muni a

"BOBBY
'J

BY

R. P A L M E -D U T T

it
S u m m a r is e d b y
JACK LINDSAY
Research Officer, Trades and Labor Council

• ★

Price . . . ONE SHILLING

Registered a t the G.P.O., Sydney, for transm ission by post as a Book,
 Foreword
H E people of A ustralia have a bond of interest with the
T Colonial peoples, particularly India, because Australia was
once a colony, which succeeded in winning dominion status
while India has not yet been able to achieve that objective.
The advance of the Trade Union Movement, and the develop­
ment of a socialist outlook in India, are of particular interest to the
workers of Australia, because the achievement of Socialism is also
a job which lies ahead of the Australian Labor Movement.
Particularly, however, is the position of India of interest to
us to-day, when the anti-Fascist peoples and powers need all the
allies that they can win in the struggle against the barbarian
menace of Hitlerite Germany and its satellites, and Fascist Japan .
A resumption of the negotiations between the British Govern­
ment and the Indian National Congress is vitally needed, so that
such concessions can be made to Indian democratic opinion, as will
r a lly to the fullest extent possible the 400 million Indians behind
the United Nations war effort.
Many Indians to-day, in spite of the treatment that has been
meted out to them in the past, support unreservedly the Allied
Nations, because they are able to place the interests of the world
as a whole before their own interests.
It is, therefore, up to us to understand and appreciate the
ju st claims of the Indian people, and their place in a world which
is being won under the banner of freedom.

R. K IN G , M.L.C.,
Secretary, Labor Council of N.S.W.
 Introduction
A t one time the question of India may have seemed rather
remote from the affairs of the people of this country. In the past
the demand fo r the independence for India has found support
mainly in the working class movement, because it has realised that
socialism can never be realised in the advanced countries while the
ruling classes of those countries are able practically and ideologic­
ally to uphold a system of exploitation of entire colonial countries
and peoples.
To-day, however, this demand (which means at least substan­
tial steps towards Indian independence now) should find a wider
support, because the weakness of India is a menace to the cause
of the United Nations in their struggle to defeat Nazism, and con­
tributes to the danger of Australia and other countries in the
Pacific.
The weakness of India arises, firstly, from its lack of modern
economic development, a condition which exists in all countries
exploited for the benefit of other countries. Secondly, India is not
an independent country as is Australia, m aking its own law s
through its elected representatives. As a result it is difficult fo r
many of its people to see a difference between a victory for the
United Nations and a victory for Fascism.
However, the cause of the United Nations finds support in the
working class political organisations, the Trade Union Movement,
and the Youth Leagues, according to reports that have appeared
in our papers. They realise, no doubt, that the future success o f
the Soviet Union and the other nations must bring about more
favorable conditions throughout the world for the winning of
independence fo r India.
On the other hand, Gandhi, who at all times has merely been
concerned to further national aims only insofar as these do not
conflict with the interests of the Indian capitalist and landlord
class, and who has alw ays in the past fought against the complete
realisation of national independence when the national mass move­
ment threatened the interests of that class, now declares himself
and his followers in favor of “ non-violent non-co-operation.” This
formula has been used by him before in bargaining with the British
Government at the expense of the masses. It is now used to p lay
off Jap an against the British Government fo r purely Indian
nationalist and capitalist aims.
Bose, once a leader of the more progressive section of the
Congress P arty, is reported to be in Berlin, while Nehru is re­
ported to be converted to Gandhi’s policy. A s the Indian Congress
P arty leaders, while playing a progressive role in the main in the
national struggle, are in many cases representatives of the native
2
Indian capitalists and landlords, it is not surprising to find that
both Bose and Nehru have always been strong admirers of Gandlii,
and closer to him than to the mass movement led by the working
class.
The failure of the Cripps mission to secure the transfer of
any significant measure of executive power to Indian representa­
tives, a course which would have enabled them to rally their people
to the struggle against the Fascists, was undoubtedly a blow to
the more progressive forces in the Congress Party, and influenced
Nehru’s decision. Nehru himself showed willingness to co-operate
with the United Nations until the uncompromising attitude of the
British Government became apparent.
The five y e a rs’ struggle of the Chinese people against the
Japanese, and the courage and enthusiasm of the Chinese people,
have been possible because China is still in the main an indepen­
dent nation fighting against the Fascist Imperialists who are
attempting to destroy completely that independence. The 400
million people of India could wage a similar w ar on the side of
the United Nations if substantial steps towards Indian independence
were made now.
While it is up to the Indian people to distinguish clearly be­
tween the combination of powers of which the Soviet Union is a
part (which freed all the non-Russian colonial peoples after the
October revolution), and the Governments allied to Hitler, it is
also up to us to realise that the principles for which this w ar is
being fought mean freedom fo r the Indian people no less than for
ourselves. (The Indian question is fa r from solved by merely
excluding India from the provisions of the Atlantic Charter, an
expedient adopted by the Churchill Government when that docu­
ment was drawn up.)
The Indian problem is also fa r from solved by the wholesale
arrest of Indians whose crime is that they demand some of the
democracy that we are supposed to be fighting for. The release
of prisoners and more democracy fo r the Indians must m ark the
beginning of any progressive policy in India.
We should see that the Australian Government impresses on
the British Government the need fo r a provisional Government in
India, really representative of Indian democratic and national
opinion, and capable of rallying the Indian people behind the United
Nations’ w ar effort.
This pamphlet is a summary of “ India To-day,” a book of
more than 500 pages by R. P. Dutt, one of the greatest writers in
the world on current history in its economic and political aspects,
and an authority on Indian affairs.
Quotations terminating with a D indicate that these sections
have been quoted straight from his book, while many of his
original sources of information are also quoted in part or in full.
It must be kept in mind that D utt’s book was written before
the entry of Soviet Russia into the war.
J . L IN D S A Y .
3
 India as the Pivot of Modem
Imperialism
The question of India is decisive for the whole system of
Imperialism, and the subjugation of Colonial peoples by the great
powers.
AREA AND THE POPULATION OF THE MODERN
COLONIAL EMPIRES
(Statistics Based on Statesman’s Y ear Book, 1938, quoted by D.)

HOME. COLONIAL. TOTAL.

Area. Area. Area.
1000 Popula­ 1000 Popula­ 1000 Popula­
Square tion. Square tion. Square tion.
Miles. Millions. Miles. Millions. Miles. Millions.
British Empire .. 94.6 46.1 13,26 1 454.6 13,356 501
French Empire .. 2 12 41.9 4,617 65.0 4,829 107
Japanese Em pire. 147 69.3 616 62.6 763 13 2
Dutch Empire . . . 12 .6 8 .6 790 61.0 802 70
United States
Empire ............. 2973 129.2 712 14.2 3,685 143
Belgian Empire . 11 .7 8.3 902 10 .1 914 18
Italian Empire .. 119 43.5 1,575 10 .0 1,694 54
P o rt’guese Empire 35 6 .8 810 9.1 845 16
Total ............... 3604.9 353.7 23,283 6 8 6 .6 26,888 10 4 1

Of whieh I n d i a .................................. 1809 375

Per Cent................................................ 7.7% 54.6%
The Japanese Empire includes Manchuria and the Italian
includes Abyssinia.
''T h e 370 millions of India constitute’ three-quarters of the
total population of the British Empire, four-fifths of the overseas
population of the British Empire, and nearly nine-tenths of the
subject colonial population of the British Empire. The Indian
population subject to British rule is more than half the total
colonial population of the w orld.” — D.
“ The problem of India can be very simply stated. It is the
problem of 370,000,000human beings whoare living in conditions
of ■extreme poverty and semi-starvation for theoverwhelming
m ajority, and are at the same time living under a foreign rule which
holds complete control over their lives and maintains by force the
social system leading to these conditions. . . .
“ These hundreds of millions are struggling for life, for the
means of life, for elementary freedom. The problem of their
struggle is the problem of In d ia.” — D.
4
 “ One human being in six is an Indian. This very simple arith­
metical fact is important to bear in mind at the outset in approach­
ing Indian problems.
“ Of the total world population estimated in 19 3 1 at 2025
millions India held 353 millions, or 17 per cent.
“ The census report of 19 3 1 states: ‘ The population now even
exceeds the latest estimate of the population of China, so that
India now heads the list of all countries in the world in the number
of their inhabitants.’ ” —D.
“ This most numerous people in the world (whether the census
comparison with China is exact or not is another question, for
nobody knows the population of China) is subject to the foreign
rule of a country 3000 miles away, inhabited by 46 million
people. This is an extraordinary fact of the modern world situa­
tion. There is nothing like it, and has been nothing like it in
history. A ll the A frican peoples, who are also subject to foreign
rule, but divided among different Great Powers, and not yet with
inner unity, number only 130 to 160 millions (according to the
H ailey Report’s estimate). The Chinese people has also been sub­
ject to the attack and partial penetration of the Great Powers, and
is to-day faced with a war of conquest conducted by Ja p a n ; but
Chinese independence is still unbroken; China has never been re­
duced to a wholly Colonial position. ”—D.
“ The question of the continuance of this Im perialist rule in
India has to-day become an immediate and urgent one, both because
of the visible weakening and decline of that rule in the modern
period, and of its conspicuous failure to solve the problems of the
people of the country, and also because of the increasing awakening
and determination of the Indian people to win their freedom.
“ The answer to this question is likely to be decisive fo r the
future of Imperialism in relation to the subject peoples. India
is to-day the test question, the immediate crucial question, for all
the questions of democracy and Em pire which stand in the fore­
fron t of the present era.” —D.
 The Wealth oi India
India in the 17th and 18th centuries had developed m anufactur­
ing industries which were not inferior to those of the Western
European countries.
“ A t a time when the west of Europe, the birthplace of the
modern industrial system, was inhabited by uncivilised tribes, India
was famous for the wealth of her rulers and fo r the high artistic
skill of her craftsmen. And even at a much later period when mer­
chant adventurers from the W est made their first appearance in
India, the industrial development of this country was at anyrate
not inferior to that of the more advanced European nations.” —
(Indian Industrial Commission Report, quoted by D.)
“ The high quality of the native made iron, the early anticipa­
tion of the processes now employed in Europe for the manufacture
of high class steels, and the artistic products in copper and brass at
one time gave India a prominent place in the m etallurgical world. ’ ’
— (“ The Mineral Resources of In d ia,” by T. H. Holland, quoted by
D.)
Indian silks and printed calicoes were much superior to those
of British manufacture in the 18th century; heavy duties were
imposed on all Indian manufactured cotton goods imported into
Britain by the East India Company in 1720.
India comes second in the world to the U.S.A. in water power
resources— only three per cent, of which are developed.
Her iron ore deposits have been estimated, by experts to be
greater than those of all countries, excepting France and the
U.S.A.
She has 36,000 million tons reserve of coal, an amount which
would last the U.S.S.R. 250 years at her present rate of production.
She produces a little more than one-sixtli of the w orld’s supply of
manganese, used in hardening iron and steel, and before the de­
pression produced one-tliird. Good oil supplies exist in Burma.
Her agriculture is capable of vast development.
“ It seems safe to affirm that with the extension of irrigation,
more thorough and complete facilities of transport, improvements
in methods and materials of agriculture and the expansion of the
area of cultivation . . . the productiveness of India might easily
be increased by at least 50 per cent.; indeed, few countries in the
world can be said to possess so brilliant an agricultural prospect,
if judged purely by intrinsic value and extent of undeveloped
resources.” — (Sir George W att, Government Report on Economic
Products in “ Memorandum on the Resources of British In d ia,”
quoted by D.)
In spite of these resources India produces only very slightly
more iron and steel than Australia and only twice as much coal,
with more than fifty times our population.
6
 The Poverty of India
In 1921-22 in its own words “ the most optimistic estim ate”
o f the Simon Commission of the income per head of the Indian
population was 5d. per day at the time of high prices in 1921-22.
A fte r allowing for the fall in prices since that time R. P. Dutt
estimates this to be equal to 2 |d. per day at the present time.
However, some Indians receive more than others. Professor
If. T. Shah and K . J . Khamba in their “ W ealth and Taxable
Capacity of In d ia” show that one per cent, of the population get
30 per cent, of the income while 60 per cent, of the people get only
30 per cent, of the income.
Taking into account these factors R. P. Dutt estimates that the
m ajority of the population, man, woman and child, live on Id. to
l| d . per head per day, reckoning on the basis of “ the most favor­
able estimates” of a British Government Commission.
In an inquiry into working class budgets in Bombay the Bom­
bay Labor Office made comparison between the ja il code of rations
fo r prisoners and the consumption of Bombay w o rkers:
Bombay W orkers’ Bombay Jails Light
Wages. Hard Labor. Labor.
Cereals ................. 1.29 1b. .. 1.5 lb. .. 1.38 1b.
P u ls e s ..................... 0.09 „ .. 0.27 „ .. 0 .2 1 „
Meat ....................... 0.03 „ .. 0.04 „ .. 0.04
S a l t ......................... 0.04 „ .. 0.03 „ .. 0.03 „
Oils ......................... 0 .0 2 „ .. 0.03 „ .. 0.03 „
Others ................... 0.07 „ .. — .. —
“ The Bombay worker, who is better off than the mass of the
ru ral population, is only able to eat on the level of famine rations
and below the ja il code of prisoners,’ ’ comments Dutt.
“ Between 30 and 40 millions of the population do not have
more than one meal a day and live on the verge of perpetual
starvation.
“ I f the suggestion is made that the sordid clothes of a cholera
patient be burned, the answer is that, in case he gets well he will
have nothing to put on. Poverty prevents such an extravagance.
“ It is food and education, not pills, that are needed in an
Indian village.” — (C. Emerson, an American doctor who went to
live in an Indian village, in “ Voiceless In d ia,” quoted by D.)
The Royal Commission on Labor in India appointed in 1929
fo u n d :

W ages ranged from the most favorable average of 56/- a month

fo r Bombay textile workers and 26/- for women; wages were for
Bom bay unskilled workers 30/- a month; for coal miners in the
7
principal Jh a rria coalfield, an average of 15 /- to 22/- a m onth; fo r
workers in seasonal factories from 6 d. to 1/ - a day fo r men, and 4d.
to 9d. for women, and for unskilled workers in Madras and the
united provinces as low as 5d. a day for men. It stated of “ unregu­
lated factories,” in which most of the industrial workers are
employed, “ workers as young as five years of age may be found in
some of these places working without adequate meal intervals or
weekly rest days, and often for 1 0 or 1 2 hours daily, for sums as low
as two annas ( 2 |d.) in the case of those of tenderest years.”
These low wages the Commission found meant that “ in most
industrial centres the proportion of families and individuals who
are in debt is not less than two-thirds of the whole . . . in the great
m ajority of cases the amount of debt exceeds three months’ wages
and is often fa r in excess of this amount.” — (Royal Commission
on Labor in India, 1929, quoted by D.)
Of housing Dutt says, “ In 1 9 1 1 69 per cent, of the total popula­
tion of Bombay were living in one room tenements (as against six
per cent, in London in the same year), averaging 4.5 persons per
tenement. The 19 3 1 census showed that 74 per cent, of the total
population of Bombay were living in one room tenements— thus
revealing an increase in overcrowding after two decades . . .
“ The terrible overcrowding is even more sharply revealed
when working class conditions are taken separately and not merged
in an average. In 1921-22 the Bombay Labor Office inquiry into
working class budgets found that 97 per cent, of the working class
families in Bombay were living in one room tenements, often con­
taining two and even up to eight fam ilies in one room. In K arachi
the W hitley report found that almost one-third of the whole
population was crowded at the rate of six to nine persons in one-
room tenements.”
Dutt refers to the W hitley Report (official) on sanitation.
It found “ neglect of sanitation is often evidenced by heaps of
rotting garbage and pools of sewage, whilst the absence o f
latrines enhances the general pollution of air and soil. Houses,
many without plinths, windows and adequate ventilation, usually
consist of a single small room, the only opening being a doorway
too low to enter without stooping. In order to secure some privacy,
old kerosene tins and gunny bags are used to form screens which
further restrict the entrance of light and air. In dwellings such as
these human beings are born, sleep and eat, live and die.”
He further states: “ The Bombay Labor Office inquiry into
working class budgets in 1932-33 found that in respect of w ater
supply 26 per cent, of the tenements had one tap fo r eight tene­
ments and less, 44 per cent, had one tap fo r nine to fifteen tene­
ments and 29 per cent, had one tap for 16 tenements and o ver;
85 per cent, had only one p rivy fo r eight tenements or less, 12 per
cent, had one privy fo r 9 to 15 tenements, and 24 per cent, had one
p rivy for sixteen tenements and over. (Report of Inquiry into
8
W orking Class Budgets in Bombay, 1935, from which Dutt quotes).
In 1935 the Ahmedabad Textile Labor Union conducted an inquiry
into industrial housing, and found that out of a total of 23,706
tenements investigated 5669 had no provisions of any kind for
water, while those which had a supply had one to two taps in an
area occupied by 200 or more fam ilies; 5000 tenements had no
latrine accommodation; there was no sanitation or drainage.”
Perhaps these conditions are exaggerated. Perhaps it may be
argued, people could not live under such conditions. They can’t—
for long!
“ The average length of life in India is low as compared with
that of most of the Western countries; according to the census of
19 2 1, the average for males and females was respectively 24.8
and 24.7 years, or a general average of 24.75 years in India as com­
pared with 55.6 years in England and Wales. It was found to have
decreased further in 19 3 1, being 23.2 and 22.8 years fo r males and
females respectively.” (“ Industrial Labor in India,” International
Labor Office, 1938, based on Census of India, 19 3 1, quoted by D.)
On the causes of deaths Dutt declares, “ Deaths in India are
mainly ascribed to ‘ fevers’ (3.8 millions out of 6 .6 millions in
British India in 19 35)— a conveniently vague term to cover the
effects of semi-starvation, poverty conditions and their conse­
quences in ill-health. That three deaths in four in India are due
to ‘ diseases of poverty’ is the judgment of the standard economic
authority in India, a writer sympathetic to imperialism.” —D.
“ 20.5 out of a total death rate of 26.7 per thousand of the
population in 1926 were accounted for by cholera, small-pox, plague
‘ fev ers,’ dysentry and diarrhoea—nearly all of which may be con­
sidered to fa ll under the heading of ‘ diseases of poverty,’ and
most of which may be considered to be preventable.” — (V. Anstey,
“ The Economic Development of India,” quoted by D.)
It is popularly thought due to the propaganda of the Imperial­
ists in the schools and press that the poverty of India is due to very
rapid increase of population.
Dutt gives the following figures:
INCREASE OP POPULATION, 1870-1910.
Increase Per Cent.
India ..................... 18.9
England and Wales 58.0
Germany ................. 59.0
Belgium ................. 47.8
Holland ................. 62.0
Russia ..................... 73.9
Europe Average . . . 45.0
He states, “ With the exception of France the rate of growth in
India was less than that of any European country.” Further, “ The
9
population of England and Wales rose from 25.9 millions in 18 8 1
to 39.9 millions in 19 3 1. That is an increase of 53.8 per cent. The
population of India rose from 254 millions in 18 8 1 to 353 millions
in 19 3 1; but the real increase after allowing fo r new territories
and changes in computation is calculated by . the census at 85
millions. That is an increase of 31.7 per cent. The rate of increase
in England and Wales for the past half century has still been
nearly twice that of India.”
In 1933-34 the infantile m ortality rate was 524 per 1000 births
in one-room tenements in Bombay.
The following figures fo r Bombay show how the position
varies according to the housing situation:
Infantile death rate
Number of Rooms. per 1 0 0 0 births.
1 room and under 524
2 rooms and under 394.5
3 rooms and under 255.4
4 rooms and over . 246.5
(From the speech of S. V. Parulekar, Indian W orkers’ delegate
at the International Labor Conference, Geneva, 1938, quoted by
D.)
The average infantile death rate fo r the whole country, includ­
ing rich and poor, is 164 per 1000 births as compared with 40 in
Australia.

10
 The Secret oi Indian Poverty
R. P. Dutt gives a survey of M arx’s analysis of Indian problem s:
“ Immediately after the ‘ Communist Manifesto’ (in which
M arx and Engels called attention to the importance of the opening
of the Indian and Chinese markets for the development of capitalist
production), and the collapse of the 1848 revolutionary wave, M arx
concentrated his attention on the reasons underlying that collapse,
and found them above all in the new expansion of capitalism
outside Europe, into Asia, Australia and California.” —D.
“ We cannot deny that bourgeois society has been for a second
time living through its 16th century which I hope w ill sound its
death-knell as surely as the first brought it into life. The special
task of bourgeois society is the establishment of the world market—
at anyrate in its main outlines—and of a production upon this
basis. Since the world is round, this process appears to have
reached its completion with the colonisation of California, Australia
and the opening up of China and Japan. The weighty question
fo r us now is this: On the continent the revolution is imminent,
and w ill from the first take on a socialist character. But w ill it
not inevitably be crushed in-this small corner, since the movement
of bourgeois society is still ascendant on a fa r wider a rea?” — (Marx,
letter to Engels, October 8 th, 1858, quoted by D.)
“ Here, in this understanding of the significance of the extra
European expansion of capitalism for the perspective of the develop­
ment of capitalism and the socialist revolution in Europe, la y the
key thought which M arx had grasped in the eighteen fifties, but
which the main body of European socialism had only begun to
realise in the recent period. ”—D.
# # # *
“ M arx’s analysis (of the Indian economy) starts from the
characteristics of ‘ Asiatic Economy,’ which the impact of capitalism
fo r the first time overthrew.” —D.
“ The key to the whole East is the absence of private property
in land .” — (Engels to M arx in June, 1853, quoted by D.)
This, however, was also the starting point of European economy.
“ A ridiculous presumption has gained currency of late to the
effect that common property in its primitive form is specially a
Slavonian or even exclusively Russian form. It is the primitive
form which we can prove to have existed among Romans, Teutons
and Celts; and of which numerous examples are still to be found
in India, although in a partly ruined state. A closer study of the
Asiatic, especially of Indian forms of communal ownership, would
show how from the different forms of primitive Communism
different forms of its dissolution have developed.
“ Thus, fo r example, the various original types of Roman and
Teutonic private property call be traced back to various forms of
Indian Communism.”— (Marx, critique of Political Economy, quoted
by D.)
How is it that Communism in the E ast did not develop into the
landed property of feudalism as in the West?
11
 “ How comes it that the Orientals did not reach to landed
property or feudalism? I think the reason lies principally in the
climate, combined with the conditions of the soil, especially the
great desert stretches which reach from the Sahara right through
Arabia, Persia, India and T artary to the highest Asiatic uplands.
A rtificial irrigation is here the first condition of cultivation, and
this is the concern either of the Commune, the provinces or the
Central Government.”— (E n gels’ letter to M arx, Ju n e 6 th, 1853,
quoted by D.)
The conditions of cultivation were not compatible with the
existence of private property in land.
M arx wrote on the village system : ‘ ‘ Those small and extremely
ancient Indian communities, some of which have continued down
to this day, are based on possession in common of the land, on the
blending of agriculture and handicrafts and on an unalterable
division of labour, which serves, whenever a new community is
started, as a plan and scheme ready cut and dried. Occupying areas
of from 1 0 0 up to several thousand acres, each forms a compact
whole, producing all it requires. The chief part of the products is
destined fo r direct use by the community itself, and does not take
the form of a commodity. Hence, production here is independent
of that division of labour brought about, in Indian society as a
whole, by means of the exchange of commodities. It is the surplus
alone that becomes a commodity, and a portion of even that, not
until it has reached the hands of the State in whose hands from time
immemorial a certain quantity of these products has found its w ay
in the shape of rent in kind.
“ The constitution of these ancient communities varies in
different parts of India. In those of the simplest form, the land is
tilled in common, and the produce divided among the members.
A t the same time, spinning and weaving are carried on in each
fam ily as subsidiary industries. Side by side with the masses thus
occupied with one and the same work, we find the ‘ Chief inhabi­
tan t,’ who is Ju dge, Police and Tax-gatherer in one; the book­
keeper who keeps the accounts of the village and registers
everything relating thereto; another official, who prosecutes
criminals, protects strangers travelling through, and escorts them
to the next v illa g e ; the boundary man who guards the boundaries
against neighbouring communities; the water-overseer, who dis­
tributes the w ater from the common tanks for irrigation; the
Brahmin, who conducts the religious services; the schoolmaster,
who on the sand teaches the children reading and w ritin g; the
calendar-Brahmin or Astrologer, who makes known the lucky or
unlucky days for seed-time and harvest, and every other kind of
agricultural w o rk ; a smith and a carpenter, who make and repair
all the agricultural implements; the potter, who makes all the pottery
of the v illag e; the barber; the washerman, who washes clothes; the
silversmith; here and there the poet, who in some communities
renlaees the silversmith, in others the schoolmaster. This dozen of
individuals is maintained at the expense of the whole community.
Tf the population increases, a new community is founded, on the
pattern of the old one, on unoccupied land. . . .
12
 “ The simplicity of the organisation fo r prochiction in these
self-supporting communities that constantly reproduce themselves
in the same form, and when accidentally destroyed spring up again
on the spot and with the same name— this simplicity supplies the
key to the secret of the unchangeableness of Asiatic societies, an
unchangeableness in such striking contrast with the constant dis­
solution and refounding of the Asiatic states, and the never-ceasing
changes of dynasty. The structure of the economical elements of
society remain untouched by the storm-clouds of the political sky.”
(M arx “ C apital,” Vol. I., Ch. X IV ., quoted by D.)
BRITISH CONQUEST.
This was the traditional economy shattered by the onset of
foreign capitalism.
“ Herein the British conquest differed from every previous
conquest, in that while the previous foreign conquerors left un­
touched, the economic basis and eventually grew into its structure,
the British conquest shattered that basis and remained a foreign
force, acting from outside and withdrawing its tribute outside.
Herein also the victory of foreign capitalism in India differed from
the victory of capitalism in Europe, in that the destructive process
was not accompanied by any corresponding growth of new forces
[of production.].”—D.
“ There cannot remain any doubt but that the misery inflicted
by the British on Hindustan is of an essentially different and
infinitely more intensive kind than all Hindustan had to suffer
before. I do not allude to European despotism, planted upon
A siatic despotism, by the British East Indian Company, form ing
a more monstrous combination than any of the divine masters
startling us in the temple of Salsette. . . .
“ A ll the civil wars, invasions, revolutions, conquests, famines,
strangely complex, rapid and destructive as their successive action
in Hindustan may appear, did not go deeper than its surface.
England has broken down the whole fram ework of Indian society,
without any symptoms of reconstruction yet appearing. This loss
of his old world, with no gain of a new one, imparts a peculiar
melancholy to the present misery of the Hindu, and separates
Hindustan, ruled by Britain, from all its ancient traditions and the
whole of its past history.” (M arx, “ The British Rule in India,”
New Y o rk “ Herald-Tribune,” 1853, quoted by D.)
M arx analyses how this destruction of the Indian economy was
accomplished.
This is summarised by Dutt as follow s:
“ In the earlier period the initial steps of destruction were
accomplished first by the E ast India Company’s colossal direct
plunder (‘ during the whole course of the 18th century the treasures
transported from India to England were gained much less by the
comparatively insignificant commerce, but b y the direct exploita­
tion of that country and by the colossal fortunes extorted and trans­
mitted to England.’—M arx, quoted by D .). Second, by the neglect
of irrigation and public works, which had been maintained under
13
previous Governments and were now allowed to fa ll into neglect;
third, by the introduction of the English landed system, private
property in land, with sale and alienation, and the whole English
Criminal Code; and, fourth, by the direct prohibition or heavy
duties on the import of Indian manufacturers, first into England
and later also into Europe.” —D.
The final blow followed much later.
The E ast India Company was not concerned to find outlets
fo r British goods. It sought to secure a monopoly of the trade in
foreign goods imported into England and Europe from the East.
The English m anufacturing interests fought against the
monopoly, and secured the exclusion from England of Indian
manufactures while rival British trading interests agitated for the
abolition of the Company’s monopoly of the Indian trade.
This monopoly was recognised by Parliament in the reign of
W illiam III.
With the ascendancy of English industrial capital the monopoly
was partly overthrown in 18 13 and fin ally abolished in 1833.
The Indian market was then thrown open to English manu­
factures expanding under the gigantic impetus of the industrial
revolution.
“ It was only after 18 13 , with the invasion of English industrial
manufacturers, that the decisive wrecking of the Indian economic
structure took place.” —D.
“ From 18 18 to 1836 the export of cotton twist from Great
Britain to India rose in the proportion of 1 to 5200. In 1824 the
export of British muslins to India hardly amounted to 6,000,000
yards, while in 1837 it surpassed 64,000,000 yards. But at the same
time the population of Dacca decreased from 150,000 inhabitants
to 20,000. This decline of Indian towns celebrated for their fabrics
was by no means the worst consequence. British steam and science
uprooted over the whole surface of Hindustan the union between
agriculture and industry.” (M arx, “ The British Rule in In d ia,”
quoted by D.)
“ The English cotton machinery produced an acute effect on
India and the Governor-General reported in 1834-35, ‘ The misery
hardly finds a parallel in the history of commerce. Tho bones of
the cotton weavers are bleaching the plains of India.’ ” — (Marx,
“ Capital,” Vol. I., Ch. X V ., quoted by D.)
“ This revolution not only destroyed the old m anufacturing
towns, driving the population to crowd the villages, but destroyed
the balance of economic life in the villages. From this arose the
desperate overpressure on agriculture which has continued on a
cumulative scale right down to the present day.” —D.
A t the same time the merciless increase in the land revenue
(referred to elsewhere) and lack of expenditure on public works
( .8 per cent, of the revenue in 18 5 1) prevented agricultural develop­
ment.
M arx, however, shed no tears at the destruction of these back­
w ard communities, because he realised that this was necessary for
mankind to advance.
14
 “ Sickening as it may be to human feeling to witness these
myriads of industrious,' patriarchal and inoffensive social organisa­
tions disorganised and dissolved into their units, thrown into a
sea of woes, and their individual members losing at the same time
their ancient form of civilisation and their hereditary means of
subsistence, we must not forget that these idyllic village communi­
ties, inoffensive though they may appear, had always been the solid
foundation of oriental despotism, that they restrained the human
mind within the smallest possible compass, making it the unresist­
ing tool of superstition, enslaving it beneath traditional rules,
depriving it of all grandeur and historic energies.
“ We must not forget the barbarian egoism which, concen­
trating 0 1 1 some miserable patch of land, had quietly witnessed the
ruin of empires, the perpetuation of unspeakable cruelties, the
massacre of the population of large towns, with no other considera­
tion bestowed upon them than on natural events, itself the helpless
prey of any aggressor who deigned to notice it at all.
“ We must not forget that this stagnatory, undignified and
vegetative life, that this passive sort of existence evoked on the
other hand, in contradistinction, wild, aimless, unbounded forces
of destruction, and rendered murder itself a religious rite in
Hindostan.
“ We must not forget that these little communities were con­
taminated by distinctions of caste and by slavery, that they sub­
jugated man to external circumstances, that they transformed a
self-developing social state into never-changing natural destiny,
and thus brought about a brutalising worship of nature, exhibiting
its degradation in the fact that man. the sovereign of nature, fell
down on his knees in adoration of Hanuman the monkey and
Sabbala the cow .” — (Marx, “ The British Rule, etc.,” quoted by D.)

