§ Order read, for resuming Adjourned Debate on Question [this day], "That Mr. SPEAKER do now leave the Chair."
§ Question again proposed.
§ (9.0.) SIR MANCHERJEE BHOWNAGGREEAlthough, like many other hon. Members, I have been waiting impatiently for a turn in this debate, I wish for a moment that an older Member was following upon the noble Lord who spoke last; for he would have, perhaps with greater authority than I can command, congratulated my noble friend on the success of his first speech as Under Secretary for India. The House is not unacquainted with the noble Lord's eloquence, but the power of mastering flit details of a technical subject fraught with 550 perplexing considerations which he has exhibited, holds out ample promise for the future, upon which, I am sure, the House will join with me in congratulating him.
Until a very recent date, it seemed highly probable that the large surplus shown in the Financial Statement of the Government of India for the year under review would disappear, and a further severe strain placed on all the spare resources of the country in the effort to relieve the distress from another famine more severe in its character than even those with which it had to combat in recent years. It seemed very likely that not only the population within our own territories in India, but a large portion of the subjects of Native States, would have hail to be succoured. If this had happened, I am afraid that the energy of all Indian administrators, and even the attention of this House would have had to be exclusively devoted to devising ways mot means for meeting a huge catastrophe. But the timely fall of the monsoon rains this year has changed all this dismal prospect, and the promise of normal, if not abundant, crops, which will enable the country to retrieve the losses of the past years, is a matter for sincere thankfulness, enabling us tonight to turn our attention to many other questions of paramount importance to our fellow-subjects in India. The name of such questions is legion, but it would be idle to treat them wholesale within the limited time at the disposal of this House. Nor would it serve any useful purpose to do so, for I recognise that many of them which have been even mentioned here from time to time in the form of Questions can more fittingly be left to the authorities in India for consideration and disposal. I propose, therefore, to restrict my remarks tonight to three main topics, with regard to which the approval or intervention of Parliament is, in my judgment, likely to prove of solid service. The first of these is embodied in the Motion which stands in my name viz.: "That this House, while viewing with approval the efforts made by the Government of His Excellency Lord Curzon to obtain reports and advice from experts on the subject of starting a scheme of technical instruction for the whole of India, is of 551 opinion that it is desirable, pending the inauguration of a complete scheme, to adopt immediate measures for the preservation, improvement, and encouragement of the existing industrial and agricultural occupations of the people of that country, and to establish classes in connection with existing schools for imparting elementary instruction to students in those pursuits."
It will be observed, Sir, that the first part of this Motion pledges the House to an approval of the steps adopted by Lord Curzon on this important question. No hon. Member who knows how earnestly the Viceroy has entered upon the necessary preliminary inquiry, invited advice from experts, and himself laid down the broad propositions on which such investigation should be conducted and advice tendered, would be prepared to withhold approval of Lord Curzon's action. At the same time, it must be freely admitted that an exhaustive investigation of a subject so complicated by the varying sentiments, needs, and conditions of the different communities which form what is called the Indian population, and the evolution of a complete project for the spread of technical education amongst them, must spread over a great length of time. On the other hand, it is now broadly recognised that every day almost the existing industries of the country are becoming enfeebled, and, in the face of foreign competition, losing ground so rapidly that their very existence is endangered. This may be said more especially of manufactured articles. Recent famines have proved two propositions to demonstration. The first that agricultural occupation is over-manned, and that the proportion of the people dependent mainly on it must be reduced; and that can be done in one way, and one way alone—that is, by opening out other avenues of industry to the tiller of the soil. The other lesson forced upon us by the famines is that the methods of agriculture itself have to be improved. A knowledge of the different qualities of the soil, of its adaptability to the growth of various sorts of crops, of the use of improved implements, and a hundred other subjects allied to the science of agriculture, have to be taught to, at all events, the more intellectual among the large classes of cultivators. I doubt if there is any 552 means in any part of India where the son of even a well-to-do agriculturist or land owner can today obtain the most elementary knowledge of such important subjects. Among the wise proverbs or saws of India in the time of its former civilisation in the pre-British epoch, one which was of general acceptance and most acted upon was embraced in the two words "Oottum Kheti," which meant that of all the callings agriculture was the most precious and best worth following. These words have lost their meaning today; and why? Because in spite of the changed conditions of the times, with a population rapidly multiplying, and their wants and the consequent burden on their resources increasing, the cultivator is left to his ancient methods of eking out a hare subsistence as best he can. It is of the utmost necessity to let in light and intelligence into his dark but and unchanging lot. One man in a thousand brought up to a scientific training in agriculture, who can analyse the clay, handle an improved harrow, know how to keep his cattle in good condition, and take account of the economic and natural conditions amid which he has to work, would prove a benefactor of the 999 who in normal times live from hand to mouth, and with the first touch of a drought lapse into abject helplessness. But where is this one man to acquire his training? I say, Sir, without fear of contradiction, that there is no means at his disposal for the purpose. True, there are a few classes, sparsely spread in the neighbourhood of some towns, meant to give agricultural instruction. Even if they were efficient, they are not numerous