I enhance the greatness of both. If I adore the Poet as he knows, I do in spite of differences between us. I am not likely to disparage the greatness of the man who made the great reform movement of Bengal possible and of which the Poet is one of the finest of fruits.

“We did not conquer India for the benefit of the Indians. I know it is said at missionary mectings that we conquered India. We conquered India to raise the level of the Indians. That is cant. We conquered India as the outlet for the goods of Great Britain. We conquered India by the sword and by the sword we should hold it. (“Shame.”) Call shame if you like. I am stating facts. I am interested in missionary work in India and have done much work of that kind, but I am not such a hypocrite as to say we hold India for the Indians. We hold it as the finest outlet for British goods in general, and for Lancashire cotton goods in particular.”

This is reported to have been said by Sir William Joynson-Hicks. But he is not the first minister to have reminded us of our serfdom. Why should truth be at all unpalatable? It must do us good to know ourselves as we are—destined to be ‘hewers of wood and drawers of water’ for the benefit of whom-