unit 2: establishment of english east india company … 3rd sem/bachelor degree... · though the...

UNIT 2: ESTABLISHMENT OF ENGLISH EAST INDIACOMPANY

Unit Structure

2.1 Learning Objectives

2.2 Introduction

2.3 Battle of Plessey

2.3.1 Causes

2.3.2 Events

2.3.3 Significances

2.4 Battle of Baxur

2.4.1 Causes

2.4.2 Events

2.4.3 Significances

2.5 Let Us Sum Up

2.6 Further Reading

2.7 Answers to Check Your Progress

2.8 Model Questions

2.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

After going through this unit, you will be able to-

Know the causes of the battle of Plessey,

Analyse the events and results of battle of Plessey,

Trace the origin of the battle of Baxur,

Analyse the events and results of the battle of Baxur.

2.2 INTRODUCTION

India had close commercial relations with European countries from

very early times. In 1453 when the Ottoman Empire conquered Asia-Minor

and captured Constantinople, the old trading routes between the East and

2 4 History (Block 1)

the West came under Turkish control. Therefore by the later part of the

fifteenth century and the beginning of the sixteenth century, the European

countries began the search for new trade route to establish trade relations

with the East. As a result, the Portuguese navigator Vasco-da-Gama

discovered a new sea route to India. By using this route many European

powers entered into India. They tried to establish their commercial as well

as political control over India. In this race the British ultimately became

successful. They established their empire over India and continued their

rule for the next two hundred years. How the British East India Company

converted itself from a mere trading company to a political power makes

an interesting study. In this unit we are going to discuss about the

establishment of East India Company in India. We will focus on their

occupation of Bengal in this unit.

Coming of the East India Company

In 1599, a group of English merchants, known as the ‘Merchant

Adventurer’ formed a commercial organization called the East India

Company, to trade with the Eastern countries. On December 31, 1600,

Elizabeth, the Queen of England, granted to this company the monopoly of

trade in the East for fifteen years by a charter. In 1608 the first British ship

reached India and sent Captain Hawkins and Sir Thomas Roe to the court

of the Mughal Emperor Jahangir to obtain royal favours. Consequently, the

Company was given permission to open factories at several places in India.

From the very beginning they tried to establish their political control over

the territory where their factories were situated.

Conditions in South India were more favourable to the Company,

because they did not have to face a strong local government there. The

English opened their first factory in the South at Masaulipatam. Then they

got Madras on lease from a local ruler. Now they shifted their activities

here. The island of Bombay was acquired by the East India Company from

Portugal in 1668 as part of the dowry of Catherine of Bragenze who became

the Queen of king Charles II.

2 5History (Block 1)

Establishment of English East India Company Unit 2

In eastern India the East India Company had opened its first factories

in Orissa in 1633.In 1651 it was given permission to trade at Hughli in Bengal.

Now the Company desired an independent settlement in Bengal. So in

1686, the English declared a war on the Mughal Emperor, Aurangzeb. The

English were defeated and were driven out of their factories in Bengal.

Their factories at Surat, Masaulipatam and Vishakhapatam were besieged.

They now expressed their willingness to trade under the protection of the

Indian rulers. The Mughal authority readily agreed.

In 1698, the Company acquired the Zamindari of the three villages

Sutanati, Kolkota and Govindapur, where it built Fort William. The villages

soon grew into a city, known as Calcutta (Modern Kolkata). In 1717 the

Mughal Emperor Farrukhsiyar issued a Farman granting old privileges of

carrying on duty free trade in Bengal. Similar permission was also received

in Hyderabad and Surat.

2.3 BATTLE OF PLASSEY

2.3 1 CAUSES

Bengal was a very fertile and rich province of India. The East India

Company and its servants had highly profitable trading interests in the

province. The Farman of 1717 by the Mughal Emperor granted them freedom

to export and import their goods in Bengal without paying taxes and the

right to issue dastaks for the movement of such goods. The Company

servants were also permitted to trade, but were not covered by this Farman.

This Farman was a source of conflict between the Company and the Nawab

of Bengal because it meant less revenue for the Bengal government. The

power to issue dastaks for the Company’s goods was misused by the

Company’s servants. All the Nawabs of Bengal from Murshid Quli Khan to

Alivardi Khan had compelled the Company to pay tax and firmly suppressed

the misuse of dastaks.

In 1756 Siraj-ud-Daula succeeded his grandfather Alivardi Khan. He

demanded that the Company should trade on the same basis as in the

times of Murshid Quli Khan .The English refused to comply and levied heavy

Farman: Invitation

to report to

someone.

Dastaks: Special

cert if icates, by

using which

commercial goods

could be

transported from

one place to

another in Bengal

without paying any

taxes.


Establishment of English East India CompanyUnit 2

duty on Indian goods entering Calcutta, which was under their control. All

this annoyed the Nawab. He also suspected that the Company was favouring

his rivals for the throne of Bengal. Following were the main causes for the

outbreak of the Battle of Plassey-

Bengal was a rich and prosperous province. The British were

anxious to occupy this region. They were looking for an opportunity

to conquer it. Siruj-ud-Daulah, the Nawab of Bengal, was an

incompetent and weak ruler. The British thought that they could

easily subjugate him.

In 1756, Seven Year War broke out in Europe. Both the French and

British began to fortify their settlements in Bengal as they feared an

attack from each other. Siruj-ud-Daulah asked both of them to

demolish their fortifications. The French carried out his orders but

the British refused to do so.

The British had also not received any permission from the Mughal

Emperor to fortify their settlements. Nawab Siruj-ud Daulah could

not tolerate this.

The British officers had begun to misuse the trading concessions

given to them by the Mughal Emperor in 1716.

The British had granted asylum to the enemies of Siruj-ud Daulah

which embittered relations between them.

The British were hatching conspiracies against the Nawab with some

Hindu chiefs. One of them was Kishan Das. It also annoyed Siruj-

ud-Daulah.

In 1756, Siruj-ud-Daulah occupied the British colony of Kasim Bazar.

He next captured Fort William and Calcutta. It is said that the Nawab

imprisoned 146 English men in a small dingy dark room. Next day,

when the door of the room was opened, only 23 prisoners came

out alive. This incident is called the Black Hole Incident.

Clive hatched a conspiracy with Amir Chand, a rich Hindu merchant,

and Mir Jaffar, the Nawab’s commander-in –chief against Siruj-ud-

Daulah. According to their plan, it was decided that Clive with a

contingent of army would march to Plassey. Mir Jaffar, along with



his army would desert Siruj-ud-Daulah and join Clive. Nawab Siruj-

ud-Daulah would be deposed and Mir Jaffar be installed as the

Nawab of Bengal in his place.

2.3.2 EVENTS

Clive marched towards Murshidabad, the capital of Siruj- ud- Daulah

with a small army of 8000 European soldiers and 2100 Indian sepoys and

10 guns only. Siruj-ud-Daulah too with an army of about 70,000 and 50

guns marched from his capital. It was an unequal fight. The two armies

met at Plassey. The traitor Mir Jafar and Rai Durlabh took no part in the

fighting. Only a small group of Nawab’s soldiers led by Mir Madan and Mohan

Lal fought bravely. The Nawab was forced to flee and put to death by Mir

Jafar’s son Miran.

2.3.3 SIGNIFICANCES

Though the battle of Plassey was only a small battle from military point of

view, politically its importance in the history of India is indeed great.

The Battle of Plassey paved the way for the British to establish

themselves in Bengal and eventually the whole of India.

Mir Jafar was appointed the Subedar of Bengal. He awarded the

British with much wealth for this favour. Besides he gave them

the district of Twenty Four Parganas in the South of Calcutta

They also got a huge sum of money as compensation. Mir Jafar

soon realized that it was impossible to meet the demands of the

company.

In 1760 the British forced the Nawab of Bengal to make his son-

in-law, Mir Qasim as the Nawab of Bengal.

The battle brought many important changes in the position of the

East India Company. Before this battle, it was only a trading

company but this battle made them a political power in Bengal. It

also greatly improved their financial position which helped them

in defeating the French in the Third Battle of Carnatic.



LET US KNOWCauses of defeat of Siruj-ud-Daulah and success of

East India Company

1. Siruj-ud-Daulah had to face the opposition of his

relatives. They challenged the claim of Siruj-ud-Daulah to the

Nawabship of Bengal.2. The British instigated the Hindu traders and merchants to oppose

Siruj-ud-Daulah.3. Nawab was also deceived by his treacherous servants. They took

bribes from the British and helped them against the Nawab.4. The Nawab was an inexperienced person and lacked political

foresight.5. The Nawab had no knowledge about the strength of the British. He

attacked Calcutta without any preparation.6. Nawab made a mistake by capturing the French Colony at Chander

Nagar, now he could not expect any help from the French.

CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

Answer the following questions:

Q.No. 1: Name the Mughal emperor who issues a

Farman in 1717?

.......................................................................................................................

Q. No. 2: Who succeeded Alivardi Khan in Bengal?

................................................................................................................................

Q. No. 3: In which year did Siruj- ud- Daulah occupy the British colony

at Kasim Bazar?

......................................................................................................................

Q. No. 4: Who was Amir Chand?

......................................................................................................................



2.4 BATTLE OF BUXAR

2.4.1 CausesMir Jaffar was not a capable ruler. He led a luxurious life and wasted

money of the state on his own pleasure. The people were not satisfied with

him and the English also no longer cared for him because his resources

were completely exhausted and they could no longer enrich themselves at

his cost. The new British Governor General deposed Mir Jaffar and appointed

his son-in- low Mir Qasim as Nawab of Bengal. Mir Qasim displayed

considerable ability and had a chance been given to him, there was every

probability that he would have solved the financial problem which he was

struggling. But the opportunity of doing so was denied to him. The servants

of the company first of all demanded considerable sums of money as

personal presents. Next, they asserted that they had the right to trade in

country’s produce without paying any taxes. The result was that Qasim

lost his chief source of income and all his efforts to improve the financial

condition of the country were rendered useless. Mir Qasim determined to

put himself beyond the pale of English control. He removed his capital to

Monghre which was far off from Calcutta. He then abolished all traits and

duties throughout his dominions and remitted all duties on European and

Indian traders alike. Then he put an end to the concessions which the

employees of the Company enjoyed. He also began to recruit a large and

trained army. It was now clear that Mir Qasim was no longer willing to

remain a puppet in the hands of British.

The British decided to depose Mir Qasim and declared war on him.

The British seized Patna, but Mir Qasim recaptured the town. The British

send an army against Mir Qasim and the latter was defeated in three

successive wars at Gheria, Udwanulla and Monghyr. Mir Qasim fled away

to Oudh and took refuge at the court of Shuja-ud-Daulah, where he met the

Mughal emperor Shah Alam-II.

2.4.2 EVENTSThe three Indian princes, Mir Qasim- ruler of Bengal, Shuja-ud-

Daulah-ruler of Oudh and Shah Alam-II-Mughal emperor made an alliance



to combine their forces to put a check on the rising power of the English in

Bengal. A combined force of 20,000 armies marched against the British.

The opposing armies met at Baxur where Major Munro defeated the armies

of three allied forces in 1764. The English followed up the success in the

following year; they completely defeated Shuja-ud-Daulah at Kara in 1765.

Nizam-ud-Daulah a son of Mir Jaffar was made Nawab of Bengal. But the

general administrations of province, which include law and order and army

organisation, were in the hands of Mohammed Raza whom the British

appointed as his Naib. But the real control of Bengal was in the hands of

British.

Nizamat: Control over the administration. Diwani: The right to collect

revenue In 1765 the company signed a treaty with the Nawab of Bengal

Nizam-ud-Daulah and got the Nizamat of Bengal. The Company secured

the Diwani of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa from Shah Alam who was still the

titular head of the Mughal Empire. Thus, the Company’s control over Bengal

was legalized.

LET US KNOWThe ‘Massacre of Patna’ was to take direct action against

the British, Ellis, the English agent at Patna, attacked and

seized Patna. However, the Nawab’s forces soon re-

captured it and took 2000 Englishmen as prisoners. In August 1763, the

English troops headed by Major Adams defeated the Nawab’s force at

Katwa, Gheria and Udayanal. A dejected Mir Qasim returned to Patna

where he ordered the slaughter of all the captured Englishmen. This event

came to be known as Massacre of Patna.

Treaty of Allahabad and Grant of Diwani to the British

After the defeat of Indian forces at the Battle of Buxer, Clive

proceeded to sign Allahabad Treaty with the Indian defeated rulers. Clive

restored Oudh (except the districts of Allahabad and Kara) to Shah Shujah

in return for Rs 50 lakh as war indemnity. Clive gave districts of Allahabad



and Kara to Shah Alam-II and obtained from him the grant of Diwani to

Bengal, Bihar and Orissa.

Significance of the Treaty

Though theoretically, the British had been granted the right of

Diwani i.e. to collect the revenues of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa, it actually

made the British the masters of these territories. The nawab of Bengal

was reduced to the position of a pensioner of the British. Clive however did

not take over the administration of the country. He entrusted the function of

land revenue and custom collection, civil and military criminal justice and

police to the Deputy Nawab Raja Khan in Bengal and Shitab Rai in Bihar.

The Deputy Nawabs were to administer really in the interest of the Company

while maintaining only in name the sovereignty of the Mughal Emperor and

authority of the Nawab. The British had become the real rulers of Bengal

and had become the most powerful political authority in India.

Thus the Battle of Baxur completed what Plassey had begun; it

not only defeated the Nawab of Bengal but of the Mughal Empire as well as

of the Nawab of Oudh.

CHECK YOUR PROGRESSAnswer the following questions:

Q.No 5: Who succeeded Mir Jaffar in Bengal?

...........................................................................................................................

Q.No 6: Who was Shuja- ud- Daulah?

..........................................................................................................................

Q.No 7: Who headed the English army at Baxur?

......................................................................................................................

Q. No 8: What do you mean by the ‘right of Diwani’?

......................................................................................................................

Q. No 9: Who by the Allahabad Treaty gained the districts of Allahabad

and Kara?

.........................................................................................................................

Q. No. 10: Name the provinces which lost their Diwani right to the English

by the Allahabad Treaty.

............................................................................................................



2.5 LET US SUM UP

After going through this unit, you have learnt-

The factors responsible for the Battle of Plassey,

The internal clashes within the officers and jealousy of nearer and

dearer of the Bengal ruler helped a lot to the British in their success at

the Battle of Plassey.

Battle of Plassey gave a grip to the East India Company in the Indian

administration.

Mir Qasim, the new ruler of Bengal however was an egoist person

and he did not want to be a puppet at the hands of the British,

accordingly he made alliance with his contemporary ruler of Oudh

and the Mughal Emperor against the British and stood against the

British at Baxur.

The combined force of Indian rulers could not succeed at the Battle

of Baxur and the British through this Battle theoretically established

political power in India.

2.6 FURTHER READING

1. Chopra P.N. , Puri B.N., Das M.N. Pradhan A.C. (1996) Anew advanced history of India, New Delhi, Prentice Hall of India.

2. Majumdar, R.C. Ray Choudhury, H.C. Dutta , K, (1996)An Advanced History of India, New Delhi, Macmillan India Ltd.

3. Grover, B.L. Mehta, Alaka (2011) A New look at Modern Indian His-tory, New Delhi, C. Chand & Company Ltd.

4. Banerjee A.C. (1985) History of India , Calcutta, A Mukherjee & Co.

Pvt. Ltd.

2.7 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

Answer to the question no.1: Farukhsiyar



Answer to the question no.2: Siruj- ud- Daulah

Answer to the question no.3: 1756

Answer to the question no.4: A rich merchant of Bengal

Answer to the question no.5: Mir Qasim

Answer to the question no.6: Nawab of Oudh

Answer to the question no.7: Major Munro

Answer to the question no.8: The right to collect revenue

Answer to the question no.9: Mughal emperor Shah Alam-II

Answer to the question no.10: Bengal, Bihar and Orissa

2.8 MODEL QUESTIONS

A) VERY SHORT QUESTIONS (Answer each question within 50

words)

1. Mention two reasons for the outbreak of the Battle of Plassey.

2. Who was the ruler of Bengal during the Battle of Plassey?

3. Who was Shah Alam II?

4. Name the rulers made alliance against the British on the eve of the

Battle of Baxur.

B) SHORT QUESTIONS (Answer each question within 150 words)

1. Briefly discuss the significance of the Battle of Baxur.

2. What is the meaning of right of Diwani?

3. Analyse the factors responsible for the defeat of Siruj-ud-Daulah at

the hands of British.

4. Write a short note on the Battle of Baxur.

C) LONG QUESTIONS (Answer each question within 300-500 words)

1. Discuss the Battle of Plassey in your own words.

2. Why the Battle of Baxur was more important than the Battle of

Plassey? Give reasons.

