Company rule in India
295335
219170036
2008-06-13T22:04:36Z
SpellingBot
6773085
independance → independence
{{Infobox Former Country
|native_name =
|conventional_long_name = British India
|common_name = India
|continent = Asia
|country = India
|era =
|status = Colony
|empire = United Kingdom
|event_start = Battle of Plassey
|date_start = June 23
|year_start = 1757
|event_end = [[Government of India Act 1858|Government of India Act]]
|date_end = August 2
|year_end = 1858
|event1 = Third Anglo-Maratha War
|date_event1 = 1817-1818
|event2 = [[Indian Rebellion of 1857|Indian Rebellion]]
|date_event2 = 1857
|p1 =
|flag_p1 =
|p2 =
|flag_p2 =
|p3 =
|flag_p3 =
|s1 = British Raj
|flag_s1 = British Raj Red Ensign.svg
|image_flag = Flag of the British East India Company (1801).svg
|flag = British East India Company#Flags|The flags of the British East India Company
|image_map = India under clive1760.jpg
|image_map_caption = India in the time of Clive at the onset of Company Rule
|capital = Calcutta
|national_motto =
|national_anthem =
|common_languages = [[English language|English]] and many others
|currency = [[History of the rupee|Rupee]]
|representative1 = Warren Hastings
|year_representative1 = 1774-1775
|representative2 = [[Charles Canning, 1st Earl Canning|The Viscount Canning]]
|year_representative2 = 1857-1858
|title_representative = [[Governor-General of India|Governor-General]]
|footnotes=
}}
'''Company rule in India''' (sometimes, '''Company ''Raj''''',<ref>{{Harvnb|Robb|2004|pp=116-147}} "Chapter 5: Early Modern India II: Company Raj", {{Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|pp=56-91}} "Chapter 3: The East India Company Raj, 1772-1850," {{Harvnb|Bose|Jalal|2003|pp=76-87}} "Chapter 7: Company Raj and Indian Society 1757 to 1857, Reinvention and Reform of Tradition."</ref> "''raj''," lit. "rule" in [[Hindi]]<ref>Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition, 1989: [[Hindi]], ''rāj'', from [[Sanskrit|Skr.]] ''rāj'': to reign, rule; cognate with [[Latin|L.]] ''rēx'', ''rēg-is'', [[Old Irish|OIr.]] ''rī'', ''rīg'' king (see RICH).</ref>) refers to the rule or dominion of the [[British East India Company]] on the Indian subcontinent. This is variously taken to have commenced in 1757, after the [[Battle of Plassey]], when the [[Nawab of Bengal]] surrendered his dominions to the Company,<ref>{{Harvnb|Bose|Jalal|2003|p=76}}</ref> in 1765, when the Company was granted the ''diwani'', or the right to collect revenue, in [[Bengal]] and [[Bihar]],<ref>{{Harvnb|Brown|1994|p=46}}, {{Harvnb|Peers|2006|p=30}}</ref> or in 1772, when the Company established a capital in [[Calcutta]], appointed its first [[Governor-General of India|Governor-General]], [[Warren Hastings]], and became directly involved in governance.<ref>{{Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|p=56}}</ref> The rule lasted until 1858, when, consequent to the [[Government of India Act 1858]], the [[India Office|British government]] assumed the task of directly administering India.
==Expansion and territory==
The [[English East India Company]] (hereafter, the Company) was founded in 1600, as ''The Company of Merchants of London Trading into the East Indies''. It gained footing in India in 1612, after [[Mughal]] emperor [[Jahangir]] granted it the rights to establish a ''factory'' (a trading post) in [[Surat]]. In 1640, consequent to receiving similar permission from the local [[Vijayanagara Empire|Vijayanagara ruler]], a second factory was established in [[Madras]]. Soon, in 1668, the Company leased [[Bombay]] island, a former Portuguese outpost recently gifted to [[Kingdom of England|England]] as part of the [[dowry]] of [[Catherine of Braganza]] for her marriage to [[Charles II of England|Charles II]]. Thereafter, in 1687, the company moved its headquarters from Surat to Bombay. Next, in 1690, a Company ''settlement'' was established in [[Calcutta]], again after receiving such rights from of the [[Mughal]] emperor, and the Company now began its lengthy presence on the [[Indian subcontinent]]. During this time, other ''companies'', established by the [[Portuguese India|Portuguese]], [[Dutch East India Company|Dutch]], [[French East India Company|French]], and [[Danish East India Company|Danish]], were similarly expanding in the region.
[[Image:India1765and1805b.jpg|right|thumb|250px|India in 1765 and 1805 showing East India Company Territories]]
[[Image:India1837to1857.jpg|right|thumb|250px|India in 1837 and 1857 showing East India Company and other territories]]
Although the British had earlier ruled in the factory areas, the beginning of British rule is often dated from the 1757 [[Battle of Plassey]]. [[Robert Clive]]'s victory was consolidated in 1764 at the [[Battle of Buxar]] (in [[Bihar]]), where the emperor, [[Shah Alam II]], was defeated. As a result, Shah Alam was coerced to appoint the company to be the ''[[diwan]]'' for the areas of [[Bengal]], Bihar, and [[Orissa]] (this pretense of [[Mughal]] control was abandoned in 1827). The company thus became the supreme, but not the titular, power in much of the [[Lower Gangetic plains moist deciduous forests|lower Gangetic plain]]. The Company also expanded from their bases at Bombay and Madras. The [[Anglo-Mysore Wars]] of 1766 to 1799 and the [[Anglo-Maratha Wars]] of 1772 to 1818 placed the Company dominant over much India south of the [[Sutlej River]].
