or bhistis 6 do not allow any one but themselves to touch their water buckets, or the skins in which they carry their water. Hindoos generally draw water in an iron vessel known as a 'dol.' This is only used for drawing the water. When required the water is poured into another vessel, and only from this other vessel is the water poured into the hands of any one requiring a drink. No one is allowed to go on to the platform of a well without removing his shoes.

Other wells in the village are reserved for household purposes. The vessels used to draw drinking water are never allowed to be lowered into these wells by Hindoos. I suspect that Musalman bhistis are not so particular; at any rate, this is the case with bhistis employed by English people. The poorest Hindoos have two separate sets of vessels, one to hold drinking water, the other for water used in household purposes, such as washing the cooking vessels.

Houses, being generally made of mud, are constantly in need of repair. The workmen (or coolies) who need water for carrying out this work necessarily employ very dirty earthenware vessels. I am certain that these are not allowed to be lowered into drinking-water wells, and I believe they are not allowed to be lowered into wells used for household purposes. A small tank containing dirty water is generally attached to each well, and from this the workmen take the water which they need in repairing houses. When first I saw these tanks I thought it was rather unsanitary to have such dirty water so close to the well. But the above statements, I venture to think, make it obvious that it is better to have such tanks than that coolies should lower their dirty vessels into a well used for drinking purposes.

I once asked a completely uneducated native why it was necessary to have dirty wells in the place, why the dirty wells could not be closed, and all the water, whether for drinking or household purposes, be obtained from clean wells. His answer was that if this were done diseases would become prevalent. Whatever truth there may be in this answer appears to me to depend on the practical necessity that in some cases dirty vessels have to be lowered into wells; and hence it seems to be a good plan, as things go, to reserve some wells into which alone such vessels may be lowered.

I recently had to do with a cholera epidemic in which certainly most of, possibly all of, the infection was derived from wells used for household purposes, and it is probable that the disease would have been far more widespread if the water of such wells had been actually drunk by the mass of the population. The epidemic in

• Bhistis are always Mahommedan, and only draw water for Mahommedans or for English people. Hindoos usually draw water for themselves, but sometimes waterdrawers are employed. These are always of Brahmin or Cahar castes.

* Some details concerning this epidemic will be found in my Annual Report already quoted.

question occurred in Shahgunj, and at the time it was stated to be inexplicable on the grounds that only women had been attacked. I found that the latter statement was true so far as the first part of the epidemic was concerned. The women who were affected had no Some of them obtained their

supply of drinking water in common. drinking water from a well situated a couple of miles away from their houses. But out of seven cases I found evidence that six had been in the habit of going to one well which was used, not for drinking, but only for household purposes, and consequently was chiefly frequented by women. A few poor Musalmans, however, were in the habit of using the water for drinking purposes. Hindoos used a better well situated about sixty yards away. The epidemic affected twenty-six Mahommedans and only one Hindoo. I have little doubt that the first part of the epidemic was due to accidental infection from the water brought by the women for household purposes. In the latter part of the epidemic the cholera microbe appears to have spread to other wells in the place; but in these cleaner wells the microbe seems to have assumed a less virulent form, for the cases which now affected both men and women in nearly every instance ended in recovery, and on my putting disinfectants into the wells the epidemic ceased.

It is commonly supposed that the natives are in the habit of washing their clothes and themselves at the wells, and that the water frequently runs back into the well. This is not quite accurate. Women generally wash themselves either in their houses or in the river, if one is near. Men wash themselves and also their dhoti or loincloth at the wells, and owing to the platform of the well sloping away from its mouth, very little water, if any, gets back into the well, provided it is in good repair. Clothes, both of men and women, are washed by dhobies, who are never allowed to carry on their business near a well. They are obliged to use either the river or a tank. It is considered that the occupation of dhobies is unclean, and consequently they belong to one of the five lower castes who are not allowed to come near a well used by higher castes.

Perhaps the most interesting precaution taken by Hindoos about their drinking water is that those who are supposed to be engaged in dirty occupations, or vessels belonging to such persons, are not allowed to come near a well. In towns and larger villages it sometimes happens that a well is especially reserved for the use of Chamars and sweepers. More generally, if a sweeper wants water, he has to sit down at a distance from the well and wait till some one of higher caste comes and draws water for him.