*******



UNIT 3: ROBERT CLIVE AND HIS REFORMS

UNIT STRUCTURE


3.2 Introduction

3.3 Robert Clive and His Reforms

3.4 An Estimate of Robert Clive

3.4.1 Military Settlement

3.4.2 Political Settlement

3.5 Dual Administration in Bengal

3.6 Let Us Sum Up

3.7 Further Reading


3.9 Model Questions

3.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After going through this unit, you will be able to:

Discuss the Robert Clive’s reforms for the British administration in

India.

Estimate the Robert Clive’s role for the establishment of British rule

in India.

Assess the dual government in Bengal and its impact.

3.2 INTRODUCTIONIn this unit, we are going to discuss about the Robert Clive’s reforms

for the British administration in India. He established the military and political

supremacy in Bengal and thus, together with the Warren Hastings; he was

regarded as one of the key figures in establishment of British rule in India.

In his first Governorship from 1757 to 1760, he got military triumph upon

the French, Dutch and Nawab of Bengal (Siraj-Ud-Daula). In the second

phase of his Governorship from 1765 to 1767, he solved the political problem


of Bengal, Oudh and Mughal emperor. He initiated and implemented dual

administration in Bengal, which had adverse impact.

3.3 ROBERT CLIVE AND HIS REFORMS

Robert Clive was born in 29 September 1725 Styche Hall, Market,

Drayton, Shropshire, England. Clive served East India Company as a clerk,

then as a trader, as a soldier, a commanding Officer and finally twice

Governor of Bengal. Clive arrived at Fort St George, Madras in June 1744.

When in 1746 French attacked Madras, Clive escaped south to Fort St.

David and joined the East India Company’s army. Commissioned as an

ensign, he served until peace was declared in 1748 (First Carnatic War). In

1749, Major Stringer Lawrence, the first Commander in Chief in India (1697-

1775) appointed Clive commissary at for St. George with the rank of captain.

The Council of Calcutta first elected him as a Governor in June 1758 and

the home authorities of the Company legalized the election in December

1756. However, he returned to England in February 1760 and back to India

in May 1765 to serve his second term as a Governor. Because of his

military skills and achievements, William Pitt, the elder, the Prime Minister

of England (1759-1806), describes Clive as a “heaven born general.”

As a resolution of taskmaster and the boldness of a dictator, Clive took

decisive action in case of administrative reforms for the British rule in India.

We are now going to discuss the administrative reforms of Robert Clive

through the following sub sections:

Civil Reforms:

During the time of Robert Clive, Company transformed into a political

body, needed administrative reforms. The three revolutions of Bengal namely

1757, 1760 and 1764 enriched the governors and councilors, but

demoralized the servants of the Company from top to bottom. The

Company’s servants than misusing the dastak (trade permit by which trader

of East India Company were exempted from paying customs or transit

duties on their private trade) began to indulge private trade. In lieu of

Company’s interest, servants were busy in self-advancement. Due to this,


Robert Clive and His ReformsUnit 3

Clive compelled the servants of the Company to sign ‘covenants’ by

prohibiting acceptance of presents. He forbade the servants of the Company

from indulging in private trade and made payment of internal duties

obligatory.

Clive to compensate the private traders for their low salaries and

loss of income sought to regularize and control of internal trade. A Society

of Trade was formed in August 1765, which had monopoly of trade in salt,

betelnut and tobacco. All the production and imports into Bengal was

purchased by Society of Trade and sold it at selected centres through the

retailers. The profits from this trade went to the superior servants of the

Company on a graduated scale.

The evils of private trade raised the price of ordinary commodities,

which suffered the people of Bengal. Clive resorted to abolish plunder of

the individual servants of the Company, but on a collective basis sought to

put the plundering activities of the Company’s servants. But this scheme

was disallowed by the Court of Directors in 1766. Society of Trade also

abolished in January 1767 by Clive.

Military Reforms: In 1763, the Court of Directors sent orders for

reduction of the double bhatta (field allowances) paid to the military Officers

in Bengal and bhatta should be given based on bhatta of Madras army.

Based on this order, Clive with effect from 1 January 1766 issued ordered

that double allowance would be paid only to Officers on service outside the

frontiers of Bengal and Bihar. Here it is mentionable that double bhatta

originally granted to the active service. This was continued by Mir Jaffar in

times of peace also. Since then military Officers considered bhatta as a

part of their salary. Thus, the allowance of Bengal army Officers was twice

as high as of corresponding Officers in the Madras army.

Due to the order of Clive, the whole brigades stationed at Monghyr

and Allahabad organized resistance. The Brigades calculated that the

possible advance of the Marathas would compel Clive to withdraw the order.

Even one of them planned to assassinate Clive. Clive strongly takes action

in this regard. He accepted all resignations and ordered to arrest and trial


Robert Clive and His Reforms Unit 3

of all ring leaders. Clive’s resolution proved effective and the White Mutiny

was suppressed.

Revenue Reforms (Dual System):

As Nizam-ud-daula (After Mir Jaffar’s death Nizam-Ud-Daula was

made as a king of Bengal)) surrendered the Nizamat functions on conditions

to the British and in August 1765 Shah Alam II (the tiller head of Mughal

Empire) granted the Diwani functions in Bengal to the Company, thus path

was ready for imposing dominion upon revenue administration of Bengal.

But at this time Robert Clive was not ready to direct administration on

revenue. To exercise of Diwani functions, Company appointed two Deputy

Diwans, Muhammad Reza Khan for Bengal and Raja Shitab Roy for Bihar.

In the way the whole administration Nizamat as well as Diwani was exercised

through Indian agents, though the actual power rested with the Company.

This system was known as the Dual system. In actual practice, Company

exercised all political power and used the Indians as mere instruments for

their purposes. Clive justified his dual system on the following grounds:

An open take over of power would have invited revolt from the Indian

princes and thus embroil them in a war.

Company did not have trained personnel to run the work of

administration. The few servants of the Company were ignorant of

Indian practices, languages and customs. So, it will fruitful for British

It was doubtful whether the French, Dutch and other foreign powers

would acknowledge the Company’s authority.

Clive understood that Court of Directors opposed to the acquisition

of territories for that might interfere with their trade and profits, as

Directors were more interested in commerce and finance than

territorial acquisitions.

Clive’s open assumption was that political power could create

complications in England’s diplomatic relations with France, Holland,

Portugal or Sweden and might urge those powers to join in an anti-

British front.3 8 History (Block 1)


Clive was afraid that an open assumption of political power might

lead to interference in the affairs of the Company by the British

Parliament.

CHECK YOUR PROGRESSQ 1: Write the period of Robert Clive’s first

Governorship in Bengal.

............................................................................................................

Q 2: Which year Society of Trade was formed?

....................................................................................................

Q 3: In which items monopoly was imposed through the Society of

Trade?

....................................................................................................

Q 4: Which year Robert Clive ordered to abolish double bhatta paid to

the military officers of Bengal?

....................................................................................................

Q 5: Who offered the Diwani of Bengal to British?

....................................................................................................

Q 6: Who was first appointed as a Deputy Diwan in Bengal?

....................................................................................................

3.4 An Estimate of Robert Clive

In the above, we learn about the reforms of Robert Clive. Now to

estimate Robert Clive, let us discuss about the military and political

settlement of him in detail in the following heads:

3.4.1 Military Settlement

The military settlement of Robert Clive can be discussed through

the following sub-sections.



Siege of Arcot (August 1751, Second Carnatic War): As a part of

Anglo-French war in Europe, the hostilities broke out in India, in 1746. From

1746 to 1763, three Carnatic Wars took place in India. In the first Carnatic

War (1746-48) on 21 September 1746, Madras town capitulated to the

French. Before the peace arrived in India British had sent an expedition to

Tanjore , in which Clive promoted to Lieutenant and he lead bravely to the

soldiers. Later Madras was return to the British as a part of the peace

agreement in 1749 (Treaty of Aix-La- Chapelle in Europe).

In the second Carnatic war against the French, Robert Clive tactically

captured Arcot (August 1751), the capital of Carnatic, with a few hundred

soldiers (210 men). It encouraged the English army to push their schemes

with greater vigor and demoralized the French and Chanda Sahib (ruler of

Carnatic). Very soon, English captured Trichinipoly, defeating Chanda Sahib.

Clive established Muhammad Ali (son of Nawab Anwar-Ud-Din, ruler of

Carnatic before Chanda Sahib) on the throne of Carnatic. He left Madras in

1753.