ENGLAND’S DOUBLE ROLE.

M arx considered that England liad a destructive and also a
regenerating role to play in India.
“ England, it is true, in causing a social revolution in Hindo­
stan, was actuated only by the vilest interests, and was stupid in her
manner of enforcing them. But that is not the question; the question
is, Can mankind fu lfil its destiny without a fundamental revolution
in the social state of A sia? I f not, whatever may be the crimes
of England, she was the unconscious tool of history in bringing
about that revolution.” — (Marx, “ The British R u le,” etc., quoted
by D.)
“ The British were the first conquerors superior, and therefore
inaccessible to Hindu civilisation. They destroyed it by breaking
up the native communities, by uprooting the native industries, and
by levelling all that was great and elevated in the native society.
The historic pages of their rule report hardly anything beyond that
destruction. The work of regeneration hardly transpires through
15
a heap of ruins. Nevertheless it has begun.” — (M arx, “ The Future
Results of British Rule in India,” as quoted by D.)
M arx saw the beginnings of a regenerative process in :
[ ( 1) “ Political unity . . . more consolidated and extending
further than it ever did under the great M oguls,” and
destined to be “ strengthened and perpetuated by the
electric telegraph.”
(2) The “ native arm y” (this was before the disbandment after
the revolt of 1857, and the consequent deliberate strength­
ening of British forces to one-third of the whole).
(3) “ The free press, introduced fo r the first time in Asiatic
society” (this was following the proclamation of the free­
dom of the press in India in 1835, and before the series
of Press Acts, begun in 1873 and steadily strengthened in
the modern period of declining imperialist rule).
(4) The establishment of private property in land.
(5) The building up, however reluctantly and sparingly, of
an educated Indian class “ endowed with the requirements
for government and imbued with European science.”
( 6 ) “ Regular and rapid communication with Europe” through
steam transport.
More important than all these was the inevitable consequence
of industrial capitalist exploitation of India. In order to develop
the Indian market it was essential to secure the “ transformation
of India into a reproductive country” — that is, into a source of
raw material to export in exchange for the imported manufactured
goods. This made necessary the development of railw ays, roads
and irrigation. This new phase was only beginning at the time
M arx wrote. From the consequences of this development M arx
made a prophecy which is the most famous of his declarations on
India.]—D.
“ I know that the English millocracy intend to endow India
with railw ays with the exclusive view of extracting at diminished
expenses the cotton and other raw materials for their manufactures.
But when you have once introduced machinery into the locomotion
of a country, which possesses iron and coal, you are unable to
withhold it from its fabrication. Y ou cannot maintain a net of
railw ays over an immense country without introducing all those
industrial processes necessary to meet the current wants of railw ay
locomotion and out of which there must grow the application of
machinery to those branches of industry not immediately connected
with the railw ays. The railw ay system will, therefore, become in
India truly the forerunner of modern industry . . . modern industry,
resulting from the railw ay system w ill dissolve the hereditary
divisions of labour, upon which rest the Indian castes, these decisive
impediments to Indian progress and Indian power.” — (Marx, “ The
Future Results,” etc., quoted by D.)
However, M arx did not see imperialism as capable of improving
16
the lot of the Indian people, but only as capable of .laying down
the material basis for socialism.
“ A ll the English bourgeoisie may be forced to do w ill neither
emancipate nor m aterially mend the social condition of the mass
o f the people, which depends not only on the development of the
productive power, but on its appropriation by the people. B u t what
they w ill not fail to do is to lay down the material premises for
both. Has the bourgeoisie ever done more? Has it ever effected
a progress without dragging individuals and people through blood
and dirt, through misery and degradation?
“ The Indians w ill not reap the fruits of the new elements of
society scattered among them by the British bourgeoisie till in
Great Britain itself the now ruling classes shall have been sup­
planted by the industrial proletariat, or till the Hindus themselves
sh all have grown strong enough to throw off the English yoke
altogether.” — (Marx, “ The Future Results,” etc., quoted by D.)
“ It w ill be seen that M arx’s analysis of the Indian situation
up to the middle of the 19th century turns on three main fa c to rs:
first, the destructive role of British rule in India, uprooting the
old society; second, the regenerating role of British rule in India
in the period of free-trade capitalism, laying down the material
premises fo r the future new society; third, the consequent practical
conclusion of the necessity of a political transformation whereby
the Indian people should free themselves from imperialist rule in
order to build the new society.
“ To-day imperialist rule in India, like capitalism all over the
world, has long outlived its objectively progressive or regenerating
role, corresponding to the period of free-trade capitalism, and has
become the most powerful reactionary force in India, buttressing
a ll other forms of Indian reaction. The stage has thus been
reached when the task of the political transformation indicated by
M arx is directly the order of the day.” — D.

1/
The Plunder and Devastation of India
“ The main outlines of M a rx ’s historical analysis still stand,
and his vision into the future of India (for which no parallel can
be found in any 19th century w riter on India) has only been con­
firmed by experience in all the development that has taken place
since then. . . . ” —D.
“ Three main periods stand out in the history of imperialist
rule in India. The first is the period of merchant capital, repre­
sented by the E ast India Company, and extending into the general
character of its system to the end of the 18th century. The second
is the period of industrial capital, which established a new basis
of exploitation of India in the 19th century. The third is the
modern period of finance capital, developing its distinctive system
of exploitation of India on the remains of the old, and growing up
from its beginning in the closing years of the 19th century to its
fuller development in the most recent phase.
“ M arx dealt with the first two periods of merchant capital and
of industrial capital, in relation to India. We have now to carry
forw ard this analysis to the modern period of finance capital and
its policy in India.”—D.
The Company founded its first trading depot at Surat in 16 12 .
But it was not until the middle of the 18th century that it built
up its real territorial power in India. Its charter in its final form
was granted by Parliament in 1708. It received an exclusive
charter from Parliament and “ was thus a typical monopolist
creation of the W hig oligarchy which fixed its grip on England
with the W hig revolution.” —D.
“ The internal wars which wrecked India in the 18th century
after the decline of the Mogul Empire represented a period of inner
confusion (comparable in some respects to the W ars of the Roses
in England or the 30 Y ears W ar in Germany) necessary fo r the
break-up of the old order and preparing the w ay in the normal
course of evolution for the rise of bourgeois power on the basis
of the advancing merchant, shipping and m anufacturing interests
in Indian society. The invasion, however, during this critical
period, of the representatives of the more highly developed Euro­
pean bourgeoisie, with their superior technical and m ilitary equip­
ment and social political cohesion, thwarted this normal course o f
evolution, and led to the outcome that the bourgeois rule which
supervened in India on the break-up of the old order was not
Indian bourgeois rule, growing up within the shell of the old order,
but foreign bourgeois rule forcibly superimposing itself over the
old society and smashing the germs of the rising Indian bourgeois
class. Herein lay the tragedy of the Indian development which
thereafter became a thwarted or distorted social development fo r
the benefit of a foreign bourgeoisie.” —D.
It was in this period of confusion and internal strife that the
E ast India Company was able to fasten its grip on the country
18 ■.
(not without the British State first defeating the French in war
on a world scale).
Lord North’s regulating A ct of 1773 set up a Governor-
General, his Council and a Supreme Court of India, while P itt’s
A ct of 1784 set up a Secretary of State for India and a Board of
Control in London, so that the British State was established as
the sovereign ruler. The power of the Company was not completely
overthrown, however, until 1858.
This company of merchant capital was concerned to secure a
monopoly of eastern products for sale on the European markets.
Its difficulty, however, was to secure suitable products to export
to India in return. “ England . . . had nothing of value to offer
to India in the w ay of products comparable in quality or technical
standard with Indian products, the only important industry then
developed being the manufacture of woollen goods, which were
of no use to India.” —D.
They had, therefore, to export precious metals, a course repug­
nant to the prevailing mercantilist theory of national economy,
which regarded the precious metals and their increase in the
country as the only real wealth.

ROBBERY AND FAMINE.

Resort was had to substitutes. “ The English trade with India
was really a chase to find something that India would be willing
to take, and the silver obtained by the sale of slaves in the West
Indies and Spanish America was all-important in this connection.” —
(ICnowles, “ Economic Development of the Overseas Em pire,”
quoted by D.)
“ So soon, however, as domination began to be established
methods of power could be increasingly used to weight the balance
of exchange and secure the maximum goods for the minimum p a y ­
ment. The margin between trade and plunder, from the outset
ne‘ver very sharply drawn (the original adventures often combined
trade with piracy), began to grow conspicuously thin.” —D.
“ They forcibly take away the goods and commodities of the
Ryots (peasants), merchants, etc., for a fourth part of their value;
and by w ays of violence and oppression they oblige the Ryots, etc.,
to give five rupees for goods which are worth but one rupee.” —
(Memorandum of the Nawab of Bengal to the English Governor,
May, 1762, quoted by D.)
“ The English, with their Banyans and b la c k , Gamastahs,
arbitrarily decide what quantities of goods each m anufacturer shall
deliver and the prices he shall receive fo r them . . . and upon the
weavers refusing t.o take the money, offered, it has been known that
they have been tied in their girdles and sent aw ay with a flogging.
. . . ” — (W illiam Bolts, merchant, “ Consideration on Indian
A ffa ir s,” 1772, quoted by D.)
10
 In 1765 the Company secured the administration of, Bengal,
Bihar and Orissa and the Government revenues therefrom. This
was a new source of plunder.
“ Then began a process of wholesale unashamed spoliation
which made the Company’s administration during the last third of
the 18th century a byword in history.” — D.
“ I do most confidently maintain that no civilised Government
ever existed on the face of this earth which was more corrupt, more
perfidious and more rapacious than the Government of the E ast
India Company from 1765 to 178 4 .”— (Sir George Cornwallis in the
House of Commons, Feb. 12, 1858, quoted by D.)
(In 1765 Clive, in a letter to the directors, quoted by Dutt,
set out that of the total revenue received from governing, one
quarter was spent on government, one quarter was necessary
to square the local potentates, and one half was simply remitted
to the Company in England, an amount of one and a half
million pounds.)
This, of course, was not trade, but direct plunder. In addition
individual servants of the Company made huge fortunes. Clive
returned to England with £250,000. “ Fortunes o f-£100,000 have
been obtained in two years,” he stated.
Under this system of plunder, and a continual raising of the
land revenue, the economy of the country fell into ruinous con­
dition.
A s a result, in 1770, a famine in Bengal carried o ff 10 millions
or one-third of the population.
“ Notwithstanding the loss of at least one-third of the inhabi­
tants of the provinces, and the consequent decrease of cultivation,
the net collections of the year 17 7 1 exceeded even those of 1768
. . . it was naturally to be expected that the diminution of the
revenue should have kept an equal pace with the other consequences
of so great a calamity. That it did not was owing to its being
violently kept up to its former standard.” — (W arren Hastings (the
Governor), report to the Court Directors, November 3, 1772, quoted
by D.)
“ In former times the Bengal countries were the granary of
nations and the repository of commerce, wealth and manufacture
in the E ast . . . but such has been the restless energy of our mis-
government that within the short space of 2 0 years many parts of
these countries have been reduced to the appearance of a desert.
The fields are no longer cultivated, extensive tracts are already
overgrown with thickets; the husbandman is plundered; the manu­
facturer oppressed; famine has been repeatedly endured and de­
population has ensued.” — (W illiam Fullerton, M.P., “ A View of
the English Interests in Ind ia,” 1787, quoted by .D.)
, “ Were we to be driven out of India this day nothing would
remain to tell ,that it had been possessed, during this inglorious
20
 period of our dominion, by anything better than the orang-outang,
or the tiger.” — (Edmund Burke in his rhetorical denunciation in
Parliament, quoted by D.)
“ I may safely assert that one-third of the Company’s territory
in Hindustan is now a jungle and inhabited only by wild beasts.”
— (Lord Cornwallis (Governor-General), minute of September 8 ,
1789, quoted by D.)
“ On the basis of the plunder of India in the second h alf of
the eighteenth century modern England was built up.” —D.
England in the middle of the eighteenth century was still
mainly agricultural.
“ Socially, in respect of division of classes, the creation of a
proletariat and the establishment of a secure bourgeois rule, the
conditions were ripe for the advance to industrial capitalism. The
commercial basis had been laid. But the advance to the industrial
capitalist stage required also an initial accumulation of capital on.
a much larger scale than was yet present in England in the middle
o f the eighteenth century.
“ Then in 1757 came the battle of Plassey, and the wealth of
India began to flood the country in an ever-growing stream. Imme­
diately after, the great series of inventions began which initiated
the Industrial Revolution. In 1764 came the spinning-jenny of
H argreaves; in 1765 came W att’s steam engine; in 1769 came the
w ater frame of Arkwright, followed by his patents in 1775 for
carding-drawing and spinning machines; in 1779 the mule of
Crompton, and in 1785 the power loom of C artw right; and in 1788
the steam engine was applied to blast-furnaces. . . .” —D.
“ M arx has shown how the prim ary accumulation of capital in
the modern world, alike in the earlier stages of bourgeois growth
and in its further development, derives above all from the spoils
of the colonial system, from the silver of Mexico and South America,
from the slave trade and the plunder of In d ia; if money, according
to Augier, ‘ comes into the world with a congenital blood-stain on
one cheek,’ capital comes dripping from every pore, with blood and
d irt” (“ Capital,” Vol. I., Ch. X X X I .) —D.
“ The influx of the Indian treasure, by adding considerably to
the nation’s cash capital, not only increased its stock of energy,
but added much to its flexibility and the rapidity of its movement.
V ery soon after Plassey the Bengal plunder began to arrive in
London, and the effect appears to have been instantaneous; for
all the authorities agree that the industrial revolution, the event
which has divided the nineteenth century from all antecedent
time, began with the year 1760 . . .” — (Brook Adams, “ The Law of
Civilisation and Decay,” quoted by D.)
“ Bu t once the industrial revolution had been achieved in E n g ­
land with the aid of the plunder of India the new task became to
find adequate outlets fo r the flood of manufactured goods. This
necessitated a revolution in the economic system from the prin*
ciples of mercantile capitalism to the principles of free trade
21
capitalism. And this in turn necessitated a corresponding change
in the methods of the colonial system ,” — D.)
(In the free trade period English manufacturers no longer
needed protection, and required the abolition of duties on raw
materials entering the country. The industrial capitalists also
sought to lower and fin ally abolish the duties on corn so as
to lower the necessary outlay in wages.—J.L .)

RUIN FOR INDIAN PRODUCER.

