« AnkstesnisTęsti »
hundred years of British rule, but unfortunately it is true, and my own personal knowledge and observation confirm it. Six or seven months ago, a missionary friend in the Deccan wrote to me to say that there influenza was a greater scourge than the plague, and that of ten couples married by him earlier in the year, only two remained complete. He was doing what he could with his small staff, to help the people, but what can one man do among a million? Two months later he wrote to say that the cotton crop had been almost destroyed by untimely rains. Another two months passed and he wrote to say that the jowari crop, the food crop of man and beast, have failed for want of rain, and the people were selling their cattle from Rs. 3 to Rs. 6 per head. There was no fodder to buy and no money to buy it. The people's harvest this year consists of the skins of their cattle. The cattle go, the people remainto stagnate?
for the people? It is the duty of the Government of India. Why?
1. Because it is the duty of Government to protect the people from oppression.
2. Because it is the duty of Government to destroy a system of finance-the 'mahajani'which brings discredit on British rule, and dishonour to the British flag; and which sterilises the beneficent work of the Government.
3. Because no one else can provide the credit money required by 315 millions of people.
4. Because the Government currency note is the only possible form of credit money, and the only one which the people know and trust.
5. Because the trade balance on which the currency system turns, centres in the hands of Government, and will provide the capital required. 6. Because, if it is the duty of Government to provide a railway system which removes the surplus crops of the people, it is equally the duty of Government to provide a banking system which will bring back the price.
7. Because, without a banking system which will develop the money power of the country, the Montagu Chelmsford Reform, Scheme, or any other, becomes a dead letter, and the new Legislative Council a farce.
These seven are only half of my fourteen points: the others ought not to be wanted. A banking system to finance 300 millions of people implies two things; on the one hand, ample resources to lend, and on the other, ample credit on which to borrow. Let me say a word or two regarding the resources available. In Europe the banks depend on deposits for their resources, but in India the resources of the masses being nil, their deposits are nil. I might also point out that deposit banking never develops properly until metallic money has been replaced by paper: therefore, if India is ever to develop a large system of deposit banking, the one-rupee note must oust
the silver rupee. Why deposit banking follows the development of the paper currency is easily explained. Silver money keeps, if hoarded, paper money perishes. To save its life the owner of the currency note is forced to bank it, and, if the Government has the courage of its convictions, it will push the one-rupee note all it can. If it does, I have little doubt that ere long, the damp and the middew and the white ant, to say nothing of the dacoit, will do more to develop deposit banking in India, than the Government has done in the last hundred years.
If, however, India is soon to begin her onward march, it would be well not to wait for deposits. Where then shall we find the resources to finance 300 millions of people? We shall find them in the trade balance and the paper currency and gold standard reserves of the Government. These reserves could be made to yield another three hundred crores of good credit money which only awaits the creation of a banking channel through which it can flow out to fertilise the country, and At set India agoing on her onward march. the Co-operative Conference in Simla, I drew attention to the unfairness, to put it mildly, of investing India's money reserves in England and elsewhere, while India is starving for money; and I was glad to see that the Indian merchants of Bombay drew Sir James Meston's attention to the same matter the other day. I hope India's publicists will keep an eye on these reserves, and see that India's money is used for India's good; for the loss to India by the present system of investing the money outside of the country, runs to hundreds of crores in the course of a few years.
So much for the resources available. What about the credit of the three hundred millions who are eager to borrow? What is it worth? An acre or two of impoverished land, a pair of lean cattle, an eight-anna plough, a drycow,
two rupee goat, represent the assets of the borrower; who will trust him? The function of a bank is to monetise trust or credit, but if the credit is not there, the bank is powerless to monetise it. The development of trust or credit is, therefore, one of the chief tasks awaiting the attention of Government. Credit or trust is the key to industry as to all others, but trust does not grow afoot in a night like the bamboo in June. It is a delicate plant of slow growth. It requires for its cultivation carefully trained gardeners, thousands of them, and the sooner they set to work the better, if the three hundred millions are to begin their onward march within a reasonable time.