Winning the Battle of Plassey: Clive returned to India in July 1755

to act as Deputy Governor of Fort St. David at Cuddalore. As a head of the

post he got the news of the capitulation of Calcutta (20 June 1756) by Siraj-

Ud-Daula, (succeeded as the ruler of Bengal by grandfather Alibardi Khan

in early 1756), directed an army towards Calcutta. Clive after reaching in

14 December 1756 bribed Manik Chand, Nawab Siraj Ud-Daula’s Officer in

Charge of Calcutta and he surrendered Calcutta to the English after making

a show of resistance. In February 1757, Clive signed Treaty of Alinagar with

the Nawab, which restored English their former privileges of trade, granting

permission to fortify Calcutta and promising compensation for the losses

suffered by the English.

After that, Robert Clive to defeat Siraj-Ud-Daula made a conspiracy

with Mirjafar, (the Commander-in chief of the Nawab’s army), Rai Durlabh,

Jagat Seth, (an influential banker of Bengal) and Omi Chand, an intermediary.

By the conspiracy, it was planned to make Mirjafar as Nawab who in turn

was to reward the services of the Company and pay compensation for the

losses suffered by them earlier.



After making conspiracy, Robert Clive’s army and Siraj is army

reached on the battlefield of Plassey, a mango grove 22 miles south of

Murshidabad. The English army consisted of 950 European infantry, 100

European artillery, 50 English sailors and 2100 Indian sepoys. Treacherous

General MirJafar commanded the Nawab’s large army. Only Mir Mudan

and Mohan Lal got the better of the English troops and forced Clive to

withdraw his forces behind the trees. When Mir Mudan died, the troops of

Siraj surrendered. Siraj-Ud-Daula captured and put to death.

Perhaps the battle of Plassey was in the game of diplomacy of Clive.

He played on the fears of the Jagat Seths, worked up the ambition of Mirjafar

and won a victory without fighting. In general, he made an alliance with the

dissatisfied nobles of the Nawab Siraj Ud-Daula and reduced the new

Nawab Mirjafar to the position of a puppet ruler. The Battle of Plassey in

1757 paved the way for the conquest of India by the British and Clive became

the defacto masters of Bengal.

Blow to the power of Dutch: When Clive suspected that the

Nawab of Bengal was in league with the Dutch, he attacked the Dutch, by

land and sea. The Dutch made peace at Chinsura and agreed not to fortify

their settlements in India.

3.4.2 Political Settlement

Robert Clive when recalled back to England, he returned to Bengal

as its Governor in May 1765. Clive settled the problem of Bengal, Oudh and

Mughal emperor politically for the Company’s interest as British defeated

the combined powers of Mir Qasim- Bengal ruler, Shuja-ud-Daula the ruler

of Oudh and Shah Alam II Mughal emperor in the Battle of Buxar in 1764.

This was one of the most decisive battles of Indian history, which

demonstrated the superiority of English arms. Likewise, the military

settlement, the political settlement can we discuss through the following

sub-sections:

Settlement of Bengal: Clive gradually changed the power of Bengal

and transferred the authority of the Government from the Nawab to the



Company. After the death of father Mir Jaffar, Nizam-Ud-Daula was made

king in February 1765 based on the following conditions:

The Nawab was to disband most of his army.

Nawab was to administer to Bengal through the Deputy Subedar who

to be nominated and dismissed by the Company only.

Nawab was to virtually surrender the Nizamat (Judicial power) to the

Company.

The above conditions made the British real power of Bengal, while

responsibility for administration rested on the shoulders of the Nawab of

Bengal.

Settlement with Oudh: Although Oudh ruler Shuja-ud-Daula was

the one of the allies of Mir Qasim in the Battle of Buxar, Robert Clive did not

want to annex Oudh. Rather he wanted to impose obligation upon Oudh

through friendly relations, as there were threats of attack from the two strong

power of the time- the Afghans under Ahmad Shah Abdali and the Marathas.

With this view, Robert Clive proceeded to Oudh, met Shuja-ud-Daula, at

Allahabad, and concluded with him the Treaty of Allahabad (16 August, 1765).

The terms of the Treaty were as follows:

Nawab will surrender Allahabad and Kara to Emperor Shah Alam.

Nawab agrees to pay Rs 50 lakhs to Company as war indemnity.

Balwant Singh, Zamindar of Benaras were given in full possession

of his estate.

Apart from the regular Treaty Nawab entered into an offensive and

defensive treaty with the Company. By this Treaty Nawab was bonded with

a mutual term by the British. By the term, Nawab will render gratuitous

military help to the Company in time of need and the Company to help the

Nawab with troops for the defense of his frontier. The cost of defense will

be paid by the Nawab to British. This friendly Treaty not only made the

Nawab a firm friend of the Company, but also created Oudh into a buffer

state.

Settlement with Shah Alam II: Robert Clive’s settlement with Shah

Alam II, (Mughal emperor) based on practical wisdom. As through the Treaty

of Allahabad (August 1765) Shah Alam was given Allahabad and Kora from



the Nawab of Oudh and he was taken under Company’s protection. In return,

Shah Alam was compelled to issue a firman dated 12 August 1765 granting

to the Company in perpetuity the Diwani of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa, which

legalized political gain of the Company in Bengal. Similarly, Company made

an annual payment of Rs 26 lakhs to Shah Alam and providing for the

expenses of the Nizamat of the said provinces, which was fixed at Rs 53

lakhs.

Thus, Robert Clive was regarded as the true founder of British rule

in India. He correctly understood the political situation of the time and took

bold step in this regard. He got more permanent results than the Duplex,

the French Advisory. His successful action against Arcot (1751) turned the

scales against the French in the Carnatics. In Bengal, he won the battle of

Plassey (1757) more tactically and made the King Mirjafar as a puppet

king. On the base of Bengal, English conquered south India and overthrow

the French, the political rivals in India. Above all, he transformed the trading

East India Company into a political power. When Clive was recalled in 1765,

he consolidated the gains of Company and regulated the Company’s relation

with the native states on a secured basis. Percival Spears mentioned that

Clive was not a founder but a harbinger of the future.

But, he was criticized by the historians. He had weakness upon

money, which was even criticized by the British Parliament. He collected

illegal presents, which created bad habits among his successors. By

organizing Society of Trade, he encouraged general plunder in Bengal. In

case of Dual Government scheme in Bengal, Clive’s paramount

consideration was establishment of English power and not welfare of the

people. The whole of Bengal was reduced to the position of an estate of the

East India Company. Clive failed himself as a Statesman. His administrative

settlement created difficulties to his successors. In case of establishment

of peace and order in this distracted land, Clive cannot claim any share,

which created disorder through the various expeditions in India.



CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

Q 7: Which year first Carnatic War took place?

.......................................................................................................

Q 8: Write the name of the capital of Carnatic.

.......................................................................................................

Q 9: Between whom Treaty of Alinagar was signed?

.......................................................................................................

Q 10: Where Plassey situatd?

.......................................................................................................

3.5 Dual Administration in Bengal

The dual administration was introduced by the Robert Clive as a

solution to the political problems of Bengal. Hereby Company acquired

real power while the responsibility for administration rested on the shoulders

of the Nawab of Bengal. But the Dual System proved ineffective and

unworkable, which created new problems in Bengal. Through the following

sub sections, the impact of dual administration in Bengal can be analyzed.

Administrative Breakdown: The dual control of the Nizamat

undermined its importance. As a result, the administration of law and order

virtually declined and the administration of justice became futile. The Nawab

had no power to enforce and provide justice and the Company refused to

take any responsibility in administration. Corruption increased largely and

the people of Bengal suffered lots. The Indian servants of the Company

badly treated by the masters and the Governor and the members of the

Council could not choose honest Indians.

Decline of Agriculture: Under the Dual system economic problems

increased. Land revenue was annually farmed out to the highest bidder.

The tax collectors or contractors had no permanent interest in the land.

The peasants suffered from over assessment, harshness of collection.

Thus, they compelled to sell their children to pay rents or even flee from

Bengal to jungles or joined the ranks of the robbers. At the same time, the



famine of 1770, which was one of the most terrible famines known in human

history, produced untold miseries and loss of life. Even during the famine,

land revenue was collected with severity while the servants of the Company

added to the misery by trading and profit in essentials articles of foodstuffs.

Trade and Commercial Disruption: The agricultural depression

followed the famine adversely affected trade and commerce. The

Company’s servants virtually monopolized the internal trade of Bengal

creating obstacles for the Indian merchants in the local markets. This was

admitted by Clive himself in the House of Commons that the Company’s

merchants traded not only as merchants but also as sovereigns. The famine

was due to the failure of the rains its effects were heightened by the

Company’s policies.