The company's dominance of India took two major forms. The first was the use of ''[[Subsidiary alliance|subsidiary alliances]]'' between the company and the local rulers, these agreements were essentially feudal in nature and under them the local rulers gave up much of their control on foreign affairs to the Company and in return had their independence guaranteed. This development created the ''Native States'', or [[Princely States]], of the Hindu [[maharaja]] and the Muslim [[nawab]]s. The second and least favoured method of control was the outright governance of areas; it is these parts of the subcontinent that are more properly called 'British India'.
At the turn of the 19th century, Governor-General [[Richard Wellesley, 1st Marquess Wellesley|Wellesley]] began what became two decades of accelerated expansion of Company territories.<ref name=ludden-expansion>{{Harvnb|Ludden|2002|p=133}}</ref> Prominent among the princely states were: [[Kingdom of Cochin|Cochin]] (1791), [[Jaipur State|Jaipur]] (1794), [[Travancore]] (1795), [[Hyderabad State|Hyderabad]] (1798), [[Kingdom of Mysore|Mysore]] (1799), [[Cis-Sutlej states|Cis-Sutlej Hill States]] (1815), [[Central India Agency]] (1819), Kutch and Gujarat Gaikwad territories (1819), [[Rajputana]] (1818), and [[Bahawalpur (princely state)|Bahawalpur]] (1833).<ref name=ludden-expansion/> The annexed regions included the ''Northwest Provinces'' (comprising [[Rohilkhand]], [[Gorakhpur]], and the [[Doab]]) (1801), Delhi (1803), and [[Sindh]] (1843). [[Punjab region|Punjab]], [[North-West Frontier Province]], and [[Kashmir]], were annexed after the [[Anglo-Sikh Wars]] in 1849; however, Kashmir was immediately sold under the [[Treaty of Amritsar]] (1850) to the [[Dogra Dynasty]] of [[Jammu]], and thereby became a princely state. In 1854 [[Berar]] was annexed, and the state of [[Awadh|Oudh]] two years later.<ref name=ludden-expansion/>
The East India Company also signed treaties with Afghan rulers and with [[Ranjit Singh]] to counterbalance Russian support of [[Iran|Persian]] plans in western [[Afghanistan]]. In 1839 the Company's actions brought about the [[First Anglo-Afghan War|First Afghan War]] (1839-42). However, as the British expanded their territory in India, so did [[Russia]] in [[Central Asia]], with the taking of [[Bukhara]] and [[Samarkand]] in 1863 and 1868 respectively, thereby setting the stage for the [[Great Game]] of [[Chinese Turkestan|Central Asia]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Ludden|2002|p=135}}</ref>
==The Governors-General==
{| class=wikitable
|- valign=bottom
! Governor-General !! Period of Tenure!! Events
|-
| [[Warren Hastings]]|| [[20 October]] [[1773]]–[[1 February]] [[1785]]|| [[Bengal famine of 1770]] (1769–1773)<br>[[Rohilla War]] (1773–1774<br> [[First Anglo-Maratha War]] (1777–1783)<br>
[[Second Anglo-Mysore War]] (1780–1784)
|-
| [[John MacPherson (governor of India)|John MacPherson]] ([[locum tenens]]) || [[1 February]] [[1785]]–[[12 September]] [[1786]]||
|-
| [[Charles Cornwallis, 1st Marquess Cornwallis|Charles Cornwallis]]|| [[12 September]] [[1786]]–[[28 October]] [[1793]] || [[Permanent Settlement]] <br> [[Third Anglo-Mysore War]] (1789–1792)
|-
| [[John Shore, 1st Baron Teignmouth|John Shore]] || [[28 October]] [[1793]]–March 1798||
|-
| [[Alured Clarke]] ([[locum tenens]]) || March 1798–[[18 May]] [[1798]]||
|-
| [[Richard Wellesley, 1st Marquess Wellesley|Richard Wellesley]]|| [[18 May]] [[1798]]–[[30 July]] [[1805]]|| [[Fourth Anglo-Mysore War]] (1798–1799)<br> [[Second Anglo-Maratha War]] (1803 - 1805)
|-
| [[Charles Cornwallis, 1st Marquess Cornwallis|Charles Cornwallis]] (second term) || [[30 July]] [[1805]]–[[5 October]] [[1805]] ||
|-
| [[George Hilario Barlow]] ([[locum tenens]]) || [[10 October]] [[1805]]–[[31 July]] [[1807]] || [[Vellore Mutiny]] ([[July 10]], [[1806]])
|-
| [[Gilbert Elliot-Murray-Kynynmound, 1st Earl of Minto|Lord Minto]] || [[31 July]] [[1807]]–[[4 October]] [[1813]]|| [[Stamford_Raffles#Java|Invasion of Java]]<br>[[History_of_Mauritius#British_rule_.281810.E2.80.931968.29|Occupation of Mauritius]]
|-
| [[Francis Rawdon-Hastings, 1st Marquess of Hastings|Marquess of Hastings]] ||[[4 October]] [[1813]]–[[9 January]] [[1823]] || [[Anglo-Nepal War of 1814]] <br> Annexation of [[Kumaon]], [[Garhwal]], and east [[Sikkim]].<br> [[Third Anglo-Maratha War]] (1817–1818)
|-
| [[John Adam (India)|John Adam]] ([[locum tenens]]) || [[9 January]] [[1823]]–[[1 August]] [[1823]]||
|-
| [[William Pitt Amherst, 1st Earl Amherst|Lord Amherst]]|| [[1 August]] [[1823]]–[[13 March]] [[1828]]|| [[First Anglo–Burmese War]] (1823–1826)<br> Annexation of [[Assam]], [[Manipur]], [[Arakan]], and [[Tenasserim]] from [[Burma]]