“ The new needs required the creation of a free market in India
in place of the previous monopoly. It became necessary to trans­
form India from an exporter of cotton goods to the whole world
into an importer of cotton goods. This meant a revolution in the
economy of India. It meant at the same time a complete change
over from the whole previous system of the E ast India Company.
A transformation had to be carried through in the methods of
exploitation of India, and a transformation that would have to be
fought through against the strenuous opposition of the vested in-'
terests of the Company’s monopoly.” —D.
The industrial capitalists and independent merchants opposed
to the monopoly had already limited the Company’s power by
means of the Regulating Acts already mentioned. In 1788 W arren
Hastings was impeached for corruption and misgovernment.
Lord Cornwallis was sent out as Governor-General in 1786 to
reorganise the whole system of Government.
He replaced the system of individual anarchy and corruption
by a well paid Civil Service. He sought to end the previous con­
tinual arbitrary raising of the land revenue to the ruin of the
country by introducing the permanent settlement and a new land­
lord class in Bengal. In 18 13 the monopoly of the Company in trade
with India was ended.
“ A ll these measures were intended as reforms. In reality, they
were the necessary measures to clear the ground for the more
scientific exploitation of India in the interests of the capitalist
class as a whole. They prepared the w ay fo r a new stage of
exploitation of industrial capital, which was to work fa r deeper
havoc over the whole economy of India than the previous hap­
hazard plunder.” —D.
In 18 13 a Parliam entary inquiry preceded the renewal of the
Charter of the East India Company, and the abolition of its
monopoly.
A t this time the duties on the import of Indian calicoes into
Britain were 78 per cent. The duties on Indian cotton and silk goods
were from 70 per cent, to 80 per cent.
“ Without these prohibitive duties the British cotton industry
could not have developed in its early stages.” —D.
A t the Parliam entary inquiry of 1840 it was reported that while
British cotton and silk goods imported into India paid a duty of
3 | per cent., Indian cotton goods imported into Britain paid 10 per
cent., silk goods 20 per cent, and woollen goods 30 per cent.
22
 “ Thus it was not only on the basis of the technical superiority
o f machine industry, but also with the direct State assistance of
one w ay free trade (free entry, or virtual free entry, for British
goods into India, and prevention of direct trade between India and
European or other foreign countries, by the operation of the N aviga­
tion Acts) that the predominance of British manufacturers was
built up in the India market and the Indian manufacturing indus­
tries destroyed.” —D.
(The Navigation Acts provided that trade must be con­
ducted between foreign countries and British possessions in
B ritish ships.—J.L .)
Between 18 14 and 1835 British cotton manufactures exported
to India rose from one million yards to 5 1 million yards. Indian
cotton piece goods imported into Britain in the same period fell
from 1^ million pieces to 300,000 pieces, and in 1844 to 63,000 pieces
(or to l-20th of the 18 14 level).
While machine made cotton goods from England ruined the
Indian weavers the export of machine made cotton twist ruined
the spinners. Between 18 18 and 1836 the English export of cotton
tw ist to India increased 5200 fold.
The same process occurred in respect of silk goods, woollen
goods, iron, pottery, glass and paper.
“ The effects of this wholesale destruction of the Indian manu­
facturing industries on the economy of the country can be imagined.
In England the ruin of the old hand loom weavers was accom­
panied by the growth of the new machine industry. B u t in India;
the ruin of the millions of artisans and craftsmen was not accom­
panied by any alternative growth of new forms of industry.” —D.
“ The population of the town of Dacca has fallen from 150,000
to 30,000 or 40,000, and the jungle and malaria are fast encroaching
upon the town . . — (Sir Charles Trevelyan before the P arlia­
m entary inquiry of 1840, quoted by D.)
“ The decay and destruction of Surat, of Dacca, of Murshidabad
and other places Avhere native manufactures have been carried on,
is too painful a fact to dwell upon. I do not consider that it has
been in the fair course of trade, I think it has been the power of
the stronger exercised over the weaker.” — (Montmorency Martin,
an historian, before the 1840 Parliam entary inquiry, quoted by D .)
In 1 9 1 1 the census report showed the same process to be still
continuing. It showed a six per cent, decline in the number of
textile workers, in spite of an increase of textile m anufacturing on
a machine basis. A t the same time hide, skin and metal trades
workers declined by six per cent.
“ The decrease in the number of metal workers and the con­
comitant increase in the number of metal dealers is due largely to
the substitution for the indigenous brass and copper utensils for
enamelled ware and aluminium articles imported from Europe.” —
(“ Census of India Report, 1 9 1 1 , ” quoted by D.)
“ The native iron smelting industry lias been practically
23
 stamped out by cheap imported iron and steel within range of the
railw ay, but it still persists in the more remote parts of the
peninsula.” — (“ Imperial Gazetteer of India,” 1907, Vol. I l l , quoted
by D.)
“ It was not only the old m anufacturing towns and centres;
that were laid waste and their population driven to crowd and
overcrowd the v illa g e s; it was above all the basis of the old v illag e
economy, the union of agriculture and domestic industry, that
received the mortal blow. The millions of ruined artisans and
craftsmen, spinners, weavers, potters, tanners, smelters, smiths,
alike from the towns and from the villages, had no alternative
save to crowd into agriculture. In this w ay India was forcibly
transformed, from being a country of combined agriculture and
manufactures, into an agricultural colony of British m anufactur­
ing capitalism. It is from this period of British rule, and from
the direct effects of British rule, that originates the deadly over­
pressure on agriculture in India, which is still blandly described
in the official literature as if it were a natural phenomenon of the
old Indian society, and is diagnosed by the superficial and ignorant
as a symptom of ‘ over population.’ In fact the increase in the
proportion of population dependent on agriculture has developed
under British rule, continuously extending, not only throughout
the nineteenth century, but even in the twentieth century, as an
examination of the census figures w ill show (between 18 9 1 and 19 2 1
the proportion of the population dependent on agriculture increased
from 61 per cent, to 73 per cent. . . . ) . ” —D.
“ I do not agree that India is an agricultural country; India
is as much a m anufacturing country as an agricultural; and he
who would seek to reduce her to the position of an agricultural
country seeks to lower her in the scale of civilisation. I do not
suppose that India is to become the agricultural farm of E n g lan d ;
she is a manufacturing country, her manufactures of various de­
scriptions have existed for ages, and have never been able to be
competed with by any nation wherever fa ir play has been given
to them. . . . To reduce her now to an agricultural, country would
be an injustice to India.” — (Montmorency Martin, Historian, before
the 1840 Parliam entary inquiry, quoted by D.)
The manufacturers, however, had other ideas.
“ In India, there is an immense extent of territory and the
population of it would consume British manufactures to a most
enormous extent. The whole question with respect to our Indian
trade is whether they can pay us, by the products of their soil,
fo r what we are prepared to send out as manufactures.” — (Thomas
Bazley, President of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce, before
the same inquiry, quoted by D.)
“ To develop the India m arket it was necessary to develop
the production and export of raw materials from India. I t was.
to this objective that British policy now turned.” —D.
“ The importance of India to England in the first half o f
the century lay in the fact that India supplied some of the
24
essential raw materials—hides, oil, dye, jute and cotton—required
fo r the industrial revolution in England, and at the same time
afforded a growing market for English manufactures of iron
and cotton.”— (L. C. A. Knowles, “ Economic Development of the
Overseas Em pire,” quoted by D.)
In 1833 Englishmen were given permits to acquire land and
set up as planters in India. That year slavery had been
abolished in the West Indies.
“ Experienced planters were brought from the W est Indies.
The area attracted a rough set of planters, some of whom
had been slave drivers in America, and carried unfortunate ideas
and practices with them.” — (Buchanan, “ Development of Capital­
ist Enterprise in India,” quoted by D.)
The resulting horrors were exposed in the Indigo Commission
of 1860.
“ To-day there are more than a million workers tied to tea,
rubber and coffee plantations or more than the total number of
workers in the textile, coal mining, engineering, iron and steel
industries combined.” —D.
“ The new plantation system . . . was nothing but thinly veiled
slavery. ”— D.
E xp o rt of raw materials to England increased rapidly. Raw
cotton exports rose from nine million pounds weight in 18 13 to
32 million in 1833 and 8 8 million in 1844; sheep wool from 3.7
thousand pounds weight in 1833 to 2.7 million in 1844 (it increased
730 tim es); linseed from 2100 bushels in 1833 to 237,000 in 1844.
Between 1844 and 19 14 exports of raw cotton rose from 8 8
million pounds weight to 963 million pounds; jute exports rose
from £68,000 sterling in 1849 to £ 8 .6 millions in 19 14 , or 126-fold.
“ Even more significant was the rising export of food grains
from starving India.-” —D.
The export of food grains, principally rice and wheat, rose
from £858,000 sterling in 1849 to £3.8 million sterling in 1858,
£7.9 million sterling in 1877, £9.3 million in 19 0 1 and £19.3 million
in 19 14 , or an increase 22-fold in the whole period.
“ Alongside this process went a heavy increase in the
number and intensity of famines in the second half of the 19th
century. ’ ’—D.
Years. Famine Deaths.
1800-25 . 1, 000,000
1825-50 400,000
1850-75 . 5,000,000
1875-1900 . 15,000,000
“ In the first half of the nineteenth century there were seven
famines, with an estimate total of 1 £ million deaths from
famine.
“ In the second half of the nineteenth century there were
twenty-four famines (six between 18 5 1 and 1875 and eighteen
between 1876 and 1900), with an estimate total of over 20
million deaths. ’ ’— D.
25
 Modern Imperialism and India
“ The distinctive forms of nineteenth century exploitation of
India by industrial capital did not exclude the continuance of
the old forms of direct plunder, which were also carried forward
and at the same time transformed.
“ The tribute, as it was still openly called by official spokes­
men up to the middle of the nineteenth century, or direct annual
removal of millions of pounds of wealth to England, both under
the claim of official ‘ home charges,’ as well as by private remitting
without the return of goods to India (except for the proportion­
ately small amount of Government stores from England), con­
tinued and grew rapidly throughout the nineteenth century along­
side the growth of trade. In the twentieth century it grew even
more rapidly alongside the relative decline in trade.” — D.
Growth of tribute from India to England (£ millions):
18 5 1 19 0 1 19 13 -14 1933-34
Home Charges .................... 2.5 17.3 19.4 27.5
Excess of Indian exports . . 3.3 11.0 14.2 69.7
(The home charges are remitted and spent in England with
only a small return in Government stores sent to India, 1.5
million out of 27.5 million being spent on stores in 1933-4.)
Annual average of five-year periods (in £ millions):
1909-10 19 31-32
1851-5. 1897-1901. to 19.13-14. to 1935-6.
Excess of Indian Exports 4.3 15.3 22.5 59.2
“ W hat is here revealed in this steeply accelerating curve of
exploitation is something more than a quantitative increase; it
reflects a change in the quality and methods of exploitation.
“ The enormous and rapid increase in the tribute from India
to England during the second half of the nineteenth century
and accelerating increase in the twentieth century conceal in reality
the emergence of new forms of exploitation, developing out of
the conditions of the period of free-trade nineteenth century
capitalism, but growing into the new twentieth century stage of
the finance capitalist exploitation of India.” — D.
“ The requirements of nineteenth century free trade capitalism
compelled the new development of British policy in India.
“ First, it was necessary to abolish once and fo r all the
Company and replace it by the direct administration of the
British Government, representing the British capitalist class as
a whole. This was partially realised in the new 1833 Charter,
but only fin ally completed in 1858.
“ Second, it was necessary to open up India more completely
for commercial penetration. This required the building of a net­
work of railroads; the development of roads; the beginning of
attention to irrigation, which had been allowed to fa ll into
complete neglect under British ru le; the introduction of electric
telegraph and the establishment of a uniform postal system ;
the first limited beginnings of an Anglicised education to secure
26
 a supply of clerks and subordinate agents and the introduction
of the European banking system.” —D.
“ Commercial and social advantages which India would derive
from their establishment (railways) are, 1 truly believe, beyond
all present calculation . . . England is calling aloud for cotton
which India does already produce in some degree, and would
produce sufficient in quality, and plentiful in quantity, if only
there were provided the fitting means of conveyance for it from
distant plains to the several ports adapted for its shipment.
E v e ry increase of facilities for trade has been attended, as we
have seen, with an increased demand fo r articles of European
produce in the most distant markets of India . . . new markets
are opening to us on this side of the globe under circumstances
which defy the foresight of the wisest to estimate their probable
value or calculate their future extent,” — (Lord Dalhousie, Gov­
ernor-General 1848-56, minute 0 11 Railways, 1853, quoted by D.)
This process required the development of British capital
investments in India.
“ In the normal formula of imperialist expansion this process
would be spoken of as the export of capital.” —D.
(Lenin named “ five essential features” of the imperialist
phase of capitalism :
1. The concentration of production and capital, develop­
ing to such a high stage that it has created monopolies which
play a decisive role in economic life.
2 . The merging of bank capital with industrial capital
and the creation, on the basis of this “ finance capital,” of
a financial oligarchy.
3. The export of capital, as distinguished from the export
of commodities, becomes of particularly great importance.
4. International monopoly combines of capitalists are
formed which divide up the world.
5. The territorial division of the world by the greatest
capitalist powers is completed.—J.L .)
Dutt goes on to say, “ But, in the case of India, to describe
w hat happened as the export of British capital would be too bitter
a parody of the reality.”
The amount of actual export of capital was very small. Only
over the seven years, 1856-62, in the whole period up to 19 14 was
the normal excess of exports replaced by an excess of imports,
totalling £22.5 million for the seven years—not a very large
contribution for an ultimate total of capital investments estimated
at close on £500 millions by 1914. Over the period as a whole
the export of capital from Britain to India was more than counter­
balanced many times over by the contrary flow of tribute from
India to England, even while the capital was being invested.
Thus the British capital invested in India was in reality first
raised in India from the plunder of the Indian people and then
written down as a debt from the Indian people to Britain, on which
they had thenceforward to pay interest and dividends.
27
 INDIAN NATIONAL DEBT.
The nucleus of these investments was the public debt of £70
million taken over in 1858 by the British Government from the
E ast India Company. Most of it was due to the cost of the Afghan
and Sikh wars, and the suppression of the 1857 mutiny which was
debited to India.
“ The burdens that it was found convenient to charge to India
seem preposterous—the cost of the Mutiny, the price of the
transfer of the Company’s rights to the Crown, the expenses of
simultaneous wars in China and Abyssinia, every Governmental item
in London that remotely related to India down to the fees of the
charwomen in the India offices. . . .
“ The Sultan of Turkey visited London in 1868 in state, and
his official ball was arranged fo r at the India Office, and the ball
charged to India. A lunatic asylum in Ealing, gifts to members of
the Zanzibar Mission, the consular and diplomatic establishments
of Great Britain in China and in Persia, part of the permanent
expenses of the Mediterranean Fleet, and the entire cost of a line
of telegraph from England to India, had been charged before 1S70
to the Indian Treasury. . . . ” — (L. H. Jen ks, “ The M igration of
British Capital to 1875,” quoted by D.)
B y these dubious means the public debt had doubled by 1876,
becoming £140 millions.
Up to the end of the nineteenth century £226 million had been
spent on railw ay construction.
English contractors received 5 per cent, above cost.
“ There was a kind of understanding that they were not to be
controlled very closely . . . nothing was known of the money
expended until the accounts were rendered.” — (The former Gov­
ernment Auditor of Railw ay Accounts before the Parliam entary
inquiry on Indian finance in 1872 quoted by D.)
“ Enormous sums were lavished and the contractors had no
motive whatsoever for economy. A ll the money came from the
English capitalist and, so long as he was guaranteed 5 per cent,
on the revenue of India, it was immaterial to him whether the funds
that he lent were thrown into the Hooghly or converted into bricks
and mortar. . . . It seems to me that they are the most extravagant
works ever undertaken.” — (W. N. Massey, form er Finance Minister
at the same inquiry, quoted by D.)
A loss of £40 million was made on the railw ays up to the end
of the century, and charged to the Indian Budget. Thereafter a
profit was made and at the present time interest on the railw ays
debt of £ 10 million a year is transmitted to England.
The Indian public debt was £719 million in 1936, of which
£346 million was owed in London and £343 million in India.
The Presidency Banks A ct of 1876 regulated the three Presi­
dency Banks under Government protection. In 19 2 1 they were
amalgamated into the all-powerful Imperial Bank of India.
The Exchange Banks with headquarters outside India— espe­
cially the Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China, the Mer­
28
cantile Bank of India, the National Bank of India, and the Hong­
kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation— developed banking
operations in India and in unison with the Presidency Banks dom­
inated the position. B y 10 13 the foreign banks (Presidency Banks
and Exchange Banks) held over three-fourths of all the deposits,
while the Indian Jo in t Stock Banks held less than one-fourth.
Dutt quotes an estimate by Sir George Paish in a paper.read
to the Royal Statistical Society in 1 0 1 1 of British capital invest­
ments in India in 1909-10. (His estimate was admittedly an under­
estimate, since he excludes private capital other than companies,
fo r which no documentary evidence was available, says Dutt.)
He gave the following figures, which total £365 million:
£ million.
Government and Municipal ......................... 182.5
Railw ays ............................................................. 136.5
Plantations (tea, coffee, rubber) ............... 24.2
Tram ways ........................................................... 4.1
Mines ................................................................. 3.5
Banks ............................................................... 3.4
Oil ....................................................................... 3.2
Commercial and Industrial ......................... 2.5
Finance, Land and Investment ................... 1.8
Miscellaneous .................................................. 3.3
“ It w ill be seen from this very instructive list that the process
of British capitalist investments in India, and so-called export of
capital, did not by any means imply a development of modern
industry in India. Ninety-seven per rent, of the British capital
invested in India before the w ar of 19 14 was devoted to purposes
of Government, transport, plantations and finance—that is to say,
to purposes auxiliary to the commercial penetration of India, its
exploitation as a source of raw materials and market for British
goods, and in no w ay connected with Indian industrial develop­
ment.” — D.
The “ Economist” of February 20, 1909, estimated £475 million
of British capital.

29
 Transition to Finance Capital
Since the w ar of 19 14 -18 imperialism in India has been con­
sidered by many to have entered a new phase, in which the old
absolutism has been ended in the political field, and in which the
policy of the encouragement of Indian industry has been adopted
in the economic field.
“ A closer examination of the facts of the period since 19 18
w ill show that they are fa r from bearing out this picture of a
progressive imperialism in its declining days. Undoubtedly a trans­
formation has taken place from the old free trade industrial
capitalist exploitation of India. B u t the decisive starting point of
change was not in reality constituted by the Avar of 19 14, much as
this may appear on a first view to have made the gulf between the
old and the new. The first World W ar with its fa r reaching effects
supervened on a process of change which was already developing
in the first decade and a half of the twentieth century. That change
is constituted by the transition from the free trade industrial
capitalist stage to finance-capital and its rule in India. The founda­
tions of this transition had already been laid.
“ The w ar of 19 14 accelerated and forced forw ard the whole
development, at the same time as, by unloosing the general crisis
of capitalism, it launched a series of political mass struggles of a
type previously unknown in India. From this double process arises
the distinctive character of the modern period in India. This period
has simultaneously seen the unfolding of the fu ll characteristics
of finance-capitalist rule in India, which was present only in a
partial uncompleted form in the earlier phase, and at the same
time the breaking of a series of waves, of mass assault which have
rocked the foundations of imperialist supremacy. These two gov­
erning forces have moulded the new India of to-day.’.’— D.
Constitutional reforms in India were no recent invention, but
developed in a continuous line from the Council’s A ct of 186 1, the
development of a municipal and district boards in 1865 and 1882,
the Councils A ct of 1892 and the Morley-Minto Reforms of 1909.
Sim ilarly in the economic field Lord Curzon in 1905 established
the new department of Commerce and Industry, and in 1907 the
first Industrial Conference was held.
“ The growth of the Indian cotton mill industry was not oidy
relatively, but also absolutely, greater in the twenty years before
19 14 than the twenty years after.
“ The proclamations of the change of policy in relation to the
aim of industrialisation have been more marked since then than
before, and the new ta riff policy dates from the post-1918 period.
B u t the results have been, by universal admission, extremely meagre
compared to the needs and possibilities; and the antagonisms
thwarting productive development have continued and even been
intensified in new forms.
“ The main transformation of the modern period has been the
political transformation through the advance of the Indian people
30
to a new stage in the struggle for their freedom. This advance,
however, has been achieved in opposition to Imperialism.
“ Fo r the analysis of the driving forces of the modern period
of imperialist rule in India the key lies in the transition from the
era of industrial capital to the era of finance-capital. The under­
standing of this process and its consequences is the first necessity
fo r the understanding of this period.” — D.

Finance-Capital and India

“ While the basis for the finance-capitalist exploitation of India
was thus in general laid before the first World War, its fuller
working out was only to be reached in the subsequent period.
“ The new basis of exploitation of India by British finance-
capital growing out of the conditions of the already existing indus­
trial capitalist and trading exploitation of India, was from the out­
set, as the analysis by Sir George Paisli of the composition of the
capital invested in India by 1909-10 showed, auxiliary to the trad­
ing process and not replacing it. Nevertheless a change in the
proportions developed of decisive significance for the modern
period.
“ The British nineteenth century industrial monopoly and dom­
ination of the world market began to weaken in the fourth quarter
of the nineteenth century. In other parts of the world the decline
before the new European and American rivals was marked. In
India the decline was fa r slower because the stranglehold was
tenaciously held with the aid of political sovereignty. Even up
to the w ar of 19 14 Britain held fast nearly two-thirds of the Indian
m arket against all the rest of the world. Y et also in India the
decline slowly but steadily devolped from the end of the third
quarter of the nineteenth century.” — D.
In the five years 1874 to 1879 Britain ’s share of Indian imports
was 82 per cent, and 1 1 per cent, more went to British possessions.
B y 1909-14 the 82 per cent, share had fallen to 63 per cent.
“ But at the same time profits on invested capital and the
volume of home charges was steadily risin g.” —D.
(Dutt here makes an estimate for 19 13 -14 of home charges
and profits on invested capital which he puts at £50 million. This
includes interest on the national debt, banking profits, dividends
from plantations, coal mines, etc. He then compares this with all
trading, shipping and manufacturing profits on goods exported
to or exported from India. These pofits he estimates at £28 million.)
“ A n y such estimates can be of very limited value fo r the
purpose of comparison. But it is evident that by 19 14 the interest
and profits on invested capital and direct tribute considerably ex­
ceeded the total of trading manufacturing and shipping profits out
of India.
“ The finance-capitalist exploitation of India had become the
dominant character in the twentieth century.”—D.
31
 “ The w ar of 19 14 -18 and the subsequent period enormously
accelerated this process.” —D.
Between 19 13 and 19 31-2 B ritain ’s share of Indian imports
fell from 63 per cent, to 35 per cent. The Ottawa agreement,
imposed in spite of Indian protests, forced it up to 40 per cent,
in 1934-5, but it fell to 38.5 per cent, in 1936-7. Ja p a n ’s share
rose from 2.6 per cent, in 19 13 -14 to 16.3 per cent, in 1935-6;
Germ any’s from 6.9 to 9.2 per cent., and that of the U.S.A. from
2.6 to 6.7 per cent.
The following more recent figures are affected by the ad­
ministrative separation of Burm a from India.
Proportion of Indian Imports.
1935-6 1936-7 1937-8
United Kingdom 31.7 31.0 29.9
Burm a ............... 17.5 19.3 14.9
Jap an ............. 13.0 13 .3 12.8
Germany ......... 7.9 8.2 8 .8
United States .. 5.6 5.3 7.4
“ Britain still holds the lio n ’s share—more than the combined
total of its three main competitors, Japan , Germany and the United
States. But the lion’s share is becoming increasingly restricted,
and the lion has been having to use its claws more and more
desperately against both foreign and Indian competition to main­
tain its share.” —D.
This sharp decline in B rita in ’s share is due above all to the
collapse of its export of cotton goods— the main field of industrial
capitalist exploitation of India in the nineteenth century.
Dutt quotes an estimate for 1933 of British capital invested
in India by the Associated Chambers of Commerce of India. It
places the total at a thousand million pounds.
“ This total of £1000 million would represent no less than one-
quarter of the estimated total of £4000 million of British foreign
investments throughout the world. When S ir George Paish made
his estimate in 19 1 1, he found that British capital investments in
India represented 1 1 per cent, of the total of British capital
investments throughout the world.
“ The advance from one-ninth to one-quarter, from 1 1 per cent,
to 25 per cent., is a measure of the increasing importance of India
to British finance capital to-day, and a key to modern imperialist
policy and the new constitution with its special provisions for safe­
guarding British financial interests in India.” — D.
Dutt quotes estimates by K . T. Shah and K . J . Khambata,
Indian Economists, in their “ Wealth and Taxable Capacity of
Ind ia,” 1924, putting the annual tribute to England (home charges,
interest, shipping, banking, commercial and industrial profits) at
£146 million at the 1921-22 sterling equivalent of rupee prices. A n­
other estimate of £ 135 million is made by Sir M. V isvesvaraya in
his “ Planned Economy for India,” 1934.
32
 “ Since the Index of Indian prices fell from 236 in '19 2 1 to 1 2 1
in 1933, it would appear that this total, if correctly estimated, would
represent a considerable increase on that of a decade earlier.”— D.
“ A fter allowing the fullest margin of variation for the factors
that cannot be exactly calculated the broad conclusion is evident
and inescapable that the exploitation of India in the modern period,
is fa r more intensive than in the old. It was estimated that in the
three-quarters of a century of British rule up to the taking over
by the Crown the total of tribute drawn from India had amounted
to £150 million. In the modern period, during the last two decades,
it is estimated that the total annual tribute from India to England
is in the neighborhood of £135 million to £150 million. This
intensified exploitation of India under the conditions of finauce-
capitalism underlies the present gathering crises and intensified
revolt against imperialism in India.”— D.
The 19 2 1 estimate of the tribute worked out at £3 per head
o f the population of Britain at the time, or £1700 a year fo r every
super tax payer in Britain.

The Question of Industrialisation

“ The view lias been put forward that the development of the
modern finance-capitalist era of British rule in India . . . has at
an y rate led to advancing industrialisation.”—D.
“ Up to 19 14 , the opposition of Imperialism to industrial de­
velopment in India was open and unconcealed.” —D.
In 1908 the Madras Government appointed a Director of Indus­
tries.
In 19 10 an embargo from Whitehall came down on this attempt
to foster Indian industry in the shape of a dispatch by Lord Morley,
Secretary of State for India.
“ I have examined the account which the M adras Government
lias given of the attempts to create new industries in the Province.
The results represent considerable labor and ingenuity, but they
are not of a character to remove my doubts as to the utility of>
State effort in this direction, unless it is strictly limited to industrial
instruction and avoids the semblance of a commercial venture. . . .
“ M y objections do not extend to the establishment of a bureau
o f industrial information or to the dissemination from such a
centre of intelligence and advice regarding new industries, pro­
cesses and appliances, provided that nothing is done calculated to
interfere with private enterprise.” — (Quoted by D.)
“ The discouragement of Indian industrial development was not
confined to administrative action or inaction but was supplemented
by positive ta riff policy.” — D.
“ In the eighteen sixties and seventies the very weak Indian
cotton industry began to develop. In 1877 Lord Salisbury for-
33
warded a resolution of the House of Commons to the Indian Gov­
ernment. He pointed out that ‘ five more mills were about to
begin w ork; and that it was estimated that by the end of March,
1877, there would be 1,231,284 spindles in In d ia.’ ” — (Letter of
Lord Salisbury to the Governor-General, August 30, 1877, quoted
by D.)
Accordingly in 1877 import duties (in India) on coarser
cotton goods, where there was competition, were removed. In 1894
financial requirements led to the reimposition of a general import
duty, and “ the new device was invented of imposing an excise
duty on all Indian mill woven cloth, an impost without parallel in
the economic history of any country. ”—D ..
This was only fin ally abolished in 1925 under the pressure of a
strike of the mill workers.
Industrial development up to 19 14 was slight under these
conditions. In that year there were only 951,000 workers under
the Factory Act. The development was mainly in the textile in­
dustry where Indian capital was pushing its w ay fo rw ard ; in the
jute industry where British capital was able to use cheap Indian
labor as a Mreapon against the English jute w orkers; in the match
industry represented by foreign capital. Engineering was only
represented by repair shops, mainly for the railw ays. The barest
beginnings with iron and steel had just been made. There was no
production of machinery.
“ W ith the first World W ar a complete reversal of policy
was proclaimed by the Government.” —D.
“ It is becoming increasingly clear that a definite and self-
conscious policy of improving the industrial capabilities of India
w ill have to be pursued after the war, unless she is to become the
dumping ground for the manufacturers of foreign nations who w ill
be competing the more keenly for markets the more it becomes
apparent that the political future of the larger nations depends on
their economic position. The attitude of the Indian public towards
this question is unanimous and cannot be left out of account.” —
(Lord Hardinge, Viceroy, Despatch to the Indian Secretary, Nov.
26, 19 15 , quoted by D.)
The Indian Industrial Commission was appointed in 19 16 under
the chairmanship of Sir Thomas Holland, President of the Institute
of Mining Engineers.
The reasons for the change of policy were as follow s:
“ F irst, m ilitary strategic reasons. The w ar conditions, the
cutting down of communications and supplies, and not least the
Mesopotamian scandals, laid bare the weakness of the old style
Indian empire and of the whole British strategic position in the
E ast owing to the failure to develop the most elementary basis of
modern industry in India, and consequent dependence on long
distance overseas supplies.” —D.
34
 “ The possibility of sea communications being temporarily in­
terrupted forces us to rely on India as an advance base fo r; pro­
tective operations in Eastern theatres of war. Nowadays the pro­
ducts of an industrially developed community coincide so nearly
in kind though not in quantity with the catalogue of munitions of
war, that the development of In d ia’s natural resources becomes a
matter of almost m ilitary necessity.” — (Montagu-Chelmsford Re­
port, 19 18, quoted by D.) ;
“ Second, competitive economic reasons. Foreign'-competitors
were beginning to break down the British monopoly in the Indian
market and the weakening of the British industrial position through
w ar needs threatened to open.the w ay to a rapid further advance
after the w ar and the loss of the Indian market. The danger, as
Lord Hardinge explained, was that India would become the dump­
ing ground for the manufacturers of foreign nations. A system
of tariffs to prevent this would serve tAvo purposes. In the first
place, in so fa r as the foreign industrialist was replaced by.
development of industry within India, the British financial and
political domination could secure a more favorable possibility to
extract the ultimate profit for British capital than if the m arket
were lost to an independent foreign power. In the Second place,
the establishment of a tariff system could prepare the w ay for
Imperial, preference to assist Britain to; win <back the Indian
m arket.”— D. .
‘ ‘ Third, inner political reasons. To maintain control of India
during the w ar and in the disturbed period succeeding th e 'w a r
it was essential to secure the co-operation of the Indian bourgeoisie,
and fo r this purpose it was necessary to make certain concessions
and promises of concessions, economic and political, of a character
to win their support. ‘ The attitude of the Indian public,’ as Lord
Hardinge was scrupulous to point out, ‘ cannot be left out of
accounts.’ ” —D.