Industrial Backwardness: The weaving industry of Bengal,

particularly the silk and cotton industry received a setback. The Company

used political power to discourage its growth to hamper rivalry with silk

fabrics of England. In 1769, the Court of Directors sent orders urging Bengal

authorities to encourage the manufactures of raw silk and cotton and

discourage weaving of silk and cotton fabrics. Thus, the labourers were

compelled to work in the Company’s factories. The Company’s agents or

gomastahs oppressed the weavers by fines, imprisonments and forcing

bonds from them. These gomastahs registered a large number of weavers

in the books and did not permit them to work for any other. The monopoly in

internal trade led the Company to force the prices on raw materials like silk

and cotton to the disadvantage of the Indian producers.

Drain of Wealth: As the wealth of Bengal was inexhaustible and so

after the battle of Plassey Company controlled the Nawab of Bengal to

drain the wealth of the Province. The Company’s authorities no longer sent

money from England to purchase Indian goods. Goods were purchased

through collected revenues of Bengal and sold them abroad by the British.

These were known as the Company’s investment and formed a part of its

profits. Besides the British Government wanted its share of the profit and

demanded from the Company an annual payment of Rs 400,000. In the

years 1766, 1767 and 1768 alone, nearly 5.7 million were drained from



Bengal. The abuses of the Dual Government and drain of wealth led to the

impoverishment and depletion of the resources of Bengal.

Degradation of Morality of the People: The weaver and farmers

were begun to believing that if they labored more than they would have to

pay more. On the other hand, Government Officials would work no more.

Weavers were also not given their best for work and society became static.

CHECK YOUR PROGRESSQ 11: Write one impact upon agriculture due to the

dual administration in Bengal.

....................................................................................................

Q 12: Write one impact upon trade and commerce due to the dual

administration in Bengal.

.....................................................................................................

Q 13: Which industry received severe setback due to the dual

administration in Bengal?

3.6 LET US SUM UP

After going through this unit, you have learnt that,

Robert Clive made administrative reforms for the continuation of

British rule in India.

To stop the misuse of Dastak, Clive compelled the Company’s

servants to sign ‘covenants’. Clive to compensate the private traders

for their low salaries and loss of income formed ‘A Society of Trade’

in August 1765, later, which was abolished in January 1767 by

himself.

Clive reduced the double bhatta paid to the military Officers of

Bengal, which led White Mutiny. But Clive suppressed it.

Clive with small soldiers won the battle of Arcot in the second

Carnatic War. In the battle of Plassey he tactically defeated the

Siraj-ud-daula and became the real master of Bengal.



After Mir Jaffar’s death, Nizam-ud-daula was made as a dependent

ruler of Bengal. By the Treaty of Allahabad (16 August 1765) Shuja

–ud-daula, king of Oudh was made as a dependent state of British

and became the buffer state against Afghans and Marathas. From

the Shah Alam II British got the diwani of Bengal.

Dual administration had adverse impact on the administration and

economy of Bengal.

3.7 FURTHER READING

1. Bipan Chandra: History of Modern India

2. Hermann Kukle; Dietmar Rothermund: A History of India

3. Philip Lawson: The East India Company: A History

4. Douglas M. Peer: India under colonial rule: 1700-1885

5. Sekhar Bandhopadhyay: From Plassey to Partition: A History of

Modern India

6. B. L. Grover; S. Grover: A New Look of Modern Indian History

7. W Cooke Taylor: A popular History of British India

8. Percival Spear: The Oxford History of Modern India (1740-1975)

9. R. C. Majumdar: (Volume-I / Volume-II) British Paramountcy and

Indian Renaissance

3.8 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

Ans to Q No 1: 1757-1760

Ans to Q No 2: August 1765

Ans to Q No 3: Salt, betelnut and tobacco

Ans to Q No 4: 1 January 1766

Ans to Q No 5: Shah Alam II, Mughal Emperor

Ans to Q No 6: Muhammad Reza Khan

Ans to Q No 7: 21 September 1746

Ans to Q No 8: Arcot

Ans to Q No 9: Between Clive and Nawab Siraj-ud-daula



Ans to Q No10: Plassey situated in a mango grove, 22 miles south of

Murshidabad.

Ans to Q No11: Although the tax collectors or contractors had no permanent

interest in the land, but they over assessed, harassed the peasants for

collection of revenue, which suffered. They were compelled to sell their

children to pay rents or even flee from Bengal to jungles or joined the ranks

of the robbers.

Ans to Q No 12: The Company’s servants virtually monopolized the internal

trade of Bengal, which created obstacles for the Indian merchants in the

local markets.

Ans to Q No 13: Silk and cotton

3.9 MODEL QUESTIONS

A) Very Short Questions (Answer each question within 50 words)

Q 1: Write one justification of Clive’s dual Government in Bengal.

Q 2: Who was Shah Alam II?

Q 3: Write one term of the Treaty of Allahabad.

Q 4: Who was Nizam-ud-daula?

B) Short Questions (Answer each question in about 150 words)

Q 1: Write shortly about the civil reforms of Robert Clive.

Q 2: Write in short about the military reforms of Robert Clive.

Q 3: Define the term of ‘dual administration’ in Bengal.

Q 4: How did the Robert Clive behave against the ruler of Oudh?

C) Long Questions (Answer each question in about 300-500 words)

Q 1: Discuss the reforms of Robert Clive.

Q 2: Critically estimate Robert Clive as the Governor of Bengal.

Q 3: Analyze the impact of dual administration in Bengal.



UNIT 4: WARREN HASTINGS AND HIS REFORMS (1772-1785)

Unit Structure


4.2 Introduction

4.3 Administrative Reforms

4.3.1 Regulating Act

4.3.2 Pitt’s India Act

4.4 Revenue Reforms

4.5 Relation with Oudh

4.6 Estimate of Warren Hastings

4.7 Let Us Sum Up

4.8 Further Reading


4.10 Model Questions



Understand the administrative reforms introduced by Warren

Hastings.

Discuss the relationship between Company and Oudh during the

tenure of Warren Hastings.

Estimate Warren Hastings.

4.2 INTRODUCTION :

Warren Hastings was appointed as the Governor of Bengal in 1772.

His appointment opens a new chapter in the history of the East India

Company. He had to face the administrative challenges of newly acquired

Bengal province. At the same time he had to rehabilitate the finance of the4 9History (Block 1)

Company and improve its commerce. In this unit we will discuss reforms

he incorporated to stabilise the Company administration in India.

4.3 ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS

As the Dual administration established by Clive was not working up

to the mark and therefore the Court of Directors decided to end the Dual

System and in 1772 required the President and Council to ‘stand forth as

the Diwan’ and take over charge for the entire care and management of the

revenues of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. Warren Hastings dismissed the two

Deputy Diwans, Mohammad Reja Khan and Raja Shitab Rai. The Governor

and the Council formed the Board of ‘Revenue and the Company appointed

its officers called Collectors to manage revenue affairs. The treasury was

removed from Murshidabad to Calcutta. Thus the entire internal

administration was transferred to the servants of the Company and the

Nawab deprived of every share in the government. However, the Nawab

still lived in a state of sovereignty. Hastings also reorganised the household

of the Nawab of Bengal and appointed Munny Begum, the widow of Mir

Jaffar, as the guardian of the minor Nawab Mubarak-ud-daula. The allowance

of the Nawab was reduced from 32 1akhs to 16 lakhs. Further, Hastings

redefined relations with the Emperor. He stopped the payment of 26 Lakhs

of rupees annually paid to Emperor Shah Alam since 1765. The districts of

Allahabad and Kora assigned to the Emperor by Clive in 1765 were also

taken back and sold to the Nawab of Oudh for 50 lakhs of rupees. Though

the motivating force was economy, the pica put forward was that the

Emperor had accepted the protection of the Marathas. Thus Hastings tried

to seize all powers from Nawab to the Company. The two major

administrative reforms initiated during the period of Hastings by the British

government were the Regulating Act of 1773 and the Pitt’s India Act of

1784. Now we will discuss these acts in detail.


Warren Hastings and His Reforms (1772-1785)Unit 4

4.3.1 The Regulating Act, 1773In 1773, the British Parliament passed the Regulating Act which

made changes in the constitution of the Company and also in the

government of its territories. The Company had remained not only a trading

body but it had also acquired large possessions in India and had become a

political power. So the British government found it necessary to control its

administration.