|-
| [[William Butterworth Bayley]] ([[locum tenens]]) || [[13 March]] [[1828]]–[[4 July]] [[1828]]||
|-
| [[Lord William Bentinck|William Bentinck]] || [[4 July]] [[1828]]–[[20 March]] [[1835]]|| [[Sati_%28practice%29#British_and_other_European_territories|Abolition of ''Sati'']] <br> Suppression of ''[[Thuggee]]''
|-
| [[Charles Metcalfe, 1st Baron Metcalfe|Charles Metcalfe]] ([[locum tenens]]) || [[20 March]] [[1835]]–[[4 March]] [[1836]] ||
|-
| [[George Eden, 1st Earl of Auckland|Lord Auckland]]||[[4 March]] [[1836]]–[[28 February]] [[1842]] || [[First Anglo-Afghan War]] (1839–1842) <br> [[Massacre of Elphinstone's army]]
|-
| [[Edward Law, 1st Earl of Ellenborough|Lord Ellenborough]]|| [[28 February]] [[1842]]–June 1844 || [[First Anglo-Afghan War]] (1839–1842) <br> [[History_of_Sindh#Colonial_era|Conquest of Sindh]]
|-
| [[William Wilberforce Bird]] ([[locum tenens]]) || June 1844–[[23 July]] [[1844]] ||
|-
| [[Henry Hardinge, 1st Viscount Hardinge|Henry Hardinge]] || [[23 July]] [[1844]]–[[12 January]] [[1848]] || [[First Anglo-Sikh War]] (1845–1846) <br> Annexation of [[Jullundur Doab]]
|-
| [[James Broun-Ramsay, 1st Marquess of Dalhousie|Marquess of Dalhousie]]|| [[12 January]] [[1848]]–[[28 February]] [[1856]] ||[[Second Anglo-Sikh War]] (1848–1849) <br> Annexation of Punjab, [[NWFP]], and [[Kashmir]]<br> Sale of [[Kashmir]] to [[Gulab Singh]] of [[Jammu]]<br> [[Second Anglo-Burmese War]] (1852–1853) <br> Annexation of [[Lower Burma]] <br> Annexation of [[Satara]], [[Nagpur]], and [[Jhansi]] under [[Doctrine of Lapse]]<br> Annexation of [[Berar]] and [[Awadh]]<br>[[Ganges Canal]], [[Indian Railways]], [[Communications_in_India#Introduction_of_Telegraph|Telegraph in India]]
|-
| [[Charles Canning, 1st Earl Canning|Charles Canning]]||[[28 February]] [[1856]]–[[1 November]] [[1858]] || [[Indian Rebellion of 1857]] <br> Liquidation of the [[English East India Company]] under [[Government of India Act 1858]]
|}
==Regulation of Company rule==
{{main|Honourable East India Company}}
Until [[Robert Clive|Clive]]'s victory at [[Battle of Plassey|Plassey]], the East India Company territories in India, which consisted largely of the [[presidency]] towns of Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay, were governed by the mostly autonomous and sporadically unmanageable ''town councils'', composed of merchants; the councils barely had enough powers for the effective management of the local affairs, and the ensuing lack of oversight of the overall Company operations in India, led to some grave abuses by Company officers or their allies.<ref name=igi-bandyo-post-clive>{{Harvnb|Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV|2007|p=14}}, {{Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|p=76}}</ref> Clive's victory, and the award of the ''diwani'' of the rich region of Bengal, brought India into the public spotlight in Britain.<ref name=igi-bandyo-post-clive/> The Company's money management practices also came to be questioned, especially as it began to post net losses even as some Company servants, the "Nabobs," returned to Britain with large fortunes, which—according to rumors then current—were acquired unscrupulously.<ref>{{Harvnb|Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV|2007|p=14}}, {{Harvnb|Peers|2006|p=35}}, {{Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|p=76}}</ref> By 1772, the Company needed British government loans to stay afloat, and there was fear in London that the Company's corrupt practices could soon seep into British business and public life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Peers|2006|p=35}}</ref> The rights and duties of the British government with regards the Company's new territories also came to be examined. <ref name=marshall-207>{{Harvnb|Marshall|2007|p=207}}</ref> The British parliament then held several inquiries and in 1773, during the premiership of [[Frederick North, Lord North|Lord North]], enacted the ''Regulating Act'', "for the better management of the affairs of the East India Company as well in India as in Europe."<ref name=igi-14>{{Harvnb|Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV|2007|p=14}}</ref>
<Center>
<Gallery>
Image:Company rule calcutta from ftwilliam.jpg|A view of Calcutta from Fort William, 1807.
Image:Company rule government hse fort stgeorge2.jpg|Government House, Fort St. George, Madras, the headquarters of the [[Madras Presidency]].
Image:Warren-Hasting.jpg|[[Warren Hastings]], the first Governor-General of [[Bengal Presidency|Fort William (Bengal)]] who oversaw the Company's territories in India.
Image:Company rule trial warren hastings2.jpg|The trial of Warren Hastings in the Court of Westminster Hall, 1789.