TARIFF SYSTEM.
A protective tariff system was developed to carry out this
policy. A general import duty was raised to 15 per cent.1 in 1922 (it
was 3 J per cent, in 19 16 ). A Fiscal Commission was appbinted in
19 2 1 and reported in favor of “ discriminating protection” by a
procedure of detailed inquiry in each case, its five Indian 1 members
dissenting in favor of full protection. A T ariff Board was set up
in 1923 on its recommendation. ■ . ' .
The duty on cotton piece goods was raised to 7 J per cent, in
19 17 , and 1 1 per cent, in 19 21. In 1924 the iron and steel industry
secured protection at the rate of 33 l-3rd per cent.
“ A t this point the hopes of the Indian industrialists in an
assisting, forw ard policy were raised high. This was the period of
the S w araj party, or party of Indian progressive capitalism which
defeated the ‘ non-co-operation’ policies of the Garidhist leadership
at the National Congress of 1923, and dominated the years 1923-26
35
with its policies, first of entering the councils fo r the purpose of
conducting the fight from within and eventually ‘ honorable’ co­
operation.
“ But these hopes were to receive heavy blows in the succeed­
ing yea rs.”—D.
A central Bureau of Industrial Intelligence and Research
was set up with an allocation of £37,500 for three years. It was
announced that its main attention would be devoted to silk culture
and hand loom w eaving!
A fter the granting of the iron and steel protective duties in
3.924 applications fo r protection in the case of the m ajority of other
industries, the most important being cement and paper, were not
endorsed. When the iron and steel duties came up for renewal in
1927 the basic duties were lowered, and subsidies previously given
to the industry were wiped out.
“ Most important of all a new principle was introduced, the
principle of Imperial preference or favored rates of entry for British
manufactured goods. ”—D.
In 1930 Imperial preference was extended to cotton piece goods.
The objections to this course of the T a riff Board in 1933 were
overruled.
In 1932 the Ottawa agreements imposed a general system of
Im perial preference in the face of universal Indian protest and a
hostile vote in the Indian Legislative Assembly.
“ The ta riff system of the early nineteen twenties, originally
proclaimed as a means of assisting Indian industry, was thus trans­
formed in the succeeding period into a system of imperial prefer­
ence fo r assisting British industries (while giving India in return
the privilege of favored rates for the export of raw materials
and semi-manufactured goods—i.e., the attempt to move back­
wards towards the pre-1914 basis) . . .
“ It was against the British manufacturer as the biggest mono­
polist of the Indian market that the Indian industrialist desired
protection no less than against other foreign manufacturers. British
capitalism on the other hand desired tariffs in India prim arily
against the invasion of the Indian maket by non-British com­
petitors. Hence the conflict of interests.” —D.
The trade agreements of 1935 and 1939 between India and
the United Kingdom were rejected by the Indian Legislative
Assembly. These votes were overruled by the British Government.
“ The same process may be traced in the wider economic field.
Immediately after the 19 14 -18 w ar the shortlived boom was even
more feverish in India than elsewhere.” — D.
“ The reports of 4 1 jute mills, all under British control, with a
total capital of £ 6 . 1 million, showed fo r the four years 19 18 -21 no
less than £22.9 million' profits, in addition to £19 million placed to
reserves, or total earnings of £42 million in four years on a capital
of £ 6 million.
36
 “ British capital flowed into India in these immediate post-war
years in the hope of sharing in these colossal profits.” —D.
The average dividend of the leading Bombay cotton mills was
120 per cent, in 1920.
“ During the two years 1920-21 and 1921-22 there was even
a nominal excess of imports, the only time since 1856-62, the
period of railw ay investment; but this in fact partly reflected the
disastrous consequences of the Government’s attempt to fix arti­
ficially the rupee at the high rate of 2 /-, resulting in a premium
on imports into India, ruin for Indian exporters, and the expendi­
ture of no less than £55 million by the Government in the vain
endeavor to maintain this exchange.
“ But the crash followed from the end of 1920 and 19 21,
accentuated by the Government’s exchange policy, when the aban­
donment of the 2/- rupee and the sudden drop to 1/4 ruined the
importers and led to defaults estimated at over £30 million. Many
o f the Indian firm s which were formed in the post-war boom
went bankrupt in the following years. As soon as it became clear
that the abnormal profits of the post-war boom could not be
expected to be continued, the flow of British capital dried u p .”— D.

BRITISH CAPITAL EXPORTS TO INDIA AND CEYLON.

To India Total Per Cent.
Annual and Overseas to India
Average. Ceylon. Issues. and Ceylon.
(£ million) (£ million)
1908-10 ................. 14.7 .. 172.3 .. 8.5%
1921-23 ................. 30.2 .. 129.0 .. 23.7%
1925-27 ................. 2.1 .. 120.9 .. . 1.7 %
1932-34 ................. 4.2 .. 13 5 .1 .. 3.1%
1934-36 ................. 1.0 .. 30.2 .. 3.3%
(Figures by Sir George Paish and Midland Bank Returns
quoted by D.)
New Capital Issues in British India in “ Statist,” 1927.
19 14 .19 2 1.19 2 2 .19 2 3 .19 2 4 .19 2 5 .19 2 6 .19 2 7 .
Index of Capital of
Companies registered
each y e a r ................... 100 221 12 1 51 40 31 45 29
“ There can be little doubt that the figures reflect a definite
setback in the economic development of the country. Fo r this
setback the currency and exchange policy pursued by the Govern­
ment of India is not wholly without blam e.” — (Statist, August 6 ,
1927, quoted by D.)
The setback to industrial development was strongly marked
before the world crisis. Indian firm s went through a very difficult
period. The Tata Iron and Steel Company, the leader of Indian
capitalist advance, Avas forced to go to the London market for £2
million debentures.
37
 “ British finance capital strengthened its grip over Indian
enterprise during these years after the temporary loosening of the
reins in the early post-war yea rs.” —D.
“ A further powerful blow was struck at Indian industry by the
decision in 1927, following the report of the Hilton Young com­
mission on Indian finance and currency in 1926, to stabilise the
rupee exchange at the high rate of 1 / 6 in place of the pre-war
rate of 1/ 4 .” — D.
This policy hit the Indian exporter and was opposed by Indian
opinion.
Financial control was withdrawn “ still further aw ay from the
remote possibility of Indian influence” by' the establishment of
an Indian Reserve Bank, privately owned, in addition to the
Imperial Bank of India, in spite of Indian protests, to control the
issue of currency and credit.
“ In this situation of already difficult conditions the world
economic crisis fell on India with heavier force than on any other
leading country owing to India’s extreme dependence on prim ary
production. The value of Indian prim ary products, on which four-
fifths of the population were in practice dependent (this value
governed also the m arket for the weak industrial development),
fell by one-half. Between 1928-29 and 1932-33 the value of Indian
exports of goods fell from 3390 million rupees to 1350 million
rupees; the value of Indian imports from 2600 million rupees to
1350 million rupees. Y et the heavy payment of tribute of interest
on debt and home charges, now doubled in weight by the fall
in prices, had to be maintained and was ruthlessly exacted. Fo r
India there was no Hoover moratorium, as for E u ro p e; no frozen
credits scheme as for Germ any; no repudiation of debt payments
as for Britain with the American debt. The tribute was paid by
the export of treasure. Between 19 3 1 and 1935 no less than 32
million ounces of gold, valued at £203 million, were extracted from
India (Economist, Dec. 12, 1936), or more than-the total British
gold reserve before the crisis. During 1936 and 1937 further gold
exports from India amounted to £38 million (Economist, A pril 2,
1938), or a total of £241 million for the seven years 1931-7. This
gold represented the traditional form of saving of the peasantry
and poorer people, in a country where banking or other forms of
savings are unknown among the masses of the people. B y this gold
drain of 19 31-37 the slender savings of the impoverished Indian
peasantry were scientifically extracted by British finance capital
to swell the British gold reserve, which rose, according to the
Bank of International Settlements, from the equivalent of 3021
million gold Swiss francs at the end of 1932 to 7 9 11 million by the
end of 1936, or an increase of 162 per cent. Once again, in a new
form, as in the days of the industrial revolution, the measure
of recovery of British capitalism in 1933-37 was built up on the
spoliation of India.”— D.
38
 Summing-Up on Post-War
Industrialisation
Dutt tlien sums up on Indian industrialisation since the ap­
pointment of the Indian Industrial Commission in 1916.
“ Undoubtedly a measure of industrial development has taken
place, carrying forward a development which had already been
proceeding before 19 14 in the face of British official opposition.”
— D.
The textile industry in 1934-3,5 supplied three-fourths of the
mill-produced cotton goods used in India as against one-fourth in
19 14 .
The Indian steel industry supplied three-quarters of the Indian
m arket fo r steel in 1934-35, but then only 879,000 tons (less than
the output of Poland, which had only one-tenth of the population).
The steel industry was just coming into existence before,the Great
W ar.
“ Decisive, however, for industrialisation is not the develop­
ment of the textile industries, which in any case had won their
basis in India before 1914, but the development of heavy industry,
o f iron, steel and the production of machinery, and it is here that
the weakness of India stands out. India remains still wholly de­
pendent on abroad for machinery.”—D.
Between 1 9 1 1 and 19 3 1, according to the census figures, the
numbfer of persons employed in industries declined from 17.5 million
to 15.3 million. While the numbers in industries declined by 1 2 . 6
per cent, the population in the same period increased by 1 2 per cent.
Declining Numbers of Workers in Principal Industries,
from the Census Reports.
19 11. 19 21. '19 3 1.
Textiles ................... 4,449,449 4,030,674 4.102,136
Industries of dress
and toilet ............... 3,747,755 3,403,842 3,380,824
Wood ....................... 1,730,920 1,581,006 1,631,723
Pood industries . . . . 2,134,045 1,653,424 1,476,995
Ceramics ........................................... 1,139,168 1,085,335 1,024,830
“ Thus the real picture of modern India is a picture of what
has been aptly called ‘ de-industrialisation’— that is, the decline of
the old handicraft industry without the compensating advance of
modern industry. The advance of factory industry has not over­
taken the decay of handicraft. The process of decay characteristic
o f the nineteenth century has been carried forward in the nine­
teenth century and in the post-war period. . . .” —D.
Average Daily Number of Workers in Factories.
1897 .......................................... 421,000
1907 .......................................... 729,000
19 14 .......................................... 951,000
1922 1,361,000
19 3 1 .......................................... 1,431,000
39
 Although there has been an advance in the number of factory
workers, this has not made up for the decay of handicraft.
“ In the seventeen years between 1897 and 19 14 the number
of factory workers increased by 530,000.
“ In the seventeen years between 19 14 and 19 3 1 the number o f
factory workers increased by 480,000.
“ Thus not only has the rate of increase in the period since
19 14 been m arkedly slower than before 19 14 , but even the absolute
increase has been less.”—D.
“ These contradictions [of imperialist rule] not only lie in the
direct hostility of the opposing interests to Indian industrial de­
velopment and the determination to hold and increase by every
means the dwindling British share in the Indian m arket; they also
lie in the insoluble problems of the home m arket fo r Indian industry
under the conditions of imperialist exploitation with the extreme
impoverishment of the agricultural population. The ta riff system
does not solve but increases this contradiction by the additional
burden it throws on the working peasantry.
“ The industrial question in India cannot be solved apart from
the question of agriculture, which involves the foundations o f
imperialist rule.” —D.
Dutt also refers to the stranglehold of British finance capital
over Indian industries. Its control of banking and credit, with
the ability thus to discriminate in lending policy in favor o f
British firms, and the British banks holding of three-quarters o f
all bank ^deposits, are factors already mentioned.
The managing agencies which in the textile industries promote
and control textile companies are to a large extent in British
hands in this field, which represents the greatest Indian industrial
advance. There were in 1927 27 British managing agencies as
against 56 Indian. The English agencies, however, control 98.9
million of rupees capital as against 97.7 in the case of the Indian
agencies, although the latter control twice as many looms and
spindles.
In the new Constitution there are special provisions to allow
the Governor-General to intervene if he considers that Congress
ministries are discriminating against British firms.

40
 Outcome of Imperialism in Indiu
“ When M arx spoke of British rule ‘ causing a social revolution’
in India, and described England as ‘ the unconscious tool of history
in bringing about that revolution,’ he had in mind, as his explana­
tion made clear, a twofold process.
“ First, the destruction of the old social order.
“ Second, the laying of the material basis fo r a new social order.
“ These two factors still continue operating, although their sig­
nificance is to-day overshadowed by the characteristics of the new
stage of modern imperialism which have grown out of the preceding
stages.
“ The destruction of the old hand industry is still reflected in
the continuing diminution of the total number of industrial workers,
since that diminution is not yet balanced by the slow advance of
modern industry. The destruction of the old village economy has
now reached a stage of contradictions which is driving to a general
agrarian crisis.
“ A t the same time the first beginnings of modern industry have
developed as M arx predicted, although with extreme slowness, out
o f the material basis laid by British ru le ; and thereby have brought
into being the new class in Indian society, the industrial working
class of wage workers in modern machine industry who represent
the creative force of the new social order in the India of the future.
“ B u t to-day a new situation has come into being as a conse­
quence of the further development of this process, which has
brought into existence forces that were not present when M arx
wrote. To-day the conditions within India have fu lly ripened for
a large-scale new advance of the productive forces to a modern
le v e l; and the need for this becomes every year more urgent and
inescapable. Modern imperialism, on the other hand, no longer
perform s the objectively revolutionising role of the earlier capitalist
domination of India, clearing the w ay by its destructive effects for
the new advance and laying down the initial material conditions
fo r its realisation. On the contrary, modern imperialism in India
stands out as the main obstacle to advance of the productive forces,
thw arting and retarding their development by all the weapons of
its financial and political domination. It is no longer possible to
speak of the objectively revolutionising role of capitalist rule in
India. The role of modern imperialism in India is fu lly and ™ m -
pletely reactionary.
“ The old advancing capitalism in the first half of the nineteenth
century battered at the fabric of the old society in India, even
consciously led the assault against certain reactionary religious
and social survivals, laid low ruling prince after prince to incor­
porate their dominions in its uniform domination, made the first
beginnings to spread Western European education and conceptions,
41
and even established for a period the principle of freedom of the
press. During this period the advancing elements in Indian society
— that is, the rising middle class typically represented by Ram
Mohan Roy— supported British rule and sought to assist its
endeavors; it was the decaying reactionary elements, discontented
princes and feudal forces which led the opposition, and whose
leadership culminated and foundered in the revolt of 1857. No
force was then capable of leading and voicing the exploited and
oppressed peasantry; and the revolt could only end in defeat.
“ A fter the revolt of .1857 British rule in India began the trans­
formation of its policy. Modern imperialism in India protects and
fosters the princes and its puppets and seeks increasingly, as in its
latest expresion, the new contitution, to m agnify their political
ro le ; jealously guards and preserves reactionary social and religious
survivals against the demands of progressive Indian opinion fo r
their reforms (as on the question of the age of m arriage or the
breaking of the bans against untouchables), holds down speech and
thought in an elaborate network of repression, and blocks the over­
whelming demands of Indian opinion fo r social, educational and
industrial advance. B y all these symptoms imperialism in India,
reveals itself to-day as the main bulwark of reaction in the social
and political, no less than in the economic field.
“ Therefore all the advancing forces of Indian society in the
modern period unite in an ever more powerful national movement
of revolt against imperialism as the main enemy and buttress o f
reaction; while it is the reactionary decaying forces that are to-day
the most loyal supporters of imperialist rule.
‘ ‘ The rising productive forces in India are straining against the
fetters of imperialism and of the obsolete economic structure which
imperialism maintains and protects. This conflict finds expression
in the agrarian crisis, which is the index of the bankruptcy o f
imperialist economy and the main driving force to decisive change.
It is possible to discern the signs of the approaching agrarian revo­
lution in India in the same w ay as it was possible to discern the
signs in the later years of Tsarist Russia or in late eighteenth
century France. In India the developing agrarian revolution is
intertwined with the developing national democratic liberation
movement against imperialist rule. And the union of the two is
the key to the new period of Indian history now opening. . . . ” — D.
Dutt says in another connection:
“ For it is the failure to develop the productive resources off
India that finally sounds the death-knell of imperialism in India*
to-day, just as it was the relative economic superiority of the British
bourgeois invaders to the system of rule of the feudal princes
(despite the wholesale destruction and spoliation involved in that
invasion) which caused the victory of their rule two centuries.

42
 Indian Agriculture
In the traditional land system of India before British rale the
land belonged to the peasantry, and was owned collectively by the
village community.
The K in g received a share of the total produce, which was
fixed under the Hindu kings at l / 6 th to l/12 th , and might be raised
in time of war to l/4th.
The Mogul emperors raised the proportion to l/3 rd .
In the period of the break-up of the Mogul Empire the collec­
tors to whom the revenue was farmed out often raised the propor­
tion to one-half.
“ The extortionate tribute of a period of disorder appeared as
the starting point and customary level to the new conquerors.” —D.
Land revenue in Bengal in the last year of administration of
the Mogul’s agents, 1764-65, totalled £818,000. It rose to £1,470,000
in 1765-66, the first year of East India Company’s administration.
When the permanent settlement was established in Bengal in 1793
the figure was £3,091,000.
The total land revenue stood at 4.2 million in 1800-1 (it rose
by an increase in territories and assessments to 15 .1 million in
1857-58, when the Crown took o ver; under the Crown it rose to 17.5
million in 19 0 1, and 20 million in 19 11- 12 . In 1936-37 it w as 23.9
million).
“ The later figures of land assessment in modern times show
a smaller proportion to total produce . . . than the earlier figures
of British rule . . . the extreme violence of whose exactions could
not be maintained.”—D.
“ Even more important than the actual increase in the burden
of the assessments in the initial period was the revolution in the
land system effected by the British conquest.” —D.
Before the British conquest the “ K in g’s share” was a fixed
proportion of the produce, varying in amount with the size of the
harvest, and could be paid in kind.
The British levied a fixed amount payable in good and bad
years alike. Moreover, the assessments had to be paid in money.
The assessments which in pre-war British times had been the
responsibility of the village community to pay were now fixed in
the m ajority of settlements on individual landholders, whether
directly cultivators or landlords appointed by the State.
The Zemindars or tax collectors of Mogul times, who had raised
themselves to the position of semi-feudal chieftains, were now
raised to the status of landlords by the British with powers to evict
tenants for non-payment of the land revenue which was now
referred to as rent. This power they had never possessed before.
43 •
 “ The introduction of the English landlord system (for which
there was no previous equivalent in India, the new class being built
up on the basis of the previous tax farm ers), of individual land-
holding, of mortgage and sale of lands, and of a whole apparatus
of English bourgeois legal conceptions alien to Indian economy
and administered by an alien bureaucracy which combined in itself
legislative, executive and judicial functions, completed the process.
“ B y this transformation the British conquerors’ State assumed
in practice the ultimate possession of the land, making the peasantry
the equivalent of tenants, who could be ejected fo r failure of pay­
ment, or alienating the lands to its own nominees as landlords,
who held their titles from the State and could equally be ejected
fo r failure of payment. The previous self-governing village com­
munity was robbed of its economic functions as of its administrative
ro le; the great part of the common lands were assigned to indi­
vidual holders. ” —D.
“ Prom being owners of the soil, the peasants have become
tenants while simultaneously enjoying the woes of ownership in
respect of mortgages and debts, which have now descended on the
m ajority of their holdings; and with the further development of
the process, an increasing proportion have in the past century, and
especially in the past half-century, become landless laborers, or
the new class of the agricultural proletariat, now constituting from
one-third to one-half of the agricultural population.” —D.
“ The obstacles presented by the internal solidity and articu­
lation of pre-capitalist national modes of production to the corro­
sive influence of commerce is strikingly shown in the intercourse
of the English with India and China. The broad basis of the mode
of production is here formed by the unity of small agriculture and
domestic industry to which is added in India the form of communes
resting upon common ownership of the land, which, by the way,
was likewise the original form fo r China. In India the British
exerted simultaneously their direct political and economic power
as rulers and landlords for the purpose of disrupting these small
economic organisations.” — (K arl Marx, “ Capital,” Vol. III., quoted
by D.)

44
 Burdens on the Peasantry
In 1793 Lord Cornwallis, Governor-General, introduced the
“ permanent land settlement” in Bengal, Bihar, Orissa and later
extended it to parts of north Madras.
The Zemindars, the pre-British tax farmers appointed by pre­
vious rulers to collect the land revenue on commission, were con­
stituted landlords in perpetuity. This security was subject to a
fixed payment to the Government of 1 0 / llt h s of the payments of
the cultivators.
M any of the better type of Zemindars were in turn eventually
evicted by the British because they could not display sufficient
ruthlessness in making the exactions.
Subsequently, however, the fall in the value of money enabled
these landlords to rack-rent illegally higher amounts from the
peasants while the Government’s share of the spoils was fixed.
The result is that to-day only about one-quarter of the land revenue
goes to the Government in Bengal and three-quarters of it to the
Zemindars.
“ The purpose'of the ‘ permanent Zemindari settlement’ was to
create a new class of landlords after the British model as the social
buttress of English rule. It was recognised that, with the small
numbers of English holding down a vast population, it was abso­
lutely necessary to establish a social basis for their power through
the creation of a new class whose interests, through receiving a
subsidiary share in the spoils (one-eleventh in the original intention)
would be bound up with the maintenance of British rule.” —D.
Lord Cornwallis, Governor of Bengal, in defending his policy,
said he was “ convinced that, failing the claim of right of the
Zemindars, it would be necessary for the public good to grant a
right of property in the soil to them, and to persons of other
descriptions” (quoted by D.).
“ I f security was wanting against extensive popular tumult or
revolution, I should say that the permanent settlement, though a
failure in many other respects and in its most important essentials,
has this great advantage at least— of having created a vast body
of rich landed proprietors deeply interested in the continuance of
the British dominion and having complete command over the mass
of the people.” — (Lord William Bentinck, Governor-General, 1828-
25, quoted by Dutt from “ Speeches and Documents on Indian
Policy,” by A. B. Keith.)
“ This alliance of British rule with landlordism in India,
created largely by its own act, as its main social basis, continues
to-day, and is to-day involving British rule in inextricable contra­
dictions which are preparing its downfall along with the downfall
of landlordism.” — D.
The permanent settlement was a mistake, since it allowed the
lion’s share of the land revenue to fa ll into the hands of the Zemin­
dars. This mistake was not repeated.
45
 Subsequent Zemindari settlements were made temporary to
allow of a progressive raising of the rent. These temporary settle­
ments cover 30 per cent, of the area of the land, while the permanent
settlement covers 19 per cent, of the area. The R yotw ari settlements
were developed to make a direct settlement with the cultivators
and to prevent a share falling to intermediaries. These extend
over the remaining 5 1 per cent, of the area. They are in existence
in most of Madras, Bombay, in Berar, Sind, Assam and other parts.
“ Although in these areas the Government deals with the cul­
tivators direct in practice through the process of sub-letting and
through the dispossession of the original cultivators by money­
lenders and others securing possession of their land, landlordism
has spread extensively and at an increasing pace in the Ryotw ari
areas. . . .”—D.
“ Over 30 per cent, of the lands are not cultivated by the
tenants themselves in Madras and Bom bay.” — (Mukerjee, “ Land
Problems of India,” quoted by D.)
The Census reports show that in Madras, 19 0 1 to 19 2 1, the
number of non-cultivating landowners (that is, landlords) increased
from 19 to 49 per thousand, and the number of cultivating land­
owners decreased from 484 to 381 per thousand; the number of
cultivating tenants increased from 1 5 1 to 225 per thousand.
The Punjab Census reports for 19 2 1 showed an increase in the
persons living from rent of agricultural land from 626,000 in 1 9 1 1
to 1,008,000 in 19 21.
In the united provinces between 18 9 1 and 19 2 1 the number of
persons returned as deriving their main income from agricultural
rents increased by 46 per cent. In the central provinces and Berar,
in the same period, the rent receivers increased by 52 per cent.
“ This extending chain of landlordism in India, increasing most
rapidly in the modern period, is the reflection of the growing dis­
possession of the peasantry and the invasion of the moneyed
interests, big and small, which seek investment in this direction,
having failed to find effective outlets for investment in productive
industry.’ ’—D.
Over large areas a fantastic chain of sub-letting has come into
existence.
“ In some districts the sub-infeudation has grown to astonish­
ing proportions, as many as 50 or more intermediary interests
having been created between Zemindar at the top and the actual
cultivator at the bottom.” — (Simon Report, quoted by D.)
In 1842 S ir Thomas Munro, a Census Commissioner, reported
that there were no landless peasants in India. “ An undoubtedly
incorrect picture, but indicating that the numbers were not con­
sidered to require statistical measurement.”—D.
46
 In 1882 the Census estimated 7% million “ landless day
laborers in agriculture.”
In 19 2 1 the Census showed 2 1 million and in 19 3 1 a total of
3 3 million or one-third of those engaged in agriculture.
In addition, many of the cultivators fo r absentee landlords
■are really farm hands, while many of those who nominally own
their land hire themselves out to work on other farms.
In 1927 N. M. Joshi told the All-India Trade Union Congress
that he estimated 25 million to be agricultural laborers and 50
million as partly wage earners on the land.
“ Thus the position of the overwhelming m ajority of Indian
cultivators approximates to that of a rural proletariat rather than
o f small peasant farm ers.”—D.
R. M ukerjee (“ Land Problems of In d ia,” quoted by D.) has
estimated the trend of wages in agriculture as follow s:
Field labourer without food (day wage in annas): 1842, 1 ;
1852, l i ; 1862, 2; 1872, 3 ; 1 9 1 1 , 4 ; 1922, 4 to 6 .
Price of rice—seers of rice bought per rupee: 1842, 40; 1852,
30; 1862, 37; 1872, 2 3 ; 19 1 1, 1 5 ; 1922, 5.
The cash wage has risen 4 to 6 times since 1842 and the price
o f rice has risen by eight times, so that the real wage has fallen
by about 50 per cent.
The Report of the Quinquennial Wage Survey in the United
Province in 1934 (quoted by D.) showed an average wage equal
to 3d. per day and in many cases to li d . per day.
The Central Banking Inquiry Committee m ajority report
(quoted by D.) estimated that the “ average income of an agri­
culturist in British India does not work out a higher figure than
£3 a year.”
N. S. Subramanian, in'his “ Study of an Indian V illag e” (Con­
gress Political and Economic Studies, No. 2 , 1936, quoted by D .),
investigated the village of Nerur of Trichinopoly, with a popula­
tion of 6200.
The net income from agriculture, after deducting expenses for
cultivation (not labor and excluding wages paid within the village),
came to 212,000 rupees. Net income from non-agricultural sources,
wages, etc., earned outside the village came to 24,000 rupees, making
•a total net income of Rs. 236,000.
Of this amount a total of Rs. 152,000 went for Government
revenue, taxation, rent and interest, leaving balance of Rs. 80,000
fo r the village. The inhabitant of the village earns an equivalent
o f £ 2 /17 /- for the year. A fter the British tax collector, money­
lender and landlord have taken their share of two-thirds of his
earnings he is left with 13/- a year.
47
 In evidence before the A gricultural Commission in Bombay in
1927 (quoted by D.) a survey of one million acres was presented.
Number of Increase or
Area of Holdings. Holdings in Decrease.
19 17. 1922.
Under 5 acres . . . . 6,272 6,446 .. plus 2 .6
5-15 ....................... 17,909 .. 19 ,130 .. „ 6 .8
15-25 ....................... 11,908 .. 12,018 .. „ 0.9
25-100 ..................... 15,532 .. 15,020 .. — 3.3
100-500 ..................... 1,234 1 ,1 1 7 .. — 9.5
Over 500 ................... 20 19 .. — 5.0
A witness, a Government official, commented: “ These figures
referring only to a period of five years, appear to me to show a
very marked increase in the number of agriculturists cultivating
holdings up to 15 acres, which, except in a very few soils, is not
an area which can economically employ a pair of bullocks' (quoted
b y D .).
The following is a survey of Dr. Harold H. Mann, who was-
Director of A griculture in Bombay, in his “ L ife and Labor in a
Deccan V illage” (quoted by D .). There were 156 holdings in the
first village:
Area of Holdings.
30 acres and more .. 2
20-30 acres ............... 9
10-20
5-10
„ .....
„ ...............
18
34
1-5 „ ............... 1
Less than 1 acre 22
The investigator thought that this might not be a typical case.
In the second village he investigated he found 77 per cent, of the
holdings under 2 0 acres, which he regarded as minimum economic
area.