enough: but I go further, and maintain that, owing to the class of people from which the students are drawn, the idea of securing some official post with which they work, and other causes into which I cannot of course enter here, these desultory, heartless experiments yield no substantial results. What we want in India today is a multiplication of such a farm as I had the good fortune to see in Allahabad last January. By the efforts of a single individual, what was once a small farm for the use of the military has in the course of a very few years been turned into a large undertaking, comprising many hundreds of acres of land, and 553 giving employment to a large number of men, a good many of whom were rescued from famines. The organiser of this enterprise was a military officer who had some knowledge originally of agricultural pursuits, which enabled him to develop it, stage by stage, from a small experimental farm into what is today a model and highly reproductive institution, having well-equipped departments for all kinds of dairy produce, and breeding fine stock of cattle which would bear favourable comparison with anything of the kind in this country. This gentleman has not only conquered the difficulties of climate, and introduced such new industries as the manufacture of bacon, but drawn to his work many willing hands from the agriculturists of surrounding districts by his kindly treatment and such concession to their feelings as abstaining from killing cows reared on the farm. It is teachers of this gentleman's type and the instruction which can be obtained on his farm, that India is sorely in need of, and I do not see why what has been shown to be possible in Allahabad should not be multiplied in every province of India. The country should be dotted over with such model farms. Then, with regard to what might be done for training in manufactures on a small scale, I would instance the methods pursued by the American Mission in the Deccan. This mission also rescued a goodly number of waifs and strays in the recent famine years, clothed and fed them, and side by side with giving them the necessary elementary education, trained them to such industries as carpet-weaving and metal work in small workshops attached to their schools. Almost every child put to this sort of training has in a very short time been able to earn enough for its livelihood. This, therefore, is also an object-lesson which might be very widely imitated in connection with many of our smaller schools in India. I mention these matters in support of the Motion to which I have invited the attention of the House, and the sympathetic manner in which it is received will, I feel sure, encourage the Government of Lord Curzon to evolve the larger project of technical instruction to which it is pledged, and also induce it to take immediate measures in the direction I have ventured to suggest.
554 I now pass on to the second matter to which I consider it necessary to invite the attention of hon. Members. The treatment of the British Indian subjects in South Africa and other colonies has, I am thankful to say, at last evoked the sympathy of the British public, and if they were fully acquainted with the nature of the disabilities imposed upon these our fellow-subjects in certain parts of the Empire, their sense of justice would positively revolt against the stigma unnecessarily cast upon a docile and law-abiding community. I shall briefly recount some of the restrictions imposed on them. A British Indian subject in the Trans. vital would be required (a) to take out a registration ticket on payment of £3; (b) take out a 1s. pass before travelling in a railway carriage; (c) not to walk on footpaths; (d) not to reside except in certain locations; (e) not to own landed property; (f) not to trade or farm on his own account; and so forth. These disabilities were imposed on them by the late Boer administration, but with the introduction of our rule they do not seem to have disappeared. And it naturally fills all India with concern that if, when the new Colonies are vet under the direct administration of the Imperial Government, these restrictions are not removed, later on they might be perpetuated. Sir, this sort of legislation by the Boers and in our own Colonies is not based on any economic considerations. It is simply the result of prejudice, aye, of hatred, towards the people of India on the part of the settlers. It is unreasoning and uncalled for. I need not labour this point, because I know that both the Secretaries for India and for the Colonies have looked upon it with disapproval and disgust. And I must here acknowledge with gratitude the promise given by the noble Lord only the other day to a deputation which waited on him, to do all he could to secure redress for this great grievance. I was disappointed that at the Conference of the Colonial Premiers this question was not discussed. But during the forthcoming visit of the Colonial Secretary to Africa, I trust the right hon. Gentleman will make it a point to discuss it on the spot, and induce the Colonial authorities to extend that fair treatment to the Indian subjects of His Majesty which has been heretofore denied them. It is said 555 that the Colonies being self-governing, the Imperial Government is unable to interfere in this matter. I cannot admit that plea. Self-government carries with it certain rights, but it also imposes certain responsibilities. And if the Colonies refuse to recognise the responsibility of treating India with justice and with courtesy, in accordance with the pledges given to her people by the Crown for equal treatment and fair play, they are trampling upon the noble and sacred traditions of the British Constitution. I still hope that the combined action of the Secretaries for India and the Colonies will induce them to desist, and that the great personal influence of the Colonial Minister and the good sense of the better classes of the Colonies will prevail over the prejudice of the lower population, which is at the bottom of this harsh treatment of their Indian fellow-subjects. If this expectation is not soon realised, then I submit, and I do so with regret, that it will be the duty of the noble Lord, as the protector of the rights and liberties of the people of India, to call upon the Indian administration to adopt such reciprocity in legislation as may place the people of those Colonies under the same ban in India that they persist in imposing upon her people within their own jurisdiction. That, at all events, will serve to protect the loyal and unoffending millions of His Majesty's Indian Empire from the slur which the legislature of the Colonies has sought to cast on them as unfit to enjoy the ordinary rights of British citizens.