</Gallery>
</Center>
Although [[Lord North]] himself wanted the Company's territories to be taken over by the British state,<ref name=marshall-207/> he faced determined political opposition from many quarters, including many in the City of London and the British parliament;<ref>{{Harvnb|Peers|2006|p=35}}</ref> the result was a compromise in which the Regulating Act—although implying the ultimate sovereignty of the British Crown over these new territories—asserted that the Company could act as a sovereign power on behalf of the Crown, while being concurrently subject to oversight and regulation by the British government and parliament.<ref>{{Harvnb|Marshall|2007|p=197}}</ref> The Court of Directors of the Company were required under the Act to submit all communications regarding civil, military, and revenue matters in India for scrutiny by the British government.<ref name=bandyo-77>{{Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|p=77}}</ref> For the governance of the Indian territories, the act asserted the supremacy of the [[Bengal Presidency|Presidency of Fort William (Bengal)]] over those of [[Madras Presidency|Fort St. George (Madras)]] and [[Bombay Presidency|Bombay]]; it also nominated a [[Governor-General of India|Governor-General]] ([[Warren Hastings]]) and four councilors for administering the Bengal presidency (and for overseeing the Company's operations in India).<ref>{{Harvnb|Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV|2007|p=14}}, {{Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|p=77}}</ref> "The subordinate Presidencies were forbidden to wage war or make treaties without the previous consent of the Governor-General of Bengal in Council,<ref>"in Council," ''i.e.'' in concert with the advice of the Council.</ref> except in case of imminent necessity. The Governors of these Presidencies were directed in general terms to obey the orders of the Governor-General-in-Council, and to transmit to him intelligence of all important matters."<ref name=igi-14/> However, the imprecise wording of the Act, left it open to be variously interpreted; consequently, the administration in India continued to be hobbled by disunity between the provincial governors, between members of the Council, and between the Governor-General and the Council.<ref name=bandyo-77/> The ''Regulating Act'' also addressed the prevalent corruption in India: Company servants were henceforth forbidden to engage in private trade in India or to receive "presents" from Indian nationals.<ref name=igi-14/>
[[William Pitt the Younger|William Pitt's]] [[India Act 1784|India Act of 1784]] established a Board of Control in England both to supervise the East India Company's affairs and to prevent the Company's shareholders from interfering in the governance of India.<ref>{{Harvnb|Travers|2007|p=211}}</ref> The Board of Control consisted of six members, which included one Secretary of State from the British cabinet, as well as the [[Chancellor of the Exchequer]].<ref name=bandyo-77/> Around this time, there was also extensive debate in the British parliament on the issue of landed rights in Bengal, with a consensus developing in support of the view advocated by [[Philip Francis (English politician)|Philip Francis]], a member of the Bengal council and political adversary of Warren Hastings, that all lands in Bengal should be considered the "estate and inheritance of native land-holders and families ..."<ref name=travers-213>Quoted in {{Harvnb|Travers|2007|p=213}}</ref>
Mindful of the reports of abuse and corruption in Bengal by Company servants, the India Act itself noted numerous complaints that "'divers Rajahs, Zemindars, Polygars, Talookdars, and landholders"' had been unjustly deprived of 'their lands, jurisdictions, rights, and priviliges'."<ref name=travers-213/> At the same time the Company's directors, were now leaning towards, Francis's view that the land-tax in Bengal should be made fixed and permanent, setting the stage for the [[Permanent Settlement]] (see section [[Company_rule_in_India#Revenue_settlements_under_the_Company|Revenue settlements under the Company]] below).<ref>{{Harvnb|Guha|1995|p=161}}</ref> The India Act also created in each of the three presidencies a number of administrative and military posts, which included: a Governor and three Councilors, one of which was the Commander in Chief of the Presidency army.<ref name=bandyo-78>{{Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|p=78}}</ref> Although the supervisory powers of the Governor-General-in-Council in Bengal (over Madras and Bombay) were extended—as they were again in the Charter Act of 1793—the subordinate presidencies continued to exercise some autonomy until both the extension of British possessions into becoming contiguous and the advent of faster communications in the next century.<ref name=igi-15>{{Harvnb|Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV|2007|p=15}}</ref>
Still, the new Governor-General appointed in 1786, Lord Cornwallis, not only had more power than Hastings, but also had the support of a powerful British cabinet minister, [[Henry Dundas]], who, as [[Secretary of state]] for the [[Home Office]], was in charge of the overall India policy.<ref>{{Harvnb|Travers|2007|p=213}}</ref> From 1784 onwards, the British government had the final word on all major appointments in India; a candidate's suitability for a senior position was often decided by the strength of his political connections rather than that of his administrative ability.<ref name=peers-36>{{Harvnb|Peers|2006|p=36}}</ref> Although this practice resulted in many Governor-General nominees being chosen from Britain's conservative landed gentry, there were some liberals as well, such as [[Lord William Bentinck]] and Lord Dalhousie.<ref name=peers-36/>
British political opinion was also shaped by the attempted impeachment of [[Warren Hastings]]; the trial, whose proceedings began in 1788, ended, with Hastings' acquittal, in 1795.<ref name=peers-36-37>{{Harvnb|Peers|2006|pp=36-37}}</ref> Although the effort was chiefly coordinated by [[Edmund Burke]], it also drew support from within the British government.<ref name=peers-36-37/> Burke, accused Hastings not only of corruption, but—appealing to universal standards of justice—also of acting solely upon his own discretion and without concern for law and of willfully causing distress to others in India; in response, Hastings' defenders asserted that his actions were in concert with Indian customs and traditions.<ref name=peers-36-37/> Although Burke's speeches at the trial drew applause and focused attention on India, Hastings was eventually acquitted, due, in part, to the revival of nationalism in Britain in the wake of the [[French Revolution]]; nonetheless, Burke's effort had the effect of creating a sense of responsibility in British public life for the Company's dominion in India.<ref name=peers-36-37/>