This does not exhaust the list of precautions taken by natives in this district to insure the purity of their water supply. I was astonished to discover that they take pains to prevent the contamination of the River Jumna. While staying the other day in a bungalow in the

Ram Bagh Garden, which is situated above Agra on the banks of the river, a fisherman came to me and complained that my servants had dug a drain from the cook house and that from it dirty water was running into the river. The servants had made this drain by my orders, as I had a prejudice against the accumulation of stagnant water near to where my food was being prepared. On the fisherman making the complaint I hazarded the statement that it did not matter, since all up the banks of the river everywhere the natives were in the habit of depositing on its banks, as they often did at the margin of a tank, refuse which frequently fell into the water. The fisherman somewhat indignantly denied that this was the case, saying that men who would do such a thing must be of very low caste, and that higher caste people certainly always took pains to prevent the pollution of the river. To this I objected that the natives did not care whether the water was dirty or not, because a mile or two lower down the stream they were bathing at the ghats just where a large drain ran into the river. The fisherman admitted that they did this, because their ancestors had always bathed there, but at the same time he said they do not like the drain being run into the river, because the river is holy and they make many prayers to it. It appears to me that this incident well illustrates to what extent with these people cleanliness is godliness, and tends to make one regret that cleanliness has not been left a matter of common-sense instead of having become incorporated with their religion.

I have only attempted to describe some of the customs of the Hindoos in respect of their supply of drinking water. A further study of their customs would show that, with the higher castes of Hindoos, cleanliness and the avoidance of defilement are virtues to be cultivated in one's self and admired in others. Among the poorer classes and among men of lower castes these hygienic virtues are apt to be tempered with much original sin of the insanitary kind. But it cannot, I think, be denied, that even when only a few members of higher castes are present in a village they exert a beneficial influence in preserving the supply of drinking water from contamination. Unfortunately, their influence does not go far enough, but it appears to me that this is only a reason for trying to extend it in those directions in which it appears likely to be of use.

8

The above remarks may seem like a eulogy of the caste system. This is far from my wishes. A system which enjoins that persons.

s For instance, I am engaged in writing a tract in Hindustani on the prevention of cholera in India. By way of advocating the imposition of a quarantine on persons. returning from a pilgrimage who may possibly bring back the cholera virus with them, I suggested in my rough draft of the pamphlet that such persons should be regarded as unclean for a week after their return. But on translating it into Hindustani, I was unable on the one hand to find any word for unclean that did not mean unholy; and on the other hand I found that the custom already existed in the case of certain distant pilgrimages. My informant, whom I have every reason to rely on, tells me that PP

VOL. XL-No. 236

who are careful in avoiding defilement should be admired and respected, but not imitated, at any rate by part of the population, is far from satisfactory even from the hygienic standpoint. From the ethical standpoint, a system which tends to keep certain classes in a low position and to prevent them from rising to anything higher, no doubt leaves much to be desired. Further, it seems to make no distinction in importance between matters which might be of great use, such as those relating to the water supply, and those of trivial import, such as the position of the cooking vessels while food is being prepared.

E. H. HANKIN.

pilgrims returning from Goya and Budrinath are not allowed to eat with other members of their families or, I believe, to come near their wells, until they have bathed in the Ganges. I believe this custom to be the reverse of widespread, but in my tract I have explained its advantages, and suggested that it should be applied to every returning traveller, that his clothes should not be washed until they have been exposed in the sun to dry, that he should be allowed to bring none but dry food back with him into the village, &c.

1896

OF WOMEN IN ASSEMBLIES

I PROPOSE in the present paper to treat of the question of woman's co-operation with man in public work from a single point of view. I wish to support the general proposition that a real discussion of important matters, on which practical action is to follow, is impossible by men in any assembly in which women sit with them as fellowdebaters and fellow-voters. By real discussion I mean a discussion which shall be at once fair, exhaustive, and penetrating to all the vital issues of the matter. I make the proposition general because I believe the impossibility to be founded on a necessary relation between men and women, a relation as old as the Garden of Eden, or as any historic or semi-historic record. If this aspect of the matter has struck others, it has not, so far as I know, been publicly noticed, and it is possible that, unless noticed in the abstract, it would not force itself upon the general attention till public mischief had resulted in various directions from the neglect of it.

It will be granted that, with exceptions, woman is physically weaker than man. It will be granted also that, with few or no exceptions, she has enormous influence over him. If I could find a stronger word than enormous I would use it without fear. How did she obtain it? By fascination. Fascination is a word of wide and vague meaning, and therefore is a suitable one. One does not want to tie down fascination to one or two special methods, we are concerned chiefly with its results. Ugly women have fascinated men, and pretty ones, and old ones and young ones, and robust ones and very weak ones, and talkative ones and silent ones where found. I am not sure that a woman both ugly and silent has often reigned supreme, but I may be wrong. If so, she probably spoke to some purpose once. If they have all prevailed, it must have been from something which they had in common. The quality in common may be expressed by the word fascination. May fascination be described (not defined) as an effect not wholly dependent on the facts of the case? Woman's strength lies in having something to grant which can only be granted to the favoured; also in establishing such a relation with the other sex that any attempt to snatch the It is a proverb that kissing goes by favour.' 559

PP 2