During the decade starting from 1930 the defla-
tionary movements had created indebtedness in the
country on account of ruinous low prices of farm pro-
ducts. The irony of it was that the producer had
nothing to maintain his staying power. Whatever he
had, he gave away in heavy interest charges, in land
revenue and in meeting indirect taxation all of which
were based on high price-levels of farm products. Bri-
tain took full advantage of this situation.
After World War II began, circumstances became
favourable for the Indian farmer. Then he was denied
the compensation.
The way in which this indebtedness has been in-
creased is, to say the least, economically unjustifiable
and morally scandalous. Britain wanted to foist her
sterling LO.TLs on India. There were enough Indian
princes, zamindars, bankers, capitalists and industrial-
ists who live on British support who could have been
forced to take up sterling loans. But Britain took ad-
vantage of an innocent provision of the Reserve Bank
of India Act by issuing paper currency against sterling
securities. The British Government used this legal
device to such an extent that the sterling securities
against currency aggregated to Rs. 1135 crores. Cost of
living went up; people were starved. This is the Gov-
ernment that now wants to mobilise moral indignation
of the uninformed against the middle and upper
classes in India who happened to hold high denomina-
tion notes.
When and how will this debt be paid?
At the time of the Round Table Conference India
was indebted to Britain, Britain was the creditor. And
as a creditor, it demanded manifold commercial safe-
guards against India. Now that Britain is indebted to
28