their primary duty of extending western education to India, and so preparing Indians to govern themselves.

I have since looked back to this walk as one of the milestones in my own education. So far I had thought of selfgovernment as a Western institution, which was and would always remain peculiar to the peoples of Europe, just as a Hindu thinks of Hinduism as a religion to which a man must be born. It was from that moment that I first began to think of the Government of each by each, and of all by all' not merely as a principle of western life, but rather of all human life, as the goal to which all human societies must tend. It was from that moment that I began to think of the British Commonwealth as the greatest instrument ever devised for enabling that principle to be realized, not merely for the children of Europe but for all races and kindreds and peoples and tongues. And it is for that reason that I have ceased to speak of the British Empire and called the book in which I published my views, The Commonwealth of Nations.

§ 4. Let us now return to the thread of my narrative. We three spent four months in Canada, often following different routes and making a number of friends. I then returned to South Africa for the closing session of the Transvaal Legislative Council, of which I was a member, and there drafted a memorandum on the whole question. The result satisfied us that we were confronted by a problem too large and too difficult for a handful of friends in South Africa to solve for themselves. So in 1910 on the appointed day when the Union of South Africa came into being, I sailed for New Zealand. There I discussed the document with men connected with the Universities and in private business. It was finally decided that student groups should be formed at University centres to study the memorandum, which for that purpose, was printed with blank sheets opposite the text. We agreed that the groups should include men of all parties and Government officials, but not, unless in exceptional circumstances, journalists and politicians, for the reason that such men were committed to political programmes. Our object was to arrive at conclusions by which each man could regulate his own political conduct for himself. Each student was to note his criticism on the blank pages opposite the text. They were then to meet in their groups and discuss these criticisms with a view to framing joint reports, or, failing that, majority and minority reports or reports coupled with minutes of dissent. These collective and individual criticisms were to be sent to me,

in the light of which I was to compile a comprehensive report on the whole Imperial Problem for submission to the groups, with a view to seeing whether any agreement could be reached. It was further decided to obtain the co-operation of similar groups in Canada and England and to start a quarterly journal, called the Round Table, which was to contain information on Imperial affairs and articles from the various countries included in the British Commonwealth, for the mutual information of the student groups. Its object was to promote a common interest and not to inculcate any definite doctrines. The constitution of at least one English group and the editing of the Magazine was entrusted to Mr. Kerr. The journal was to be published. Otherwise our studies were to be private, until they had yielded results which were worth publication. Obviously such studies could not be conducted in an atmosphere of newspaper criticism.

In

§ 5. Five of such groups were established in New Zealand, and five more at University centres in Australia. accordance with the expressed wish of these groups, I next proceeded to Canada, and there formed several groups in University towns. Thence I returned to England, where groups were subsequently formed at Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leeds, and Birmingham, as well as in London.

Early in 1911 the individual and collective criticism of the groups began to arrive. Before the close of the year I printed all that had reached me in a large volume with an analytical index containing, I think, some 700 pages. No names were printed, but only numbers indicating the country to which the critics belonged. In the case of memoranda agreed upon by the groups, the location of the group was named. There were two reasons for this practice. In the first place it was thought desirable that each student should feel the utmost freedom in expressing his views. In the second place it was desired that the opinion of each student should be considered by all the others on its merits and without reference to the authority which any particular name might carry.

So far as I can remember more than one thousand copies of this volume were printed. The copies were distributed to the groups and were also given freely to any one who asked for them. The volume has never been published, but obviously there can be no element of secrecy with regard to a document at least one thousand copies of which were

freely distributed to any studiously-minded person who desired to obtain one. Two years later a second volume, containing further memoranda from the groups and individual students, was circulated in the same way.

These volumes revealed the widest possible divergence of opinion amongst the various students engaged. In the light of this material I began to draft a report on the whole problem. Sections of the draft were printed as soon as they were written, and were circulated for criticism amongst the groups.

The subsequent creation of an Indian group at Agra illustrates the spontaneous and informal manner in which this student movement has spread. During the war three members of the Oxford group, one an Indian, the other two officers in a Territorial regiment, found themselves at Agra. The Indian friend suggested the formation of a Round Table group for the purpose of studying the problem of Imperial reconstruction after the war. Several local officials were included, and I myself never heard of its existence until it was actually constituted and at work. The system meets the needs of those who feel that in these times of political transition private study and mutual discussion are essential to those who would properly discharge their duty as citizens. It will be harder for Indians to play their part in the coming reconstruction unless some such methods of study are first promoted amongst the educated classes.

