their colleagues whose way led them through Russia, and who brought back with them the most frightful accounts of the vexatious rapaciousness and cruelties they had been subjected to by the official and nonofficial world. In acquiring such experiences, I began to understand the secret of British supremacy in India, and I said to myself, what on earth could the English not achieve with this moral standing and reputation? The reader may imagine my astonishment, when I afterwards saw English statesmen priding themselves upon and glorying in the destruction of this eminent advantage, and, ridiculing what is called prestige, beginning to emulate Russia in her reckless and unjustifiable enmity against the Mohammedan world. I allude, of course, to the attitude assumed by the Liberal Ministry against Turkey, to the disgraceful comedy at Dulcigno, to the inglorious policy in Egypt, and to many, many other incidents aiming at the entire destruction of Turkey, of that only power in the world which can be of great service to England's standing in Asia, and cordial relations with which offer the best safeguard to English power in Mohammedan India.

Of course, there have been, and there are, even now, contradictory opinions as to the link existing between the Mohammedans of India and those of Turkey. I have read, quite recently, in a paper

written by an evidently staunch Liberal, and published in the Nineteenth Century (April, 1885), the following remark:-"Judging from my own experience in India, I am of opinion that the vast majority of Mussulmans there, like the vast majority of Christians in Europe, are occupied chiefly with things of this world, taking thought for the morrow, how they may eat and drink, and wherewithal they may be clothed, and troubling their heads very little about the Caliph of Islam, his triumphs and defeats." Considering that this opinion is shared by many other influential statesmen of the same school, I beg leave to remark that "my own opinions," based upon a long and intimate connection with the Mohammedan world of Asia, have impressed me with the fact that there is a strong tie of unity between the true believers on the Indus and their co-religionaries on the Bosphorus; a unity which has manifested itself during the late Russo-Turkish war, through the large sums voluntarily contributed by Indian rice-merchants, landowners and Moulwis to the exchequer of Constantinople, and which can be easily fostered by the influential native press, and made a source of great discomfort to the English, should they persevere in their enmity towards the Caliph, the legally acknowledged head of the whole Mohammedan world. If the gentlemen in Downing Street are not aware

of the fact that Hindoo Rajahs of Moslem faith, in returning from England, where they finished their studies, are most anxious to pay their respects to the Sultan at Stambul, I would gently whisper into their ear that there always are certain mollas, dervishes and sheiks, in the close proximity of the Sultan, who regularly undertake errands to Bombay, Calcutta, and Lahore, and who, returning from the distant East to the so-called Hind Tekesi (Indian Convent) in Constantinople, are generally the bearers of such messages and interchange of ideas, as fully testify to the common cause of the two extreme links of Moslem society.

The Sultan, although politically a sick and halfdead man, still represents, from a religious point of view, a great moral power; and as I remember well the words addressed by the late Reshid Pasha to a Hindoo Mohammedan of note in 1857, during the Sepoy mutiny-words which left a deep impression upon that fanatic man from the banks of the Indus, I may be well entitled to assume that words pronounced by the Sultan in a contrary meaning would not miss their effect. To Russia, Germany, Italy, etc., the Turk may be "unspeakable," and may be driven bag and baggage" from Europe; but to England's standing in Asia he may still be of great use, and an alliance with the Ottoman Empire

out "

recommends itself best to ward off Russian encroachments in Asia. Turkey, possessing even now 400,000 men of the best fighting material, is by no means a contemptible ally, and will fill up the gap left through the inefficiency of English military preparation. With a comparatively small assistance of money, England, without being compelled to use the dubious blustering of the Germans, expressed in the words "Unser Volk in Waffen" (Our people in arms), may soon get an army able to work wonders in the interior of Asia, an army which will certainly better answer expectations than the famous united force of Europe sent against Russia during the Crimean war, which force, directed by the intrigues of Napoleon III., made itself immortally ridiculous by its achievements.

Persia, in every respect inferior to Turkey, and unable therefore to offer similar advantages, can be nevertheless of use to England, if the Shah can close Khorassan against an invading Russian army; if he prohibits the carrying out of provisions beyond the north-eastern frontier, and facilitates, at the same time, the carrying into effect of English plans. As to those Mohammedans who now are under Russian rule being brought into a connection with an eventual attempt to revolutionise the Bokharians, Khokandians, and Khivans, I cannot agree with those English

politicians who put any faith in this ultimate measure. The flame of rebellion might be easily kindled by the adversary too, and in such a case England would fare worst, for Tadjiks, Sarts, and Uzbegs are cowards, and there is no power to rouse them against Russia, considering that the shadow of a Cossack suffices to strike terror into the breasts of hundreds of the settled inhabitants of the three khanates, who ought never to be compared with the Indian Mohammedan, the heir of the military virtues of his conquering ancestors.

It is only as to the Turkomans that I would make an exception, knowing them, as I do, from an intimate intercourse. These adventurous and unprincipled children of the desert, famous for their boundless greed, have been partly subdued by force of arms, and partly now adhere to Russia owing to the fact of the so-called "wandering rouble." But the rouble is a very poor champion if compared with the sovereign; its convincing power is certainly wanting in superiority, and English outbidding, properly applied, can easily bring Sariks, Salors, and Mervians, and, particularly, the Turkomans around Andkhoi, under the standard of England. For a transaction of this kind, England wants agents like Alikhanoff, Tahiroff, and Naziroff, who may be easily found in the ranks of the auxiliary Ottoman army, Osmanlis,