Soon rumblings began to appear among merchants in London that the monopoly granted to the East India Company in 1600 to facilitate it to better organize against Dutch and French competition in a distant region, was no longer needed.<ref name=igi-15/> In response, in the [[British East India Company#Charter Act 1813|Charter Act of 1813]], the British parliament renewed the Company's charter but terminated its monopoly except with regard to tea and trade with China, opening India both to private investment and missionaries.<ref name=ludden-134>{{Harvnb|Ludden|2002|p=134}}</ref> With increased British power in India supervision of Indian affairs by the [[British Crown]] and [[British parliament|parliament]] increased as well; by the 1820s British nationals could transact business or engage in missionary work under the protection of the Crown in the three presidencies.<ref name=ludden-134/> Finally, in [[British East India Company#Charter Act 1833|Charter Act of 1833]], the British parliament revoked the Company's trade license altogether, making the Company a part of British governance, although the administration of British India remained the province of Company officers.<ref name=ludden-134/> The Charter Act of 1833 also charged the Governor-General-in-Council (to whose title was now added "of India") with the supervision of civil and military administration of the totality of India, as well the exclusive power of legislation.<ref name=igi-15/> Since the British territories in north India had now extended up to Delhi, the Act also sanctioned the creation of a Presidency of Agra, later constituted, in 1936, as the Lieutenant-Governorship of the North-Western Provinces (current-day western [[Uttar Pradesh]]).<ref name=igi-15/> With the annexation of [[Awadh|Oudh]] in 1856, this territory was extended, and eventually became the [[United Provinces of Agra and Oudh]].<ref name=igi-15/> In addition, in 1854, a Lieutenant-Governor was appointed for the region of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa, leaving the Governor-General to concentrate on the governance of India.<ref name=igi-15/>
==Revenue settlements under the Company==
{{main|Permanent Settlement|Zamindari|Ryotwari}}
In the remnant of the [[Mughal]] revenue system existing in pre-1765 Bengal, [[zamindar]]s, or "land holders," collected revenue on behalf of the [[Mughal]] emperor, whose representative, or [[diwan (title)|diwan]] supervised their activities.<ref>{{Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|p=20}}</ref> In this system, the assortment of rights associated with land were not possessed by a "land owner," but rather shared by the several parties with stake in the land, including the peasant cultivator, the ''zamindar'', and the state.<ref name=metcalf-78>{{Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|p=78}}</ref> The ''zamindar'' served as an intermediary who procured [[economic rent]] from the cultivator, and after withholding a percentage for his own expenses, made available the rest, as [[revenue]] to the state.<ref name=metcalf-78/> Under the Mughal system, the land itself belonged to the state and not to the ''zamindar'', who could transfer only his right to collect rent.<ref name=metcalf-78/> On being awarded the ''diwani'' or overlordship of Bengal following the [[Battle of Buxar]] in 1764, the [[Honourable East India Company|East India Company]] found itself short of trained administrators, especially those familiar with local custom and law; tax collection was consequently [[Tax farming|farmed out]]. This uncertain foray into land taxation by the Company, may have gravely worsened the impact of a famine that struck Bengal in 1769-70 in which between seven and ten million people—or between a quarter and third of the presidency's population—may have died.<ref name=peers-metcalf-famine>{{Harvnb|Peers|2006|p=47}}, {{Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|p=78}}</ref> However, the company provided little relief either through reduced taxation or by relief efforts,<ref name=peers-47>{{Harvnb|Peers|2006|p=47}}</ref> and the economic and cultural impact of the famine was felt decades later, even becoming, a century later, the subject of [[Bankim Chandra Chatterjee]]'s novel ''[[Anandamath]]''.<ref name=peers-metcalf-famine/>
In 1772, under Warren Hastings, the East India Company took over revenue collection directly in the [[Bengal Presidency]] (then [[Bengal]] and [[Bihar]]), establishing a Board of Revenue with offices in Calcutta and [[Patna]], and moving the pre-existing Mughal revenue records from [[Murshidabad]] to Calcutta.<ref name=robb-revenue>{{Harvnb|Robb|2004|pp=126-129}} </ref>
In 1773, after [[Awadh|Oudh]] ceded the tributary state of [[Benaras]], the revenue collection system was extended to the territory with a Company [[Resident_%28title%29#Residents_in_.28British.29_Asia|Resident]] in charge.<ref name=robb-revenue/> The following year—with a view to preventing corruption—Company ''district collectors'', who were then responsible for revenue collection for an entire district, were replaced with provincial councils at Patna, Murshidabad, and Calcutta, and with Indian collectors working within each district.<ref name=robb-revenue/> The title, "collector," reflected "the centrality of land revenue collection to government in India: it was the government's primary function and it moulded the institutions and patterns of administration."<ref>{{Harvnb|Brown|1994|p=55}}</ref>
<Center>
<Gallery>
Image:Company rule riverside scene2 bengal1860.jpg|A riverside scene in rural east Bengal (present-day [[Bangladesh]]), 1860.
Image:Cornwallis.nationalgallery.jpg|[[Charles Cornwallis, 1st Marquess Cornwallis|Lord Cornwallis]], the Governor-General who established the [[Permanent Settlement]] in [[Bengal Presidency|Bengal]].
Image:Company rule kochh mandai2 woman1860.jpg|A Kochh Mandai woman of east Bengal (present-day [[Bangladesh]]) shown with a broad-bladed agricultural knife and carrying a freshly harvested [[jackfruit]]. (1860)
Image:Company rule paddy fields madras2.jpg|Paddy fields in the [[Madras Presidency]], ca. 1880. Two-thirds of the presidency fell under the ''[[Ryotwari]]'' system.