§ 6. In Canada, meanwhile, the inquiry had excited such interest in University circles, that the groups each threatened to expand beyond a manageable size. The original groups, therefore, proposed the institution of new groups. I was faced by the difficulty, however, that the existing groups were sending in more documents than I could well digest. I stipulated therefore that I should not be expected to read the documents of any further groups, and on this understanding a large number of new groups were brought into existence for the purpose of study and self-education. They have been supplied with all the proceedings of the organization. Thus two classes of groups have come into existence.

(1) The original groups formed for the purpose of collaboration in the inquiry.

(2) Additional groups formed merely for discussion and self-education on the Imperial Problem.

In 1913 I went to Canada to discuss the development of the inquiry in the light of the experience we had gained, and summarized the results in an address delivered in

October to the Toronto groups. The various solutions revealed by the divergent opinions of members could all, as I pointed out, be grouped under four headings—

(1) There were those who preferred that things should remain as they were.

(2) There were those who saw no solution but a declaration of Independence by the Dominions.

(3) There were those who believed that the unity of the Empire could be maintained by the separate and independent co-operation in foreign affairs of the several Governments of the Empire.

(4) Lastly, there were those who believed that selfgovernment could only be realized within the limits of the Commonwealth by reducing the United Kingdom to the status of a Dominion, and by relieving the Imperial Government of all responsibility for the domestic affairs of the British Isles, thus making it possible for the other communities of the Empire to be represented on the Imperial Government.

This last, I said, was the conclusion to which my own report would lead. I therefore urged that the other three views should be expounded in reports drawn up by the students who believed in them, for obviously I could not undertake to make the best possible case for a view which I did not hold. I then urged that the results of the inquiry could best be produced in the form of four reports instead of only one, thus leaving the public to draw its own conclusions after reading the best that could be said for each view by those who believed in it. On this and on other occasions I was at special pains to deprecate any tendency on the part of Round Table groups to drift into propaganda. It has happened that members of groups after years of study together have found themselves in substantial agreement. I have always taken the position that each individual is free to advocate the views he holds, and also that individuals are free to combine for advocacy in any new organization, with a separate name of its own adopted for the purpose. But I have urged, and so far always with success, that the primary object of the Round Table groups would be lost if they ceased to consist of men who differ and are combined only for the purpose of study. A motion in favour of Imperial Union proposed at a meeting of delegates from the Australian groups in Melbourne last August, was negatived on this ground, although a majority, I think, believed in the ideal it embodied. I could not, of course, prevent

a group carrying such a motion. The movement is largely a spontaneous growth; it has no rules and no constitution, and for that very reason it is not possible for any member to declare that this or that is a tenet of the Round Table organization. It is merely a system for enabling people to unite for the study of their duties as citizens of this Commonwealth, as a guide to their own individual action. Lacking definite tenets, it naturally lacks the mechanism of a political organization.

More than a thousand copies of the address delivered at Toronto were printed and circulated to the Round Table groups.

When war broke out in August 1914 I had circulated four instalments of my report and had received a mass of valuable criticism thereon. A number of my colleagues then pointed out to me that the report would take some years to complete, while, if the British Commonwealth survived the struggle with Germany, the problem we were examining would be raised in its acutest form at the close of the war. They therefore asked me to put my practical conclusions in a short popular volume which would be ready for production whenever the crisis came. I agreed, subject to the understanding that in such a volume I could only deal with the self-governing communities, because I had as yet made no sufficient study of India.

§ 7. I then revised the four instalments in the light of the criticisms made on them, wrote a final chapter, and reprinted the whole in one volume which was privately circulated amongst the Round Table groups under the title of The Project of a Commonwealth.

Then I made the first draft of the popular volume since published under the title of The Problem of the Commonwealth. It was printed and privately circulated in the usual way. A mass of criticism was sent in, much of which was destructive. But a general consensus of opinion was expressed that I should revise and publish it at once on my own authority, in order that the public might have time to think over the issues involved before peace came and the crisis was upon us. It was also urged that I should publish it over my own name in order to preserve the student character of the Round Table groups. Hitherto there had been no secret as to the authorship of various books I had printed; but I had never been in the habit of putting my name on the title-page, because the question of authorship seemed so irrelevant to the value of the matter