Read the excerpt given below and answer the questions that follow:

The romance is that there is security of life and property in India; the reality is that there is no such thing. There is security of life and property in one sense or way — i.e., the people are secure from any violence from each other or from Native despots… But from England's own grasp there is no security of property at all and, as a consequence, no security for life. India’s property is not secure. What is secure, and well secure, is that England is perfectly safe and secure, and does so with perfect security, to carry away from India, and to eat up in India, her property at the present rate of $\text{\textdollar}$ 30,0000,000 or 40,000,000 a year, …. I therefore venture to submit that India does not enjoy security of her property and life…. To millions in India life is simply 'half-feeding', or starvation, or famine and disease.
        — Dadabhai Naoroji

(a) Who was Dadabhai Naoroji? According to Dadabhai Naoroji, in what sense ‘security of life and property’ prevails in India?

(b) How is England ‘perfectly safe and secure’, as described in the excerpt by Naoroji?

(c) Dadabhai Naoroji propounded a theory to describe the exploitative nature of British rule in India. Name it. Explain briefly the last line of the excerpt given above.

(a) Dadabhai Naoroji, also known as the "Grand Old Man of India" and the "Unofficial Ambassador of India" was a remarkable Indian political leader, merchant, scholar, and writer. He presented his 'Drain Theory' in his paper Poverty and Un-British Rule in India. He was thrice elected as the President of the Congress.

According to Dadabhai Naoroji, 'security of life and property' prevails in India in a sense that the people were secure from internal or external violence. Naoroji acknowledges that there is a certain level of security within India itself. People are relatively safe from violence inflicted by each other or by native rulers (despots). However, this security does not extend to protection from England’s grasp. Naoroji argues that under British rule, there is no genuine security for property. The British colonial administration, rather than safeguarding Indian property, often exploited it. The "Drain Theory" proposed by Naoroji highlighted how Britain was siphoning off India’s wealth and resources, leading to India’s continued impoverishment.

(b) According to Dadabhai Naoroji England was ‘perfectly safe and secure’ because England was extracting India’s wealth at an alarming rate—approximately $\text{\textdollar}$ 30,000,000 to $\text{\textdollar}$ 40,000,000 annually. This exploitation occurred both within India (where England consumes the wealth) and outside India (where England carries it away). This drain of wealth was making England stronger and pushing India to poverty and starvation.

(c) Dadabhai Naoroji propounded 'The drain theory' to describe the exploitative nature of British rule in India.

The given line captures the harsh realities faced by millions in India during the colonial period. For those struggling to survive, life was reduced to “half-feeding,” starvation, and vulnerability to famine and disease. The over exploitation of Indian peasants, farmers and merchants was the root cause of all the economic ills of India. The draining of resources—whether through taxation or export—directly impacted the livelihoods of millions.