negatory." This is a situation offering scope for all the constructive criticism available in the country, and let it be forthcoming in full measure, but idle carping at outlay on railway improvement will serve no useful purpose, and. in any event, will not divert the course of official policy, now directed at last on the economic side, to the programme "Full steam ahead.” It is wise, as the finance member observes, to face the facts. "We have heavy liabilities hanging over us in several directions; debt of an unproductive character which we ought to dispose of in order to facilitate a remunerative borrowing programme in the near future; a currency position which requires careful handling and at least some withdrawal of our recent emergency issues of paper; and a general consolidation of our position with a view to the development of our national intelligence and earning power. If this teaches us anything, it is that our watchword must be rigid economy, both in the Government and in the lives of individual citizens". Economy, I admit, is a sound principle, rightly interpreted, but in some directions there can be too much economy. Recent financial operations, so out of proportion to previous figures, have somewhat, scared the Finance Department, but a return to the old pettifogging ways would be fatal. We do not want economy concerning railways, or education or public health, or economic development, becausé such parsimony would be not economy, except, of efficiency and intelligence. In most directions the country needs not economy, but lavish outlay which will repay itself tenfold in the higher standard of individual well-being, of economic prosperity, and of political contentment, which such a policy would bring about. It is wise counsel, if you want to get at the root of half India's troubles, to study finance-especially as interpreted at Simla. Unfortunately very few Indian politicians study finance. An exception was Gokhale. I am loth to add to the immense volume of criticism put forward concerning the Government of India's decision to tax excess profits. It is, to-day, a fait accompli, incapable of reversal. It is a pity it did.not come sooner, and on a graduated scale, say 20 % in 1916, 30 % in 1917, and 50 °/。 last year. This would have kept share values at moderate levels, whereas by the sudden change of policy-this is the real grievance-share values suffered disastrous collapse after soaring to heights never previously paralleled. The jute mills are well able to pay, their profits were enormous, while their relative competitive position, Visa Vis foreign jute mills, has been strengthened beyond all comparison. I believe they will all "pay up" cheerfully despite a vigorous effort to cajole or bully Sir James Meston into abandoning his scheme. The Finance Member, be it remembered, is an Aberdonian, and looks on his Calcutta-cum-Dundee compatriots as fair game. And as it was largely or at least partly from low prices for raw jute that mill profits were derived, it is not unfair that a percentage of these accumulations should be retained in the country. Calcutta need not complain, nor need Bombay. Madras is paying excess land revenue tax, and will go on doing so, I fear, to avert higher taxation in the two wealthier provinces named. There was an interesting debate on the pros and cons of this subject the other day, in the local Legislative Council, the upshot of which was that Madras continues to pay. "All About the War-The Indian Review War Book." A comprehensive and authentic account of the War with numerous portraits and illustrations. Edited by G. A. Natesan with an introduction by Lord Pentland and an appreciation by Lord Hardinge. Price Rs. 4. To Subscribers of the I.R. Rs.3. G. A. Natesan & Co., Publishers, George Town, Madras THE INDIANS' BURDEN TAX-PAYER-It is quite impossible for me to bear this any longer, sir. FINANCE MEMBER-Never mind, you can break down. [In the Indian Budget for 1919-20, Sir James Meston, the Finance Member, has made provision of £411,955,000 (Bs. 61,79,25,000) for Military Expenditure during the year.] THE RAILWAY GOURMAND GOURMAND-Ha! ha! What a haul for me, when there is starvation all round! (When Sir James Meston has not made aay liberal provision for education, sanitation and industrial progress in the new Budget, he has budgetted for a railway expenditure of £24,200,000, equal to Rs. 36,30,00,000.] Hindi Punch. HE news of the death of H. M. the Amir of Afghanistan has been received in India with feelings of profound regret. For the Amir's unswerving loyalty to the British Raj was an asset of considerable value during the four years' crisis that closed only the other day with the conclusion of the armistice with the Central Powers. The circumstances of his death, however, gave occasion to anxious thought. A Delhi communique issued on the 24th of February announced that he was killed by shots and stabbed in his tent at Jullunder near Kabul on the morning of the 20th by an "unknown assassin." "The body," said Lord Curzon in reply to a question in the House of Lords, "was taken to Kabul by members of his family. It was not known whether the assassination was due to religious or fanatical reasons, or reasons of politics or domestic intrigue." The Delhi communique also announced that Naib-us-Sultannah Nasrullah Khan, brother of the late Amir, has been acknowledged by the Amir's sons and representatives of the people as the Amir of Afghanistan and that he has written to H. E. the Viceroy "expressing his hope for the continuance and strengthening of friendly relations between the Afghan and British Governments." But mid-Asian politics is a vague, uncertain and dangerous thing and no say exactly if there is anything behind the latest news that Sirdar Nasrulla Khan Naib-us-Sultannah has renounced his claims to the throne of Afghanistan and has sworn allegiance, with all the civil, military and religious representatives, to Sirdar Amanulla Khan Ain-ud-Daula, who has been proclaimed Amir. Sirdar Amanulla Khan is the third son of His late Majesty Habibulla Khan. Still amidst all the change of rulers or domestic intrigues, there is no reason to suppose, as Lord Curzon reminded the Lords, that there would be any interruption of the friendly relations between Great Britain and Afghanistan whose 25 one can independence the British Government have always desired to maintain. It is notorious how the Central Powers were