The acquisition of Diwani of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa by the

Company led to the spread of chaos and confusion in these territories. The

servants of the Company amassed huge wealth by private trade and corrupt

practices. The Company paid huge amount of money to the British

government but in 1765 the financial position of the Company had

deteriorated to such an extent that the Company had to ask for loan from

its government. This gave the British Parliament an opportunity to step in

and regulate the affairs of Company in India by passing the Regulating Act

in 1773. The main provisions of the Regulating Act were as under-

The Governor of Bengal was henceforth to be known as the Governor

General of Bengal and warren Hastings was the first Governor Gen-

eral of Bengal.

The Act provided for the formation of a council of four members to

assist the Governor General.

In case of differences of opinion in the council, the decision of majority

of the present members was to prevail.

The presidencies of Bombay and Madras were subordinate to the

Governor General.

The numbers of members of Court of Directors was raised to 24 and

were to be elected for four years.

The Board of Directors was required to lay before the Secretary of

State everything dealing with civil and military administration of the

Company.

The Act sought to establish a Supreme Court at Calcutta.

The Company’s servants were prohibited from receiving bribes,

presents etc. from the native princes and people.5 1History (Block 1)

Warren Hastings and His Reforms (1772-1785) Unit 4

Significances of the Regulating Act

The Regulating Act despite all its shortcomings was a measure of

great constitutional significances. It was the first in the series of Acts of the

British Parliament that altered the structure of the British government in

India. The Act recognised the fact that the East India Company was not

merely a trading body. In fact it had emerged as a territorial power and had

assumed the responsibility for the administration of a vast country. It aimed

at improving the tone of the Company’s administration through the control

of British Parliament. The Governor General and the Council were required

to be obedient to the Court of Directors.

4.3.2 The Pitt’s India Act of 1784

The Regulating Act proved to be failure as it had many shortcomings.

The Governor General was powerless in dealing with his own Council. He

was not given the power of veto and could be over-ruled by a majority of his

Council. The Governor General had no effective control over the internal

policies of the Governors of Bombay and Madras. Again after the loss of

British colonies in America in 1783, the British Government feared that it

might lose the Indian possessions. So the British government felt the

necessity of putting some more checks on the powers of the East India

Company. The main provisions of the Pitt’s India Act 1784 were as follows-

The Act established a Board of Control comprising six members

out of which two were to be British Cabinet minister.

The Board of Control was to direct, superintend and control all civil

and military affairs of the Company.

The Act greatly increased the powers of the Governor General. He

had now complete control over all the military and civil

administration of the Company in India.

The presidencies of Madras and Bombay were also subordinated

to the control of the Governor General and his Council.

The Directors of the Company were empowered to appoint all

officers of the Company, but the British Crown had the right to

recall or remove of them.

The name of the

Act come from the

then British Prime

minister Pitt the

Younger



Significances of the Act : The Pitt’s India Act was a great landmark

in the constitutional history of India.

The Act practically placed the Company and its officers under the

control of the British Parliament.

The Act considerably strengthened the position of the Governor

General in his relations with the presidencies. It specifically laid down

that disobedience on the part of the Presidencies would result in

their suspension.

The Act introduced a new principle in the Company’s relations with

the native princes. The Company was not to interfere in the affairs

of the native states for the extension of its dominions in India.

The Act established the general framework in which the Government

of India was carried on till 1857.

Despite these merits of the Act, there were some defects in it. The

Act established two centres of power namely, the Board of Control and the

Board of Directors. There were possibilities of conflicts between these two

authorities.


Q. No 1: In which year the Regulating Act was

passed in the British Parliament?

......................................................................................................................

Q. No 2: The term of a member of the Court of Directors

was.........................years. (Fill in the blank)

......................................................................................................................

Q. No 3: The...............................Act sought to establish a supreme

court at Calcutta. (Fill in the blank)

......................................................................................................................

Q. No 4: Mention any one provisions of the Pitt’s India Act 1784.

...................................................................................................................................................



4.4 Revenue Reforms

The system of land revenue administration initiated by the Company

in the initial stage was nothing more than on experimental basis. They were

unable to initiate a proper revenue system.

In order to work out a satisfactory system of land revenue

administration, Warren Hastings also resorted to the devise of

experimentation and tried to evolve a system by the proverbial method of

trial and error.

In 1772 Warren Hastings made a five-year settlement of land revenue

by the crude method of farming out estates to the highest bidder. Acting on

the presumption that the zamindars were mere tax-gatherers with no

proprietary rights, in the settlement of 1772 no preference was given to

them and in fact in certain cases they were actually discouraged from

bidding.

In 1773 changes were made in the machinery of collection and

named the system as quinquennial settlement. The Collectors who had

been found to be corrupt and indulged in private trade were replaced by

Indian Diwans in the districts. Six Provincial Councils were set up to

supervise the work of Indian Diwans. The Overall charge rested with the

Committee of Revenue at Calcutta. The trend of Hastings’ Mind was towards

centralization and he desired to ultimately centralise all functions into the

hands of the committee at Calcutta.

This settlement was a miserable failure and the peasants suffered

greatly. Most for the revenue- farmers were mere speculators, had no

permanent interest in the land and therefore tried to extort the maximum

sum from the cultivators by way of land revenue. The officers of the East

India Company themselves participated in the bidding through their servants

or banias. It had been observed that even Warren Hastings himself was

not free from this greed, e.g. there is a case of a grant registered in the

name of a ten-year old son of Kuntu Baboo, an Indian servant of W’arren

Hastings. Further, the land had been over-assessed and the state’s demand

fixed very high. Added to it was the harshness in tile method of collection.



The result was that many revenue contractors fell in heavy arrears, many

had to be arrested for default and the ryot deserted the land.

After the expiry of the quinquennial settlement in 1776, Warren

Hastings reverted to the system of annual settlement on the basis of open

auction to the highest bidder. Preference was given to the zamindars in

making the settlement. Some changes were made in the machinery of

collection in 1781. The Provincial Councils were abolished. The Collectors

were re-appointed in the districts but were to have no power in the settlement

of revenue. The entire work of supervision was concentrated in the hands

of the Committee of Revenue at Calcutta.

We may say that Warren Hastings failed to devise a satisfactory

system of land revenue settlement. His bias towards centralisation worked

against an effective system of land revenue collection or acquisition of

detailed knowledge regarding revenue matters.

4.5 Relations with Oudh :Clive had sought to create Oudh as buffer state for the territories of

the Company. Every year the Nawab had asked for the help of the Company’s

troops without payment of extra expenses which meant heavy loss of the

Company. In short, the relations with the Nawab were very unsatisfactoryand he was looked upon with suspicion.

Warren Hastings felt the clear need of re-defining relations with the

Nawab of Oudh or alternatively the latter might join the Marathas for thepartition of Rohilkhand or might even succumb to a Maratha-Rohilla

combination. Hastings personally proceeded to Banaras and concluded

the Treaty of Banaras (1773) with the Nawab. By this treaty, Allahabad washanded over to the Nawab for Rs. 50 lakhs. The Nawab agreed to increase

the subsidy of the Company’s troops from Rs. 30,000 a month to Rs. 2,

10,000 a month for one brigade when called for service. Further, a secretclause provided that in case the Nawab asked for the help of the Company’s

troops against the Rohillas he would pay a further sum of Rs. 40 lakhs to

the Company. Warren Hastings defended the Treaty of Banaras before theCouncil thus— discontinuance of the Emperor’s allowance, a safe frontier,

a compact state of Oudh financial gain and the alliance between the Marathas

and the Nawab of Oudh rendered impossible.



4.6 Estimate of Warren Hastings

Warren Hastings is a very controversial figure in modern Indian

history. He raped, despoiled and conquered India and showed the British

aggressive side to India. Macaulay talked of his hard heart and lax principles

when he wrote, “The rules of justice, the sentiments of humanity, the plighted

faith of treaties were in his view as nothing when opposed to the immediate

interests of the state. His only steadfast principle was that Might is Right.

He left behind a dark trail of misery, desolation and famines in Bengal,

Banaras and Oudh”. Philip Francis reported that once a flourishing and

rich India was reduced to ‘beggary and ruin’. However, his contribution to

the cause of British dominion was really great. At a time when the overseas

possessions of Great Britain witnessed rebellion, defeat or humiliation, in

India the British position remained unharmed. Warren Hastings saved the

Company’s position in the face of great difficulties. In this field of

administrative reforms he laid the foundations where the superstructure

was raised by Cornwallis.

CHECK YOUR PROGRESSAnswer the following questions:Q. No 5: Who introduced the quinquennial settlement

of revenue collection under the Company rule?

...................................................................................................................................................

Q. No 6: Between whom the Treaty of Banaras was concluded?

...................................................................................................................................................

Q. No 7: Provincial Councils were set up by Warren Hastings to look

after Indian Diwans. ( State true or false)

...................................................................................................................................................