The Raiyat is a small man, but multiply him by 300 millions, organise his credit and his energy, and he becomes a giant, able to move the world. Finance the raiyat and he will finance the Government and the new industrial development, the Municipalities, the City Improvement Schemes, the District Boards, and everything else requiring money. Leave him as he is and India will remain what she is, a land of waste and want. The politician clamours for the power of the purse, but there is no power in it; it is as flat as the floor on which I stand, and only the raiyat can fill it. Finance the raiyat, take up the neglected duty, and India will march onwards at the head of the Empire, instead of hanging back in the rear where she now is.
PROF. S. C. RAY, M.A.
LL the great political writers of the world, although they may differ in many important points of political theory, are, nevertheless, agreed in this fundamental principle of human psychology, viz., that individuals have always tried to live peacefully in society in response to their natural desire to maintain what they consider to be their natural rights. The state is, accordingly, the ultimate form of evolution of the primitive society of "political animals" bound together by social necessities and interdependence and desirous of living in friendship and association and in the freedom of realising their highest ideals. Social order or peace is seldom disturbed unless either the economic interests of one class come into conflict with those of others living in the same or different states, or their rights are encroached upon by the executive in the exercise of their legal and discretionary powers. Commerce and Industry which was, at one time, believed to be the bond of peace and brotherhood among nations, have now become the fruitful cause of political and economic unrest throughout the civilised world, because civilisation has now come to be identified with head-long industrial and commercial progress and has ceased to be associated with the moral, intellectual, spiritual and artistic development of man. It has assumed, for good or ill, an extremely aggressive attitude, because all political power is associated with it, and it has as its aider and abettor an equally aggressive partner, viz., a sense of social supremacy. The causes of disturbance of the social order are, therefore, in the ultimate analysis, threefold: (1) economic conflict (2) social or racial diversity, and (3) abuse of executive power.
The remedy for the third cause is provided in every state by the establishment of constitutions limiting the executive powers, and regulating the relation between the people and Govern
ment, and the legal relation between man and man, I am not concerned with this. My object in this article is to analyse how far economic and racial causes are responsible for the social disorder which every sober and right-thinking man deplores, specially because no remedy has yet been devised for these causes,
Human beings in India, as elsewhere, do not differ fundamentally in their desire to live amicably in society and to live in a way which conduces best to their happiness and well-being. What this happiness or well-being implies, depends upon the conception of it entertained by particular groups of human beings. This conception may be shaken or modified by external influences in certain respects, but in its essentials it remains unshaken and resists all outside. attempts at encroachment or violation. It is in this way that conflict and discord arise. It is difficult to conceive that men having created society by their social instincts should themselves attempt to disturb its tranquillity unless they are compelled to do so by pressure of circumstances. There is, however, a limitation placed upon these circumstances by the nature of man,
We, in this country, have been accustomed to a paternal government which has given us, while we were ignorant of anything else but our elementary necessities, certain opportunities and blessings which were greatly appreciated. I need not stop to describe them. In certain matters of
detail or minor importance, where we came into contact with foreigners, we have had no causes of grievance or conflict. But after the elementary necessities had been satisfied, relations between the two communities began to be deep and complex, and interests developed which threatened to be clashing or antagonistic. And it is in such matters that our nature began to revolt in certain fundamental points.
Fifty or sixty years ago when education had not been so widely diffused as now, when world intercourse had not influenced the lives of Indians, widened their horizon, and broadened their outlook, when the educated community had not come into touch with the realities of public life, and the aims, aspirations and ideals of the great society outside the people depended more on public power for the realisation of their political life than now. Indeed, political consciousness had not then been aroused; and self-reliance and selfrespect which are the twin brothers in political evolution had not then been born. Government, on its side was accustomed to paternalism; the people, on their side, were habituated to a mode of political obedience quite out of harmony with a period of political adolescence. The people began to realise that the system of irresponsible government established in the country was not favourable to the development of self-respect and self-reliance and it was coming into conflict with its new and advanced conception of social wellbeing. If India had remained isolated from the rest of the world, it is quite possible she would have remained contented with her own lot. But coming into close association with a nation whose mission was to uplift her people and to assimilate her civilisation to that of the West, she began to think herself whether she would allow this assimilation to be effected to the complete effacement of her nationality. Herein arose a conflict between the two nations, of which we are now reaping the fruits,
This conflict, as I have indicated above, had its The origin in either economic or racial causes. economic causes are identified with the interests of trade and commerce, which are given undue prominence owing to the fact that the traders have been the founders of the Indian Empire, But it is forgotten that other men are necessary to preserve an Empire than those who founded it. The interests, rights and immemorial sanctities of
the Indian people have, as I showed in a previous article, been subordinated to the interests of trade and commerce. In the social sphere, considerations of racial superiority and British supremacy are the predominant elements. The Government refused to concede to popular demands either by changing the system of government or by allowing the conduct of the executive to be changed in their relations with the people, lest such a change might be interpreted as weakness in maintaining British prestige; they began by differentiating between Europeans and Indians in all transactions where they feared that equal treatment would shake the foundations of that prestige. The Government was naturally supported by the whole European community, who became nervous over any attempt at government to give equality to all, irrespective of race or colour. Thus political cleavage-reacted on social cleavage and vice versa. The situation may be illustrated by a few specific and glaring instances in which the differentiation was accentuated. It will not be difficult for the reader to judge in each case whether the cause is social (or racial) or economic :
(I) In the carrying of arms, Eurasians are classed with Europeans. In many other respects, they are classed as Indians.