In referring to the third subject which I wished to submit to the consideration of the House, I am glad that the statement made by the noble Lord already with regard to it enables me to dispense with any long argument. If the increased scale of pay of the British soldier sanctioned by this House were to be levied from the Indian Exchequer also, it would impose a fresh burden which India can ill bear, nor ought she in justice to be asked to bear. I note with satisfaction that the noble Lord is in agreement with the Government of India in resisting the claim put forward on this head by the War Office, and that the difference is referred to the arbitration of the Lord Chief Justice. I therefore do not feel at liberty to discuss this question, beyond 556 expressing a fervent hope that in the consideration of it the contribution of India to the military needs of the Empire, and the help she has ungrudgingly given in men and material resources to it in times of stress, will be fully taken into account. Lord Curzon voiced the sentiment of the whole of the people of India when in his masterly speech on the last Budget he said in reference to this subject—
We beg that the part played by India in the Imperial system, and the services rendered by us in time of trouble, may not be forgotten by the British nation, and that they may find in it, when the occasion arises, good grounds for reciprocal generosity and help.In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would associate myself with my noble friend in the splendid sentiments he has expressed with reference to the great Coronation Durbar to be held at Delhi next month. His unstinted tribute to the loyalty of the Princes and people of India, of which he has had personal experience, will be highly appreciated by them, as from my own life-long experience I can say it is fully deserved. And apart from the grandeur and magnificence of the historical function to which they look forward with pleasure, I am sure that its true inwardness, as explained by him to the House, will strike the minds of the chiefs and the population at large, and bind them in still closer attachment to the throne and person of the King-Emperor. I thank the House for the sympathy with which it has listened to the few questions which I have submitted to its consideration as bearing in the immediate future on their well being, and I trust therefore it will endorse an appeal which I think it right to make to His Majesty's Government. The Secretary of State has spoken in the highest terms of praise, but none too high, of the work done by Lord Curzon during the four years of his Viceroyalty. He has penetrated into every detail of the Indian administration, grasped the most complicated questions with an ability unsurpassed by any of his predecessors, and without seeking popularity, has treated the people of India with such sympathy and frankness that he has become endeared to them. With the view of solving many problems of internal administration, and devising schemes of general benefit, he has appointed Commissions and instituted inquiries 557 on many subjects. It will take some time before these investigations are completed, and before the work of construction to be based upon their results can be undertaken. I am afraid the one year left to his term of office will not suffice for that purpose. And my appeal to Government is to consider whether it would not be right to induce Lord Curzon to stay a couple of years beyond that term in India. No one can deal better with the conclusions of the inquiries I have alluded to than the author of them, so that his longer tenure, while it would be a well-deserved compliment to his sterling ability and successful administration, would secure to the people of India the fruition of those seeds which he has sown for the last four years with unceasing energy for their benefit.
§ (9.50.) MR. EMMOTT (Oldham)I am sure that many Members on both sides of the House must have shared the honest indignation which the hon. Member for North East Bethnal Green has given expression to in regard to the treatment which some of our Indian fellow-subjects have met with in South Africa. I beg to congratulate the noble Lord the Under Secretary for India on the success of his Ministerial début, and I hope that whenever his Party is in power that speech will only be a prelude to a long and distinguished career. I want to deal with certain larger aspects of the position in India. I feel some doubt as to the extraordinary prosperity winch India is supposed to be enjoying at the present time, although I shall be only too glad if my doubt can be removed. The noble Lord the Secretary for India was very positive as to the prosperity of India.
§ LORD GEORGE HAMILTONAll I said was that there were indications of reviving prosperity.
§ MR. EMMOTTI am very glad to hear the noble Lord's explanation, and I am very sorry if I have in any way misrepresented him. A very careful study of this year's Financial Statement has left me dubious on the point of the prosperity of India. There was a huge surplus last year, and a smaller surplus in the three previous years, and yet all these surpluses have been whittled away (except 558 £800,000) on fresh expenditure, while there has been no important remission of taxation. We are always told of the danger of counting on the continuance of last year's prosperity. What struck me in regard to this year's Financial Statement is that it speaks with two voices. That was my general impression on the first reading of it, and I think it was a fair one. The general impression is confirmed by a study in detail, and I would like to enter into some length in regard to two matters. First, as regards Customs. On page 5 of the Financial Statement, paragraph 15, it is said—
Now we have heard a good many arguments about the poverty or prosperity of India; but I have not seen or heard any founded on the growth or falling off of our imports. And yet, what greater test can there be of progress or decay than the consuming and purchasing power of a people? India has this year shown clearly that its consuming and purchasing power is rapidly increasing, and when we examine the classes of articles for which this increasing demand has mainly arisen, and for which this increasing purchasing power has been found, it is evident that it is not the wants or the contents of the pockets of the European population that have appreciably affected the result. It must be admitted by the most sceptical that it is the requirements and the purchasing power of the indigenous population which are alone practically responsible for the satisfactory results attained. We have here then a definite fact which cannot be explained away.And yet, if one looks at page 9 of the Statement, paragraph 36, the explanation is found. It says—We can hardly expect the extraordinary increase under this head, already noted and commented upon, to be consistently maintained, and it would seem prudent to allow for the possibility of even some falling off in Customs receipts next year. It must be remembered that we have no means of ascertaining with certainty whether the market is overstocked or otherwise with such articles as piece goods and petroleum. We accordingly take, as compared with 1901 and 1902, the reduced figures of £3,600,000.The House will see that these two statements really modify one another very considerably. On the question of railways, it is stated that the chief increase arises from two railways which could not be counted on for the future; while in another paragraph it is said that there was an