^{page 66 note 1} Parl. Papers, 1831–2, ix, 358, 492, 497; xii, 449–450; 1852–3, xxxiii, 156. Although anxious to obtain a supply of public servants, the home authorities did not desire the general replacement of Oriental by Western education. Whilst it was expected to take steps to ensure an adequate supply of Indians capable of occupying positions in the Company's service, the Government of Bengal was instructed also to give encouragement to Oriental scholarship and to regard with solicitude the feelings and traditions of the people. (Parl. Papers, 1831–2, ix, 488.)

^{page 66 note 2} Cambridge History of India, vi, 10. Though all members of the Committee wished to encourage both Oriental and English education, a marked difference in emphasis became increasingly discernible. The “Orientalists” acknowledged the value of the influences which could be introduced into Indian society only by means of education in the English language, but they expected Western influences to contribute to the development of what would remain essentially Oriental cultures. They recognized also the need for English-speaking Indians for public employment. The “English” school, on the other hand, came increasingly to regard the continuance of support to Oriental education as necessary only to avoid antagonizing the people of India, and they sought to extend “English” education to what they considered the limit of political expediency.

^{page 67 note 1} India Public Proceedings, 10th February, 1835, No. 28; Parl. Papers, 1852–3, xxxii, 415; Sharp and Richey, Selections from the Educational Records of the Government of India, Part 1, 124–5.

^{page 67 note 2} 3 and 4 Will. IV, c. 85, s. 87. This clause, according to C. E. Trevelyan, was inserted in the Act largely through the influence of Bentinck. (Parl. Papers, 1852–3, xxviii, 142.)

^{page 67 note 3} 3 and 4 Will. IV, c. 85, ss. 81–4.

^{page 67 note 4} Bentinck Papers, Bentinck to Metcalfe, 16th September, 1829.

^{page 68 note 1} Bentinck Papers, Ryan to Bentinck, 29th January, 1832.

^{page 68 note 2} Bentinok Papers, Trevelyan to Bentinck, 9th April, 1834, 30th April, 1834, et passim. See also Trevelyan, C. E., On the Education of the People of India, London, 1838, p. 146Google Scholar, and O'Malley, L. S. S. (ed.), Modern India and the West, London, 1941, p. 147Google Scholar.

^{page 68 note 3} India Public Proceedings, 3rd June, 1835, No. 8.

^{page 68 note 4} Home Miscellaneous Series, 723 (3), 12.

^{page 68 note 5} India Public Proceedings, 3rd June, 1835, No. 8.

^{page 68 note 6} Ibid., 7th March, 1835, No. 15.

^{page 69 note 1} The Hindu College had been founded privately in 1817 to provide instruction in Western knowledge through the medium of the English language, and in 1823 had become in effect a Government institution under the control of the Committee of Public Instruction. (Parl. Papers, 1852–3, xxxii, 410.)

^{page 70 note 1} India Public Proceedings, 3rd June, 1835, No. 8.

^{page 70 note 2} Ibid., 7th March, 1835, No. 15.

^{page 70 note 3} The essence of Prinsep's argument in this Note was that the method most likely to succeed in introducing Western knowledge into India was “to engraft it upon the course of education now most esteemed” (see Sharp and Eichey, op. cit., Part I, pp. 119–126). There exists among the Bentinck Papers a summary of this Note, prepared and annotated by someone with the initial “T”. The summary distorts the original Note in a manner which makes it appear unworthy of serious consideration. The existence of this document among the Bentinck Papers opens up the possibility that Bentinck saw only an abridged and garbled version prepared for him, though perusal of the original is unlikely to have led him to adopt a different course of action.

^{page 70 note 4} India Public Proceedings, 7th March, 1835, No. 19.

^{page 71 note 1} India Public Proceedings, 7th March, 1835, No. 15.

^{page 71 note 2} Bentinck Papers, Trevelyan to Bentinck, 9th April, 1834.

^{page 72 note 1} The continuance of financial assistance to Oriental scholarship, on the scale indicated in the Resolution, was probably largely due to the influence in the Supreme Council of A. Ross and W. Morison. Morison opposed any preference being given to English education (India Public Proceedings, 7th March, 1835, No. 17), and Ross, though he agreed for the most part with the views of Bentinck and Macaulay, urged strongly that support be continued to all subsidized institutions where Sanskrit and Classical Arabic were then taught. (Ibid., No. 16.)

^{page 72 note 2} The effectiveness of this provision depended largely on the attitude adopted by Bentinck's successors. Had Metcalfe succeeded Bentinck as Governor-General it is likely that the policy adopted in 1835 would have been carried out rigorously. Metcalfe sympathized with Bentinck's policy. In 1832 he had advocated the use of English as an official language in the law courts, and had expressed the opinion that it was through the medium of the English language that the Government was “most likely to convey improvement to the natives of India”. (Kaye, , Selections from the Papers of Lord Metcalfe, p. 293Google Scholar.) Moreover, as Acting Governor-General, Metcalfe sought to carry out fully the policy adopted by Bentinck. (See Trevelyan, op. cit., pp. 72–3; Cambridge History of India, vi, p. 548.) Auckland, however, sought to modify Bentinck's policy, and he restored to institutions of Oriental scholarship some of the patronage of which Bentinck sought to deprive them. (Wilson, H. H., The History of British India, iii, pp. 307–8.)Google Scholar

^{page 72 note 3} India Public Proceedings, 22nd April, 1835, No. 10A.

^{page 72 note 4} Ibid., 22nd April, 1835, No. 10A.

^{page 73 note 1} Ibid., 3rd June, 1835, No. 8.

^{page 74 note 1} In 1836 the point of view of the Orientalists was presented most effectively by H. H. Wilson, a former member of the Committee of Public Instruction, in vol. xix (New Series) of the Asiatic Journal.

^{page 74 note 2} Home Miscellaneous Series, 723 (2), p. 3.

^{page 75 note 1} Ibid., 723 (3), pp. 8–12.

^{page 75 note 2} Ibid., pp. 21–2.

^{page 75 note 3} Ibid., pp. 24–8.

^{page 75 note 4} Ibid., pp. 28–9.

^{page 75 note 5} Ibid., pp. 36–7.

^{page 76 note 1} Ibid., pp. 37–46.

^{page 76 note 2} Ibid., pp. 76–80, 83–4; In 1827, however, the home authorities had suggested to the Government of Bengal, as a measure of economy, that the practice of paying stipends to students be brought to an end as soon as possible. (Parl. Papers, 1831–2, ix, 445.)

^{page 76 note 3} Home Miscellaneous Series, 723 (3), pp. 60–3, 68–9, 99–100.

^{page 77 note 1} Home Miscellaneous Series, 723 (3), p. 12.