(2) In cases of assault or murder of Indians by Europeans, the latter do not, in the opinion of right-thinking Indians, receive just punishment. (3) The European and Indian services are graded on different principles. In the former, the number of posts in each grade diminishes as the salaries diminish; in the latter, the case is quite the reverse, affording less opportunities of quick promotion.
(4) Appointments to the high offices have not always been made on the ground of fitness, but on political considerations. And attempts have been made by high officials to explain away the statutory abolition of racial disabilities.
(5) Honours and distinctions have been bestowed on the undeserving and the obsequious i.e., on persons who have distinguished themselves not in the service of the public but in what is narrowly called " public service."
(6) Greater respect and consideration are shown in private and public places to the meanest European and Eurasian than to respectable Indians, Indians have complained that the criterion of respectability is a particular form of dress, and neither birth nor social position. This is foreign to the Indian idea of respectability.
(7) In public offices, the well-paid posts have been given to Europeans and Eurasians, many of whom are inferior in ability and education to their Indian subordinates. This feeling of bitterness has been aggravated by the distribution of offices in proportion to the population of the different communities irrespective of merit.
(8) Indian public opinion is usually subordinated to European public opinion; and even where there is no conflict between these two opinions, the former is treated with contempt. The statements of Europeans are more trusted than those of Indians and the result is that honest and truthful Indians have recourse to tricks, meanness and lies. This moral differentiation has wrought a revolution in the character of Indians; for "political despotism yields a harvest of deceit, evasions and trickery."
(9) In the case of wrongs done by Europeans to Indians, they mostly remain unredressed (1) because petty wrongs are never brought before Courts of Law and (2) serious wrongs are not adequately compensated. In hospitals, in railway trains and platforms, on public roads, in places of public recreation, events happen which lend colour to the dangerous doctrine that "Europeans can do no wrong."
the people to ventilate their grievances, the suppression of this means is naturally taken, rightly or wrongly, to be the grossest abuse of executive power.
(10) Criticism of government measures is misunderstood as contempt of government. As this is one of the few constitutional means left to
(11) Government officials have frequently preached co-operation with Indian non-officials in administration. But this "co-operation," in actual practice, has been one-sided, and the opinions of responsible Indians have been swamped by the opinion of an isolated officer.
(12) In every country, with a semblance of constitutional government, the opinion of the numerical majority is respected and followed. But in India the "ruling majority" has taken the place of the numerical majority and the result is that the opinion of the real majority is disregarded.
(13) Our sentiments have been cut to the quick by the European community without the government raising its little finger to repair the injury, Witness the sewage, dirt, refuse and other impurities which are daily discharged by the jute mills into the sacred river Hooghly which has thereby been converted into a huge sewer for the benefit of commerce. This injury is submitted to by the people with a galling sense of restraint and patience. How many thousands of people thus feel their insignificance before a few magnates of commerce and industry!
(14) The notorious corruption and oppression of the Police has not yet been eradicated. And the people may be excused if they believe that the government is at the mercy of the Police.
(15) Whenever measures have been introduced in India in the interest of Europeans, they have been defended on the ground of western precedents. But when Indians have demanded certain reforms on western models, they have been told that whatever is good or suitable for one country is not good or suitable for another. (16) It is now generally admitted that the average European in this country is not superior to the best type of Indian. The difference bet