Is not this passing strange? Sir George knows that these people are

in a state of the direst distress; their cattle dying by hundreds,

themselves penniless and foodless; if this demand is made upon

them, he has reported that they will "simply be ruined;" but at

the exhortations of Lord Lytton he sets to work cheerfully. Neither

inclination nor effort shall be wanting in him to make the people

experience to the full the agony and the bitterness of famine. Thus

it is that a prayerful Viceroy, with the "valued assistance" of his

colleagues, provides for the "well-being of the millions committed to

his fostering care."

"I have tried," writes one despairing district officer, "to stave off

collecting, but have received peremptory orders to begin. This will

be the last straw on the back of the unfortunate zemindars.... A more

suicidal policy I cannot conceive. I have done what I could to open

the eyes of the Commissioners and the Lieutenant-Governor as to the

state of the place, but without avail. I have nothing to do but to

carry out the orders of Government, which means simply ruin." "The

exaction of the land revenue in Budaon," writes another, "and, I

believe, in other districts as well, involved a direct breach of faith

with the zemindars, which has had the very worst effect on the minds

of the native community.... The people are loud in their complaints of

the faithlessness of Government, and, to my mind, with ample reason."

But the Government of India having decreed the collection of the land

revenue, were now compelled to justify their rapacity, by pretending

that there was no famine calling for a remission. The dearth and the

frightful mortality throughout the North-West Provinces were to be

preserved as a State secret like the negotiations with Shere Ali. By

this means it was hoped that the famine would work itself out, the

dead be decently interred out of human sight, and Lord Lytton obtain

the funds for his hunting expedition without an unpatriotic opposition

becoming cognizant of the facts either in India or in England. It is a

striking illustration of the enormous space which divides us from

the people of India, that such a scheme should have been thought

practicable, but stranger still--it was very near to success. An

accident may be said to have defeated it. During all that dreary

winter famine was busy devouring its victims by thousands. At the

lowest computation more than a quarter of a million perished of actual

starvation. The number would have to be doubled if it included all

those who perished of disease, the consequence of insufficient food

and exposure to cold; for, in the desperate endeavour to keep their

cattle alive, the wretched peasantry fed them on the straw which

thatched their huts, and which provided them with bedding. The winter

was abnormally severe, and without a roof above them or bedding

beneath them, scantily clad and poorly fed, multitudes perished of

cold. The dying and the dead were strewn along the cross-country

roads. Scores of corpses were tumbled into old wells, because the

deaths were too numerous for the miserable relatives to perform the

usual funeral rites. Mothers sold their children for a single scanty

meal. Husbands flung their wives into ponds, to escape the torment

of seeing them perish by the lingering agonies of hunger. Amid

these scenes of death the Government of India kept its serenity and

cheerfulness unimpaired. The journals of the North-West were persuaded

into silence. Strict orders were given to civilians, under no

circumstances to countenance the pretence of the natives that they

were dying of hunger. One civilian, a Mr. MacMinn, unable to endure

the misery around him, opened a relief work at his own expense. He

was severely reprimanded, threatened with degradation, and ordered to

close the work immediately.

All this time, not a whisper of the tragedy that was being enacted in

the North-West Provinces had reached Calcutta. The district officials

dared not communicate to the press what they knew, and in India there

are hardly any other means of obtaining information. But in the month

of February Mr. Knight, the proprietor of the Calcutta _Statesman_,

had occasion to visit Agra. He was astonished to find all around him

the indications of an appalling misery. He began to investigate

the matter, and gradually the truth revealed itself. A quarter of a

million of British subjects had perished of hunger, pursued even to

their graves by the pitiless exactions of the Government.

Mr. Knight made known in the columns of the _Statesman_ what he

had seen, and what he had learned from others in the course of his

inquiries. The guilty consciences of those who were responsible for

this vast suffering smote them. Lord Lytton and Sir George Couper felt

that it was necessary to extinguish Mr. Knight--and that speedily. Sir

George Couper accordingly drew up a long Minute, vindicating himself

from the attacks of Mr. Knight; and this Minute was duly acknowledged

in laudatory terms by the Government of India. The Viceroy in Council

characterized the Minute as "a convincing statement of facts," and

then added that the Government of India needed no such statement to

convince it that the "Lieutenant-Governor had exercised forethought in

his arrangements, and had shown humanity in his orders throughout the

recent crisis." The mortality which Lord Lytton "deplored" with "a

deep and painful regret," in so far "as it was directly the result of

famine, was caused rather by the unwillingness of the people to leave

their homes than by any want of forethought on the part of the local

government in providing works where they might be relieved." Lord

Lytton "unhesitatingly accepted the statement of the local government

that no one who was willing to go to a relief work need have died of

famine, and it is satisfactorily shown in his Honour's Minute that the

relief wage was ample."