48
 Summing-Up on Agriculture
“ The elementary basic issues underlying the present agrarian
crisis a r e :
“ 1. The overpressure of the population on agriculture, through
the blocking of other economic channels.
“ 2. The effects of land monopoly and of the burdens on the
peasantry.
“ 3. The low technique and obstacles to the development o f
technique.
“ 4. The stagnation and deterioration of agriculture under
British rule.
“ 5. The increasing impoverishment of the peasantry, sub­
division and fragmentation of holdings, and dispossession of wide
sections.
“ 6 . The consequent increasing differentation of classes, leading
to the reduction of a growing proportion of the peasantry from
one-third to one-half to the position of a landless proletariat.” —D.
“ W hat is invariably omitted from the vulgar imperialist pre­
sentation of the picture is the fact that this extreme, exaggerated,
disproportionate and wasteful dependence on agriculture as the
sole occupation of three-fourths of the people is not an inherited
characteristic of the old primitive Indian society surviving in the
modern period, but is, on the contrary, in its present scale, a modern
phenomenon and the direct consequence of imperialist rule. The
disproportionate dependence on agriculture has progressively in­
creased under British rule. This is the expression of the destruction
of the old balance of industry and agriculture, and the relegation
> of India to the role of an agricultural appendage of Im perial­
ism.” —D.
(Census.)
Percentage of population dependent on agriculture.
18 9 1 19 0 1 19 11 19 2 1
6 1.1 66.5 72.2 73.0
In 19 3 1 the basis of calculation was changed in such a w ay
as to bring the figure down to 65.6—admittedly merely due to new
classification.
Percentage of the population dependent on industry.
19 11 19 2 1 19 3 1
5.5 4.9 4.3
“ Between 1892-93 and 1919-20 the area under food crops
increased by 7 per cent.; the area under non-food crops increased
by 43 per cent. This process has gone still further in the recent
period. Between the average for the five years 19 10 -15 and 1934-35
the area under food crops has increased by 12.4 per cent.; the area
under non-food crops has increased by 54 per cent.” —D.
The population between 1 9 1 1 and 19 3 1 increased by 12 per cent.
49
 “ Thus the heavier and heavier overcrowding of agriculture,
with the increasing emphasis on non-food crops fo r export (along­
side starvation of the Indian masses), is the direct consequence
of British capitalist policy, which has required India as a market
and source of raw materials, . . — D.
“ We have swept aw ay their manufactures, they have nothing
to depend on but the produce of the land .” (Sir Charles Trevelyan,
1840, to House of Commons Select Committee, quoted by D.)
In 1936, the first All-India peasant organisation, the All-India
Kisan Sabhar, was formed. Its membership grew from 20,000 in
that year to 800,000 in 1939.
The political resolution at its Congress at Gaya, A pril, 1939,
Avas as fo llo w s:
“ The first year has witnessed a phenomenal awakening and
growth of organisational strength of the kisan of India. Not only
have the peasants taken a much greater part than ever before in
the general democratic movement in the country, but they have
also awakened to a consciousness of their position as a class, desper­
ately trying to exist in the face of ruthless feudal imperialist
exploitation. Their class organisations, therefore, have multiplied
and their struggle against this exploitation has risen to a high
level, witnessed by the numerous partial struggles, and has brought
a new political consciousness to them. They have realised the
nature of the forces they are fighting against, and the true remedies
of their poverty and exploitation. Their vision is no longer limited
by their action taken in alliance with other anti-imperialist forces
in the country. They have therefore come to the conclusion that
the logical end of their day to day struggle must be a m ighty
attack on and the removal of imperialism itself and an agrarian
revolution which w ill give them land, remove all intermediary
exploiters between them and the State, and free them from the
burden of debt and secure to them the fu ll enjoyment of the
fru its of their labor.
“ Secondly, the past year has been a year of small reliefs for
the peasantry, secured to them from the provincial Government.
The crying inadequacy of these reliefs, the greater obstacles created
b y the vested interests that have to be encountered, showing them
the patent incapability of provincial autonomy to solve any of the
basic agrarian problems, have fu lly exposed the hollowness of the
provincial autonomy. The organisation is proud to declare to-day
the determination of the peasants of India to free themselves from
the feudal-cum-imperialist exploitation and their preparedness to
do so is greater than ever before.
“ . . . the peasant organisation affirm s that the time has come
when the united forces of the country, embracing the Congress,
the States’ people, peasants, workers and the organisations and
peoples generally, should take a forw ard step and launch an attack
on the slave constitution of the imperialist domination itself, for
complete national independence and a democratic State of the
Indian people, leading ultimately to the realisation of a Kisan
Mazdoor R aj (Peasants’ and W orkers’ R u le ).” — Quoted by D.
50
 Rise oi Indian Nationalism
“ In the earlier period of British rule, in the first half of the
nineteenth century, the British rulers— in the midst of, and actually
through all. the misery and industrial devastation— were perform ­
ing an actually progressive role, were in many cases actively com­
bating the conservative and feudal forces of Indian society. A
policy of ruthless annexation was wiping out the princedoms and
fillin g the remaining rulers with alarm. This was the period of
courageous reforms, of such measures as the abolition of suttee
. . . the abolition of slavery . . . the w ar on infanticide and thuggism,
the introduction of Western education, and the freedom of the
press. . . .

“ A ll tradition bears out the closer personal relations betAveen

British and Indians in that period. The deepest enemies of the
B ritish were the old reactionary rulers, Avho saw in them their
supplanters. The most progressive elements in Indian society at
the time represented by Ram Mohun Roy and the reform movement
o f Brahmo Sam aj, looked Avith unconcealed admiration to the
B ritish as the champions of progress.”—D.

The Indian mutiny of 1857 Avas a rising led by the feudal

potentates against this destruction of their reactionary rights and
privileges.

“ Nevertheless, even so the rising laid bare the depth of jo ass

discontent and unrest beneath the surface, and created an alarm
in the British rulers, the tradition of Avhieh remains.” — D.

“ A fte r 3857 a transformation took place in British policy and

the character of British rule.” —D.

Its policy Avas now designed to win the support of the princes
against the Indian bourgeoisie and the masses. This policy AAra s
m itigated only by temporary alliances Avitli the bourgeoisie against
the masses. “ A n abrupt end was made of the system of annexa­
tion of the Indian States into British India. Henceforth the re­
maining princes were zealously preserved in possession of their
puppet poAvers as allied ‘ sovereign’ rulers, with every form of
degenerate feudal oppression and misrule protected. . . . The con­
sequent political map of India was preserved as a senseless patch­
w ork of petty principalities and divided administrations.

“ The period of reform came to an end (thfe Age of Consent

A c t raising the minimum age from 10 to 12 years in 18 9 1 being
almost the solitary exception in the later period).

“ A ll reactionary religious customs and caste barriers Avere

henceforth protected, and Hindus played off against Moslems as
p a rt of the technique of British rule. ’ ’— D.
51
 “ Thus the change which developed in the general character
of capitalism in Britain and on a world scale, from its earlier
ascendant progressive role, and fin ally to fu ll decay in the period
of imperialism, was accomplished by a corresponding change in
the character of British rule in India.” — D.
A t the same time in the second half of the 19th century
Indians had founded a modern textile industry, and Indian lawyers,
doctors and teachers and administrators were appearing and com­
ing into contact with Western ideas and education.
“ . . . the new class was appearing which was inevitably to
find the British bourgeoisie its overshadowing competitor and
obstacle to advance, and was therefore destined to become the'
first articulate expression and leadership of Indian national
claims. ”—D.
A t the same time the growing poverty and desperation of the
peasantry was revealed in the fact that in the first half of the
19th century there were seven famines causing 1-| million deaths,,
while in the second half of the century there were 24 famines,
causing 28J million deaths; 18 of these famines occurred in the
last quarter of the century.
“ Thus by the last quarter of the nineteenth century the con­
ditions were now present for the beginning of the Indian national
movement.” —D.

5?
I

The Notional Congress

The Indian National Congress was officially founded by A. 0.
Hume, with the support of the Viceroy, Lord Dufferin, in 1885.

Hume had had access to the files of police reports on the

■unrest of the time.

“ The evidence convinced me at the time . . . that we were

in imminent danger of a terrible outbreak.” — (Sir W illiam Wedder-
b u rn ; Allan Octavian Hume, Father of the Indian National Con­
gress, 19 13 , quoted by D.)

This, in his own words, is how he viewed the Congress: “ A

safety valve for the escape of great and growing forces, generated
b y our own action, was urgently needed, and no more efficacious
safety valve than our Congress movement could possibly be de­
vised .” — (Wedderburn, quoted by D.)

Dutt declares that the intention was to separate the moderates

from the extremists, who had to be isolated.

The first Congress closed by Mr. Hume calling fo r and getting

“ thrice times three” cheers for the Queen Empress Victoria.

“ This twofold character of the National Congress in its origin

is very important for all its subsequent history. This double strand
runs right through its history; on the one hand, the strand of
co-operation with imperialism against the menace of the mass move­
ment, on the other hand, the strand of leadership of the masses
in the national struggle. This twofold character, which can be
traced through all the contradictions of its leadership from Jokhale,
in the old stage, to his disciple Gandhi, in the new, is the reflection
o f the twofold or vacillating role of the Indian bourgeoisie, at once
in conflict with the British bourgeoisie and desiring to lead the
Indian people, yet fearing that ‘ too rapid’ advance may end in
destroying its privileges along with those of the imperialists. This
contradiction can only be finally solved in proportion as the national
movement . . . builds itself on the masses.” —D.

53
 The First Wave of Straggle, 1905-10
“ The historical development of Indian nationalism is m arked
by three great waves of struggle, each at a successively higher level,
and each leaving its permanent m ark on the movement and opening
the w ay to a new phase. In its earlier phase Indian nationalism,
as we have seen, reflected only the big bourgeoisie, the progressive
elements among the landowners, the new industrial bourgeoisie and
the well-to-do intellectual elements. The first great wave of unrest
which disturbed these placid waters, in the period preceding 19 14 ,
reflected the discontent of the urban petty bourgeoisie, but did not
. yet reach the masses. The role of the masses in the national move­
ment, alike of the peasantry and the new force of the industrial
working class, emerged only after the war of 19 14-18. Two great
waves of mass struggle developed, the first in the years immediately
succeeding the world economic crisis. On the basis of this record
of struggle, Indian nationalism stands to-day at the highest point
of struggle since its inception. The national Congress, following
its sweeping election victory of 1937 and its period of control of
the Ministries in the m ajority of the provinces, has reached w ith
its five million members a decisive representative position, and
now faces the most critical responsibilities of leadership. Once
again to-day the National movement stands at the parting of the
ways. It is evident to all observers that a great new period of
struggle, which may prove decisive for the future of British rule
in India and for the Indian people, is now open.” —D.
In the first twenty years the national Congress developed along
the path indicated by its founders. No claim was made for self-
government, but only for a greater amount of Indian representation
within the British system of rule.
“ So long as the nascent working class was still completely
without expression or organisation, and the peasants were still the
dumb millions, the Indian bourgeoisie were the most progressive
and objectively revolutionary force in India. They carried on work
fo r social reform, education and modernisation against all that was
backward and obscurantist. They pressed the demand for indus­
trial, technical and economic development.” —D.
“ The educated classes,” declared Ananda Mohan Bose, President
of the 1898 Congress, “ are the friends and not the foes of England—
her natural and necessary allies in the great work that lies before
her.” — (Quoted by D.)
“ I have no fears,” affirm ed Sir Pherozeshah Mehta in 1890,
“ but that British statesmen w ill ultimately respond to the call.” —
(Quoted by D.)
“ The people of India are not fond of sudden changes and
revolutions. . . . They desire to strengthen the present Government
and bring it more in touch with the people. They desire to see
54
some Indian members in the Secretary of States Council and in
the V iceroy’s Executive Council representing Indian industry and
agriculture,” stated Romesh Chandra Dutt in 19 0 1, who was Con­
gress President in 1890 (in his preface to “ The Economic History of
In d ia,” Vol. 1. “ India Under E a rly British R u le,” quoted by D.)
. the early Indian bourgeoisie of that time understood
very well that they were in no position to challenge British rule.
. . . Fo r them the main enemy was not British rule as such, but
the backwardness of the people, the lack of modern development
. . . the strength of the forces of obscurantism and ignorance. . . .
In their figh t against these evils they looked hopefully for the co­
operation of the British rulers.’—D.
“ But their faith and hope in British imperialism was doomed
to disappointment. Britisli imperialism understood very clearly—
more clearly than they did themselves—the significance of this
progressive role and the inevitable conflict it would mean with
the interests of imperialist rule and exploitation.” —D.
In 1890 all Government officials were forbidden to attend the
Congress. “ The Congress is tottering to its fa ll; and one of my
great ambitions, while in India, is to assist its demise,” said the
Viceroy, Lord Curzon, in 1900.— (Quoted by D.)
The old Congress leaders became known as moderates, under
the veteran leadership of Gokhale, in opposition to the younger
school of “ extremists” or nationalists, who were discontented with
the older leadership, which had proved to be inadequate in the fuce
of the uncompromising attitude of the British Government.
They desired to make a clean break with the policy of co-opera­
tion with imperialism, and to enter on an uncompromising struggle
against imperialism. As yet, however, there was no mass move­
ment in India to make such a decisive struggle possible. They
reached only the lower middle class, the literate youth and unem­
ployed.
They were cut o ff from the advanced social theory of Europe.
This accounts for the fact that under G. B. T ila k ’s leadership they
sought to build a national movement on the basis of orthodox
Hinduism, and campaigned against the Westernisation processes, in
reality progressive, but which they claimed “ denationalised In d ia.”
In 1905 the Government had decided to partition Bengal, then
the centre of political advance in India, a measure which aroused
universal condemnation.
“ The forces which gathered for a new wave of struggle in
1905 reflected the wave of world advance at the time following
the defeat of Czarism by Ja p an (the first victory in modern times
of an Asiatic over a European power, having its own profound
repercussions in India), and the initial victories of the first Russian
revolution.” -—D.
55
 A boycott of British goods was proclaimed by the Nationalists,
supported by the Congress eventually in 1906 at Calcutta, and also
h y the moderates.
Repression followed in India. Extrem ist leaders were deported
without trial, and Tilak was sentenced to six years’ imprisonment
in 1908.
“ The arrest of Tilak led to a general strike of the Bombay
textile workers— the first political action of the Indian proletariat,
and hailed by Lenin at the time as a portent of the fu tu re.” — D.
“ Most of the other prominent leaders were either sentenced
■or deported, or passed into exile . . . meetings were broken up . . .
school children were arrested fo r singing national songs.” —13.
Repression was accompanied by concessions to ra lly the moder­
ates. The Morley Minto Reforms of 1909 gave a small extension
of the Indian Council’s A ct of 189 2; and permitted a minority of
indirectly elected members in the Central Legislative Council, and
a m ajority of indirectly elected members in the provincial councils.
The Councils had only advisory powers.
The partition of Bengal was revised. In 1907 the Moderates
■and Extrem ists split at the Surat Congress, to be reunited again
later in 19 16. Two years later the moderates left the Congress
altogether to form the liberal federation. The moderates were in
complete control in 19 1 1. A Congress spokesman declared, “ E v ery
heart is beating in unison with reverence and devotion to the
British Throne, overflowing with revived confidence in and grati­
tude towards British statesmanship.” — (Quoted by D.)
“ In the pre-1914 years the revision of the partition was a
partial victory achieved by the extremists leaders, who fo r all their
limitations had achieved a great and lasting w o rk.” —D.
“ The Indian claim to freedom . . . had been for the first time
brought to the forefront of world political questions,” writes Dutt.

56
 The Second Wave of Struggle,
1919-22
“ It was the shock of the first World War, with its lasting blow
to the whole structure of imperialism and the opening of the world
revolutionary wave that followed in 19 17 and after, which released
the first mass movement of revolt in In d ia.” —D.
Imperialism took firm measures with all revolutionary and
uncompromising leading elements immediately at the outbreak o f
the war, most of whom were imprisoned or interned.
The Congress in 19 14 and 19 15 and 19 16 passed resolutions,
of loyalty, and was attended by Government representatives. Indian
leaders in London, including Jinnah, Sinlia, and L ajp at Rai, offered
their services to the Government.
Gandhi, in London, wrote to the Secretary of State: “ It was.
thought desirable by many of us that those Indians who are resid­
ing in the United Kingdom and who can at all do so should place
themselves unconditionally at the service of the authorities. On
behalf of ourselves and those whose names appear on the list
appended hereto, we beg to offer our services to the authorities.”'
— (Quoted by D.)
He raised a volunteer ambulance corps of Indians in London.
On returning to India he proposed to the Viceroy that he raise
a corps of stretcher bearers for service in Mesopotamia. The
Viceroy excused him on the grounds of ill-liealth, stating “ his-
presence in India itself at that critical time would be of more
service than he could render abroad.” In Ju ly , 1918, he was con­
ducting a recruiting campaign urging the Gujarati peasants to
win Sw araj by joining the army.
The Indian leaders thought that by these measures they would
gain Indian self-government.
“ They were later to express their disillusionment.” —Dutt.
“ The docility of the upper political leadership did not prevent
the growth of mass unrest from the conditions of the w ar—the v e ry
heavy burdens of crippling financial contributions exacted from
the poverty-stricken people of India for the service of the w ar,
the rising prices and the reckless profiteering creating conditions-
of mass misery and impoverishment, which were reflected in the
unparalleled toll of the influenza epidemic at the end of the w ar,
killing 14 millions.”—D.
Mutinies occurred in the army, and were suppressed by execu­
tions and heavy sentences.
In 19 17 the Rowlatt Commission was appointed to inquire into
“ the criminal conspiracies connected with the revolutionary move­
ments in India.”
57
 Stirring's occurred in the political -field. Tilak founded the
Home Rule fo r India League, and the Moslems and the Congress
plans for alliance reached fruition in 1916. Their programme was
fo r reforms in the direction of partial self-government within the
Empire.
“ That was the position when the rapid transformation of the
w orld situation in 19 17 , following the Russian revolution, affected
the whole tempo of events. . . . The issue of self-determination was
brought to the forefront in a manner highly embarrassing to the
imperialist powers on both sides.”—D.
Within five months of the fall of Czarism the Montagu declara­
tion (Montagu being the name of the Secretary of State of the
time) declared the aims of British rule in India to be “ the gradual
development of self-governing institutions with a view to the pro­
gressive realisation of responsible government in India as an
integral part of the British E m pire” and promised “ substantial
steps in the direction as soon as possible.” — (Quoted by D.)
A year later the Montagu-Chelmsford Report declared for re­
forms along the lines of “ D yarch y” in the provinces, or divisions
o f portfolios between British and Indian Ministers. They did not
come into operation until 1920.
The Government had won the support of the moderates, who
left the Congress in 1918, but a special session of the Congress in
the same year condemned the reforms as “ disappointing and un­
satisfactory.” In 1919 Gandhi secured the acceptance of the pro­
posals after a hard fight, supported by Mrs. Besant, a theosophist.
The militant opposition was led by C. R. Das.

GANDHI AND REFORMS.

A t the end of 19 19 Gandhi stated, “ The Reforms Act, coupled
with the proclamation, is an earnest of the intention of the British
people to do justice to India and it ought to remove suspicion on
that score. Our duty, therefore, is not to subject the reforms to
carping criticism, but to settle down quietly to work so as to make
them a success.”— (M. K . Gandhi, in “ Young In d ia,” in 1919,
quoted by D.)
“ The year 19 19 saw a wave of mass unrest spread over India
. . . already the closing months of 19 18 and the opening months of
1919 saw the opening of a strike movement (referred to elsewhere
— J.L .) on a scale never before known in In d ia.” —D.
“ The basis of co-operation was disappearing from under the
feet of the Congress.”— D.
The Rowlatt Acts were introduced in 19 19 with the purpose
o f continuing, now the war was ended, the Government’s power of
imprisonment without trial and other repressive measures. This
demonstrated “ the iron hand of imperialism beneath the velvet
glove of reform .” — D. '
Gandhi thought to organise a passive resistance movement
aganst the Rowlatt bills. A hartal, or day of suspension of busi­
ness, was called for April.
58.
 _ “ The response of the masses startled and overwhelmed the
initiators of the movement. Throughout March and A pril a mighty
wave of mass demonstrations, strikes, unrest, in some cases rioting,
and courageous resistance in the face of heavy casualties, resulted.
“ The official Government report for the year referred
anxiously to the fact that ‘ one general feature of the general
excitement was the unprecedented fraternisation between the
Hindus and Moslems.’ ” — (Quoted by D.)
Extraordinary measures of repression followed.
The massacre of Am ritsar occurred at this time, when General
Dyer fired 1G00 rounds of ammunition into an unarmed crowd in
an enclosed place without means of exit, killing 379 and leaving
1200 wounded without medical attention. General Dyer said he
hoped to create “ a moral effect . . . not only 0 11 those who were
present, but throughout the Punjab.”
News of the massacre was kept from the British public for
eight months. The action was subsequently approved by the House
o f Lords. The General got a purse of £20,000 for his valiant deed.
“ The movement assumed the undeniable character of an organ­
ised revolt against the British R a j.” — (Sir Valentine Chiral,
“ India,” 1926, quoted by D.)
Gandhi declared he had committed “ a blunder of Himalayan
dimensions” and called off the movement because, as he stated
in a letter to the press on Ju ly 2 1, “ the Civil Resister never seeks
to embarrass the Government.” — (Quoted by D.)
Gandhi in this situation in 1920 now “ executed a decisive
change of front, through over co-operation with the reforms, deter­
mined to take the leadership of the rising mass movement, and fo r
this purpose evolved the plan of ‘ non-violent non-co-operation.’ ” —D.
This new policy was adopted by the Congress. “ The attain­
ment of S w araj by peaceful and legitimate means” was declared
to be the programme in place of the old aim of colonial self-
government within the empire.
“ The new programme and policy inaugurated by Gandhi
m arked a gian t’s advance for the National Congress. The Congress
now stood out as a political party leading the masses in the struggle
against the Government for the realisation of national freedom.
From this point the national Congress won its position (a position
a t which the militant nationalists of the earlier years would have
rubbed their eyes) as the central focus of the united national move­
ment, a position which through good and ill repute, through what­
ever changes of tactics and fortunes, it has maintained and car­
ried forward up to this day.”—D.

NON-VIOLENCE.
The new programme contained two contradictory elements,
“ mass struggle against imperialism and the formula ‘ non-violent’
which attempted in practice to conciliate the interests of the
masses with the big bourgeoisie and landlord interests.” — D.
59
 Gandhi had no plan for the realisation of independence, no
idea of the concrete steps in the struggle.
“ It was obvious that to most of our leaders S w araj meant
something less than independence. Gandhi was delightfully vague
on the subject, and did not encourage clear thinking about it
either.” — (Jaw ah arlal Nehru, “ Autobiography,” present Congress
Leader, quoted by D.)
The movement swept on following the adoption of the pro­
gramme.
The Midnapore no-tax campaign, the Moplah rebellion in Mala­
bar, the militant akali movement against the rich Mohants in the
Punjab, and the organisation of the national volunteers to march
in mass formation picketing shops selling British goods were ele­
ments in the movement.
A t the beginning of 1922 30,000 were in jail.
“ Enthusiasm was at fever heat.”— D.
“ A ll the best known Congress leaders except Gandhi w ere
imprisoned.”— D.
The Government played their trump card by bringing the
Prince of Wales to India. “ The results exceeded their expectations
in the reverse direction. The hartal [day of suspension of business]
all over India which greeted the Prince of Wales on his arrival on
November 17 was the most overwhelming and successful demonstra­
tion of popular disaffection which India had yet known.” —D.
“ The Government was anxious and perplexed and began to
lose its nerve.” —D,
It began abortive negotiations with the political leaders in ja il
offering to legalise the national volunteers and release them if civil
disobedience were called off.
The Ahmedabad Congress was held at the end of 19 2 1 in this
situation. It proclaimed “ the fixed determination of the Con­
gress to continue the campaign of non-violent non-co-operation until
Sw araj is established and the control of the Government of India
passes into the hands of the people. ” Dictatorial powers were placed
in the hands “ of Mahatma Gandhi as the sole executive authority
of the Congress.”
“ Gandhi was now Dictator of the Congress . . . the whole
country was looking to Gandhi. W hat would he do?
“ In the midst of this ferment of national enthusiasm and hope
one man on the Congress side was unhappy and alarmed at the
development of the events. That man was Gandhi. His movement,
the movement that he had envisaged, was not developing at all in.
the w ay that he had intended. Something was going wrong. This
was not the perfect idyllic movement that he had pictured. He
had unchained a monster. More and more openly already in the
closing weeks of 19 21, when tens of thousands of fighters were
going to prison with his name on their lips, he was expressing his
alarm and disgust as in his revealing cry that Sw araj stank in his
nostrils.”— D.
A t Ahmedabad the retreat really began.
fiO
 The call to open struggle was not made at Alnnedabad . . . the
references to mass civil disobedience were hedged around with
ifs and ands “ under proper safeguards,” “ under instructions to be
issued,” “ when the mass of people had been sufficiently trained
in methods of non-violence.” Gandhi secured the rejection of a
motion by the Moslem leader, Hasrat Mohani, who refused to
define Sw araj as “ complete independence from all foreign con­
trol. ”
The Viceroy telegraphed to London:
“ During Christmas week the Congress held its annual meeting
a t Ahmedabad. Gandhi had been deeply impressed with the rioting
at Bombay . . . and the rioting had brought home to him the
dangers of mass civil disobedience . . . he omitted any reference to
the non-payment of taxes.”— (“ Telegraphic correspondence regard­
in g the situation in India,” 1922, quoted by D.)
A month later the Congress districts approached Gandhi and
asked him to begin a no-tax campaign. He decided to make a
beginning in a district, Bardoli, in which one four-thousandth part
o f the Indian population lived. He sent an ultimatum to the Vice­
ro y on February 1 declaring that unless prisoners were released
and repressive measures abandoned mass civil disobedience would
begin, in Bardoli exclusively.
The peasants in a little village in another district, Chauri
Chaura, had got in ahead of him, however, and had burned the
village police station, causing the deaths of 2 2 policemen.
The working committee of the Congress met at Bardoli and
called the whole campaign of mass civil disobedience off in view
o f “ the inhuman conduct of the mob at Chauri Chaura.”
Clauses 6 and 7 of its decision read : “ The working committee
advises Congress workers and organisations to inform the Ryots
[peasants] that withholding rent to Zemindars [landlords] js con­
tra ry to the resolutions of Congress and injurious to the best in­
terests of the country.”— (Quoted by D.)
“ The working committee assures the Zemindars that the Con­
gress movement is in no w ay intended to attack their legal rights. ’ ’
— (Quoted by D.)
“ Why, then, should a resolution, nominally condemning ‘ vio­
lence,’ concentrate so emphatically on the , question of the non­
paym ent of rent?” —D. He goes on: “ There is only one answer
possible. The phraseology of non-violence is revealed as only in
reality a cover, conscious or unconscious, for class interests and
the maintenance of class exploitation.
“ The dominant leadership of the Congress associated with
Gandhi called off the movement because they were afraid of the
awakening mass activity; and they were afraid . . . because it was
beginning to threaten the propertied class interests with which they
■were still themselves closely linked.” —D.
The Bardoli decision paralysed the movement. The masses
taught to depend on Gandhi’s leadership were hopelessly confused
and demoralised.
61
 Motilal Nehru, and L ajp a t Rai, and other leaders sent indignant
letters to Gandlii from prison. He replied that they were “ c iv illy
d ead” and had no say in policy.
Jaw ah arlal Nehru later declared that the decision “ brought
about a certain demoralisation.”
“ A fter the movement had been thus paralysed and demoral­
ised from within the Government struck with confidence. On March.
10 Gandhi was arrested and sentenced to six y e a rs’ imprisonment.
Not a ripple followed in the mass movement. W ithin less than two
years Gandhi was released. The crisis was over.” — D.