4.7 Let Us Sum Up

After going through this unit, you have learnt,

Various administrative measures adopted by Warren Hastings to

stabilise the Company’s rule in India.



Provisions of the Regulating Act, 1773 in order to regulate the

administrative and military works of the Company in India.

Provisions of the Pitt’s India Act, 1784 to practically placed the

Company and its officers under the control of the British Parliament.

The revenue reform measures initiated by Hastings to financially

stabilise the Company.

The relation with Oudh during his period.

4.8 Further Reading






Modern India





Indian Renaissance


Answer to the question no 1: In 1773

Answer to the question no 2: Four Years

Answer to the question no 3: The Regulating Act 1773

Answer to the question no 4: The Act established a Board of Control

comprising six members out of which two were to be British Cabinet

minister.

Answer to the question no 5: Warren Hastings

Answer to the question no 6: Between English East India Company and

Nawab of Oudh5 7History (Block 1)


Answer to the question no 7: True

4.10 Model Questions

A) Very Short Questions (Answer each question within 50 words)

Q.1: Why did the British Parliament pass the Regulating Act 1773?

Q.2: Who was the first Governor General of Bengal?

Q.3: Who was Munni Begum?

Q.4: The number of members of the Court of Directors was raised to 23/

19/24 by the Regulating Act 1773. (Find out the correct answer)

B) Short Questions (Answer each question within 150 words)

Q.1: How did Warren Hastings reorganise the administration of Bengal?

Q.2: Discuss the provisions of the Pitt’s India Act 1784

Q.3: Write a short note on the provisions of the Regulating Act 1773.

B) Long Questions (Answer each question within 300-500 words)

Q. 1: Evaluate the Regulating Act of 1773 in your own words.

Q. 2: Discuss the significances of the Pitt’s India Act 1784.

*******



UNIT 5: LORD CORNAWALLIS AND HIS REFORMS(1786-1793)

Unit Structure5.1 Learning Objectives

5.2 Introduction

5.3 Judicial Reforms

5.3.1 Cornwallis’s Code

5.3.2 Reform of Criminal Law

5.4 Police Reforms

5.5 Revenue Reforms

5.5.1 Introduction of Permanent Settlement

5.5.2 Merits and Demerits of Permanent Settlement

5.6 Let Us Sum Up

5.7 Further Reading


5.9 Model Questions



Understand the judicial reforms of Cornwallis,

Know the police reforms initiated by Cornwallis,

Analyse the revenue reforms of Cornwallis.

5.2 INTRODUCTION

Cornwallis was appointed to carry out the policy of peace outlined

in Pitt’s India Act and to reorganise the administrative system in India. He

was especially charged with the duty of finding out a satisfactory solution of

the land revenue problems, establishing efficient judicial machinery and ofreorganising the other administrative set ups. In this unit we shall discuss

the reform measures of Cornwallis to stabilise the Company administration

in India.5 9History (Block 1)

5.3 JUDICIAL REFORMS

The first attempt of Cornwallis was towards concentration of authority

in the district in the hands of the Collector. This trend was also in line with

the instructions of the Court of Directors who had enjoined economy and

simplification. In 1787 the Collectors in-charge of the districts were made

judges of Diwani Adalats, they were given more magisterial powers and

empowered to try criminal cases with certain limits.

Regarding criminal administration also further changes were made

during 1790 -92. The District Faujdari Adalats presided over by Indian Judges

were abolished and in place of these four circuit courts- three for Bengal

and one for Bihar, were set up. These circuit courts were presided over by

European covenanted servants who decided cases with the help of Qazis

and Muftis. These courts toured the districts twice a year and tried persons

committed by the city magistrates. Further, the Sadr Nizamat Adalat at

Murshidabad so far presided by a Mohammedan judge was replaced by a

similar court set up at Calcutta comprising the Governor-General and

members of the Supreme Council assisted by the Chief Qazi and two

Muftis.

5.3.1 Cornwallis’ Code

From the above discussion we have noticed that Cornwallis took

several initiatives for judicial reforms. His judicial reforms took the final shape

by 1793 and were embodied in the famous Cornwallis Code. The new

reforms were based on the principle of separation of powers. Under the

influence of the eighteenth century French philosophers, Cornwallis sought

to separate the revenue administration from the administration of justice.

The Collector was the head of revenue department in a district and also

enjoyed extensive judicial and magisterial powers. Cornwallis believed that

concentration of all powers in the hands of the Collector in the district

retarded the improvement of the country. How could the Collector acting as

a judge of the Diwani Adalat redress the wrongs done by him as collector


Lord Cornawallis and His Reforms (1786-1793)Unit 5

or assessor of revenue? Thus neither the landlords nor the cultivators could

regard the Collector as an impartial judge in revenue cases. The Cornwallis

Code divested the Collector of all judicial and magisterial powers and left

him with the duty of administration of revenue. A new class of officer called

the District Judge was created to preside over the District Civil Court. The

District Judge was also given magisterial and police functions.

A gradation of civil courts was set up. The distinction between

revenue and civil cases was abolished and the new Diwani Courts were

competent to try all civil cases. At the lowest level of the ladder were the

Munsiffs’ Courts presided over by Indian officers and competent to decide

cases involving disputes up to 50 rupees. Next came the courts of Registrars

presided over by European officers which tried cases UP to 200 rupees.

Appeals from both these courts lay to the District of City Courts. District

Judges presided over District Courts and decided civil suits with the

assistance of Indians well-versed in law. Above the District Courts were

the four Provincial Courts of Appeal at Calcutta, Murshidabad, Dacca and

Patna. These courts were also to supervise the working of District Courts

and on the basis of their report the Sadr Diwani Adalat could suspend the

District Judges. In certain cases it had original jurisdiction also. These courts

presided over by English Judges heard appeals in suits involving disputes

up to 1,000 rupees. Next in order of gradation came the Sadr Diwani Adalat

at Calcutta presided over by the Governor-General and his Council which

heard appeals from Provincial Courts in cases involving over 1,000 rupees.

Appeals lay to the King-in-Council in disputes involving more than £ 5,000.

Regulations also laid down the procedure to be followed in these courts

and also the qualifications of Indian officers attached to these courts. The

Mohammedan law was administered in respect to Muslims and Hindu law

in respect to Hindus.

Even the European subjects in the districts were made amenable

to the jurisdiction of the local civil courts. Europeans intending to reside in

the districts away from Calcutta were not given licences until they agreed

to submit themselves to the jurisdiction of the district civil courts. Further,

Government servants were made answerable before the civil courts for


Lord Cornawallis and His Reforms (1786-1793) Unit 5

the acts done by them in their official capacity. Thus Cornwallis proclaimed

the principle of Sovereignty of Law in India.

Important changes were introduced in the field of criminal

administration. The District Faujdari Adalats presided over by Indian officers

were abolished. The District Judge was given magisterial powers to order

the arrest of criminals and disturbers of peace. The petty cases were decided

by the District Judge himself while for serious offences lie-committed the

culprits to the four circuit courts. The provincial circuit courts of appeal

which heard appeals in civil cases also worked as criminal circuit courts.

The judges of these circuit courts toured their divisions twice a year and

decided criminal cases with the assistance of Indian Qazis and Muftis.

These courts could pass sentences of death or life imprisonment subject

to the confirmation of the Sadr Nizamat Adalat which was the highest court

of appeal in criminal cases. The Governor-General enjoyed the general

power of pardon or commutation of punishment.

5.3.2 Reform of Criminal Law

If Warren Hastings had asserted the right of the Company’s

government to interfere with the administration of law, Cornwallis maintained

that the Company had the right to reform the criminal law itself. The

Mohammedans take their criminal law to be divinely ordained.

During 1790-93 Cornwallis introduced certain changes in the criminal

law which were regularised by a Parliamentary Act of 1797. In December

1790 a rule was framed for the guidance of Mohammedan law officers that

in all trials of murder they were to be guided by the intention of the murderer

either evident or fairly inferable and not by the manner or instrument of

perpetration. Further, in cases of murder, the will of the heir or kindred of

the deceased were not to be allowed to operate in the grant of pardon or in

the demand of compensation money as a price of blood. Again, the usual

punishment of amputation of limbs of body was replaced by temporary

hard labour or fine and imprisonment according to circumstances of the

case. Regulation IX of 1793 amended the law of evidence by providing that



‘the religious persuasions of witnesses shall not be considered as a bar to

the conviction or condemnation of a prisoner’. Thus non-Muslims could

give testimony against Muslims in criminal cases-not permitted so far

according to the Muslim law of evidence.