making continued endeavours to wean the Amir to their side so as to provoke a disturbance on the Indian frontiers. In this, the Germans counted without their host. For the Amir was a staunch ally of the British and would not be persuaded into a false step. H. E. the viceroy made a happy reference to His Majesty's fidelity to the British cause, in the course of his opening address to the Delhi Conference in April last: 'In the north there is a bulwark against German intrigue and German machinatious. I refer to our staunch friend and ally, his Majesty the Amir of Afghanistan. As you are aware, at the outbreak of the war, his Majesty gave his royal word that, so long as the independence and integrity of his kingdom were not threatened, he would maintain neutrality. He has kept his royal word unswervingly in spite of every attempt of our enemies to seduce him from his purpose and to embarrass his position, and I do not believe that in the history of this country the relations between any Amir of Afghanistan and any Viceroy of India have been more cordial or mutually confident than they are to-day. But in Afghanistan as in India there are many ignorant people, credulous people, fanatical people, such as at a time of world excitement may be coerced away by any wind of vain doctrine. Such persons may at any moment become a serious enbarrassment to wise and level-headed statesmanship.' A German official mission having visited Kabul in furtherance of the nefarious designs on India, the Amir disposed of them thus shrewdly: 'I don't propose to speak to you (his Majesty is reported to have said) until I have a Turkish and a German army on my western frontier. You cannot expect me to begin talking about an alliance with you while I have the Russian army in the north and the British army in the south and you are still many hundreds of miles away.' In rejecting the German offer in this fashion, the late Amir strictly followed the lead of his father, Abdur Rahman, who throughout his strenuous career continued to act up to the terms of the Anglo-Afghan agreement. But then little was known in those days either of the personal character of the Amir or of his government beyond the fact that Abdur Rahman was a masterful ruler and that the Indian representative at his court, a Mahomedan official, had hardly anything to complain of his intentions towards the British Govern ment. Everything was vague and mysterious. And when, on the death of Amir Abdur Rahman, Habibullah ascended the throne, little was known of the new ruler and his sympathies while much anxiety was felt if he should prove a weak tool at the hands of the unscrupulous elements in the Afghan court. But Habibullah was no such weakling, and we have the testimony of his father that he showed marked aptitude for political authority even so early as 1881 when the Amir had to march against Ayub Khan, his dangerous rival, and to quell the rebellion in Herat. Habibullah was scarcely eleven years old at the time. Later on, the heir-apparent acted as regent in Kabul during the campaign of his father against his rebellious cousin, Ishak Khan. Abdur Rahman records in his autobiography: On my return to Kabul on July 24, I found that during my two years' absence my son, Habibullah Khan, had governed the country so wisely, cleverly, and so entirely in accordance with my wishes, that I conferred two orders upon him, one for his distinguished services in the administration of the Kingdom; the second for having very bravely put a stop to a mutiny which was caused by my own soldiers of the Kandahar Hazara-battalion. He acted most bravely on this occasion riding alone in the midst of the rebellious soldiers without showing any fear of their injuring him. In fact, for over eight years, the prince was practically associated with the Amir in the task of Government. A Mussalman scholar in close touch with Afghan affairs wrote in 1904 that, on his death-bed, Abdur Rahman had nominated Habibullah Khan as his successor, and this nomination was accepted by all the members of the family, the nobles, the functionaries, and the "mullahs" present. On the day following his death the ceremony of "baist" was performed and the oath of allegiance was formally taken by the people. We have said that "mid-Asian politics" was a sealed book and the British Government was naturally anxious to come to some definite understanding with the new Amir whose intenwas towards his neighbours it tions pith of British policy to decipher. Lord Curzon throughout his regime constantly endeavoured to the bring about the adjustment of many minor points of dispute between "Calcutta and Kabul," which threatened sometimes to aggravate the issues of more important questions. But no good followed till in the autumn of 1904 the Imperial Government decided to despatch a mission headed by Sir Louis Dane. The negotiation lasted over four months and the upshot of it was that the Amir outmatched the mission in diplomacy. The treaty finally settled in March 1905 confirmed the old agreement regarding the Amir's subsidy and powers in respect of the importation of arms while the Amir obtained a distinct advantage by securing an agreement that he should be styled "His Majesty "-a mark of distinction affirming his independence. A further step to facilitate and strengthen the amity between the Amir and the British Government was sought after by an invitation to the Amir to visit the Viceroy in India in January 1907. The Amir was prepared to accept the invitation of the Government of India provided that no discussion of political matters was entered into and that, after the Viceregal Durbar at Agra from January 9 to 16, the Amir should be free to adopt to his own wishes the programme arranged for his entertainment. The stipulation was agreed to. The story of the historic visit of the Amir is well within the recollection of our readers. The Amir reached LandiKotal on January 2, and Calcutta on January 28, after witnessing a grand review of some 30,000 troops at Agra, with which he is said to have been much impressed. From Calcutta he proceeded to Bombay, where he arrived on February 12. He left by sea on February 25 for Karachi, landing on the 27th, and left Peshawar on his return home on March 7. The Indian Review published at the time a narrative of the tour together with a record of his more important utterances.* It is impossible to See Vol. VIII page 198 Indian Review, 1907. |