The Third Wove of Struggle, 1930-34

“ For half a decade after the blow of Bardoli the national
movement was prostrated. The Congress fell to a low ebb.” —
L ajp at R ai in 1925 said : “ The political situation is anything
but hopeful and encouraging. The people are sunk in depression.
Everything—principles, practices, parties and politics—seem to be
in a state of disintegration and dissolution.” — Quoted by D.
“ In this depression of the national movement the sinister symp­
tom of communal disorders was able to spread over the land. The
Moslem League separated itself again from the Congress.” — D.
A section of the Congress after Bardoli formed the S w araj
P a rty under the leadership of C. R. Das and Motilal Nehru. • They
wished to turn aw ay from the servile policy of Gandhi. The new
party remained within the Congress. It was opposed by the Con-*
servatives who followed Gandhi’s policy of promoting the spinning
of hand-made cloth, temperance, and the removal of untouchabilit.y.
B y 1925 it had won the support of the Congress m ajority.
It ended the boycott of the elections, imposed at the time of
the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms, which was, “ in view of the
weakness of the mass movement, a step in advance.” —D.
The Sw araj P arty leaders, however, while turning aw ay from
Gandhi, also turned further aw ay from any basis among the masses^
While C. R. Das spoke of “ Sw araj for the 98 per cent.,” and the
new programme of the necessity of workers and peasants’ organisa­
tion, it also stated that “ private and individual property will be
recognised and maintained, and the growth of individual wealth,
both movable and immovable, will be perm itted” (quoted by D .).
An explanatory statement issued with the programme stated:
• “ True it is that the party stands for justice to the tenant, but poor
indeed w ill be the quality of that justice if it involves any injustice
to the landlord” (quoted by D.).
“ The S w araj P a rty was the party of the progressive bour­
geoisie moving to co-operation with imperialism on the inclined
plane of parliamentarism.” —D.
62
 In 1923 the party entered the Central Legislative Assembly as
the largest single party, and with the precarious support of the
moderates were in a majority. .
C. R. Das, as leader, declared “ His party had come there to
offer their co-operation. I f the Government would receive their
co-operation, they would find that the Sw arajists were their men”
(quoted by D.).
In 1926 they contemplated taking office under the Subarmati
Pact with the Liberals, but this was turned down by the rank and
file.
“ But the hopes of the bourgeosie for harmonious co-operation
with imperialism were destined to end in disillusionment. As soon
as it was clear that the forces of the national struggle had weak­
ened, and that the Swarajists, divorced from the mass movement,
were reduced to pleading for terms, imperialism reversed the
engines, began to go back on the partial economic concessions
during the previous years, and open an economic offence to estab­
lish full domination, through the Currency B ill of 1927, the estab­
lishment of the rupee ratio at 1/6 (in the face of universal Indian
protests), and the neAV steel protection bill of 1927 which under­
mined the protection of the 1924 Act by introducing preferential
rates for British steel. Towards the end of 1927 the Simon Commis­
sion was announced to settle the fate of the future Constitution of
India with a complete exclusion of Indian representation.” —D.
“ Thus the Indian bourgeoisie, however, unwillingly found
themselves once again forced to turn aside from their hopes of
co-operation and to look towards the possibility of harnessing the
mass forces once more in their support, if they were to have any
prospect of driving a successful bargain.” —I).
B u t “ in the interval the mass forces had begun to awaken to
a new life of their own, to independent political expression and
aims, and to active struggle, not only against imperialism, but
against the Indian exploiters.” —D.
“ The new ideology of the working class, or socialism, began
to develop fo r the first time as a political factor in India.”— D.
The Cawnpore conspiracy trial of 1924 aimed at stamping out
the first signs of revolutionary working-class politics.
The W orkers and Peasants’ P arty came to the front in 1926
and 1927, preceding a great Trade Union advance. In 1928, 3 1
million working days were lost by strikes—more than in the pre­
vious five years. The Red Flag Union of Bombay textile workers
sprang from nothing to 65,000 members in a year . . . there were
working-class demonstrations against the Simon Commission which
visited India during the year. The L eft W ing were victorious at
the Trade Union Congress in 1929—“ these were the harbingers of
the driving force that led to the new wave of struggle of the
Indian people.” —D.
In 1927 Jaw ah arlal Nehru returned from a tour of Europe in
which he made contact with socialist circles, and at the M adras
Congress in 1927 he and Subhas Bose were appointed General Sec­
retaries. They were the principal leaders of youth and developing
63
 L e ft tendencies in the Congress. A resolution was passed unani­
mously for complete independence. This was condemned by
Gandhi as “ hastily conceived and thoughtlessly determined.”
Congress decided to boycott the Simon Commission and to affiliate
w ith the International League against imperialism.
The victories of the L eft were, however, superficial and based
on lack of opposition.
The R ight W ing leadership turned again to Gandhi, whom they
had previously brushed aside. “ W hatever the views of the mod­
erate leaders might be with regard to his personal idiosyncrasies,
there was no question that he was the most subtle and experienced
politician of the older group, with unrivalled mass prestige, which
w orld publicity had now enhanced as the greatest Indian fig u re;
the ascetic defender of property in the name of the most religious
and idealistic principles of humility and love of p overty; the
invincible metaphysical-theological casuist who could ju stify and
reconcile anything and everything in an outstanding tangle of
•explanations and arguments which in a man of common clay might
have been called dishonest quibbling, but in the great ones of the
•earth like MacDonald or Gandhi is recognised as a higher plane of
spiritual reasoning; the prophet who by his personal saintliness
and selflessness could unlock the door to the hearts of the masses
where the moderate bourgeois leaders could not hope for a h earin g;
and the best guarantee of the shipwreck of any mass movement
which had the blessing of his association. This Jonah of revolution,
this general of unbroken disasters, was the mascot of the bour­
geoisie in each wave of the developing Indian struggle. So appeared
once again the -characteristic feature of modern Indian politics, the
unwritten article of every successive constitution— the indispens­
ab ility of Gandhi (actually the expression of the precarious balance
o f class forces). A ll the hopes of the bourgeoisie (the hostile might
say, the hopes of imperialism) were fixed on Gandhi as the man
to ride the waves, to unleash ju st enough of the mass movement
in order to drive a successful bargain, and at the same time save
India from revolution.” —D.
A t the Calcutta Congress in December, 1928, Gandhi secured
the adoption of the Nehru Report (named after the Chairman, the
•elder Nehru) demandng a Constituton fo r responsible government
within the Empire as a step to complete independence. I f this was
not granted by December 3 1, 1929 (Gandhi’s move fo r the end of
1930 was defeated), a campaign of non -violent non - co-operation
was to begin with the non-payment of taxes. An amendmeut by
the younger Nehru and Subhas Bose for an immediate campaign
w as defeated by 1950 against 973 fo r the Left.
“ Twelve months’ notice was given to imperialism to prepare.”
— D.
In March, 1929, the Government arrested all prominent w ork­
ing-class leaders from all over India and sent them to the remote
Court of Meerut, where they were tried without a ju ry. The trial
was dragged out for four years, thus decapitating the working-class
leadership at a critical period.
64
 A t the end of the year Gandhi stood down from the presidency
for the younger Nehru, thus showing “ his skilful appreciation of
the existing situation and relation of forces.” —D.
A t the Lahore Congress at the end of 1929 the Nehru Report
was considered to have lapsed and a campaign for complete inde­
pendence was decided tipon. Gandhi, however, in the New Y ork
“ W orld” on Jan u ary 9, stated “ that the independence resolution
need frighten nobody” (quoted by D.). On Jan u ary 30, in his
paper, “ Young India,” he made an offer of eleven points covering
reforms such as rupee ratio of 1/4, total prohibition, reduction of
land revenue, protective tariff against foreign cloth; in return for
which the campaign would be called off.
“ The publication of the eleven points on the eve of the struggle
served to intimate to the other side that the claim for complete
independence was to be regarded as only a bargaining counter,
a kind of convential maximum at the opening of a traditional
bazaar haggling which could be placed on one side in return for
substantial concessions. ”—D.
A t the meeting of the Congress Committee in February, 1930,
power was placed in the hands of “ Mahatma Gandhi and those
working with him,” and not in any elected executive.
“ On behalf of the Left Wing a resolution was moved by the
writer to the effect that Congress should aim at setting up a
parallel Government in the country, and to that end should take
up the task of organising the workers, peasants and youths. This
resolution was defeated, with the result that though the Congress
accepted the goal of complete independence as its objective, no plan
was laid down for reaching that goal—nor was any programme of
w ork adopted for the coming year. A more ridiculous state of
affairs could not be imagined.”— (Shubas Bose, “ The Indian
Stru ggle,” quoted by D.)

GANDHI’S TACTICS.
The struggle was either to be for the ending of British rule
altogether or merely to secure concessions. The former objective
had been adopted by the Lahore Congress. I f this were to be the
aim, “ any hope of success depended on rapidly throwing the m axi­
mum forces into the offensive . . . the calling of a general strike
with the entire weight of the Congress behind it, the calling of the
entire peasantry to a no-tax and a no-rent campaign, and the setting
up of a parallel National Government. . . . Such a campaign, in the
then heightened state of affairs of national and mass feeling, could
have, if conducted with extreme speed and resoluteness, stood a
reasonable chance of mobilising the mass of the people, isolating
imperialism, and winning independence.” —D.
“ This was not the conception of Gandhi.” —D.
“ I would welcome even utter failure with non-violence unim­
paired rather than depart from it by a hair’s breadth to achieve
a doubtful success.” — (Gandhi, May, 19 3 1, in “ Times” May 8 ;
quoted by D.).
65
 “ The party of violence is gaining ground and m aking itself
felt. . . . It is my purpose to set in motion that force (non-violence)
as well against the organised violence of the British rule as the
unorganised violence force of the growing party of violence. To
sit still would be to give reign to both the forces abovementioned.’'
— Gandhi’s letter to Viceroy, March 2 , 19 30 ; quoted by D.)
“ Thus on the eve of the rising struggle Gandhi proclaimed the
fight on two fronts, not only against British rule, but against the
internal enemy in India. This conception of the figh t on two
fronts corresponds to the role of the Indian bourgeoisie, alarmed
as it sees the ground sinking beneath its feet with the growing
conflict of imperialism and the mass movement. . . .
“ However, ‘ non-violence,’ like the notorious ‘ non-intervention’
of later days . . . in relation to Spain, was one-way-non-violence.
It was non-violence for the Indian masses, but not for imperialism,
which practised violence to its heart’s content— against the Indian
people. ” —D.
Gandhi decided to fight against the salt monopoly as a first
campaign, the workers being thus excluded. It enlisted “ the sup­
port and popular interests of the peasantry, while diverting them
from any struggle against the landlords.” —D.
He decided to confine the campaign to himself and a few
others. There followed the march to Dandi, on the seashore, by
Gandhi and his 78 followers “ with the news-reel cameras of the
world clicking aw ay while the masses were called upon to wait
expectant.” —D.
When three weeks had passed and the campaign had ended
with the ceremonial boiling of salt (not followed by arrest), the
mass movement broke loose.
The Chittagong Arm oury raid occurred in Bengal. Peshawar
was in the hands of the people for 10 days. Spontaneous no-rent
campaigns broke out, and in the united provinces the Congress
attempted to mediate by securing 50 per cent, of the rent fo r the
landlords.
“ Most significant for the whole future was the refusal of the
Garhwali soldiers at Peshawar to fire on the people” (D.). Two
platoons of the second battalion of the 18tli Royal Gurhwali Rifles,
Hindu troops, refused to fire on a Moslem crowd. The m ilitary left
the city. It was later recaptured without resistance. Semences
ranging from life transportation to fifteen years were subse­
quently accorded these troops.
“ The example of the Garhwali soldiers . . . might have been
thought at least a triumph of non-violence” (D.). Not by Gandhi,
though. In the subsequent Irwin-Gandhi agreement the clause for
the release of the prisoners specifically excluded the Garhwali men.
“ A soldier who disobeys an order to fire breaks the oath which
he has taken and renders himself guilty of criminal disobedience.
I cannot, ask officials and soldiers to disobey. . . . I f I taught them
to disobey I should be afraid that they would do the same when
66
 I am in power.” — (Gandhi, reply to French journalist Petrasch
on question of Garhwali soldiers, in Monde, February 20, 19 3 2 ;
quoted by D.).
“ This sentence . . . throws a flood of light on the real meaning
of non-violence.” —D.
On M ay 5, when it was evident Gandhi no longer could control
the movement, he was arrested. While in liberty his authority was
in danger of waning.
Great demonstrations followed. In the industrial town, Shola-
pur, in the Bombay presidency, the 140,000 people took over the
administration and established their own laws. Ninety thousand
civil resisters were sentenced within a year.
“ The records of indiscriminate lathi charges, beating up, firing
on unarmed crowds, killing and wounding of men and women, and
punitive expeditions made an ugly picture.”—D.
From A pril 1 to Ju ly 14 there were 24 cases of firin g on the
public, killing 103 with 420 wounded, according to official estimates.
The power of the movement caused the most serious alarm to
the authorities and to the British trading community, hard hit by
the boycott of their goods.
This was particularly noticeable in Bombay, the centre of
industrial working-class struggle. There the workers held posses­
sion of the streets in spite of police charges and appeal by the
Congress 1 o disperse.
“ But for the presence of troops and armed police the Govern­
ment of Bombay would be overthrown in a day and the administra­
tion would be taken over by the Congress with the assent of a ll.”
— (Dutt quotes a letter in “ Spectator,” Ju ly 5.)
The British business men in Bombay joined with Indian busi­
ness men, through the Millowners’ Association and the Chamber of
Commerce, in demanding self-government for India immediately
on a dominion basis.
“ The amazing spectacle was witnessed of the “ Times” of
India (Bombay) clamoring for responsible parliamentary govern­
ment at the centre.” —D.
“ Thus a situation of defeatism and demoralisation bordering
on panic, despite all the bluster and repression, began to show
itself in the imperialist camp, and it became essential for imperialism
at all costs to negotiate a settlement. On the basis of the struggle
and sacrifices of the Indian people the Congress leadership held
a strong hand.”—D.
On Jan u ary 20, 19 31, MacDonald (Prime Minister of England)
made the declaration at the Round Table Conference: “ I pray that
by our own labors India w ill possess the only thing which she
now lacks to give her the status of a Dominion among the British
Commonwealth of Nations—the responsibility and the cares, the
burdens and the difficulties, but the pride and honor of respon­
sible self-government.” — Quoted by D.
Gandhi and Congress Working Committee were released from
ja il on Jan u arv 26.
67
 On March 4, after prolonged negotiations, the Irwin-Gandhi
agreement was signed. “ It secured not a single aim of the Congress
struggle (not even the repeal of the salt ta x ).” — D.
Not one concrete step to self-government was granted. Civil
disobedience was declared off. Freedom to boycott foreign goods
was allowed, but not with picketing and not exclusively against
British goods. This, of course, helped both British and Indian
manufacturers. Prisoners were released, but not those “ guilty of
violence” or soldiers of “ disobeying orders.”
Congress was to participate in a round-table conference and
the basis of discussions was to be a Federal Constitution with
“ Indian responsibility,” and there were to be “ reservations of
safeguards in the interests of India.”
“ The fact that the British Government had been compelled to
sign a public treaty with the leader of the National Congress, which
it had previously declared an unlawful association and sought to
smash, was undoubtedly a tremendous demonstration of the strength
of the National Movement.”—D.
There was great elation, except among the more politically
conscious people.
F;ven Gandhi’s previous 1 1 points had not been conceded.
“ The Irwin-Gandhi agreement thus repeated the Bardoli
experience on an enlarged scale. Once again the movement was
suddenly and mysteriously called off when it was reaching its
height.” — D.
The K arachi Congress in March adopted the agreement. Bose
and Nehru supported the agreement so as, they said, not to break
the national front. Nehru in his autobiography said he thought,
“ W as it for this that our people had behaved so gallantly for a
year? Were all our brave words and deeds to end in this?”— Quoted
by D.
GANDHI FIASCO.
Sharp criticisms of the agreement were expressed from the
working-class movement and the youth. Bombay workers held
hostile demonstrations against Gandhi on his departure to London
for the round-table conference.
“ Imperialism, once it had secured the whip hand, was deter­
mined to use its advantage to the utmost. The ‘ truce’ from the
outset had been one-sided; repression had continued. Gandhi
returned in the last days of 19 3 1 to hear a pitiful tale from his
colleagues. He called at once to the Viceroy, begging fo r an inter­
view. It was refused. Imperialism had utilised every day of that
nine months’ truce (while the comedy had been enacted in Lon­
don) to complete its grim preparations for a decisive battle. . . . ”
—D.
Sir John Anderson, of “ Black and Tan” repute in Ireland, was
sent to Bengal as Governor.
On Ja n u a ry 4, 1932, negotiations were broken off with the
Congress. A host of repressive ordinances were issued. A ll the
principal Congress leaders and organisers throughout the country­
68
side were arrested. A ll Congress organisations were declared
illegal, their press banned and their property confiscated. Gandhi
was arrested.
Dr. Syed Mahmud, of the Congress W orking Committee, told
the Indian League delegation “ that he and his colleagues had
definite information that the Government’s plans fo r repression
were ready in November, while Gandhi was still in London.” —
Quoted by D.
B y the end of March, 1933, 120,000 arrests had taken place.
“ Some record of the accompanying wholesale violence, physical
outrages, shooting and beating up, punitive expeditions, collective
fines on villages and seizure of lands and property of villagers can
be found in the India League Congress delegation report, ‘ Condi­
tions of India,’ issued in 1933.” —D.
The Congress issued orders against secrecy under the now
illegal conditions. “ A resolution was issued to the Zemindars
(landlords) to .assure them that no campaign would be approved
against their interests.” — D.
B y the summer of 1932 Gandhi had abandoned all interest in
the national struggle. He began a fast directed not against repres­
sion, but against separate representation in the Legislatures for
the “ Untouchables.”
In May, 1933, he began a new fast, not against the Govern­
ment, but to change the hearts of his countrymen. He said it was
a “ heart prayer for purification of myself and my associates for
greater vigilance and watchfulness in connection with the H arijan
cause.” — Quoted by D.
“ The delighted Government released him unconditionally.”
—D.
Civil disobedience was suspended for six weeks, not on the
basis of any terms reached with the Government, but because, as
Gandhi put it, the country would be in a state of “ terrible suspense”
during his fast.
In Ju ly , 1933, Congress decided to end mass civil disobedience
and replace it with individual civil disobedience; at the same time
it decided to dissolve all Congress organisations.
“ In the autumn Gandhi decided to abstain from political
activity on religious grounds.
“ Meanwhile the struggle dragged on, neither ended nor led.”
—D.
In May, 1934, the end of the struggle came.
Gandhi said: “ Satyagraha needs to be confined to one quali­
fied person at a time. . . .
“ In the present circumstances only one, and that myself,
should for the time being bear the responsibility for civil dis­
obedience.” —Quoted by D.
69
 “ Such was the final reductio ad absurdum of the Gandhist
theory of ‘ non-violent non-co-operation’ as the path of liberation
for the Indian people.” —D.
In June, 1934, legality was restored to Congress. In Ju ly the
Communist P arty was declared illegal. In the same year Gandhi
resigned from the Congress, “ his work for the time being accom­
plished,” —D.
“ The unhappy final ending of the great wave of struggle of
1930-34 should not blind us for a moment to its epic achievement
. . . the National Movement can be proud of the record of those
years. Imperialism dreamed . . . by every device in the modern
armoury of repression to smash and cow the people of India into
submission to its will. It failed. Within two years, after all those
heavy blows, the National Movement was advancing again, stronger
than ever. The struggle had not been in vain. The furnace of
those years of struggle helped to forge and awaken a new and
greater national unity, self-confidence, pride and determination.
. . D.
THE CONGRESS MINISTRIES.
“ The recent development of Indian Nationalism since the
great mass struggles of 1930-34 falls into two clearly marked
stages. First, there was the rebuilding of organisation after the
heavy blows of repression, and hammering out of new lines of
policy, followed by the advance through the elections and the
Congress provincial ministries to a commanding position greater
than any previously reached. That is the achievement of the years
1934-39. There followed growing crisis, already visible in its first
forms in 1938 and 1939, and developing since the outbreak of war
to a new conflict.”—D.
A t the Lucknow Congress, 1936, membership stood at 457,000.
B y 1939 it had reached 5,000,000.
This Congress was notable because in his presidential address
Nehru proclaimed the socialist objective. A t the Faizpur Congress
in December, 1936, the socialists numbered one-third of the W ork­
ing Committee.
A t Lucknow a proposal by Nehru of collective affiliation of
W orkers and Peasants’ Committees was defeated on the Committee
by 35 votes to 16. Instead mass contact committees were formed.
A t Faizpur is set out its standpoint in contesting the elections.
“ This Congress reiterates its entire rejection of the Govern­
ment of India A ct of 1935 and the Constitution that has been
imposed on India against the declared w ill of the people of the
country. In the opinion of the Congress any co-operation with
this Constitution is a betrayal of In d ia’s struggle fo r freedom and
a strengthening of the whole of British imperialism and a further
exploitation of the Indian masses who had already been reduced
to direst poverty under imperialist domination. The Congress,
therefore, repeats its resolve not to submit to this Constitution or
to co-operate with it, but to combat it both inside and outside the
Legislatures, so as to end it. The Congress does not and w ill not
70
recognise the right of any external power or authority to dictate
the political and economic structure of India, and every such
attempt w ill be met by organised and uncompromising opposition
of the Indian people. The Indian people can only recognise a
constitutional structure which has been framed by them and which
is based on the independence of India as a nation and which allows
them fu ll scope for development according to their needs and
desires.
“ The Congress stands for a genuine democratic State in India,
where political power has been transferred to the people as a
whole, and the Government is under their effective control. Such
a State can only come into existence through a constituent assembly
elected by adult suffrage and having the powers to determine
finally the Constitution of the country. To this end the Congress
works in the country and organises the masses, and this objective
must ever be kept in view by the representatives of the Congress
in the Legislatures.” — Quoted by D.
The question of taking office was to be decided later.
The National Congress was the only organisation contesting
the elections on an All-India basis, the only truly National Party.
Its programme also included demands for the reduction of
rents, land revenue and debts, agricultural credit, abolition of
forced labor and feudal dues, a living wage for agricultural labor,
the right to form Peasants’ Unions.
“ In regard to industrial workers the policy of the Congress
is to secure them a decent standard of living, hours of work and
conditions of labor. . . . ”
It also demanded for the workers protection from the economic
consequences of sickness, old age and unemployment and the right
to strike.
It demanded the removal of all legal and social disabilities of
women and maternity benefits and protection of women workers.
Removal of untouchability and the disabilities of the depressed
classes was also advocated in this election manifesto.
Out of a„total of 1585 seats, only 657 seats were open seats, not
earmarked for some special interests. Congress won 7 15 seats,
including some Moslem seats in which it stood its own Moslem
candidates.
This showed beyond all doubts that its policy had the support
of the m ajority of the people, especially when the reactionary
division of seats is remembered and also the fact that the voting
qualification allowed only one-ninth of the population to be repre­
sented by the casting of votes. The All-India Congress Committee
on the motion of Gandhi decided to form Ministries, where the
leader of a party was able to state publicly that the powers of
the Governors wonld not be used against the Ministers. This was
carried by 127 votes to 70, the socialists and left wing opposing ac­
ceptance of office. “ This opposition was largely actuated by lack
of confidence in the moderate constitutionalist elements of the
leadership.’ ’—D.
71
 The most important achievements of the Congress Ministries
related to civil liberties. N early all political prisoners, some of whom
had been in ja il since 19 2 1, and the Garhwali riflemen and the
Meerut prisoners, were released. Bans on scores of political organ­
isations were removed (but not the ban on the Communist P arty
imposed by the Central Government). The freedom of the press
was partially extended, and a great flood of progressive literature
followed.
“ Nevertheless, the role of the Congress Ministries as organs
of the police administration of imperialism was revealed from an
early date.” — D.
A leading Congress socialist was sentenced under the Madras
Congress Government to six months imprisonment fo r sedition (i.e.,
anti-imperialist statements).
“ The doctrine of ‘ non-violence,’ with its usual amazing elas­
ticity, was extended to include police action and imprisonment
against those considered guilty of ‘ propaganda of violence’— a term
which was in fact used in a very free and easy manner to cover
opinions hostile to the existing regime and advocating the normal
forms of mass struggle.” —D.
Tenancy legislation giving a certain degree of protection
against eviction was enacted. Debts were scaled down somewhat.
The rate of interest was reduced. In some cases remission of land
revenue was granted, and enhancements of rent and irregular ad­
ditional dues were prevented. The agricultural laborers were not
affected.
“ In general the tenancy legislation was of very limited effec­
tiveness and aimed at protecting the large peasant cultivator rather
than the sub-tenant and dispossessed agriculturist.” — D.
The formation of the Ministries led to a great advance in
strikes, wage demands, and Union activity and organisation among
the industrial working class. The Ministries, while seeking to pro­
mote industrial conciliation, used their influence to further wage
demands and conditions. The textile workers in Bombay were
secured wage increases following 0 11 a Government inquiry, while
in the case of the Cawnpore strike the Union was recognised and
wage increases were secured by the assistance of the Government
of the united provinces.
However, sharp issues arose concerning the right to strike
and Trade Union recognition.
“ In Madras intervention by the Government was constantly
directed against the workers in cases of disputes.” —D.
In Bombay the Bombay Industrial Disputes B ill in 1938 limited
the right to strike to four months after conciliation machinery had
been operating. On November 7 the Bombay provincial Trade Union
Congress Committee called a strike against the bill. Some minor
modifications were made.
In the sphere of social reform the main attention was con­
centrated on securing the prohibition of drinks and drugs. “ The
72
 sale of drinks and drugs was promoted by the imperialist Govern­
m ent,'through agencies under its control, as a source of revenue;
the prohibition meant a heavy financial loss.” —D.
In education and health reforms the Ministries were ham­
strung by lack of taxation finance and lack of power.
“ The experience of the formation and early period of the
Congress Ministries led, not so much by the actions of the Minis­
tries, as by the hopes aroused and impetus given, to an enormous,
advance of the national movement, of confidence and mass awaken­
ing. But the negative side of the account was heavy. The experience
of the two years of Congress Ministries demonstrated the growing
acuteness of the dangers implicit in entanglement in im perialist
administration under a leadership already inclined to compromise.
The dominant moderate leadership in effective control of the Con­
gress machinery and of the Ministries was in practice developing
to increasing co-operation with imperialism, and was acting more
and more openly in the interests of the upper class landlords and
industrialists and was showing an increasingly marked hostility
to all militant expression and forms of mass struggle. A s the prac­
tical experience of the Ministries developed discontent grew. I t
became more and more obvious that the decisive tasks of the
national struggle for independence were in front and could not be
solved through the machinery of the Congress Ministries. Hence
a new crisis of the national movement began to develop.” —D.
In 1939 the Congress Ministries resigned as they considered the
obstacles placed in their path by imperialism as increasingly severe.
The Federal Constitution had been rejected, but in 1938 nego­
tiations for compromise were proceeding between the Government
and leading Congress figures.
In this situation Subhas Chandra Bose, who was elected
President unopposed the previous year, decided to contest the elec­
tion on the basis of combating the existing right wing tendencies,
and of launching a nation-wide campaign, drawing in the masses,
against the Federal Constitution. He was elected by 1575 votes
to 1376. The President had the right to choose the working com­
mittee (a reactionary constitutional feature beoueatlied by Gandhi).
A t the Tripuri session of Congress in 1939, however, a resolu­
tion moved by Gandhi’s supporters instructed Bose to nominate
his working committee on the instructions of Gandhi (who was
not even a member of Congress at the time).
Gandhi had previously issued a statement threatening the
resignation of the Congress right wing because they did not like the
direction the policy was taking.
“ Those who, being Congress minded, remain outside it b y
design, represent it most. Those, therefore, who feel uncomfortable
in being in the Congress may come out.” — (Quoted b y D.)
Bose then resigned from the Presidency for Rajendra Prasad.
He then organised the “ forward bloc” within the Congress to r a lly
radical and anti-imperialist elements.
73
 However, the forw ard bloc, in Bose’s words, “ while cherishing
the highest respect fo r Mr. Gandhi’s personality and his political
doctrine of non-violent non-co-operation w ill not, however, have
confidence in the present high command of the Congress.” —
Quoted by D..
“ There was no basic disagreement between the two sections
on policy.” — D.
In the summer of 1939 the All-India Congress Committee
adopted resolutions restricting the powers of Congress provincial
Committees in relation to Congress Ministries aiid prohibiting mem­
bers of Congress from leading movements of passive resistance,
without approval of the appropriate Congress Committee.
Bose and the left wing leaders, however, called public demon­
strations, and Bose was disqualified from holding office in Con­
gress for three years.
Dutt points out that “ while the divisions within the upper
Congress leadership, which were mixed with personal issues, did
not yet represent a clear political alignment, there was no question
of ferment that was developing in the Congress membership and in
the masses of the people.”
He concludes: “ The basic programme and leadership of the
mass movement had still to develop. But the facts showed that
the conditions were ripening fo r an advance to a new stage in the
National Movement.”