</Gallery>
</Center>
The Company inherited a revenue collection system from the Mughals in which the heaviest proportion of the tax burden fell on the cultivators, with one-third of the production reserved for imperial entitlement; this pre-colonial system became the Company revenue policy's baseline.<ref name = peers-p45-47>{{Harvnb|Peers|2006|pp=45-47}}</ref> However, there was vast variation across India in the methods by which the revenues were collected; with this complication in mind, a Committee of Circuit toured the districts of expanded Bengal presidency in order to make a five-year settlement, consisting of five-yearly inspections and temporary [[tax farming]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Peers|2006|pp=45-47}}, {{Harvnb|Robb|2004|pp=126-129}} </ref> In their overall approach to revenue policy, Company officials were guided by two goals: first, preserving as much as possible the balance of rights and obligations that were traditionally claimed by the farmers who cultivated the land and the various intermediaries who collected tax on the state's behalf and who reserved a cut for themselves; and second, identifying those sectors of the rural economy that would maximize both revenue and security.<ref name = peers-p45-47/> Although their first revenue settlement turned out to be essentially the same as the more informal pre-existing Mughal one, the Company had created a foundation for the growth of both information and bureaucracy.<ref name=peers-p45-47/>
In 1793, the new Governor-General, [[Charles Cornwallis, 1st Marquess Cornwallis|Lord Cornwallis]], promulgated the [[Permanent Settlement|permanent settlement]] of land revenues in the presidency, the first socio-economic regulation in colonial India.<ref name=robb-revenue/> It was named ''permanent'' because it fixed the land tax in perpetuity in return for landed property rights for [[zamindars]]; it simultaneously defined the nature of land ownership in the presidency, and gave individuals and families separate property rights in occupied land. Since the revenue was fixed in perpetuity, it was fixed at a high level, which in Bengal amounted to £3 million at 1789-90 prices.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|p=82}}</ref> According to one estimate,<ref>{{Harvnb|Marshall|1987|pp=141-144}}</ref> this was 20% higher than the revenue demand before 1757. Over the next century, partly as a result of land surveys, court rulings, and property sales, the change was given practical dimension.<ref>{{Harvnb|Robb|2004|p=127}}</ref> An influence on the development of this revenue policy were the economic theories then current, which regarded agriculture as the engine of economic development, and consequently stressed the fixing of revenue demands in order to encourage growth.<ref>{{Harvnb|Guha|1995}}</ref> The expectation behind the permanent settlement was that knowledge of a fixed government demand would encourage the zamindars to increase both their average outcrop and the land under cultivation, since they would be able to retain the profits from the increased output; in addition, it was envisaged that land itself would become a marketable form of property that could be purchased, sold, or mortgaged.<ref name=peers-p45-47/> A feature of this economic rationale was the additional expectation that the zamindars, recognizing their own best interest, would not make unreasonable demands on the peasantry.<ref name=bose-ps>{{Harvnb|Bose|1993}}</ref>
However, these expectations were not realized in practice, and in many regions of Bengal, the peasants bore the brunt of the increased demand, there being little protection for their traditional rights in the new legislation.<ref name=bose-ps/> Forced labor of the peasants by the zamindars became more prevalent as cash crops were cultivated to meet the Company revenue demands.<ref name=peers-p45-47/> Although commercialized cultivation was not new to the region, it had now penetrated deeper into village society and made it more vulnerable to market forces.<ref name=peers-p45-47/> The zamindars themselves were often unable to meet the increased demands that the Company had placed on them; consequently, many defaulted, and by one estimate, up to one-third of their lands were auctioned during the first three decades following the permanent settlement.<ref>{{Harvnb|Tomlinson|1993|p=43}}</ref> The new owners were often [[Brahmin]] and [[Kayastha]] employees of the Company who had a good grasp of the new system, and, in many cases, had prospered under it.<ref name=metcalf-revenue>{{Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|p=79}}</ref>
Since the zamindars were never able to undertake costly improvements to the land envisaged under the Permanent Settlement, some of which required the removal of the existing farmers, they soon became rentiers who lived off the rent from their tenant farmers.<ref name=metcalf-revenue/> In many areas, especially northern Bengal, they had to increasingly share the revenue with intermediate tenure holders, called ''jotedars'', who supervised farming in the villages.<ref name=metcalf-revenue/> Consequently, unlike the contemporaneous [[Enclosure movement]] in Britain, agriculture in Bengal remained the province of the subsistence farming of innumerable small [[paddy]] fields.<ref name=metcalf-revenue/>