This eulogy on Sir George Couper and all his doings was published on

May 2, 1878, after Mr. Knight had begun publishing his revelations in

the _Statesman_. It is to be noted that neither Sir George Couper nor

the Government of India denies that the famine has been sore in the

land and the mortality excessive. But on February 28--two months

previously, and before Mr. Knight had commenced his inconvenient

disclosures--Sir George Couper reported to the Government of India

that "it may be questioned whether it will not be found hereafter

that the comparative immunity from cholera and fever which, owing

apparently to the drought, the Provinces have enjoyed during the past

year, will not compensate for the losses caused by insufficient food

and clothing, and _make the mortality generally little, if at all,

higher than in ordinary years_." At the time when this letter was

written, the official mortuary returns showed that the mortality in

the North-West was seven and eight times in excess of what it was

in ordinary years. There can, therefore, be no question that the

confession of that "terrible mortality" which Lord Lytton so deeply

"deplored," was wrung from Sir George Couper by the publication of Mr.

Knight's letters. But for them, the official record would have stated

that the "mortality was little, if at all, higher than in ordinary

years." This record is sufficient proof that no adequate arrangements

were made to meet a calamity which, according to Sir George Couper,

did not exist--at least, not until Mr. Knight insisted that it did. At

the same time, it will be as well to give the proof of this in detail,

in order to show what the Government of India is capable of saying.

In one of his letters to the _Statesman_, Mr. Knight averred that

there were "no relief works worthy of the name till about January

20, and no works sufficient for the people's need till the middle of

February." Sir George Couper replies to this charge as follows:--"The

reports already submitted to the Government are, I think, amply

sufficient to acquit me of this charge.... In October, Colonel Fraser

was again deputed to visit the head-quarters of each division, and, in

consultation with the district officers, settle what works should be

undertaken to give employment to the poor when the inevitable pressure

began." Here Sir George Couper affirms that so far back as October

he had foreseen the "inevitable pressure," and made all the necessary

arrangements. Nevertheless we find him, so late as November 23,

reporting as follows to the Government of India:--

"_Although the danger of widespread famine ... has happily

passed away_, it is a matter of extreme importance that

well-considered projects for great public works should be

ready in case of future necessity.... _Very few projects of

this character have been completed for these provinces_,

and the Lieutenant-Governor thinks no time should be lost in

preparing them.... There can be no doubt that the want of such

projects would have been felt as a most serious difficulty

by this Government if relief works on a large scale had been

necessary in the present season."

Thus, we find that up to the close of November no large relief works

had been sanctioned, because the "danger of widespread famine had

happily passed away." Allowing for official delays, this would make

the date when "relief works worthy of the name" were opened tally with

the time stated by Mr. Knight--namely, January 20. What, again, Sir

George Couper could mean by reporting on November 23, that "danger

of widespread famine has happily passed away," is perplexing, for on

November 26, or just three days subsequently, he writes as follows:--

"It appears to his Honour that the Government of India fail to

realize the extent of the damage caused _by the unparalleled

failure of the rain this year_.... The rain did not come until

6th October, by which time _the greater part of the crops was

irretrievably ruined_.... It is a mistake to suppose that the

autumn crop has escaped in the greater part of the Benares

and Allahabad divisions, and in the south-eastern districts of

Oudh.... _The rice crops_, which are largely grown in most

of the districts in these divisions, _have almost entirely

perished_, and of other crops, the area sown is much less than

usual."

On October 11 Sir George Couper reported that if the land revenues

was exacted the village communities would be ruined. On November 26 he

reported that the crops had been "irretrievably ruined." Nevertheless,

on November 23, he reported that no large relief works had been

sanctioned because "the danger of widespread famine had passed away."

It follows, from this last report, that for whatever other purpose

Colonel Fraser may have been deputed to visit the head-quarters

of each division, it was not to make satisfactory provision for a

widespread famine. No. As Sir George Couper was well aware at the time

he penned his reply to Mr. Knight, the object of Colonel Fraser's tour

was precisely the opposite of this. These were the instructions he was

charged to enjoin upon civil officers and executive engineers:--

"_Please discourage relief works in every possible way._ It

may be, however, that when agricultural operations are over,

some of the people may want work. This, however, except on

works for which there is budget provision, should only be

given if the collector is satisfied that without it the people

would actually starve. _Mere distress is not a sufficient

reason for opening a relief work._ And if a relief work be

started, task-work should be rigorously exacted, _and the

people put on the barest subsistence wage_; so that we may

be satisfied that if any other kind of work were procurable

elsewhere, they would resort to it."