The New Constitution

The new Constitution is laid down by the Government of India
A ct in 1935, and is the third Constitution for India.
It consists of a Federal section, not yet in operation, fo r the
Central Government of a projected all-India Federation and a
provincial section for the Provinces in British India. While the
Congress P a rty has already taken office in the provinces, its policy
is to oppose the operation of the Federal section.
The Federal Legislature consists of an upper Chamber or
Council of State and a lower chamber or Federal Assembly.
In the Council of State the Princes are allocated 104 out of
■260 seats, or 2-5ths of them.
In the Federal Assembly they are given 125 out of 375 seats,
or l-3rd.
They are overrepresented as the population of the States is
less than one-quarter of the people of India. They are, of course,
despots and not elected b y their own people. Their States only
contribute 1 0 per cent, of the national revenue.
74
 Of the remaining 156 seats in the Council of State only 75
are open to direct election, from an electorate of 150,000 or .05
per cent, of the population of India, a narrow upper class
electorate.
The remaining seats are allocated among Moslems, Sikhs,
Indian Christians, Europeans, thus, of course, seeking to per­
petuate racial disunity.
Of the remaining 250 seats in the Federal assembly, only 105
are general seats open to indirect election from the provincial
assemblies, which in turn are elected on a franchise covering one-
ninth of the population, as compared with 67 per cent, in England.
Ninety-four sections of the Act confer discretionary powers
on the Governor-General. The following is a small selection of
his powers:
He may—
1. Appoint or dismiss Ministers.
2. Veto legislation passed by the Legislature.
3. Pass legislation rejected by the Legislature.
4. Prohibit the discussion of legislation.
5. Issue ordinances.
6 . Instruct Provincial Governors to issue ordinances.
7. Veto provincial legislation.
8 . Issue rules for the police.
9. Control the use of the armed forces.
10. Dissolve the Legislature.
1 1 . Suspend the Constitution.
In the eleven provincial legislatures of the 1584 seats, 808
are general seats, including those of the depressed classes.
It has been possible here for the Congress party to take office.
In Bengal, however, the open seats are only 48 out of 250.
The ultimate controlling power of veto is in the hands of the
Governor-General.
These Legislatures deal with education, health and other social
services.
Their main source of income is the unpopular land revenue.
In this w ay they are shackled, even within their limited legislative
field , by lack of finance, the intention being, no doubt, to shift on
to their shoulders the general opprobrium in which the British
rule stands for its lack of elementary health and education mea­
sures. The Constitution in the provinces was inaugurated on A pril
F o o l’s Day, 1937, notes Dutt.

75
 Rise of Labor and Socialism
“ The industrial working class in India in the modern sense is
not numerically large in relation to population; but it is con­
centrated in the decisive centres and is the most coherent, advanced,
resolute, and basically revolutionary section of the population.” — D.
The following calculation by Dutt is based on the census of
19 3 1.
Factory workers in medium and larger factories 1,855,000
Miners ........................................................................ 371,000
Railw ay m e n ................................................................ 636,000
W ater Transport (dockers and seamen) ............ 361,000

Total of above g r o u p s ...................................... 3,223,000

“ Excluded from this total are all Avorkers in petty industry
(establishments Avith under 10 workers), as well as in larger enter­
prises without poAver driven machinery. . . From the standpoint
of the potential strength of the organised Labor Movement we should
have over 1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 workers employed on the plantations who are
employed in fu lly large scale enterprises under the most scientific
slave-driving conditions, and have already shown a high degree of
militant activity. . . . The immediate effective organisable strength
of the Indian working class should, therefore, certainly represent
over 5,000,000 workers.” —D.
“ The beginnings of the Labor Movement in India go back h alf
a century, but its continuous history as an organised movement
dates only from the end of the first world war.” — D.
There were strikes in the 7 0 ’s, Avhich coincided with the estab­
lishment of factory industry.
There Avas a strike in 1877 at the Empress Mills over Avage
rates. Between 1882 and 1890 25 strikes were reported in the Bom­
bay and Madras presidencies.
“ Despite almost universal testimony before Commissions be­
tween 1880 and 1908 to the effect that there Avere no actual Unions,
many stated that the laborers in an industrial mill were often able
to act in unison and that, as a group, they Avere independent. The
Inspector of Boilers in 1892 spoke of an ‘ unnamed and unwritten
bond’ of union among the Avorkers peculiar to the people; and
the collector of Bombay wrote that although this was ‘ little more
than a ir ’ it was ‘ pow erful.’ ” — (D. H. Buchanan, “ Development of
Capitalist Enterprise in India,” quoted by D.)
“ During 1905-9 there was notable advance. . . . A strike in
the Bombay mills, serious strikes in the railways, in the railw ay
shops, and in the Government press in Calcutta. . . . The highest
point Avas reached with the six-day political mass strike in Bombay
against the sentence of six years’ imprisonment on Tilak (a
national leader) in 1908.”—D.
76
 Bu t “ it was the conditions of the close of the first world war
and of the sequel of the Russian revolution and the world revolu­
tionary wave that brought the Indian working class at a bound
into fu ll activity and opened the modern Labor Movement in India.
Economic and political conditions alike contributed to the new
awakening. Prices had doubled during the war, there had been no
corresponding increase in wages; fantastic profits were being
amassed by the employers . . . the first waves of revolutionary
influence were reaching India.”—D.
“ The strike movement which began in 19 18 and swept the
country was overwhelming in its intensity.” —D.
“ Some conception of the intensity and extent of the strikes
o f this period may be had from the following d ata: November 4
to November 6 , 1919, woollen mills, Cawnpore, 17,000 men out;
December 7, 1919, to Jan u ary 9, 1920, Railw ay workers, Jam alpur,
16,000 men out; Jan u ary 9 to 18, 1920, jute mills, Calcutta, 35,000
men out; Ja n u a ry 2 to February 3, Bombay, 200,000 men out;
Ja n u a ry 20 to 3 1, mill workers, Rangoon, 20,000 men out; Ja n u a ry
3 1 , British India Navigation Co., Bombay, 10,000 men out; Ja n u a ry
26 to February 16, mill workers, Sholapur, 16,000 men out;
Feb ru ary 2 to 16, Indian Marine Dockers, 20,000 men o u t; February
4 to March 29, Tata Iron and Steel workers, 40,000 men out;
March 9, mill workers at Bombay, 60,000; March 20 to 26, mill
workers, Madras, 17,000 men o u t; May, 1920, mill workers,
Ahmedabad, 25,000 men out.” — (R. K. Das, “ The Labor Movement
in India,’ 1923, quoted by D.)
“ In the first six months of 1920 there were 200 strikes in­
volving 1 | million workers.
“ These were the conditions under which Indian Trade Union­
ism was born.” —D.
“ Trade Unions were formed by the score during this period.
M any were essentially strike committees springing up in the con­
ditions of an immediate struggle, but without staying power. 'While
the workers were ready for struggle the facilities for office organ­
isation were inevitably in other hands . . . there was not yet any
political movement on the basis of socialism, of the conception of
the working class and class struggle.”—D.
Hence the leadership of the early Unions was largely in the
hands of middle class leadership who came “ without understanding
the aims and needs of the Labor Movement, and brought with them
conceptions of middle class politics.” —D.
In this period the Indian Trade Union Congress was founded
in 1926. It was mainly a top organisation in its early years, with­
out much connection with the class struggle, and was formed to
secure a nominating body for representation at the Geneva Labor
Conference. The following is an extract from the Chairman’s
address in 1926:
77
 “ I heartily commend to you the good work of the purity mis­
sion started by the Central Labor Board, Bombay. . . . The mission
was started with the object of helping the laborer to give up his
habits of vice and to encourage him to lead an honest, peaceful
and contented life . . . social workers visit the localities and explain
the evils of drink, gambling and other vices. This is the sort of
education that a laborer wants and w ill make him a better man
both socially and economically.” — (Address of the President, V. V.
Giri, to the sixth Trade Union Congress at Madras, 1926, quoted
by D.)
B y 1927 the Trade Union Congress united 57 affiliated Unions
with a recorded membership of 150,000.
“ I t formed the ground in which the leaders of the newly
formed Trade Unions came together, and it was therefore only
a question of time for the breath of the working class struggle
to reach it .”— D.
From 19 2 1 regular statistics of industrial disputes were re­
corded as shown in the following table quoted by D .:
Number of Number of Number of
Strikes and Workpeople W orking
Year. Lock Outs. Involved. D ays Lost.
19 2 1 ............. ................... 396 600,351 6,984,426
1922 ............. ................... 278 433,434 3,972,727
1923 ............. ................. 2 13 301,044 5,051,704
1924 ............. ................... 13 3 312,462 8,730,918
1925 ............. ................... 134 270,423 12,578,129
1926 ............. ................... 128 18 6 ,8 11 1,097,478
1927 ............. ................... 129 131,6 55 2,019,970
1928 ............. ................... 203 506,851 31,647,404
1929 . . . . . . . ................... 1 41 532,016 12,165,691
1930 ............. ................... 148 196,301 2,261,731
19 3 1 ............. ................... 166 203,008 2,408,123
1932 ............. ................... 118 128,099 1,922,437
1933 ......... ................... 146 164,938 2,168,961
1934 ............. ................... 159 220,808 4,775,559
1935 ............. ................... 145 114 ,2 17 973,457
1936 ............. ................... 157 169,029 2,358,062
1937 ............. ................... 379 647,801 8,982,000
“ It w ill be seen that three main periods of struggle stand out.
The first was the sequel of the post-war wave, reaching to the great
successful Bombay cotton strike of 1925 against the threatened
wage cut, which at the end of three months’ struggle had to be
withdrawn. The second was the combined political and industrial
awakening of 1928-9. The third was the new advance which
opened after the formation of the Congress Ministries in 1937, and
which is still going forw ard .” — D. •
“ The Government was aware of the growth, of the political
enlightenment among the workers. : I
78
 “ From 1920 onwards the literature of the . . . Communist
party of India had begun to make its way. From 1924 a journal,
the ‘ Socialist,’ was appearing in Bom bay;” —D.
“ In 1924 (under a Labor Government in England) the Cawn-
pore trial was staged against four of the Communist leaders,
Dange, Shaukat, Usmani, Muzaffar Ahmad and Das G upta."— D.
They each got four years.
“ 1928 saw the greatest tide of working class advance of any
year of the post-war period.”—D.
Trade Union organisation increased in Bombay from 48,609 in
1923 to 95,321 members in March, 1928, and 200,325 by March,
1329. “ Foremost in this advance was the famous Girni K am gar
(Red Flag) Union of the Bombay mill Avorkers, which started
during the year with a membership of 34 and . . . had reached
54,000 by December, 1928.” —D.
“ A critical point had thus been reached by the opening of
1929. The Avorking class movem ent Avas ad va n cin g in the fo re fro n t
o f the economic and political scene.” — D.
M ilitant leadership Avas being developed.
“ Socialism is in the air. For months past socialist principles
have been preached in India in various conferences, especially those
of Avorkers and peasants,” Avrote the “ Bombay Chronicle” in May,
1929 (quoted by D.).
“ In March, 1929, the Go v e r n m e n t ’s main bloAv fell. The prin­
cipal active leaders of the Avorking class m o v e m e n t Avere arrested
from all over India.” —D.
Thirty-one Avere originally arrested, including the Vice-
President, a former President and tAvo Assistant Secretaries of the
Trade Union Congress; the Secretaries of the Bombay and of the
Bengal provincial Trade Union Federations; all the officials of the
Girni Kam gar Union, most of those of the G.L.P. Raihvaymen’s
Union, and officials of other Unions. Three Englishmen Avere
included.
The Government dragged out the trial for 3^ years.
The prosecution declared, “ The accused Avere not charged Avith
holding Communist opinions, but Avith conspiring to deprive the
K in g of his sovereignty of India. It was unnecessary for the pur­
poses of the cases to prove Avhether the accused did actually do
anything. It would suffice if only conspiracy could be proved.” —
(Quoted by D.)
The Socialist principles of the accused Avere proclaimed to the
Avorld an d in no sense a con sp iracy. I n the in d ictm en t they were
also charged with “ the incitement of antagonism betAveen Capital
and Lab or.”
Also, “ The creation of Avorkers and peasants’ parties, Youth
Leagues, Unions,” thus revealing the real purpose of the trial.
79
 The trial was authorised by a Labor Government in England.
Sentences of three to 12 years and transportation were awarded
the accused.
Sir W alter Citrine, for the British General Council of Trade
Unions, declared that the trial must take its course, and did not
a ffe c t the Indian Unions. L ater with the Labor Government out
•of office it was condemned by the General Council.
The Trade Union Movement was weakened by the removal of
its leadership. B u t the urgent needs of the economic crisis caused
a revival. Trade Union unity was achieved between the Trade
Union Congress and the Trade Union Federation (which had split
a w ay on account of the establishment of the dominance of m ilitant
leadership).
A new wave of struggles developed with the Congress party
•election in 1937. The Congress Socialist P a rty with a left and
righ t wing was formed in 1934, in which year the growing Com­
munist P a rty of India was form ally declared illegal.
In 1939 there were 350,000 Trade Unionists in India.

80
 The Durh Forces in India
“ Divide et Impera (Divide and Rule) was the old Roman
motto, and it should be ours.” — (Lord Elphinstone, Governor of
Bombay, minute of May 14 ,18 59 , quoted by D.)
In India there were only 100,000 occupied British at the 19 3 1
census, or one per four thousand of the Indian population.
“ It is obvious that, even after every precaution has been taken
to disarm the Indian population, and especially to maintain all
heavy arms, artillery and air power in exclusively British hands,
such a force could not hope to maintain continuous domination
over the 370,000,000 of India by power alone.
“ A social basis within the Indian population is indispensable.
The maintenance of a social basis, allied to imperialsm, within the
Indian population is the condition of the maintenance of imperial­
ist rule. A s in the case of every reactionary rule, and especially of
alien rule, the division of the people is the necessary law of the
ru lers’ statecraft; but such a social basis cannot be formed in the
progressive elements which are straining against imperialism. It
can only be formed in the reactionary elements whose interests are
opposed to those of the people. We have already seen how British
rule has consciously built on the basis of the landlord class, which
it has largely brought into existence by its own decrees as an
act of State policy. Along with these are various trading interests
and money-lending interests closely allied with the imperialist
system of exploitation and looking to imperialism fo r protection, as
well as the subordinate official strata. We have also seen how
imperialism has abandoned the socially reforming role of a century
ago, and to-day preserves and protects, so fa r as possible (always
in the name of impartial non-interference in the social customs and
religious beliefs of the population), all that is culturally backward
in the life of the people against the national demands for reform,
as well as utilising to the utmost the lingering reactionary lines of
division such as caste (the separate representation of the depressed
classes, and encouragement of parties founded upon this basis).
Bu t nowhere is this policy more signally demonstrated than in two
spheres which have come into special prominent in the recent period,
the question of the Indian princes or so-called ‘ Indian States,’ and
the question of communal divisions, especially in the forms of
Hindu-Moslem antagonisms.”—D.
Imperialism has divided India into two unequal segments—
British India and the Indian States.
Now that Burma is separated from India these States extend
over 45 per cent, of the area of India and embrace 81 millions or
one-quarter of the Indian population. There are 5G3 separate
States, ranging from Hyderabad, as large as Italy, with 14 million
people, to the Simla Hill States, which are little more than small
holdings.
81
 “ In the more important States a British resident holds the
decisive pow er; the lesser States are grouped under British poli­
tical agents, who manage bunches of them in different geographical
regions.” —D.
“ While plenty of petty despotism, tyranny and arbitrary law ­
lessness is freely allowed, all decisive political power is in British
hands.” —D.
“ A s to the native States, they virtu ally cease to exist from
the moment they become subsidiary to or protected by the Company
. . . the conditions under which they are allowed to retain their
apparent independence are at the same time the conditions of per­
manent decay, and of an utter inability of improvement. Organic
weakness is the constitutional law of their existence, as of all exis­
tences living on sufferance. It is, therefore, not the native States,
but the native princes and Courts about whose maintenance the
question resolves. The native princes are the stronghold of the
present abominable English system and the greatest obstacles to
Indian progress.”— (K arl Marx. “ The Native States,” “ New Y ork
Daily Tribune,” Ju ly 25, 1853, qiioted by D.)
It has already been pointed out how the British up to the
1857 Mutiny led by the princes had followed a progressive policy
of unifying India by annexing these States, and how thereafter
they preserved and fostered the princes as the main buttress of
British rule.
“ It was long ago said by Sir John Malcolm that if we made
all India into Zillahs (or British districts) it was not in the nature
of things that our Empire should last fifty years, but that if we
could keep up a number of native States without political power,
but as royal instruments, we should exist in India as long as our
naval supremacy was maintained. Of the substantial truth of
this opinion I have no doubt; and the recent events have made it
more deserving of our attention that ever.” — (Lord Canning, Gov­
ernor-General, A pril 30, 1860, quoted by D.)
A special restriction of the press in the Indian States was
explicitly imposed by the Government of India notification of
Ju n e 25, 18 9 1. A ny printed publication required the special written
permission of the political agent before it can be published, while
special restriction of any criticism of condition in the Indian States
was laid down in the States Protection A ct of 1934.
The character of the administration of the States can be seen
in their Budgets.
The following is the Budget fo r 1929-30 of the Bikanir State:
Rupees.
Civil L ist (for the expenses of the Prince’s fam ily) . . 1,253,000
Wedding of the Prince . . . 82,500
Extension of Royal Palaces 426,614
Royal Fam ily ..................... . 224,864

Total fo r Sovereign and Satellites 1,987,978

82
Education ............. 222,979
Building and Roads 618,384
Medical Service . . . 188,138
Public U tility ........ 30,761
Sanitation ............. 5.729

Total for other social purposes 1,065,991

It w ill be seen that the Sovereign and satellites received about
two-thirds of the revenue.
In the case of the State of Jam nagar out of a total revenue of
£ 1 million in 1926-27 £700,000 went to the personal costs of the
prince, and 2.4 per cent, on education and medical services.
“ The K in g of England receives roughly one in 1600 of the
national revenue, the King of Belgium 1 in 1000, the K in g of
Ita ly 1 in 500, the King of Denmark 1 in 300, the Emperor of
Ja p a n one in 400 . . . no king receives 1 in 17 like the Maharani of
Travancore (which is the most progressive State in India), and
one in 13 as the Nizam of Hyderabad, or the Maharajah of Baroda,
or one in five as the Maharajahs of Kashmir and Bikanir. The
world would be scandalised to know that not a few princes ap­
propriate 1 in 3 and 1 in 2 of the revenues of the State.” — (A. R.
Desai, “ Indian Feudal States and the National Liberation
Struggle,” quoted by D.)
Slavery still exists in many States.
“ There are slave communities in many of the Rajputana States,
and in various States of the Western India States Agency, including
the States of Kathiawar. According to the census report of 19 21, in
Rajputana and Central India alone there were in all 160,735 slaves
of the Chakar and Daroga classes.” — (P. L. Chudgar, “ Indian
Princes under British Protection,” 1929, quoted by D.)

PRINCES HAVE SLAVES.

