conversations were renewed when Lord Lytton was appointed Viceroy, but it had already become apparent that the policy towards Afghanistan which the Government had resolved to carry out, and which he himself believed to be right, would not have Lord Lawrence's approval, and it was difficult in such circumstances to discuss these matters freely. Lord Lytton could say nothing regarding the instructions which he knew that he was about to receive, and he could not attempt to controvert Lord Lawrence's opinions without seeming to himself to be wanting in proper deference to one of the most illustrious of Indian statesmen, for whose great actions and noble character he always felt sincere admiration and respect.1

1 The obituary notice of Lord Lawrence's death published in The Gazette of India, June 30, 1879, was written by Lord Lytton, and ran as follows:

"The Governor-General in Council has received, with deep concern, the announcement of the death of Lord Lawrence, late Viceroy and Governor-General of India.

'No statesman, since Warren Hastings, has administered the Government of India with a genius and an experience so exclusively trained and developed in her service as those of the illustrious man whose life, now closed in the fulness of fame, though not of age, bequeaths to his country a bright example of all that is noblest in the high qualities for which the Civil Service of India has justly been renowned; and in which, with such examples before it, it will never be deficient.

'The eminent services rendered to India by Lord Lawrence, both as ruler of the Punjab, in the heroic defence of British power, and as Viceroy, in the peaceful administration of a rescued Empire, cannot be fitly acknowledged in this sad record of the grief which she suffers by his death, and of the pride with which she cherishes his name.

'The Viceroy and Governor-General in Council, however, desiring to give some public expression to those feelings and to that national gratitude which is the best reward of national services, directs that the flag of Fort William shall, during to-morrow, the first of July, be lowered half-mast high; that thirty-one minute guns shall be fired, at sunset, from the Fort; and that the last gun shall be fired, and the flag dropped, as the sun sets.

'His Excellency in Council further directs that on this sorrowful

Stephen

From no one did Lord Lytton receive at this time more wise and practically useful advice or warmer sympathy than from Sir James Stephen,1 and Sir James during the rest of his life no man could have had a more constant or more affectionate friend. Indeed, this friendship, which may truly be said to have sprung up in a single night, became to Lord Lytton one of the closest and most valued intimacies of his later life. They first met at a dinner at Lord Arthur Russell's, and went afterwards together to the Cosmopolitan.' India was, of course, the subject of their talk. Lord Lytton was not more eager to hear than Sir James to tell all that he knew of the condition of that great empire. They did not part till they had spent half the night walking up and down, too absorbed in their subject to feel fatigue or the wish to separate.

6

Sir James Stephen's knowledge on Indian affairs was deep, and his views so interesting to Lord Lytton, that he begged to have some recorded expression of them. Sir James went home and wrote for him an elaborate exposition of the Indian administrative system, which his friend compared to a 'policeman's bull's-eye.' 2

From the time of Lord Lytton's departure till his return Sir James Stephen wrote to him by every mail. These letters were a constant source of pleasure, solace, and support. When he returned from his four years' rule of empire his other chief friends were occasion the same marks of national respect shall be simultaneously shown at all the other seats of government in India; in order that, throughout the length and breadth of the Empire with whose history the fame of Lord Lawrence is imperishably associated, honour may be rendered to the memory of the Statesman who ruled India with a wisdom strengthened in her laborious service, and whose fortitude, severely tested, was splendidly displayed throughout her fiercest trial.' 1 At this time Mr. FitzJames Stephen.

2 Life of Sir J. Stephen, by his brother, Leslie Stephen.

6

nearly all either dead or alienated, but in Stephen he never failed to find the most loyal, faithful, and devoted friend to the day of his death. The contrast between the two men could hardly have been greater. Sir James was somewhat Johnsonian in appearance and talk; Lord Lytton singularly endowed with charm and grace of manner. In mind Lord Lytton was essentially a poet gifted with a romantic and creative imagination; Sir James had little taste for poetry, or sympathy with the artistic temperament' in any of its forms, but his intellectual force, his herculean capacity for work, and the strength and loyalty with which he defended his convictions and the friends who shared them, gave to his personality an heroic stamp. They had in common, despite the widest differences, a certain rather rare and sturdy manliness of thought, and an enthusiastic patriotism. Lord Lytton's admiration and sympathy for Sir James evoked in him a responsive tenderness and affection which perhaps was all the deeper for having so rarely found an outlet, while Stephen's mental attitude on all public questions, and his strong and uncompromising way of expressing whatever he felt, were to his friend a source of unending satisfaction and support.

During all this time Lord Lytton was in frequent communication with Mr. Disraeli and Lord Salisbury in regard to the affairs of Central Asia and Afghanistan. The Prime Minister strongly impressed upon the new Viceroy his opinion that the policy of Russia gave cause for extreme anxiety and watchfulness, and that it was essential, even at the risk of failure, the possibility of which could not be denied, that an attempt should be made to induce the Amir of Kabul to enter into more satisfactory relations with our Government, or, if such a result proved impracticable,

stan

that he should at least be compelled to show clearly the attitude which he intended to hold towards Russia and towards ourselves. Anything, Mr. Disraeli thought, was better than the state of absolute uncertainty and suspicion in which our relations with Afghanistan were involved. This was the conviction of Lord Lytton himself when he left England. Lord Lytton 'Afghanistan,' he wrote a few months afterwards on Afghaniin a confidential letter, is a State far too weak and barbarous to remain isolated and wholly uninfluenced between two great military empires such as England and Russia. The present difference between the policies of these two empires, as regards the interests of the Amir, is that the British Government sincerely desires to promote his security abroad and his stability at home. It is our policy to cultivate on our north-western border a strong bulwark, by aiding Afghanistan to become a powerful and prosperous State, provided its power be friendly to ourselves and its prosperity in harmony with that of those other frontier States whose welfare and independence we are resolved to defend against all aggression. It is our wish to see the revenues of Afghanistan increased, the authority of its ruler consolidated, the permanence of his dynasty established, the peace and loyalty of the Amir's subjects assured, the safety of his border guaranteed, the efficiency of his military force developed, his independence placed above all question, on the sole condition that his loyal friendship and that of his people for the British Government be equally indubitable. We do not covet one inch of his territory, we do not desire to diminish one iota of his independence. But we cannot allow him to fall under the influence of any power whose interests are

antagonistic to our own, and thereby become the tool of ambitions to which the whole energy of the British Government will, in case of need, be resolutely opposed. On the other hand, the Russian Government, although its real policy has not been and cannot as yet be openly avowed, desires and would gladly effect the disarmament of Afghanistan and the absorption of the Amir's dominions, either by Russia alone or by Russia in conjunction with England, each of the two European powers taking, by previous agreement, its own share of the spoil. This object could be best attained by the assent and connivance of the British Government, but, failing that condition of success, its attainment will be, and indeed is already being, sought by means of adroitly playing on the hopes and fears of the Amir, and thus establishing a diplomatic influence at Kabul. The Amir, who appears to be tumbling headlong into the trap thus skilfully laid for him, under the illusion that he is strong enough, or crafty enough, to play off Russia against England and thereby maintain his equilibrium between them, must now choose which of his two powerful neighbours he will rely upon. But one lesson he will have to learn, and that is that if he does not promptly prove himself our loyal friend we shall be obliged to regard him as our enemy and treat him accordingly. A tool in the hands of Russia I will never allow him to become. Such a tool it would be my duty to break before it could be used.'1

We have seen that Lord Northbrook fully recognised, like all his predecessors, the paramount importance of maintaining the independence of

1 Letter to C. Girdlestone, August 27, 1876. Letters Despatched, vol. i. p. 427.