....Previous

While Bankim was publishing these essays in Banga Darshan, there appeared in a contemporary periodical Samaj-Daipan an essay entitled "Banga-Darshan O Jamidargan" ("Banga-Darshan and the Landlords"). Bankim Chandra appended a reply to the points raised in defence of the landlords in that essay. However, the author of that essay made an incidental remark regarding the drain of the wealth  of India as a result of foreign rule. In opposition to this widespread impression Bankim Chandra tries to show that the British rule has not impoverished India, but has rather led to her economic development and enrichment through free trade between India and Britain. Bankim Chandra's point'is not that the British rule has profited the poor in India by bringing about economic development. Quite the contrary. The poor have become poorer. It was his earnest hope that the British would change their policy and take effective steps for the equitable distribution of enormous wealth generated through the trade between India and Britain.

It was obvious to the Indians that we were paying the huge salaries of the foreign personnel of the British Government and they were taking large sums out of the country as home charges. In the original essay Bankim says this sum was not much. This sum being paid to the British personnel was being compensated by the additional wealth generated by improved agriculture and foreign trade. In a footnote to the reprinted essay Bankim Chandra said that this was a grave error, implying that the drain on this account was indeed huge and even economically and not merely politically indefensible.

What he was unsure about even in the later stage of his life was the economic benefits of our trade with Britain. In the original essay he was unambiguous in his emphasis that this trade has greatly benefited India and the British were in fact generating wealth in the country and not in any way denuding her.
His argument is that when the British exporters are making profits by selling India's products abroad, they are making this profit from the foreign buyers and not from the India producers. On the contrary the Indian producers are finding a market and can even sell their products at a premium.

But what about foreign imports? The foreign importers are making profits by selling foreign goods and these profits are being expatriated, reducing India’s national wealth. All the countries in the world try, therefore, to reduce imports by restricting free trade and imposing protecting tariffs on import duties.

Bankim Chandra argues vigorously in favour of free trade and against protectionism on the basis of the economic doctrines of Bright, Cobden and J. S. Mill.

The argument in favour of free trade and unrestricted imports put forward by Bankim Chandra wants us to consider whether the prices being paid for imported goods are fair or not. The price of a good is fair if we cannot get that good at a lower price anywhere else. The merchant is undoubtedly making a profit, but this profit is reasonable if nobody else can sell the good at a lower price. So the seller is doing no harm to the buyer and if the buyers of a country are not suffering a loss, how can the country as a whole suffer?

It may be asked that by importing foreign goods are harming the interest of the indigenous producers. But if the Indian producers can offer the same good at a comparable price, we would have bought their product and foreign would have found no buyers. But are not indigenous producer thrown out of employment? Bankim and other free trader’s is that they can produce other things for which there is a market. Thus it is in the overall interest of everybody that we get our goods and services at the cheapest price. If the price of the indigenous goods are the cheapest we shall buy them. If the foreign goods are cheapest we should be allowed as buy them not prevented by protectionist measure. These who were producing goods at a higher price would suffer it cheaper foreign goods are imported, but they can produce other goods at competitive prices. What is more important to never is that we have to pay for our imports and thus have to produce more. Export earnings increase as a result of rise in imports someone refuses to change trades and professions owing to barriers and other factors others would come forward to produce the goods to be exported and there will be no harm to the generation of additional wealth as a result of unrestricted trade.

Bankim Chandra concludes, therefore, that the British traders are not draining India of her wealth, but are contributing to her economic well-being. His only complaint is that this wealth i concentrated in a few hands and not reaching the masses of the country.

In the fourth chapter of his book entitled Equality Bankim Chandra tries to discover the social, historical and economic causes of the poverty of the Indian peasants who constitute the best majority of the Indian people. In his analyses he acknowledges his debt to two authors, Henry Thomas Buckle (1821-1862), the English historian "and Wilham Lecky (1838-1903) another Victorian historian, whose book The History of the Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism in Europe he specifically mentions.

Bankim Chandra is under no illusion that the poverty and destitution of the Indian peasants are of recent origin or specifically a consequence of die British Conquest of India. They have been exploited from times immemorial. The early rise of civilization and culture in India is due to its extremely fertile lands which yielded a surplus supporting a leisured class able to create science, art, philosophy and religion of a high order. However, die elements of the country marked by extreme heat produces a sprit of aversion to sustained hard work. With the increase in population, prosperity declined because increased numbers did not labour hard enough to attain prosperity. Excess in numbers could not be flushed out through emigration—nature with its high mountains and vast seas-offering very difficult barriers—nor through suppression of desire to marry and raise a family. People could just eke out a living ever through largely unproductive jobs. India's too early economic and cultural success proved the cause of her downfall. In Bankim's own words "It is not good to bear fruits prematurely."

Proverty, once in existence, leads to further improverishment Indians lack the acquisitive instinct. They are easily contented. Aversion to work is the root cause of contentment and lack of initiative. Bankim the artist may be appreciative of mental contentment. But Bankim the social historian is highly critical of the easy-going nature of Indians, for yearning for ever higher standard of living is the spur to greater effort and consequent economic development.

Next..