In accordance with the letter and spirit of these instructions the

famine-stricken multitudes were literally starved off such scanty

works as were open. The "barest subsistence wage" was fined down,

smaller and smaller, until the people abandoned the works in despair,

and returned to their villages to die. Nay, in some places, the

public works which had been duly sanctioned in the yearly budget were

transformed into relief works; and the labourers upon them, instead of

being paid at the ordinary market rates, were reduced to the "barest

subsistence wage, task-work being rigorously exacted." A beneficent

but economical Government took advantage of the dire extremity to

which its subjects were reduced to reap this unexpected profit out of

their miseries. None the less, "the Viceroy in Council unhesitatingly

accepts the statement of the local government, that no one who was

willing to go to a relief work need have died of famine."

The License Tax.

The foregoing is an illustration of the manner in which an Imperial

Viceroy secures "the progressive well-being of the multitudes

committed to his fostering care." I purpose now to illustrate the

manner in which the same Imperial functionary deals with the finances

"committed to his fostering care." The position of "isolation and

scarcely veiled hostility" which, without any provocation, Lord Lytton

had assumed towards the Ameer of Afghanistan rendered a war against

that sovereign a mere question of time and opportunity. Meanwhile,

funds were necessary for its prosecution in addition to those which

had been obtained from the starving population of the North-West.

Accordingly, in his Budget statement for 1878-79, Sir John Strachey

announced that the Indian Government had arrived at the conclusion

that they ought to regard famines as normal occurrences for which

provision should be made in the budgets of each year. Famine

expenditure could not be estimated at a smaller sum than a million

and a half annually. This sum he now proposed to raise by means of a

License Tax on trades and dealings, to be levied throughout India, and

which, it was estimated, would yield £700,000. The remainder of the

sum required was to be obtained by a tax on the agricultural classes

in Northern India and Bengal alone. The peculiar incidence of these

taxes was justified on the ground that the classes taxed were the same

classes which, in periods of famine, had to be supported by the State.

It was therefore only just that they should provide the fund which was

to insure them against famine. This money was in fact a sum raised

for a special purpose, at the expense of certain classes, for whose

benefit it was to be exclusively applied. This was acknowledged by

Lord Lytton with his usual superabundance of emphasis:--

"_The sole justification_ for the increased taxation which has

just been imposed upon the people of India, for the purpose

of insuring this Empire against the worst calamities of future

famine ... is the pledge we have given that a sum not less

than a million and a half sterling, which exceeds the amount

of the additional contributions obtained from the people

for this purpose, shall be annually applied to it. We have

explained to the people of this country that the additional

revenue raised by the new taxes is required, not for luxuries,

but the necessities of the State; not for general purposes,

but for the construction of a particular class of public

works; and we have pledged ourselves not to spend one rupee of

the special resources, thus created, upon works of a different

character.... The pledges which my financial colleague was

authorized to give, on behalf of the Government, were explicit

and full as regards these points.... _For these reasons, it is

all the more binding on the honour of the Government to redeem

to the uttermost, without evasion or delay, those pledges, for

the adequate redemption of which the people of India have,

and can have, no other guarantee than the good faith of their

rulers._"

The ink which recorded this solemn pledge was hardly dry before it had

been broken. The predetermined war with Shere Ali began in the wanton

manner I have told, and the question of cost was mentioned in the

Houses of Parliament. The British Imperialist glories in war when the

chances are all in his favour, but he has an invincible objection to

paying the costs of such transactions. And they are costly. It was

therefore very necessary so to arrange matters, that while the

glory of hunting an ally to death should be appropriated by British

Imperialism, the expenses of the chase should be defrayed by India.

Accordingly, towards the end of November, Lord Cranbrook informed the

House of Lords that India was in possession of a surplus more than

sufficient to defray the costs of the war:--

"I am bound to say, that _after looking very carefully into

the financial condition of India_, I believe it will not

be necessary, at least in the initial steps, to call on the

revenues of England. I am in possession of facts which, I

think, would convince your Lordships that, _without unduly

pressing on the resources of India_, there will be no

necessity to call on the English revenues--at least during the

present financial year. It was announced by my noble friend in

another place the other night that, _including the £1,500,000

of new taxes_, the surplus of Indian revenue will amount to

£2,136,000."