all-round increase which may be counted on in the future.I think I have proved that the Statement does speak with two voices. But is there any reason for these two voices? I think that if the present year's surplus is largely a currency surplus, and 559 is due to a cause which has operated against the prosperity of trade in India, then both voices are amply justified. I am going to show that the surplus this year is only in small part due to the prosperity of India. I mean that the prosperity of India relatively to other countries is a subject of the gravest doubt. For twenty years before 1895 there was a steadily falling rupee. This was good for trade. It stimulated the export trade, but it was bad for the Indian Government which had to pay the interest on Indian loans in gold. The falling rupee also meant the diminution of the income of officials, part of whose salaries had to be remitted home in gold. The flow of capital from England was likewise impeded by the constantly falling exchange. There were sometimes deficits, and there were constantly fears of deficits. These fears were often exaggerated; and there was no better proof of that than that in the year 1895–96—the first of the cotton duties—there was a surplus greater than the cotton duties provided. But still there is no doubt of the fact that new taxes were needed during these twenty years; and they were imposed to the extent of between £5,000,000 and £6,000,000. The principal items of increase were the income tax in 1886; salt tax in June 1888; the 5 per cent. duty of 1893–94, and the cotton duties early in 1895. Now, when these later taxes were put on, each drop of 1d. in the rupee meant one and a half crores, roughly speaking, or £1,000,000 sterling, and all this new taxation has been kept on. Is it difficult to understand why the Government of India is prosperous? The rupee came down to 1s. 6d., 1s. 4d., 1s. 3d. and 1s. 1d., and fresh taxes were put on when the rupee was at 1s. 1d., and the new taxes were kept on when the rupee rose to 1s. 4d. In 1895–96 the average rate for bills was 1s. 1.638 1d., and there was then a surplus of one and a half crores, or £1,000,000. The mere rise of the rupee to 1s. 4d. means a surplus this year of £3,400,000. If that were added to the cost which the Indian Exchequer saved last year by the large use made of the Indian troops in South Africa, the large balance mentioned by the noble Lord would be arrived at. At any rate, so long as the extra taxation for the great fall of the rupee from 1892 to 1895 is kept on, there must, in ordinary 560 years, be a big surplus, unless India is positively going backwards. One must, therefore, treat that question of the prosperity of India by other criteria than that of the Government Financial Statement.
Now I come to the second point—the question of whether, having regard to other criteria, India is advancing or not. Here let me say that I see no reason to doubt that India is advancing slowly. I am no pessimist on this matter: but the question of prosperity is a relative question. Generally all nations are advancing in prosperity. The question of whether India is advancing relatively with others is the point on which I wish to say a few words. First, Did India's trade behave like others in the gross, and second, how is it now in detail? The great facts of the last decade are that there was bad trade from 1890 to 1895, and an extra-ordinary increase of prosperity from 1895 to 1900. I take the foreign trade of India as a whole, and compare it, with that of the four gold standard countries—England, Germany, France and the United States, for the two quinquennial periods—1890–95 and 1895–1900. In the first period the foreign trade of England decreased 6 per cent.; of Germany 1 per cent., of France 13 per cent., and of the United States 7 per cent., whilst that of India increased 9 per cent. This was when there was a falling rupee in India, and the country was faced with bankruptcy. Now take the second period—1895–1900—the foreign trade of England increased 25 per cent., of Germany 40 per cent., of France 25 per cent., and of the United States 50 per cent., whilst that of India only increased by a beggarly 1. per cent. There is no other civilised country that I know of in which the foreign trade increased so little. Take any other criteria of prosperity; population: that did not increase largely; the salt tax: there was a greater increase in that between 1890 and 1895 than since. On page 208 of the Financial Statement, Sir E. Law, complaining of some statistics used by Mr. Gokhale says—
It is clear that, for a fair comparison, exceptional periods of famine should be excluded, I think that a comparison between two seven-year periods (normal agricultural cycles) excluding very recent famines, would be much more reasonable. If we take two such successive periods 1882–83 to 1888–89 and 1889–90 to 1895–96 that is to say up to the date of the first terrible famine, we find that all my 561 hon. colleague's calculations are entirely upset, and the results, following his method are in many cases completely reversed.But that explanation entirely ignores the whole point of the case. The point of Mr. Gokhale's case is that the raising of the rupee from 1s. 1d. to 1s. 4d. had, at any rate during the time it was in operation, been practically a contraction of the currency of India, which must have told, as it did tell, on the producing revenue of India; and any comparison between two periods entirely misses the point of Mr. Gokhale's criticism.If I had had more time I should have liked to treat all the numerous trades in detail; but, as it is, I will only refer to one or two. It is true that the coal trade has been satisfactory; but that is only a small matter. Again, although the acreage under jute has decreased, the jute trade is still flourishing. It is also stated that cotton has found a ready sale. Of course it has, because of the great shortage of cotton in the markets of the world; but there is no tendency to increase the acreage of the land producing cotton in India. With regard to the cotton industry generally, it is stated that it is a little better. That is perfectly true; but what I wish to remind the House of is that up to the time of the currency changes there was an interrupted increase, but that since these changes were introduced there has been the most serious crisis in the cotton industry in India that has ever occurred since its foundation. I have looked recently at the report of six mills of Greaves, Cotton & Co., and in these mills, alter a deduction for depreciation, there was a loss last year of 405,535 rupees or an average of £4,500 sterling per annum for each mill. I should like in this connection to read an extract from a speech delivered by Mr. Moses, who is a commercial member of the Government of Bombay's Council. At the annual meeting of the Bombay Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Moses said—