Forced labor, which may be imposed for any of a variety of
services, with no remuneration other than food, is the regular rule.
“ The system of what is known as Veth and Begar (meaning
forced labor) prevails in almost all the Indian States; and all
classes of laborers, workmen and artisans are compelled to work
for the princes and their officials, in many cases the only remunera­
tion being the barest necessity of food. The subjects are com­
pelled to work at any time and for any period that the State may
require . . . even the women, young or old, married or widows,
are not exempt. I f any of these people, men or women, are infirm
and cannot work properly, they are flogged or otherwise tortured.
“ To the knowledge of the writer, poor old women of sixty
have been severely flogged by constables. This was done with
bamboo sticks in public streets, and the crime for which they were
83
punished was merely that of pleading exemption from forced labor
on the grounds of infirm ity.” — (P. L. Chudgar, previously quoted
by D.)
There are no civil rig h ts Avhatever.
“ No subject has the right to seek redress for infringement of
his rights by the prince, the Prime Minister or State. The prince
can arbitrarily order the confiscation or forfeiture of the rights
or property of any subject. He may impose fines to any amount,
and may adopt every conceivable means of extorting payment. He
can throw anyone into prison fo r any indefinite period without
charge or trial.” — (P. L. Chudgar, previously quoted by D.)
“ Taxes are imposed at will, to grind even the poorest in order
to provide the insatiable demands of the palace.” — D.
“ The taxes as they obtain in the State of Nawanagar give a
fairly accurate idea of taxes common to all States. The first list
comprises taxes on professions and on persons, such as laborers
and artisans, on cattle, on betrothals, marriages, births, deaths and
funerals. It is to be noticed that there are also taxes on such small
concerns as the hand grinding mills of widows which provide the
sole means of subsistence of these poor women. . . .
“ To return to the land ta x . . . in the case of payments in
cash this tax is imposed in the proportion of four shillings per
a c re ; if in kind, one-fourth of the crops. In practice the rate
increases. The State’s share works out at about 40 per cent. All
other taxes . . . amount to a very modest estimate to about 1 0 per
cent, so that only 50 per cent, is left to the cultivator.
“ In addition . . . he must help to defray the cost of a ch ief’s
marriage, or the m arriage of a member of the chief’s fam ily, and
pay toll on the birth of a son to the chief, and on such ceremonies
as the funeral of a ch ief’s wife or mother.” — (P. L. Chudgar, pre­
viously quoted by D.)
“ The regime of the Indian princedoms provides the most ex­
treme oppression and misery without parallel in the modern world
precisely because it combines the most primitive feudal oppression,
including remnants of slavery below, with the highest imperial
power and exploitation above.
“ This is the regime which British rule has not only preserved
and artificially perpetuated over two-fifths of India, but in this
modern period brings increasingly into the forefront and seeks to
give added weight and prominence in Indian a ffa irs.” —D.
The National Congress until recently made no attempt to ex­
tend the national movement with its democratic programme into
the States.
“ Up to now the Congress has endeavored to serve the princes
by refraining from any interference in their domestic affairs.” —
(Gandhi at the Round Table Conference, quoted by D.)
84
f

“ I feel and I know that they have the interests of their subjects
at heart. There is no difference between them and me, except that
we are common people and they are—God has made them—noble­
men, princes. I wish them w ell; I wish them all prosperity.” —
(Gandhi, as above.)
A t the Haripura session of the Congress in 1938 resolutions
were adopted declaring that the States must be independent from
British rule, and enjoy the same measures of democracy as a free
India. However, it was decided that, “ the internal struggle of
the people in the States must not be made in the name of the
Congress,” but independent organisations should be started.
The mass movement has made great progress in the States.
A t the Tripuri session in 1939 Congress declared, “ The great
awakening that is taking place among the people may lead to a
relaxation or a complete removal of the restraint which Congress
has imposed upon itself, thus resulting in the ever - increasing
identification of Congress with the States peoples.”
“ It w ill be seen that the present Congress policy still looks only
to reforms within the continuing structure of the States and under
the continued rule of the princes. Such a position can only be a
half-way house, a stage in the awakening of the National Movement
to the issue.
“ The Indian States can have no place in a free India. The
bisection of India into British India and the India of the princes
corresponds to no natural line of division, to no historic necessity
and to no need or sentiment of the people, but it is an administra­
tive manoeuvre of imperialism to hold the people divided. For
the National Movement there can only be one Indian people with
equal rights and equal citizenship. The complete merging of the
Indian States into a united India, the wiping out of the relics of
feudal oppression and the unification of the Indian people in a real
Federation, based on the natural, geographical, economic, cultural
divisions and groupings of the people (not a so-called Federation,
which is only an elaborate machine to preserve existing autocracy
and suppress the will of the people), is vital for the unity of the
Indian nation, fo r the progressive development of India, and for
the realisation of democracy in India.” —D.

85
 India and World Politics
Until the last few years the attention of the national move­
ment was concentrated on internal politics. But of late questions
of foreign policy have come to the forefront of the national pro­
gramme.
“ In the broadest sense the question of India under British rule
has always been a world political question and a m ajor question
of world politics.” —D.
D utt goes on to say that the wars of Britain and France in
the 18th century were fought prim arily for the new world and
for domination of India. Napoleon had visions of advance to India
in his expeditions to E g yp t and the near East, while the Anglo-
Japanese treaty at the beginning of this century contained provi­
sion for Japanese assistance in maintaining British domination in
India. The conflict with Germany in the last w ar turned especially
on control of the Middle East, opening up the w ay to India.
In 1936-37 w ar expenditure totalled 54 per cent, of the Central
Indian Budget and 29 per cent, of the provincial Budgets.
“ The strategic importance of India to Britain has increased in
the period since the last war. The new Middle Eastern empire
and system of influence has been built up on the basis of India.
The concentration on the Cape route, with the new naval base of
Simonstown, to balance the possible loss of effective control of the
Mediterranean, and on the naval base of Singapore to command
the gateway from the Pacific into the Indian Ocean, alike reflect
the central concentration on the control of India and of the routes
to India as the pivot of the Empire. A s the passage through the
Mediterranean and the Suez Canal becomes increasingly precarious,
the imperial air-line which unites Britain with Australia through
Baghdad, Karachi, Calcutta and Singapore, and with the F a r E ast
through India and Siam, becomes increasingly important as the life­
line of the Empire. A s Ja p an extends its holds on the Pacific and
on the coast and riverw ays of China, the land route through Burma
assumes new importance.”— D.
(This of course was written before Ja p a n ’s entry into the
w ar, the attendant developments of which have emphasised
more than ever the strategic importance of India to Britain.
—J.L .)
The following is an extract from a resolution of the Congress
passed at the H aripura session in 19 38:
“ During the past few years there has been a rapid and deplor­
able deterioration in international relations, Fascist aggression has
increased, and unabashed defiance of international obligations has
become the avowed policy of the Fascist powers. British foreign
policy, in spite of its evasions and indecisions, has consistently
supported the Fascist powers in Germany, Spain and the F a r East,
86
and must, therefore, largely shoulder the responsibility of the pro­
gressive deterioration of the world situation. That policy still
seeks an arrangement with Nazi Germany and has developed closer
relations with rebel Spain. It is helping in the drift to imperialist
war. India can be no party to such an imperialist war and w ill
not permit her man-power and resources to be exploited by British
imperialism.”
A t the outbreak of war in 1939 India was proclaimed at war
also without, of course, any consultation with the people of India
being deemed necessary.
On September 1 1 the Viceroy read the K in g ’s message to India.
“ In these days, when the whole of civilisation is threatened,
the widespread attachment of India to the cause in which we have
taken up arms has been a source of deep satisfaction to me. . . . ”
A t the same time an autocratic dictatorship was proclaimed
and an amending bill hurried through the British Parliament in
1 1 minutes to allow the Viceroy to override the working of the
Constitution, even in respect of provincial autonomy.
On September 14 the Working Committee of the National Con­
gress instructed its members to refrain from attending the next
session of the Central Legislative Assembly.
A t the same time it posed the following direct challenge to the
British Government:
“ The W orking Committee therefore invites the Britisii Govern­
ment to declare in unequivocal terms what their war aims are in
regard to democracy and imperialism and the new order that is
envisaged; in particular, how these aims are going to apply to
India and to be given effect to in the present. Do they include
the elimination of imperialism and the treatment of India as a free
nation whose policy will be guided in accordance with the wishes
of the people 1 ”
The British Government in reply suggested no immediate con­
crete steps, but merely repeated the same promises that it had made
over 2 0 years before.
The leadership of the Congress also declared “ the Indian
people must have the right of self-determination by fram ing their
own Constitution through a constituent assembly without external
influence, and must guide their own policy.”
A s D utt's book was published before the Soviet Union’s entry
into the war, he does not deal with the change in policy which
has taken place within the Congress groups. It is sufficient to
note here that while reports indicate that the Trade Unions and
the Youth Movement, despite the failure of the negotiations with
the British Government, are now doing everything to rally the
people to resist Fascism and in particular the Japanese, Gandhi
and the dominant Congress leadership have declared for a policy
87
of “ non-violent non-co-operation” in the event of a Japanese
attack.
Once more Gandhi and the dominant leadership are at variance
with the mass movement, striving to utilise that movement to secure
merely nationalist concessions, instead of realising that the defeat
of the A xis Powers with the aid of India would, at the present stage
of world advance, help to consolidate the bonds of friendship
between the peoples of India and democratic peoples everywhere
and give great impetus to the realisation of the progressive aims of
Indian Nationalism.

88
 Communal Divisions
“ The policy of the division of the Indian people through the
instrument of the princes is closely paralleled by the policy in
relation to the Hindus and Moslems. The type of question here
arising known as the ‘ communal’ problem or question of the rela­
tions between different religious ‘ communities,’ namely, the Hindus,
representing a little over two-thirds of the population; the Moslems,
representing ju st over one-fifth of the population; and other minor
religious groupings, totalling one-tenth of the population, has
special features in India, and is a serious issue for the National
Movement. But it is by no means a type of question peculiar to
India.” —D.
Dutt instances the officially inspired Black Hundred pogroms
in Czarist Russia, which find no place in Soviet Russia. The
present-day pogroms against Jew s organised by the Nazis in Ger­
many stand in contrast to the fact that Jew s and Aryans lived
peacefully together in Germany before the advent of Hitlerism.
“ Je w s and Arabs lived peacefully in Palestine before Western
imperialism invaded the country under the form of Zionist immi­
gration.” —D.
“ Prior to British rule there is no trace of the type of Hindu-
Moslem conflicts associated with British rule, and especially with
the latest period of British rule. There were wars between States
which might have Hindu or Moslem rulers, but these wars at no
time took on the character of the Hindu-Moslem antagonism.
Moslem rulers employed Hindus freely in the highest positions, and
vice versa.
“ The survival of this traditional character of pre-British India,
m ay still be traced in the Indian States, where the Simon Commis­
sion had occasion to refer to ‘ the comparative absence of communal
strife in the Indian States to-day.’ ” —D.
“ The Simon report . . . in dealing with the Hindu-Moslem
antagonism had to refer to two peculiar facts; first, its predomin­
ance in directly British ruled territory and comparative absence
in the Indian States, although the intermingling of population
occurs equally in both, and the boundaries between the two are
purely adm inistrative; second, to the fact that ‘ in British India a.
generation ago . . . communal tension as threat to civil peace was
at a minimum.’
“ Communal strife is thus a special product of British rule,
and in particular of the latest period of British rule, or of the
declining imperialist ascendancy.”—D.
Dutt points out that while British rule holds the main respon­
sibility there are also other responsibilities.
“ Our endeavor should be to uphold in full force the (for us
fortunate) separation which exists between religions and races,
not to endeavor to amalgamate them. Divide et Impera should be
the principle of Indian Government.” — (Lieut.-Col. Coke, Com­
mandant of Moradabad, quoted by D. from “ Consolidation of the
Christian Power in India,” by B. D. Basu.)
8!) .
 “ The truth plainly is that the existence side by side of these
hostile creeds is one of the strong points in our position in India.”
— Sir Jo h n Strachey, leading authority on India, in “ In d ia,”
1888, quoted by D.)
In 1906 a Moslem deputation presented themselves to the Vice­
roy asking fo r separate and privileged representation in any
electoral scheme which might be set up. Lord Minto agreed to
this.
“ You ju stly claimed that your position should be estimated
not merely on your numerical strength, but in respect to the
political importance of your community and the service that it
has rendered to the Empire. I am entirely in accord with you.” —
(Lord Minto’s speech to Moslem deputation, 1906; quoted from
Jo h n Buchan’s “ L ife of Lord Minto,” 1925, by D.)
“ It was subsequently revealed by the Moslem leader Mohamed
A li, in the course of his presidential address to the 1923 National
Congress, that this Moslem deputation was ‘ a command perform­
ance’ arranged by the Government.” — D.
Lord Morley, Secretary of State, wrote to Lord Minto, Viceroy,
at the end of 1906:
“ I w on’t follow you again in our Mahometan dispute. Only I
respectfully remind you once more that it was your early speech
about their extra claims that first started the M. (Moslem) hare.”
— (From M orley's “ Recollections,” quoted by D.)
The foundation of the Mbslem League dates only from this
time, at the end of 1906.
“ In this w ay the system of communal electorates and repre­
sentation was inaugurated, striking at the roots of any democratic
electoral system. To imagine a parallel it would be necessary to
imagine that in Northern Ireland Catholics and Protestants should
be placed on separate electoral registers and given separate repre­
sentation, so that the members returned should be members not
even with any form al obligation to the electorate as a whole, but
members fo r the Catholics and members fo r the Protestants.” —D.
“ The purpose of driving a wedge between the two communities
was most sharply shown, not only by the establishment of separate
electorates and representation, but by giving specially privileged
representation to the Moslems. A most elaborate system of
weighting was devised. Thus to become an elector under the
Morley-Minto reforms the Moslems had to pay income ta x on an
income of 3000 rupees a year, the non-Moslem on an income of
300,000 rupees; or the Moslem graduate was required to have three
ye a rs’ standing, the non-Moslem to have thirty yea rs' standing.
The volume of representation showed a similar method of weighting.
B y this means it was hoped to secure the support of a privileged
minority, and to turn the anger of the m ajority against the privi­
leged minority, instead of against the Government.” —D.
In 19 17 , when the Moslem League had united with the Congress
temporarily, the Government fostered the non-Brahmin movement,
which was given special electoral representation in the Constitution
o f 1919. Under the 1935 Constitution the Moslems, who have one-
90
fourth of the population, receive one-third of the seats in the
Fed eral Assembly. There is also separate representation for Sikhs,
Indian Christians, the depressed classes, Europeans, landholders,
etc. A s a result the number of general seats contested b y . the
m ajority of the population is cut down to two-fifths of the whole
in the Federal Assembly.

TRICKS OF IMPERIALISTS.
There is a corresponding policy in the administrative field,
culminating in a struggle by middle class sections for Government
posts and favors in the administrative apparatus. Dutt says:
“ From the repercussion of the policy it follows that these middle
class elements who are caught by the bait naturally seek to organise
their separatist mass following on this basis in order to strengthen
their positions. Thus the overt Governmental policy becomes only
the starting point for the creation of a general situation of com­
munal antagonism.”
The Moslem League, sometimes represented in the press as repre­
senting 80 million Indians, secured only 321,772 votes cast out of
a total Moslem vote of 7,319,445 in the 1937 elections, or 4.6 per
cent, of the Moslem vote.
In the recent period the Moslem groups have demanded a
separate confederation of Moslem States. In 1925 an equally
reactionary Hindu League was organised by Lajpat Rai. It sup­
ports the Federal Constitution.
“ These so-called ‘ communal organisations’ are in reality small
ultra-reactionary groups, dominated by large landlord and banker
interests, playing fo r the support of the British Government against
the popular movement and pursuing in practice united reactionary
policy on all social and economic issues. ’ '—D.
“ The National Movement has in general conducted an active
and progressive fight against communal separatism and for
national un ity.”—D.
“ Nevertheless the difficulties of the polical situation created
by the Government’s policy have led in the past to concessions and
compromises on the part of the National Congress.” —D.
The Lucknow pact of Hindu-Moslem unity in 19 16 was based
on acceptance of separate communal representation, and an
elaborate detailed scheme for the division of seats was even worked
out.
A resolution of the All-India Congress Committee in 1937, while
opposing communal electorates, made any change in the system
dependent on agreement of communal representatives.
In 1937 the Congress Party contested only 58 of 482 Moslem
seats and won 26 of them. It has been criticised by some of its
supporters for its lack of an attempt to win the Moslem masses.
“ While the main reponsibility for the promotion and sharpen­
ing of communal antagonism rests with the imperialist Government,
it must be recognised that a serious share of responsibility has to
be placed at the door of the dominant leadership of the National
Movement.” —D.
91
 “ The attempt of Tilak and others to build a national movement
on the basis of Hinduism has been mentioned. B y this act they cut
o ff the Moslem masses from the National Movement and opened
the w ay to the Government’s astute counter-move with the form a­
tion of the Moslem League in 1906.” —D.
A t the height of the national non-co-operation movement o f
1920-21 Gandhi was proclaiming himself publicly a “ Sanatanist
Hindu,” because among other things he believed “ in the protection
of the Cow in its much larger sense than the popular. I do not
disbelieve in idol worship.” — (Quoted by Dutt from “ Young India,” '
October 1 2 , 19 2 1.)
“ The Hindu mahashabha . . . is left fa r behind in this back­
ward moving race by the Sanatanists, who combine religious
obscurantism of an extreme type with fervent or at anyrate loudly
expressed loyalty to British rule.” — (Nehru, “ Autobiography,” '
quoted by D.)
“ Even when appealing for Hindu-Moslem unity, Gandhi has
made the appeal not as a national leader appealing to both sections,
but as a Hindu leader; the Hindus are ‘ w e ’ ; the Moslems are
‘ they.’ D.
“ We shall have to go in fo r tapasya, fo r self-purification, if
we want to win the hearts of the Mussulmans.” — (Gandhi in
“ Young Ind ia,” September, 19 24 ; quoted by D.)
“ Behind the communal antagonisms, which have been promoted
to protect the system of exploitation and imperialist rule, lie social
and economic questions. This is obvious in the case of the middle
class communalists competing for positions and jobs. It is no less
true where communal difficulties reach the masses. In Bengal and
Punjab the Hindus include the richer landlord, trading and money-
lending interests; the Moslems are more often the poor peasants,
the debtors. In other cases big Moslem landlords w ill be found
among Hindu peasants. A gain and again what is reported as a
‘ communal’ struggle or rising conceals a struggle of Moslem
peasants against Hindu landlords, Moslem debtors against Hindu
moneylenders, or Hindu workers against imported Pathan strike­
breakers. No less significant is the sinister appearance of com­
munal riots (fomented by unknown hands), followed by police
firin g and deaths, in any industrial centre where the workers have
achieved an advance—as in Bombay in 1929 after the great strike
movement or in Cawnpore in 1939 after the great strike victory
of 1938. The weapon of reaction and its social economic purpose
to break the solidarity of the workers is visible.” —D.
“ In the Trade Unions and the Peasants’ Unions Hindus and
Moslems unite without distinction or difference (and without feel­
ing the need of separate electorates). The common bonds of class
solidarity, of common social and economic needs, shatter the arti­
ficial barriers of communal as of caste divisions. Herein lies the
positive path of advance to the solution of the communal ques­
tion. ” —D.
Dutt goes on to say that the slogan of the National Movement
must be “ Keep religion out of politics.”
92
 Caste and Language
The British Government and its propagandists have always
been concerned to emphasise the divisions of the Indian people as
regards caste, religion and language as an argument against the
demand fo r Indian independence.
“ The fight against untouchability has been led, not by the
British Government, but by Gandhi and the National Movement.
Indeed, the incident w ill be recalled when certain famous temples
in southern India which had been traditionally closed to the
untouchables were, under the inspiration of Gandhi’s crusade, thrown
open to them; and police were thereupon despatched to prevent
access of the untouchables on the grounds that such access would
be offensive to the religious sentiments of the population, and which
it was the sacred duty of the Government to protect.” —D.
The opinion of the depressed classes on the attitude of the
British Government is summed up by Dr. Ambedkar, whom the
Indian Government recognises as the leader of the untouchables.
“ I am afraid that the British choose to advertise our unfor­
tunate conditions, not with the object of removing them, but only
because such a course serves well as an excuse for retarding the
political progress of Ind ia.”— (Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, Presidential
address to the All-India Depressed Classes Congress, August, 1930;
quoted by D.)
“ Before the British you were in the loathsome condition due
to your untouchability. Has the British Government done anything
to remove your untouchability?
“ Before the British you could not draw water from the village
•well. Has the British Government secured you the right to the
w ell? Before the British Government you could not enter the
temple. Can you enter now? Before the British Government you
w ere denied entry into the police force. Does the British Govern­
ment admit you in the force? Before the British Government you
w ere not allowed to serve in the military. Is that career now open
to you? Gentlemen, to none of these questions can you give an
affirm ative answer. . . .
“ Nobody can remove your grievances as well as you can, and
you cannot remove them unless you get political power in your
hands. No share of this political power can come to you so long
as the British Government remains as it is. It is only in a Sw araj
constitution that you stand any chance of getting the political
power in your own hands, without which you cannot bring salvation
to your people.” — (Dr. Ambedkar, as above.)
D utt points out that where modern industry develops caste
distinctions dissolve.
The Simon Commission declared that there were 2 2 2 languages
in India, basing itself on the 19 2 1 Census. The 19 0 1 Census showed
o nly 147 languages, so one is asked to believe that 75 new languages
sprang up in India in the space of 20 years.
93
 Dutt declares that 134 of the 2 2 2 “ languages” belong to the
“ Tibeto-Burman sub-fam ily.” The nature of these languages is
shown in the “ Imperial Gazetteer of In d ia,” 1909, from which D utt
gives the following instances:
Language. Number of Speakers.
Kabui 4
Andro 1
Kasui 11
Bhranu 15
A ka . 26
Tairong 12
Nora 2
“ It is clear that the philosophical conception of a language as
a means of communication between human beings w ill have to be
revised in the light of Andro, spoken by one person; Nora, with
a grand total of two speakers, ju st scrapes through.” —D.
Dutt points out that out of 103 “ languages” of the “ Tibeto-
Burm an” group, 97 are spoken by a total of less than 200,000
people.
The Simon Commission, when it secured the administrative
separation of Burma from India, found the language difficulty no
obstacle.
Its report stated “ nearly seven-tenths of the whole population
— and the proportion is growing—speak Burmese or a closely allied
language.”
Dutt declares that in practice there are twelve to fifteen
languages in India, the rest of the so-called languages being dialects
or names of tribes.
A fter more than two centuries of British rule 3£ millions only
can speak English, while 120 millions speak Hindustani, the main
language of India.

!)4
 Opinion on Indian Problem
“ India is vital to the well-being of Britain, and I cannot help
feeling very anxious when I see forces from which our population
is largely supported being gradually diminished. Foreign invest­
ments are slowly sinking, and shipping is at a low ebb. If to these
we add the loss of India in one form or another, then problems will
arise here incomparably more grave than any we have known. You
w ill have a surplus population here which it may be beyond the
Government to provide fo r effectively.”— (Winston Churchill’s
speech at Epping, Ju ly 8 , 19 3 3 ; quoted by D.)

“ The British Nation has no intention whatever of relinquish­

ing effective control of Indian life and progress.

“ We have no intention of casting away that truly bright and

precious jew el in the Crown of the King, which more than all our
other dominions and dependencies constitutes the glory and strength
of the British Em pire.” — (Winston Churchill, speech to the Indian
Em pire Society, December 1 1 , 19 30; quoted by D.)

The Lieutenant-Governor of the Punjab, Sir Michael 0 ’Dwyer,

in a speech to the Society of Authors, 1925, quoted by D., spoke
of “ our duty to our imperial position, to our kinsfolk in India, and
to a thousand million of British capital invested in India.”

“ We did not conquer India for the benefit of the Indians. I

know that it is said at missionary meetings that we have conquered
India to raise the level of the Indians. That is cant. We con­
quered India by the sword, and by the sword we shall hold it. We
hold it as the finest outlet fo r British goods.”— (Joynston Hicks,
former Cabinet Minister,, quoted by D.)

“ M any authorities estimate that the proportion of the vital

trading, banking and shipping business of Britain directly de­
pendent upon our connection with India is 20 per cent. . . . India
is the lynch-pin of the British Empire. If we lose India the Empire
must collapse—first economically, then politically.” — (Lord Rother-
mere, “ D aily M ail,” M ay 6 , 1930; quoted by D.)

95
 Future of Indio
Dutt declares that constitutional changes which w ill transfer
the decisive power over their own affairs to the Indian people
must be supplemented by economic changes. The Constitution can
only be determined by a constituent assembly elected on the basis
o f universal adult suffrage which is the goal of the Congress
P arty.
“ . . . the tasks which require to be fulfilled for the victory of
democracy are by no means comprised simply in the form al consti­
tutional change, the transference of power and sovereignty from
B ritish rule to Indian rule.
“ F irst the effective conquest of complete independence and
ending of Im perialist domination in India requires . . . not only
the form al ending of the stranglehold of British finance-capital on
the life, labor, resources and freedom of development of the Indian
people; that is, the cancellation of the existing concessions to
foreign capital and the taking over of all foreign owned enterprises,
plantations, factories, railw ays, shipping, irrigation works, etc.,
together with such arrangements as are politically and diplomati­
cally possible, according to the relations of strength, fo r bringing
down the load of debt.
“ Second, the democratic transformation is, as we have seen,
bound up with the agrarian revolution, fo r the liquidation of land­
lordism, the re-division of land, the wiping out of peasant debt and
the modernisation of agriculture.
“ Third, the immediate tasks of economic and social reconstruc­
tion in India, to make possible industrialisation and the necessary
cultural advance as the only basis fo r a free India, require that the
independent Indian State shall be, as foreshadowed in the Congress
Declaration of Rights, in possession of the key points of economy—
that is, of the key industries and services, mineral resources, ra il­
w ays, waterways, shipping and other means of public transport,
and of banking and credit.
“ These are not yet the tasks of building socialism, although
they already lay down the prelim inary foundations for it.
“ It is evident that the democratic republic in India, which is
the present goal of the struggle of national liberation, will inevit­
ab ly have to be a democratic republic of a new type, very different
in character from the plutocratic imperialist semi-democracies of
the West, a democratic republic which has destroyed the founda­
tions of feudalism and landlordism, which is in possession of key
points of economy for national development, and which gives full
play to the organisation and advance of the working class and the
peasantry.” —D.

The W orker Trustees (40-Hour Week)

 C( s '°

O n S a l e A t . . . *

THE PIONEER BOOKSHOPS

17 Pitt Street
1 Rawson Place
144 Castlereagh Street
SYDNEY

INTERNATIO NAL BOOKSHOP

180 Exhibition Street
M ELB O U R N E

PEOPLE'S BOOKSHOP
252 George Street
B R ISB A N E

E. D. SYMON
13 Hindley Street
A D E L A ID E

PROGRESSIVE BOOKSHOP
45 London Court
PERTH

Wholesale from . . . .

CURRENT BOOK DISTRIBUTORS

14 RAW SON CHAMBERS
SYD N EY *
Phone: M A 5663 :: Post: Box 44, Haymarkct

W holly Bet up a n d p rin te d in A u s tra lia b y T h e W o rk e r T ru stee s,

238-240 C a stle rea g h S tre e t, Sydney.