Q. No 1: Which was the highest court of appeal in

criminal cases?

......................................................................................................................................

Q. No 2: Who presided over the District Faujdari Adalats?

........................................................................................................................................

Q. No 3: Where Provincial Courts of Appeal was situated?

........................................................................................................................................

5.4 POLICE REFORM

To supplement and implement the judicial reforms, important

changes were introduced in the police administration. In Calcutta itself a

state of near lawlessness prevailed and ruffians and bad characters went

unpunished. In many streets people passed after sunset only at the peril of

their lives. ‘The outskirts of Calcutta had more the appearance of a jungle

than an inhabited town,’ remarked a Police Superintendent. Even the Police

Superintendents were corrupt. The Regulation of 1791 defined the powers

of the Police Superintendent. To induce the police officials to act honestly

and with promptitude Cornwallis raised the salaries of all police officers

and offered good rewards for the discovery and arrests of burglars and

murderers.

5.5 REVENUE REFORMS

Cornwallis reorganised the Revenue Department. In 1787 the

province of Bengal was divided into fiscal areas and each placed under a



Collector. The number of Collectorships was reduced from 36 to 23. The

old Committee of Revenue was renamed as the Board of Revenue and

charged with the duty of superintending the work of the Collectors. Till the

year 1790 the old system of annual settlements was continued. In 1790

Cornwallis with the approval of the Court of Directors decided to recognise

the zamindars as the owners of land subject to the annual payment of land

revenue to the state. A ten-year settlement was made with the zamindars

in 1790 on the basis of 89% of the rental. In 1973 the decennial settlement

was declared permanent and perpetual.

5.5.1 Introduction of Permanent Settlement in Bengal,1973

At the time of his appointment Cornwallis was especially directed to

devise a satisfactory solution of the land revenue system in Bengal which

should ensure the Company’s interest as well of the cultivators. The first

essential for a satisfactory approach to the problem was a thorough enquiry

into the rents prevalent in Bengal. Prolonged discussion followed in which

the leading part was taken by Sir John Shore, the President of the Board of

Revenue, Mr. James Grant, the Record Keeper and the Governor-General

himself. The discussion centred round three vital questions: With whom

was the settlement to be made — the zamindars or the actual tillers of the

soil? What would be the state’s share in the produce of land? Should the

settlement be for a term of years or permanent? After a prolong discussion

the zamindars were recognised owners of land and a ten years’ settlement

was made with them in 1790. In 1793 the decennial settlement was declared

permanent and the zamindars and their legitimate successors were allowed

to hold their estates at that very assessed rate for ever. The state demand

was fixed at 80% of the rental, leaving 11% with the zamindars as their

share for their trouble and responsibility.

Advantages of the Settlement. Contemporary opinion claimed a

number of advantages for the Permanent Settlement:



Financially, the Permanent Settlement secured a fixed and stable

income for the state and the state could depend upon that income,

monsoons or no monsoons. Further, it saved the Government the expenses

that had to be spent in making periodical assessments and settlements.

Economically, it was claimed that the Permanent Settlements would

encourage agricultural enterprise and prosperity, waste land would be

reclaimed and the soil under cultivation would be improved; the zamindars

would introduce new methods of cultivation like better rotation of crops,

use of manure etc. Thus the Settlement would create conditions for the

development of the fullest power of the soil. This in turn would create a

contented and resourceful peasantry.

Politically, Cornwallis expected that the Permanent Settlement

should create a class of loyal zamindars who would be prepared to defend

the Company at all costs because their rights were guaranteed by the

Company. Thus the Permanent Settlement secured for the government

the political support of an influential class in the same way as the Bank of

England had for William III after 1694. The zamindars of Bengal stood loyal

during the great rebellion of 1857. Seton Karr commented that the “political

benefits of the settlement balance its economic defects”

Socially, the hope was expressed that the zamindars would act as

the natural leaders of the ryot and show their public spirit in helping the

spread of education and other charitable activities.

Lastly, the Permanent Settlement of Bengal set free the ablest

servants of the company for judicial services. Further, it avoided the evils

normally associated with the temporary settlements, the harassment of

the cultivator, the tendency on the part of the cultivator to leave the land to

deteriorate towards the end of the term to get a low assessment etc.

Disadvantages: Whatever little economic or political purposes the

Settlement might have served during its first few years, it soon turned into

an engine of exploitation and oppression. It created “feudalism at the top

and serfdom at the bottom”. Many of the advantages claimed proved to be

illusory.



Financially, the state has proved to be a great loser in the long run.

The advantages of a fixed and stable income were secured at the great

sacrifice of any prospective share in the increase of revenue from land.

Even when new areas of land were brought under cultivation and the rents

of the land already under cultivation had been increased manifold, the state

could not claim it legitimate share in the increase. The state demand fixed

in 1793 remained almost the same even in 1954.

The Permanent Settlement retarded the economic progress of

Bengal. Most of the landlords did not take any interest in the improvements

of the land but were merely interested in extracting the maximum possible

rent from the ryot The cultivator, being under the constant fear of losing the

land, had no incentive to improve the land. The zamindars did not live on

the estates, but away in the cities where they wasted their time and money

in luxury. Thus, the zamindars became a sort of ‘distant suction pumps’

sucking the wealth of the rural areas and wasting it in the cities. Besides, a

host of intermediaries grew up between the state and the actual cultivator.

This process of sub-infeudation sometime reached ridiculous proportions,

there being as many as 50 intermediaries. All the intermediaries looked to

their profits and the ryot was reduced to the position of a pauper. In this

context it may be worthwhile to quote the view of Carver who wrote: “Next

to war, famine and pestilence, the worst thing that can happen to a rural

community is absentee landlordism”.

Politically, the Permanent Settlement did fit in the game of the

Company and the zamindars along with other vested interests became the

favourite children of Imperialism However, the British Administration gained

the loyalty of the few at the cost of the alienation of the masses. Besides,

the system divided rural society into two hostile classes, namely, the

zamindars and the tenants.

Socially, the Permanent Settlement stands condemned. By

recognising the absolute right of ownership of the zamindars the Company

sacrificed the interests of the peasants whether of property or occupancy.

In a way the peasants suffered from a double injustice, first by surrendering



their property rights and secondly by being entirely left at the mercy of the

zamindars that rack-rented them. True, the Government attempted

rectification and passed tenancy legislation (Bengal Rent Acts, of 1859 and

1885) to protect the interests of the ryot, but the zamindars evaded the

protective legislation. The growth of population resulting in an excessive

pressure on land played into the hands of the zamindars and they not

infrequently ejected the ryot. In fact, the peasant was reduced to the position

of a serf.


Q. No. 4: In which year the Permanent Settlement was

introduced in Bengal?

...................................................................................................................................

Q. No. 5: Who introduced the Permanent Settlement?

.....................................................................................................................................

Q. No. 6: Permanent Settlement retarded/encourage economic progress

of Bengal. (Choose the correct one)

..............................................................................................................................................

5.6 LET US SUM UP:

After going through this unit, you have learnt –

The reforms initiated by Cornwallis in the field of judicial reforms in

the Colonial India.

The police reforms introduced by Cornwallis to improve the police

system.

The revenue reforms of Cornwallis, especially the Permanent

Settlement.



5.7 FURTHER READING






Modern India





Indian Renaissance

5.8 ANSWER TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

Answer to the question no 1: Indian Judges

Answer to the question no 2: At Calcutta

Answer to the question no 3: Sadr Nizamat Adalat

Answer to the question no 4:1793

Answer to the question no 5: Lord Cornwallis

Answer to the question no 6: Reterded

5.9 MODEL QUESTIONS

A) VERY SHORT QUESTIONS( Answer each question within 50 words)

Q. No 1: Who were Qazis and Muftis?

Q. No 2: Cornwallis raised the salaries of the police personals to

encourage them. (State true or false)

Q. No 3: Mention one social impact of the Permanent Settlement.



Q. No 4: Why did Permanent Settlement introduce in Bengal?

B) SHORT QUESTIONS (Answer each question within 150 words)

Q. No 1: Write a short note on Cornwallis police reforms.

Q. No 2: Briefly discuss the criminal law reform programmes introduced

by Cornwallis

Q. No 3: Write a short note on judicial reforms of Cornwallis.

C) LONG QUESTIONS (Answer each questions 300-500 words)

Q. No 1: Discuss the merits and demerits of Permanent Settlement.

Q. No 2: Analyse Cornwallis’s Code.

*****



unit 2: establishment of english east india company … 3rd sem/bachelor degree... · though the...

Documents