Our mill industry, in which no less than fifteen million sterling is invested, which was flourishing before the closing of the mills, has since been gradually decaying, until it has now reached the brink of bankruptcy. No less than fourteen mills are about to be liquidated, and some of them, brand new ones, were knocked down at the hammer realising only one-third of their original cost.562 One of the difficulties of this matter is that silver is still dropping in the Far East; and so the trade of India with the Far East is further jeopardised. Mr. Moses proceeds—Our exchanges with the Far East have been following in the wake of silver on the lower basis, thus rendering our trade with that country (China) unprofitable. This has been going on year by year until the trade is now almost paralysed. The mills are obliged to export to China what they produce, whether on their own account or by selling to the China merchants; but the results to all concerned have been all the same unremunerative, as they were not able to obtain sufficiently high dollar prices from John Chinaman commensurate with the fall in exchange.I wish the House to understand that that is the opinion of one of the chief commercial men in India at the present time.I will not weary the House with details of other trades, although I should liked to deal with them. I shall, however, be naturally asked what is the conclusion I draw from the facts I have stated. It is a very simple one. I think that the raising of the rupee to 1s. 4d. has helped the Government of India, but that there is another side to the question. I think the raising of the rupee has caused a contraction of the currency, which has been bad for the producing classes of India—perhaps only temporarily bad, but it has been bad; and is sure to tell and indeed has told in the misfortunes which have overtaken some of the great export trades of India. In the Government Financial Statement we read of overflowing coffers, and they are inclined to minimise the disastrous effect of the currency changes on commerce. Yet an uneasy feeling that all is not well peeps out in the official Financial Statement, if it be read carefully. Do I seek to restore the old currency system in India? Certainly not But I do urge that there should be an inquiry into the effect of the currency changes in India on the trade of India. There are certain patent considerations which ought to be inquired into. In the first place, trade has been bad in India while it has been good elsewhere. That is a somewhat serious matter. Secondly, capital is not flowing into India, although we were told that if the rupee were stable capital would follow it. Capital has not flown into India because it cannot obtain a reasonable return. Lastly, the present state of the currency cannot be permanent, and has certain dangers of its own which cannot be ignored. The standard of India 563 is the most extraordinary in the world. It is neither gold nor silver nor irredeemable paper. It is irredeemable silver with a fancy value given to it, at the suggestion of a Royal Commission, by the fiat of the Government of India; and yet some people are still alive in the world who think you cannot alter the value of currency by legislation or administration. But there are possible dangers in regard to the Indian currency. Silver is still falling; the chasm between the rupee and the intrinsic value of silver is widening; and that interferes with our national market in the Far East. There is also another serious danger in a country where the people are experts in metal work. There is danger of illicit coinage, on which there is a profit of 50 per cent. to the coiner who is not discovered. I want to urge in relation to this matter that as the raising of the rupee has helped the Government of India, and has, at all events temporarily, injured the trade of India, the Government should now help trade by a reduction of taxation. More money may be required for education and sanitation, but the chief need is the reduction of taxation. Next year we shall probably have another large surplus; but there are many taxes which urgently require to be dealt with. There is, for instance, the income tax on small incomes. I think it is a great pity that income tax is raised in India on incomes over 500 rupees; I believe that if the limit of taxable incomes could be increased, a great deal of the blackmail now levied by certain of the assessors would he immediately stopped, inasmuch as men with incomes of 1,000 rupees would be better able to look after themselves and resist blackmail than a man with only an income of 500 rupees. Then the Excise duty on cotton goods is greatly complained of; as are also the import duties. The Secretary of State is doubly and trebly pledged to deal with this question, when the time comes for the remission of taxation. I do not say that it should be the first tax to be remitted. I believe that the remission of the increase in the salt tax should precede it. Lancashire is supposed to be very selfish in regard to these import duties; but I, as a Lancashire Member, would be prepared to remit the extra salt tax before I would remit the cotton duties. However, as far as I can see, there will be a sufficient surplus to deal with both before very long. In 564 regard to this matter, I naturally rebut the charge of selfishness on the part of Lancashire; and I would invite hon. Members opposite who are landowners, and who supported the Agricultural Rates Act, to throw stones at Lancashire if they can. Only a few months ago the noble Lord, at a distribution of prizes at Coopers Hill, used this observation—
So far as outward appearances were concerned the Indian Government had steadily advanced in the path of progress and higher civilisation. But, on the other hand, he had an unpleasant feeling in his mind that, not withstanding all this great progress, the relations between governed and Government had not improved in a corresponding ratio.That is a very serious statement as coming from the noble Lord, and I only want to say in reference to it, that we ought as far as possible to consult the wishes of India in order to avoid any unnecessary friction. The question of the expense of the reception of the native princes is eminently a case in point. The noble Lord lets put a new view on that question now; but it is a pity that the suggestion was ever made that that expense should be charged on the Treasury of India. Then there is the question of increased military expenditure. That is a very difficult question; but I do not think that the present is a very suitable time, if it can be avoided, for any large increase in military expenditure in India. There is another small question which is causing a great deal of trouble in India. I think I mentioned it two years ago, and that is, that owing to the fall in the price in silver, natives, when they want to realise their ornaments, get very much less for them than they did before the price of silver dropped, and they are also very often defrauded by native dealers who make a profit out of the ornaments. That is a little question arising nut of the currency changes, but it is causing a great deal of friction in India.I must apologise, Sir, for the length at which I have detained the House; but it is very difficult to speak on Indian questions at any reasonable length. I hope I have not dealt with the subject in any partisan spirit. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Wolverhampton once said, "We are all Members for India," but sometimes I think good friends of India have asked too much in the way of heroic measures and drastic changes. It seems to me that it is not a question of heroic 565 measures or drastic changes, but a question of close attention to detail at a time when it is necessary to give the utmost attention to the development of the commerce and industries of India. I am encouraged by the greater interest shown in this debate tonight. I believe that there is rising up in this country and in this House a set of men who are willing to push reform in India on moderate lines, who are as free from sentimentalism as from selfishness, and who aim only at the good of India, and through that at the good of the Empire at large.
