had contrived to arouse an animosity against himself which has no parallel in our history. The Civil Service in India complained that he insulted or treated with contempt all the highest servants of the Company. The directors at home complained that in defiance of the law they were kept in ignorance of the measures of the Government;' and that, in opposition to a rule which he had himself laid down as President of the Board of Control, Lord Ellenborough was taking upon himself to spend large sums of money without obtaining the sanction of the court. The President of the Board of Control complained that Lord Ellenborough was taking the improper and unprecedented course of communicating directly with the Queen; and that his own time was occupied in endeavouring to preserve harmony between the Governor-General and the Court of Directors. Lord Ellenborough's own admissions gave force to some of these complaints. He admitted that he practically issued 'every order to the generals and every important instruction to the political agents,' and boasted that even the Council in Calcutta, whom he was pleased to accuse of divulging information by folly or selling it by treachery, was in ignorance of the directions which he thus gave.

The tension therefore between Lord Ellenborough and those with whom it was his duty to act was already very great. It was increased almost immediately afterwards by his treatment of Gwalior. In that State the death of the Maharajah in May 1843 led to disputes about the Regency which seemed likely to provoke disturbances. Disorder was specially serious in Gwalior, because the State had an army of 40,000 men. Lord Ellenborough accordingly decided that the British, as the paramount Power in India, had the right to interfere, and in the beginning of 1844 crossed the frontier with a considerable force. As the Gwalior troops refused to allow the Maharanee to come into the British camp, Lord Ellenborough obtained an excuse for attacking them. In two battles, at one of which Lord Ellenborough was himself present, the Gwalior army was defeated and broken up. It has usually been stated that Lord Ellenborough on this occasion was accidentally exposed to heavy fire and was in some danger. But from his own account there was no accident about the matter. He declared that he placed himself under fire as a matter of calculation, and that his doing so was essential to his position. Whether it was essential to his position or not, it was a strange commentary on the motto which, a few months before, he had selected for the Afghan medal-'Pax Asia restituta.' So far from peace having been restored, India in the interval had heard continually of wars and rumours of wars.

The excitement of danger at Maharajpore was too much for a military statesman; and Lord Ellenborough wrote home, foreseeing trouble in the Punjab, but hoping that it might be possible to defer it for eighteen months. If so, 'I should have an army with which I could

march to the Dardanelles. In four months I shall have 275,000 men under arms.' Fortunately, however, for the cause of peace, Lord Ellenborough's Indian career was already over. The Court of Directors summarily decided on his recall; and, though the Cabinet, with the Queen's approval, remonstrated with them on the injustice of superseding a man who, whatever faults he might have committed, had rendered great services, they adhered to their decision.

Once again Lord Ellenborough became responsible for the government of India. On the formation of Lord Derby's second Administration in 1858, he resumed the Presidency of the Board of Control. On that occasion it fell to his lot to criticise the proclamation which Lord Canning had issued to the people of Oudh after the capture of Lucknow ; and, without waiting for Lord Canning's reasons for his words, he took upon himself to condemn in severe terms Lord Canning's policy, and to publish his censure in the Times. It was at once evident that either the Governor-General, who was thus censured, or the minister who censured him must retire; and it was also plain that the opinion both of Parliament and of the public was with Lord Canning and not with Lord Ellenborough. In these circumstances, Lord Ellenborough took perhaps the only course which was open to him, and retired from office.

Few people at the present time are probably familiar with Lord Ellenborough's name. Yet it seemed worth while to analyse his opinions and to describe his conduct, because it is possible to draw a moral from his career. It ought to show how dangerous it is to rely on genius uncorrected by judgment, or to infer that brave words will always be followed by bold action. Lord Ellenborough was undoubtedly endowed with many of the qualities which make men great. He had a laudable ambition to increase the power of this country; he had the prescience to foresee the direction in which the British Empire would expand. But, in his desire to increase the might of England, he never paused to consider what was right. The claim of Naboth was of no importance if his vineyard was required to round off the British Empire. But though he had no scruple in seizing Sindh, or in advocating the seizure of Egypt, he had not the courage to deal with questions of real difficulty. And it is a strange and almost inexplicable fact that the man who wanted to fight Russia in the Hindoo Koosh, and who boasted that, in a few months' time, he would be in a position to march to the Dardanelles, was the same man who ordered the retreat from Afghanistan.