The zamindari system was one of two principal revenue settlements undertaken by the Company in India.<ref>{{Harvnb|Roy|2000|pp=37-42}}</ref> In southern India, [[Thomas Munro]], who would later become Governor of [[Madras Presidency|Madras]], promoted the ''[[ryotwari]]'' system, in which the government settled land-revenue directly with the peasant farmers, or ''ryots''.<ref name=peers47>{{Harvnb|Peers|2006|p=47}}</ref> This was, in part, a consequence of the turmoil of the [[Anglo-Mysore Wars]], which had prevented the emergence of a class of large landowners; in addition, Munro and others felt that ''ryotwari'' was closer to traditional practice in the region and ideologically more progressive, allowing the benefits of Company rule to reach the lowest levels of rural society.<ref name=peers47/> At the heart of the ''ryotwari'' system was a particular theory of [[economic rent]]—and based on [[David Ricardo]]'s [[Law of Rent]]—promoted by [[utilitarian]] [[James Mill]] who formulated the Indian revenue policy between 1819 and 1830. "He believed that the government was the ultimate lord of the soil and should not renounce its right to 'rent', ''i.e.'' the profit left over on richer soil when wages and other working expenses had been settled."<ref name=brown-p66>{{Harvnb|Brown|1994|p=66}}</ref> Another keystone of the new system of temporary settlements was the classification of agricultural fields according to soil type and produce, with average rent rates fixed for the period of the settlement.<ref>{{Harvnb|Robb|2002|p=128}}</ref> According to Mill, taxation of land rent would promote efficient agriculture and simultaneously prevent the emergence of a "parasitic landlord class."<ref name=brown-p66/> Mill advocated ''ryotwari'' settlements which consisted of government measurement and assessment of each plot (valid for 20 or 30 years) and subsequent taxation which was dependent on the fertility of the soil.<ref name=brown-p66/> The taxed amount was nine-tenths of the "rent" in the early nineteenth century and gradually fell afterwards.<ref name=brown-p66/> However, in spite of the appeal of the ''ryotwari'' system's abstract principles, class hierarchies in southern Indian villages had not entirely disappeared—for example village headmen continued to hold sway—and peasant cultivators sometimes came to experience revenue demands they could not meet.<ref> {{Harvnb|Peers|2006|p=47}}, {{Harvnb|Brown|1994|p=65}}</ref> In the 1850s, a scandal erupted when it was discovered that some Indian revenue agents of the Company were using torture to meet the Company's revenue demands.<ref name=peers47/>
Land revenue settlements constituted a major administrative activity of the various governments in India under Company rule.<ref name=brown-p67>{{Harvnb|Brown|1994|p=67}}</ref> In all areas other than the [[Bengal Presidency]], land settlement work involved a continually repetitive process of surveying and measuring plots, assessing their quality, and recording landed rights, and constituted a large proportion of the work of [[Indian Civil Service]] officers working for the government.<ref name=brown-p67/> After the Company lost its trading rights, it became the single most important source of government revenue, roughly half of overall revenue in the middle of the 19th century;<ref name=brown-p67/> even so, between the years 1814 and 1859, the government of India ran debts in 33 years.<ref name=brown-p67/> With expanded dominion, even during non-deficit years, there was just enough money to pay the salaries of a threadbare administration, a skeleton police force, and the army.<ref name=brown-p67/>
==Political underpinnings of Company rule==
Since the Company operated under financial constraints, it had to set up ''political'' underpinnings for its rule.<ref name=brown-67>{{Harvnb|Brown|1994|p=67}}</ref> The most important such support came from the ''[[subsidiary alliance]]s'' with Indian princes during the first 75 years of Company rule.<ref name=brown-67/> In the early 19th century, the territories of these princes accounted for one-third of India.<ref name=brown-67/> When an Indian ruler, who was able to secure his territory, wanted to enter such an alliance, the Company welcomed it as an economical method of indirect rule, which did not involve the economic costs of direct administration or the political costs of gaining the support of alien subjects.<ref name=brown-68>{{Harvnb|Brown|1994|p=68}}</ref> In return, the Company undertook the "defense of these subordinate allies and treated them with traditional respect and marks of honor."<ref name=brown-68/>
==Army, Police, and Indian Civil Service==
In 1772, when [[Warren Hastings]] was appointed the first Governor-General of the [[Bengal Presidency|Presidency of Fort William]] with capital in [[Calcutta]], one of his first undertakings was the rapid expansion of the presidency's army. Since the available soldiers, or ''[[Sepoy]]s'', from Bengal—many of whom had fought against the British in the [[Battle of Plassey]]—were now suspect in British eyes, Hastings recruited farther west from the "major breeding ground of India's infantry in eastern [[Awadh]] and the lands around [[Benaras]]."<ref name=bayly-84-86>{{Harvnb|Bayly|1990|pp=84-86}}</ref> The [[Caste system in India|high caste]] rural Hindu [[Rajputs]] and [[Brahmans]] of this region (known as ''[[Purvanchal|purabias]]'' ([[Hindi]], lit. "easterners")) had earlier been recruited by [[Mughal Empire|Mughal]] armies for two hundred years;<ref name=bayly-84-86/> the East India Company was to continue this practice for the next 75 years, with these soldiers comprising up to eighty per cent of the Bengal army.<ref name=bayly-84-86/> However, in order to forestall any friction within the ranks, the Company also took pains to adapt its military practices to the requirements of their religious rituals. Consequently, these soldiers dined in separate facilities; in addition, overseas service, considered polluting to their caste, was not required of them, and the army soon came to officially recognize Hindu festivals. “This encouragement of high caste ritual status, however, left the government vulnerable to protest, even mutiny, whenever the sepoys detected infringement of their prerogatives.”({{Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|p=61}})
{| cellspacing="4"
| valign="top" |
{| cellpadding="3" border="1" class="wikitable"
