so every reason to be
satisfied. In short, the progressive character of the Government would
seem to leave nothing to be desired. There is, however, always a "but" in
life, and in our case there are two "buts." The first of these relates to
the state of the law as regards advances given to labourers to be worked
off by them, and to contractors to bring labourers; and the second to
extradition. To these may be added three wants--I can hardly call them
grievances--the want of a Wild Birds' Protection Act, a Game Act, and an
agricultural chemist. On these five points I now propose briefly to
remark.

The practice of giving money advances to labourers to be gradually worked
off by them, and to contractors who undertake to supply labourers, has
been productive of great loss and annoyance to employers, a great
temptation to natives to commit fraud, and a source of constant worry to
the officers of the Government. The Government sought by Act XIII. of 1859
to check these evils, not by preventive, but purely by punitive
legislation. Since then there has been a constant demand by employers of
labour for more punitive legislation in the shape of amendments to the Act
of 1859, and from recent assurances made by the Viceroy when he visited
Mysore in 1892, it seems probable that something further will be done on
the same lines. And something may of course be done to insure that the
defaulter shall be severely dealt with--when he is caught. When he is
caught. Yes, therein lies the whole difficulty, one which seems to have
been as completely ignored by the Government as it has been by the
planters in the legislation adopted with a view to check the evils
connected with advances. In order to prove the necessity for further
legislation an old planter once printed an account of a case which he took
up against a defaulting coolie. His description of the hunt, and the wiles
of the defaulting labourer in moving from one part of the country to
another, was positively amusing, and showed conclusively that it did not
pay to attempt to catch a defaulting labourer. What, then, can be the use
of an Act which after all only punishes the coolie when he is caught, if
the trouble and expense involved in catching him be so great, as to make
the game not worth the candle? Is it not evident that the only thing which
can help the planter is legislation which will make it very difficult for
the labourer to obtain money from one employer and then run away a