In his dealings with men, it is fair to recollect that he displayed an unusual capacity of infusing his own spirit and energy into all ranks of the Service. On the other hand, impatient of restraint himself, he was intolerant of independence in others; and conscious of his own abilities, confident in his own judgment, he was habitually unjust to other men. It is hardly an exaggeration to say that he fancied that VOL. XLVI-No. 269

K

he possessed a monopoly of wisdom; and that he equally resented the interference of his superiors, and the advice of his subordinates. How greatly his abilities impressed his contemporaries may be inferred from the Duke of Wellington's declaration in 1841: There is no doubt but that Lord Ellenborough is better qualified than any man in England for the office of Governor-General.' And perhaps at the present time the best that can be said for him is that he is another illustration of the truth of the old apothegm that 'universal consent would have pronounced him worthy of rule, if he had not held office.'

S. WALPOLE.

1899

OLD-AGE PENSIONS IN FRANCE

A QUESTION which figures prominently upon the social programme of both the principal political parties in the State may fairly be categorised as burning: more especially when a Royal Commission and a Select Committee have each in turn sat upon it. Not less ardently than in England, State or State-aided pensions for old age are desired in France. In that country there is already an institution, resembling the Annuity branch of the English Post Office but considerably more extended in its operations, by which provision may be made for old age, and possibly on account of this, as well as of some of the other French schemes for old-age pensions, may prove of interest at a moment when, in the words of Mr. Balfour, the Government is giving its serious consideration' to this question, and has even appointed a fresh Committee upon the subject.

The Caisse nationale des Retraites pour la Vieillesse, through which pensions can now be effected, was created by the law of the 18th of June 1850. That law was the fruit of an agitation, which had been carried on for more than three-quarters of a century previously to that date, for the establishment of some institution which should make the exercise of thrift and forethought easier to the poorer classes, and which should relieve those classes from the dread of an old age passed in want and misery. The law underwent frequent amendments during the Empire, most of the alterations being made in the hope of consolidating the Napoleonic dynasty by enlarging the scope of operation of the Caisse. All working-men employed by the Government were obliged, by various decrees, to be members of the Caisse. Thus, in 1862, out of 48,187 new depositors, 46,927 were working-men; but of these only 9,421 were so by choice, the remainder being so of necessity as Government employés. Moreover, whereas the Caisse was at first intended solely for working men, the maximum pension and deposit were raised until it became rather a safe and lucrative investment for the middle classes than a thrift institution for the poorer classes.

Under the Third Republic the Caisse has reverted to its original rôle. The years 1870 and 1871 were naturally not favourable to its operations. This was partly due to the war with Prussia; but

besides this obvious cause there was another, viz. the rise in the value of money. Whereas the Caisse gave only four and a half per cent. the market rate of interest was six per cent. It might be thought that, had the Caisse been in fact intended primarily for working-men, there would have been no necessity to raise the rate of interest which it gave. This was not, however, the view of the Government, and by the Finance Act of the 20th of December 1872 the rate was increased to five per cent. This caused an immediate increase in the number and amount of deposits. But although the funds of the Caisse were by law obliged to be invested in Government stock, a profit was still made upon them until 1875, when the rate of interest returned by the funds fell below five per cent. The effect of this was a rush of small capitalists to invest in the Caisse, and the deposits increased from 11,935,821 francs in 1874 to 68,034,641 francs in 1881. The State, it will be perceived, suffered on this account a considerable loss; and on the 29th of December the rate of interest paid by the Caisse was lowered to four and a half per cent. A sum was also voted to make good its losses, amounting to more than 286 millions of francs, or considerably over eleven millions sterling.

A law was passed in 1884 which, though not modifying the relations of the depositors to the Caisse, is of importance as having created the complete autonomy of that institution. Up to that date the Caisse was a means of cancelling the Public Debt by the transformation of stock into terminable annuities. When the annuity had been inscribed on the Register of the Debt, the Caisse had no more to do with it. The law of 1884, however, imposed upon the Caisse the duty of paying the annuity, as well as of receiving the deposits and repaying those which were repayable. The new disposition was excellent; it resulted in the more speedy payment of the annuities, as well as in enabling the Caisse to study more accurately the rate of mortality of its clients. At the same time, however, it abolished a method of cancellation of stock which has been much regretted by economists.

The law, which has since been only slightly modified, by which the Caisse is now regulated is that of the 20th of July 1886. By this law the minimum annual deposit is as small as one franc, the maximum being 500 francs. The maximum pension is 1,200 francs, and the maximum annual deposit was 1,000 francs; but this was lowered in 1894 to 500 francs. The rate of interest is upon a sliding scale, varying with that of the funds and fixed by an annual decree. From 1887-91 it was at four per cent.; since that time it has been at three and a half. More important still, new tables of mortality were introduced by this law. Hitherto the Caisse had used those of Déparcieux, which were calculated on the results of certain tontines of the seventeenth century. As the expectation of