§ (10.15.) SIR EDGAR VINCENT (Exeter)I am in the unfortunate position of differing from a great many of the views put forward in the interesting speech which has just been delivered. The hon. Gentleman who has just spoken threw doubt on the reality of the prosperity of India. It appears to me that that prosperity is absolutely proved, first of all by the large figures of imports, the largest on record; by the high level at which the exports of India have been maintained, not with standing alterations in currency; and, still further, by the continued increase in the amount of treasure imported every year. The hon. Member is further inclined to attribute the absence of prosperity to the recent currency reform. I venture to lay before the House the view that the prosperity of India has been enormously enhanced by the great reforms which have been adopted by the Government, on the recommendation of the Committee presided over by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Wolverhampton. I believe that the prosperity of India has been for many years obscured—if I may use the term—by the violent fluctuations in exchange previous to the reform enacted two years ago, and that the real prosperity of the country was perhaps greater than it appeared on the surface. But it is only since the exchange has been fixed at a comparatively steady level that the world has been able to perceive what the real advance of India has been. The hon. Gentleman, although he disbelieved in the prosperity of India, suggested to the Government that they should lose no 566 time in reducing taxation. It appears to me that if the surplus is based on such an insecure foundation as he suggests, it is somewhat illogical to suppose that the Government should abandon a considerable portion of their revenue. On this particular point, I venture also with great diffidence to differ from the view expressed by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Wolverhampton. He also pressed the Secretary of State to lose no time in conceding a large reduction in, or perhaps the abolition of, the salt tax.
§ SIR HENRY FOWLERThe removal of the excess duty.
§ SIR EDGAR VINCENTYes; and I am with the right hon. Gentleman so far that, when the time comes for the reduction of taxation, I willingly concede that the salt tax is one which deserves the attention of the Indian Government. But I venture to suggest that India has only within the last two years recovered her financial prosperity. She has been through a very long period, I will not say of unsound, but of insecure and doubtful finance, and I would urge on the noble Lord that no measure for the diminution of the revenues of the Indian Government should be entertained until financial prosperity is established on a sound and secure basis. I would venture to lay before the House three grounds on which I base my suggestion. The first is that it is admitted on all sides that an elastic administration of the land tax is among the most important requirements of the prosperity of the country; and to administer the land tax in an elastic manner you require to have a large surplus of revenue to pull and haul. If you are pushed to make both ends meet, you are compelled, in order to get in revenue, to press in provinces where you had much better make remissions. The second reason is that we had from the noble Lord tonight the statement that the indebtedness of the peasantry of India has largely increased, and that special measures may be required in order to meet this growing evil. These measures can only be by the remission of revenue, and in an elastic administration of the 567 whole scheme of taxation. My third reason is that the danger in India of maintaining taxation at a comparatively high level is incomparably less than the danger, having once remitted taxation, of having to re-impose it. In an Oriental country there is no measure so likely to cause discontent, so likely to throw suspicion on the wisdom of the Government, as what I might term fiddling with taxation. First reducing taxation and then increasing it upsets the balance of your Budget and destroys the confidence of the tax paying population in your wisdom. In dealing with the tax-paying community in India, and with the general wealth of the country, it must never be forgotten that we have there a population which is not only poor but which is also improvident. In European countries a succession of good crops, a year or two of prosperity, increases the power of the people to resist subsequent troubles that may come upon them; but in India the increase of capital and all the reserve forces produced by two or three years of prosperity are incomparably less. As the taxpayer, as an individual and as a community, is improvident, so, I submit, the Government must to a certain extent be provident and farseeing for him, and the necessity which, I think, lies on all Governments of creating reserves is particularly important in the case of the Indian Government.
