I find in paragraph 10 that power is given to the District Council to make regulations for the control of money-lending and trading by non-tribals. Under sub-paragraph (2) such regulations may “(a) prescribe that no one except the holder of a licence issued in that behalf shall carry on the business of money-lending; (b) prescribe the maximum rate of interest which may be charged or be recovered by a money-lender; (c) provide for the maintenance of accounts by money-lenders and for the inspection of such accounts by officers appointed in this behalf by the District Council; and (d) prescribe that no person who is not a member of the Scheduled Tribes resident in the district shall carry on wholesale or retail business in any commodity except under a licence issued in that behalf by the District Council”. Look at this last provision. Under these regulations will it be possible for any Assamese, Marwari, Sindhi, Punjabi, or Sikh from the plains or from Bombay to carry on business in the Naga Hills if we have a rule like (d) ? To say the least, this is an impossible provision. These provisions are so bad that the only way out, I trust, is to accept my amendment. I have given a very mild amendment to the effect that “the Governor shall make regulations to control money-lending and trading in the tribal areas”. During the British days the British were believed. Do you think we shall not be believed ? The British induced the belief that they were their greatest friend and the Hindus and men of the plains were their enemies. That was the belief they created. I think we are insisting on that and inducing that belief again. And we are not allowing our business men to go there and do business. My amendment is a permissive law. The Governor has power to make rules and regulations and if he thinks that a certain man is objectionable or is not a desirable man he can rule such men out. I, therefore, submitted that this amendment should be accepted.