A fortnight later the "facts" of which Lord Cranbrook professed to

be in possession were discovered not to be facts, and the surplus was

reduced by Mr. Stanhope to a million and a half--in other words, to

exactly the sum which Lord Lytton had solemnly pledged his honour to

apply to no purpose except that of insuring India against the

ravages of famine. On the most elastic system of interpretation, the

acquisition of a fictitious "scientific frontier" cannot be made to

appear as a fulfilment of this pledge. However, on the faith of the

surplus thus created by Lord Cranbrook and Mr. Stanhope, Parliament

voted that the expenses of the Afghan war should be charged upon

India. Mr. Stanhope said,--" The surplus being of the amount he had

mentioned, it must be perfectly obvious that the Indian Government

could pay the whole cost of the war during the present year, without

adding a shilling to the taxation or the debt of the country."

The intention here is sufficiently obvious. Lord Cranbrook and Mr.

Stanhope were quite prepared to disregard the pledges given to

the people of India, and apply the Famine Insurance Fund to an

illegitimate purpose. They had all the will to do this, but their

desires were frustrated by the fact that there was no such fund in

existence. It had already been spent and disappeared. Lord Lytton thus

calmly announces its extinction in the Budget resolution of March,

1879:--

"The insurance provided against future famines has virtually

ceased to exist, and the difficulties in the way of fiscal

and commercial and administrative reform have been greatly

aggravated. Nor can it be in any way assumed that the

evil will not continue and go on increasing. Under such

circumstances, it is extremely difficult to follow any settled

financial policy; for the Government cannot even approximately

tell what income will be required to meet the necessary

expenditure of the State.... For the present the

Governor-General in Council thinks it wise to abstain from

imposing any fresh burdens on the country, and to accept the

temporary loss of the surplus by which it was hoped that an

insurance against famine had been provided."

That is, that the Government of India having "pledged itself not

to spend one rupee of these special resources," except "for the

construction of a particular class of public works"--having declared

that "the sole justification for the increased taxation" is that it

should be devoted to a particular end--no sooner gets the money into

its possession than it expends the entire sum on something else,

and then "thinks it wise" not to discuss the matter any further. The

Government is very sorry; it really wanted to make an Insurance Fund

against famine; but it finds that it "cannot even approximately tell

what income will be required to meet the necessary expenditure of the

State." Under such circumstances the Government finds it extremely

difficult to follow "any settled financial policy," except that of

spending every shilling which it can get possession of. Thus it is

that an Imperial Government "redeems to the uttermost" the honour of

the British nation, and strengthens the confidence of India in "the

good faith of her rulers."

The Cotton Duties.

I come, lastly, to the action of the Indian Government in respect to

the Cotton Duties. It is, I fancy, generally supposed in England that

the duty on imported cotton was designedly protective--_i.e._, that

it had from the beginning been imposed with the intention of favouring

the Indian manufacturer at the expense of Manchester. This is a

mistake. The duty was imposed at a time when there were no Indian

manufactures to compete with those from England, simply as a source

of revenue. In India there is a great difficulty in so arranging the

incidence of taxation that the well-to-do classes shall contribute

their proper share to the necessities of the State. A light duty

on imported cotton--as being the universally used material for

dress--enabled the Government to reach these classes in a manner that

was effective without being burdensome. Even now that mills are at

work in India, by far the larger part of these duties had nothing

protective in their character, because there is in India no

manufacture of the finer sorts of cotton. Whether, however, the duty

was or was not protective in its character, both the Indian Government

and the House of Commons had repeatedly given pledges that the duty

should not be repealed until the Indian finances were in a position

to justify the loss of revenue thereby occasioned. Lord Lytton, who

throughout his viceroyalty has made a point in all important matters

of making a confession of political faith exactly the opposite of his

subsequent political action, expressed himself on the subject of the

Cotton Duties with his usual copiousness. In reply to an address from

the Calcutta Trades' Association, shortly after his arrival in India,

he said:--

"I think that no one responsible for the financial

administration of this Empire would at present venture to

make the smallest reduction in any of its limited sources of

income. Let me, however, take this opportunity of assuring you

that, so far as I am aware, the abolition or reduction of

the Cotton Duties, at the cost of adding one sixpence to the

taxation of this country, has never been advocated, or even

contemplated by her Majesty's Secretary of State for India....

It is due to myself, and the confidence you express in my

character, that I should also assure you, on my own behalf,

that nothing will ever induce me to tax the people of India

for any exclusive benefit to their English fellow-subjects."

A short time previously he had told the Bombay Chamber of Commerce

that "he was of opinion that, with the exception of about forty

thousand pounds sterling, the duties were not protective, because

Manchester had no Indian competitors in finer manufactures. He thought

the £800,000 collected yearly as duty, on finer fabrics, a fair item

of revenue. With regard to the duty on coarse goods, he thought it

protective, because Bombay mills competed with Manchester; but he

did not see how it could be abolished, because it would lead to

irregularities in order to evade duty."

The Contemporary Review, Volume 36, December 1879 · 第 3 / 22 段