his kind, which demand
action that can be interpreted as a breach of that religious neutrality
which is one of the cardinal principles of British rule in India. The
agitation against it is not the agitation of the European whose
susceptibility is offended at a state of things that he finds hard to
reconcile with the reverence and purity of Divine worship; but it is the
outcry of the reverent Hindu against one of the corrupt and degrading
practices that, in the course of centuries, have crept into his
religion. In this particular instance the Mysore Government cannot be
accused of acting hastily. As long ago as February, 1892, they issued a
circular order describing the legitimate services to be performed in
Temples by Temple women. In 1899, the Muzrai Superintendent, Rai Bahadur
A. Sreenivasa Charlu, directed that the Temple women borne on the
Nanjangud Temple establishment should not be allowed to perform _tafe_
(or dancing) service in the Temple; but that the allowances payable to
them should be continued for their lifetime, and that at their death the
vacancies should not be filled up. Against this order the Temple women
concerned memorialised H.H. the Maharajah as long ago as 1905, and the
order disposing of it has only just been issued. In the course of the
latter the Government say:--

"'From the Shastraic authorities quoted by the two Agamiks employed in
the Muzrai Secretariat, it is observed that the services to be performed
by Temple women form part and parcel of the worship of the god in Hindu
Temples, and that singing and dancing in the presence of the deity are
also prescribed. It is, however, observed that in the case of Temple
women personal purity and rectitude of conduct and a vow of celibacy
were considered essential. But the high ideals entertained in ancient
days have now degenerated. . . . The Government now observe that whatever
may have been the original object of the institution of Temple women in
Temples, the state in which these Temple servants are now found fully
justifies the action taken by them in excluding the Temple women from
every kind of service in sacred institutions like Temples. Further, the
absence of the services of these women in certain important Temples in
the State has become established for nearly fifteen years past, and the
public have become accustomed to the idea of doing without such
services.'

"The exclusion of Temple women from Temple services obtains in Mysore in
the