<P> There is no doubt that our grievances against the British Empire had a sound basis . As the painstaking statistical work of the Cambridge historian Angus Maddison has shown, India's share of world income collapsed from 22.6% in 1700, almost equal to Europe's share of 23.3% at that time, to as low as 3.8% in 1952 . Indeed, at the beginning of the 20th century, "the brightest jewel in the British Crown" was the poorest country in the world in terms of per capita income . </P> <P> From the beginning of the 19th century, the British East India Company's gradual expansion and consolidation of power brought a major change in taxation and agricultural policies, which tended to promote commercialisation of agriculture with a focus on trade, resulting in decreased production of food crops, mass impoverishment and destitution of farmers, and in the short term, led to numerous famines . The economic policies of the British Raj caused a severe decline in the handicrafts and handloom sectors, due to reduced demand and dipping employment . After the removal of international restrictions by the Charter of 1813, Indian trade expanded substantially with steady growth . The result was a significant transfer of capital from India to England, which, due to the colonial policies of the British, led to a massive drain of revenue rather than any systematic effort at modernisation of the domestic economy . </P> <P> Under British rule, India's share of the world economy declined from 24.4% in 1700 down to 4.2% in 1950 . India's GDP (PPP) per capita was stagnant during the Mughal Empire and began to decline prior to the onset of British rule . India's share of global industrial output declined from 25% in 1750 down to 2% in 1900 . At the same time, the United Kingdom's share of the world economy rose from 2.9% in 1700 up to 9% in 1870 . The British East India Company, following their conquest of Bengal in 1757, had forced open the large Indian market to British goods, which could be sold in India without tariffs or duties, compared to local Indian producers who were heavily taxed, while in Britain protectionist policies such as bans and high tariffs were implemented to restrict Indian textiles from being sold there, whereas raw cotton was imported from India without tariffs to British factories which manufactured textiles from Indian cotton and sold them back to the Indian market . British economic policies gave them a monopoly over India's large market and cotton resources . India served as both a significant supplier of raw goods to British manufacturers and a large captive market for British manufactured goods . </P> <P> British territorial expansion in India throughout the 19th century created an institutional environment that, on paper, guaranteed property rights among the colonisers, encouraged free trade, and created a single currency with fixed exchange rates, standardised weights and measures and capital markets within the company - held territories . It also established a system of railways and telegraphs, a civil service that aimed to be free from political interference, a common - law and an adversarial legal system . This coincided with major changes in the world economy--industrialisation, and significant growth in production and trade . However, at the end of colonial rule, India inherited an economy that was one of the poorest in the developing world, with industrial development stalled, agriculture unable to feed a rapidly growing population, a largely illiterate and unskilled labour force, and extremely inadequate infrastructure . </P>

Explain the present position and problem of cotton industry in india