Now, although the noble Lord has stated that the accumulated surplus of the last three years, including the currency reserve, was something between eleven and eighteen millions sterling, yet I believe the real invested funds do not exceed three and a half millions. May I suggest to the Indian Government as a possible policy and as a wise policy that, except in cases of great urgency, or of taxes which bear with exceptional injustice on the population, they should, as far as possible, aim at creating a reserve of ten millions sterling in the currency and reserve ten millions sterling in the famine reserve; and when they have these accumulated reserves it will be then time enough to consider in what way the taxation of the country can be best diminished and the tax-paying community relieved. There is another 568 question on winch I would venture to submit a few observations. The hon. Gentleman opposite spoke of the desirability of increasing interest in this House in the administration of our Indian Empire; and I think the general tone this evening has been in the direction of a desire for increased facilities for debate. I ventured to submit that discussion in the House, interesting though it has been, particularly this evening, is necessarily rather discursive, and hardly any of the points touched are thoroughly elucidated. I would submit, as an alternative proposal, if increased attention to Indian affairs is desirable, that that increased attention should be given either in the form of further examination by Select Committees on specific problems of Indian administration, or that we should revert to, the old system in vogue at the time of the East India Company. Previous to 1858 each renewal of the Charter of the Company, which was every twenty years, was preceded by a thorough examination of the progress of India and of the development of Indian administration during the preceding period. I will not weary the House with an enumeration of the distinguished Members who have served on these Commissions; but almost every name of great eminence in the House of Commons during the first halt of the nineteenth century would be found on the records of these Commissions. Peel, Wellington, Disraeli, Gladstone, Palmerston, and Cobden formed part of them. Whether a period of twenty years be too long or too short, I submit that there would be a very real advantage in considering the possibility of re-establishing an examination of this kind. I have no doubt that it would tend to the advantage of all parties; the people of India would see in it a guarantee of fairness, and even of generosity; this country would obtain a guarantee that its benevolent intentions towards India were executed; the Indian administration, which I believe to be one of the most beneficent of human institutions, would place in a clear light the fact that they are the protectors and not the oppressors of the people of India, their guardians rather than their masters, and that they do their utmost to secure the prosperity of the vast population committed to their is another care.
§ (10.30.) LORD GEORGE HAMILTONThe understanding which was arrived at at an earlier hour was, I think, that this debate should close in time to allow the Appropriation Bill to be considered, and I rise now only to answer the several questions that have been put to me. The right hon. Gentleman expressed his dissatisfaction with the existing system of administration and promotion of railways in India. I entirely agree with the right hon. Gentleman. One part of the administration in India with which I am least satisfied is that which relates to the promotion of railways. The Government of India is not an easy machine to work, but, though the machinery is somewhat cumbrous. I doubt whether we could devise a better system for dealing with the multifarious affairs which have to be settled by the Viceroy and the Council in India, and the Secretary of State and the Council in London. But the two tribunals are eminently disqualified from dealing with commercial questions which require a prompt reply. The railways are either State managed or managed by companies with agents in India and directors in England, and the consequence is that that there is a see-saw, a shuttlecock kind of transaction going on which is almost inevitable in the circumstances, and which I think has been an obstacle to private enterprise promoting railroads such as might not have been the case had another system prevailed. Eighteen months ago we appointed a gentleman of great experience—Mr. Robertson—to investigate into the management of railways. He has devoted a great deal of time to that question, assisted by the officials in India. Mr. Robertson has been to America to look into the working of the railway system there, and now he is about to proceed to India to make his final Report. On that Report, Lord Curzon will have suggestions to make, and they will probably go in the direction of excluding, as far as possible, railway administration from the general administration of the Government, so as to get gentlemen who are experts to devote their time and attention to this particular business without being mixed up in the other multifarious transactions of the Government. I am confident that we will 570 never get private enterprise to embark in railways in India unless a more prompt reply can be given to the suggestions which are made. The question, however, is not an easy one, because the ecurity at present for all railway enterprise is the security of the Indian Revenues, and, therefore, it is impossible altogether to disconnect railway finance from the general finance of India. But the Government will travel as far as they possibly can in the direction suggested by the right hon. Gentleman, and I think that this will be in accordance with the views of men of business. I think that I heard in the speech of the hon. Member for Oldham a little echo of the Bi-metallic League. A good many of the propositions put forward are familiar to us. [Mr. EMMOTT: "The noble lord was a sympathiser in the old days."] We sometimes get wiser as we grow older. But the hon. Member criticised the standard of value in India. A remark was made the other day by an Indian official, the head of the Statistical Department. He said that during the past year the exchange value of the rupee had been as stable inside and outside India as the exchange value of the silver coins in currency in France. I do not think that we can pay a higher compliment to the system established in India. When we are told that a fall in exchange encourages trade and a stable exchange discourages trade, I would point out that the tailing rupee only encourages trade so long as it is falling. When it stops, the matter re-adjusts itself; and I do not believe that any community could benefit by a constantly-depreciating currency. On the contrary, I believe that a depreciating currency which favours exports is nothing more nor less than a legal system of sweating for those who are engaged in the export trade.
§ MR. EMMOTTI hope I did not convey that I favoured a constantly falling exchange.
§ LORD GEORGE HAMILTONThe hon. Gentleman contended that a stable standard would be a check on trade.
§ MR. EMMOTTA rising rupee.
§ LORD GEORGE HAMILTONThe export and import trade is now higher than ever. I never believe that a rising 571 and falling rupee can be a benefit to trade, because it disturbes the whole foundation on which people make their calculations. There has been no fluctuation during the past year. The hon. member for Exeter, speaking with that great authority which comes to one who has had great experience in Eastern finance, deprecated the reduction of taxation and advised the Government to persevere in the direction of establishing great reserves. I agree with my hon. friend that we ought not lightly to part with any portion of existing taxation until we are perfectly sure that we can permanently dispense with it. If we remove any portion of taxation, we cannot put it on again without causing considerable discontent; and I can, therefore, assure the House that we shall act with all precaution before we considerably diminish any of our existing sources of taxation.
My hon. friend also suggested that it would be advisable that certain questions should he referred to a Committee, who might have time thoroughly to investigate them. I have never objected to the appointment of a Committee if the question into which it was to inquire was a definite matter of immediate importance, but I have the strongest objection to a Parliamentary Committee for a mere "fishing" inquiry. Such a Committee does an infinity of harm; it brings up officials and disturbs them in the transaction of regular business, and, after a time, it results in the least influential members of the Committee occupying the time and attention of probably the most influential members of different Administrations, very much to the detriment of the public service. With regard to the inquiry which was held before the charter of the East India Company was renewed, a great deal of the evidence was written, and the oral evidence was very small, and I would point out that the members of that Committee, including such distinguished men of marked ability and genius as the Duke of Wellington, Mr. Gladstone, and Mr. Disraeli, had far less means of informing themselves as regards what was going on than lesser people of the present day. Therefore, it does not seem to me to be desirable to substitute an inquiry of that kind unless some special subject is to be investigated which the Indian Government or the 572 Indian officials cannot satisfactorily investigate for themselves.
As regards the allegation of my having described India as a very prosperous country, I disclaim having ever used language capable of that description. All I said was that all the evidence went to show that the condition of the general mass of the population was upward and not downward, and that, judging by all the tests that could be applied, the taxation did not sit so heavily on the people of India as seriously to curtail the development of industries. India has passed through a very exceptional period. It really seems as if the rain arrangements of a considerable part of the universe have altogether got out of gear. Australia has suffered for seven years, India has suffered for six years running; in Siam, in Central Asia, and in Persia there have been the same extraordinary climatic disturbances. I can only hope that we have got to the end of the cycle of disturbance, and that, if India is vouchsafed for a few years a normal rainfall, we shall be able considerably to assist that country hereafter either by reduction of taxation or other ameliorative measures. I hope the House will now conclude this discussion, in accordance with the understanding, and pass on to the next business.
§ SIR JOHN ROLLESTON (Leicester)said he hoped the noble Lord would agree to the Adjournment of the Debate, as there were still a considerable number of questions to be discussed.
§ MR. SCHWANN (Manchester, N.)said he wished to ask the noble Lord what was the definite policy of the Government with reference to the protection of labourers. The whole question had been for many years in the melting pot; and no one seemed to know yet what the definite policy of the Government was. The Government had now decided that the cost of entertaining the Indian visitors to England should be put on the National Exchequer; and he was delighted that the Government at the eleventh hour had arrived at that decision. With regard to the Durbar, £267,000 had been already added to the estimates for expenditure in connection with it. It was to be one of the 573 grandest functions ever held in India; and even the entertainment which King Solomon extended to the Queen of Sheba would only be a side-show to it. He should like to associate himself with the remarks which tell from his hon. friend the Member for the Camborne Division. He believed there was to be a Commission to inquire into the questions to which his hon. friend referred; and it might be proper that other forms of taxation in India should also be inquired into.
§ MR. WYLIE (Dumbartonshire)said it was very unfortunate that the Government should have curtailed the day usually allotted to the Indian Budget. Two days should be given for the discussion, in order that the details of questions connected with the prosperity of India might be considered. By that means hon. Members with a practical knowledge of India could not be squeezed out by hon. Members who delivered long-spun-out essays on every variety of subject. He hoped that even now the noble Lord would agree to the discussion being continued, holding over the Appropriation Bill until next day. He had given notice of a Motion to call attention to the Report of the Famine Commission of 1901, and to move that the Indian Government be encouraged to act immediately on its recommendations, especially those referring to an increase of the means of irrigation; and that the Commission now dealiing with this subject should be specially instructed to thoroughly investigate the question of irrigation works in some parts of India on a similar scale to that of the recently constructed works in the Nile Valley. When this subject was discussed on the previous occasion, one hon. Member moved an Amendment in a speech occupying an hour and three-quarters, and raised such a number of points that the Secretary of State had to reply at great length, which left only one hour for all the other Members. He thought the attention of the House should be called to the question, especially as the Government of India had ignored the Reports of two of its Famine Commissions by giving preference to railways and starving canals—an erroneous policy which was 574 still being pursued. Before dealing particularly with that subject, he wished to say a few words in opposition to the pessimistic remarks of hon. Members opposite, with regard to the economic condition of India. The increase in the revenues from Customs, Post-office and railways proved the opposite; and the Question put by the hon. Member for Ross elicited the important information that between 1881 and 1891 land under cultivation in India had increased from 194,000,000 acres to 217,000,000 acres. Seeing that India was an agricultural country, he thought that was good proof of its general progress. He wished to congratulate the Secretary of State on having been for two years in a position to put before the House more successful Budgets than had ever been introduced by any of his predecessors. That result was very much due to the introduction of the gold standard, which had conferred incalculable benefits on India; and instead of deficits they now had encouraging surpluses. In a word, it raised the financial position of India to the same plane as that of the great commercial countries of the world. He thought also that the Secretary of State would be very much gratified that the courageous policy which was pursued by the India Office in imposing countervailing duties on sugar, had been one of the indirect causes of the arrangement arrived at at the Brussels Convention, whereby bounties on sugar were to be altogether abolished. That would confer a large amount of benefit on a considerable section of the inhabitants of this country, as well as on the sugar planters in the Colonies. He thought that the India Office might well be proud of having taken the initial decisive step in this Movement, which was energetically supported by the Colonial Secretary, and carried to success by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Before proceeding further he wished to know if the discussion would be continued.
§ MR. SPEAKERIf the hon. Member appeals to me, it is not a question of order; it is a question of arrangement.
§ Motion made, and Question, "That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Mr. Wylie.)
§ Debate to be resumed Tomorrow.