! bgcolor="#DDDDDD" colspan="4" | East India Company armies after the Reorganization of 1796<ref name=igi-333>{{Harvnb|Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV|1907|p=333}}</ref>
|-
! British troops !! colspan="3" | Indian troops
|-
! !! Bengal Presidency !! Madras Presidency !! Bombay Presidency
|-
| || align="center" | 24,000 || align="center" | 24,000 || align="center" | 9,000
|-
! 13,000 !! colspan="3" | Total Indian troops: 57,000
|-
! colspan="4" | Grand total, British and Indian troops: 70,000
|}
|}
The Bengal army was used in military campaigns in other parts of India and abroad: in [[Java]] and [[Ceylon]], and also to provide crucial support to a weak [[Madras Presidency|Madras]] army in the [[Third Anglo-Mysore War]] in 1891.<ref name=bayly-84-86/> In contrast to the soldiers employed by armies of Indian rulers, the Bengal sepoys not only received high salaries, but also received them reliably, thanks in great measure to the Company's access to the vast land-revenue reserves of Bengal.<ref name=bayly-84-86/> Soon, bolstered both by the new musket technology and naval support, the Bengal army came to be widely regarded.<ref name=bayly-84-86/> The well-disciplined sepoys attired in red-coats and their British officers began to arouse "a kind of awe in their adversaries. In Maharashtra and in Java, the sepoys were regarded as the embodiment of demonic forces, sometimes of antique warrior heros. Indian rulers adopted red serge jackets for their own forces and retainers as if to capture their magical qualities."<ref name=bayly-84-86/>
In 1896, under pressure from the Company's Board of Directors in London, the Indian troops were reorganized and reduced during the tenure of [[John Shore, 1st Baron Teignmouth|John Shore]] as Governor-General.<ref name=igi-333/> However, the closing years of the 18th century saw, with Wellesley's campaigns, a new increase in the army strength. Thus in 1806, at the time of the [[Vellore Mutiny]], the combined strength of the three presidencies' armies stood at 154,500, making them one of the largest [[Standing army|standing armies]] in the world:<ref>{{Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|p=61}}, {{Harvnb|Bayly|1990|pp=84-86}}</ref>
{| cellspacing="4"
| valign="top" |
{| cellpadding="3" border="1" class="wikitable"
! bgcolor="#DDDDDD" colspan="4" | East India Company armies on the eve of the [[Vellore Mutiny]] of 1806<ref>{{Harvnb|Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV|1907|p=335}}</ref>
|-
! Presidencies !! British troops !! Indian troops !! Total
|-
| align="center" | Bengal || align="center" | 7,000 || align="center" | 57,000 || align="center" | 64,000
|-
| align="center" | Madras || align="center" | 11,000 || align="center" | 53,000 || align="center" | 64,000
|-
| align="center" | Bombay || align="center" | 6,500 || align="center" | 20,000 || align="center" | 26,500
|-
| align="center" | Total || align="center" | 24,500 || align="center" | 130,000 || align="center" | 154,500
|}
|}
As the East India Company expanded its territories, it added irregular "local corps," which were not as well trained as the army.<ref name=igi-337>{{Harvnb|Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV|1907|p=337}}</ref> In 1846, after the [[Second Anglo-Sikh War]], a frontier brigade was raised in the [[Cis-Sutlej states|Cis-Sutlej Hill States]] mainly for police work; in addition, in 1849, the "Punjab Irregular Force" was added on the frontier.<ref name=igi-337/> Two years later, this force consisted of "3 light field batteries, 5 regiments of cavalry, and 5 of infantry."<ref name=igi-337/> The following year, "a garrison company was added, ... a sixth infantry regiment (formed from the Sind Camel Corps) in 1853, and one mountain battery in 1856."<ref name=igi-337/> Similarly, a local force was raised after the annexation of Nagpur in 1854, and the "Oudh Irregular Force" was added after Oudh was annexed in 1856.<ref name=igi-337/> Earlier, as a result of the treaty of 1800, the [[Nizam of Hyderabad]] had begun to maintain a contingent force of 9,000 horse and 6,000 foot which was commanded by Company officers; in 1853, after a new treaty was negotiated, this force was assigned to [[Berar]] and stopped being a part of the Nizam's army.<ref name=igi-337/>
{| cellspacing="10"
| valign="top" |
{| cellpadding="3" border="1" class="wikitable"
! bgcolor="#DDDDDD" colspan="10" | East India Company armies on the eve of the [[Indian rebellion of 1857]]<ref name=igi-338>{{Harvnb|Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV|1907|p=338}}</ref>
|-
! Presidencies !! colspan="4" | British troops !! colspan="5" | Indian troops
|-
! !! Cavalry !! Artillery !! Infantry !! Total !! Cavalry !! Artillery !! Sappers<br>&<br>Miners !! Infantry !! Total
|-
| align="center" | Bengal || align="center" | 1,366 || align="center" | 3,063 || align="center" | 17,003 || align="center" | 21,432 || align="center" | 19,288 || align="center" | 4,734 || align="center" | 1,497 || align="center" | 112,052 || align="center" | 137,571
|-
| align="center" | Madras || align="center" | 639 || align="center" | 2,128 || align="center" | 5,941 || align="center" | 8,708 || align="center" | 3,202 || align="center" | 2,407 || align="center" | 1,270 || align="center" | 42,373 || align="center" | 49,252
|-
| align="center" | Bombay || align="center" | 681 || align="center" | 1,578 || align="center" | 7,101 || align="center" | 9,360 || align="center" | 8,433 || align="center" | 1,997 || align="center" | 637 || align="center" | 33,861 || align="center" | 44,928
|-
| align="center" | Local forces<br>&<br>contingents || || || || || align="center" | 6,796 || align="center" | 2,118 || || align="center" | 23,640 || align="center" | 32,554
|-
| align="center" | " " <br> (unclassified) || || || || || || || || || align="center" | 7,756
|-
|Military police || || || || || || || || || align="center" | 38,977
|-
|align="center" | '''Total''' || align="center" | 2,686 || align="center" | 6,769 || align="center" | 30,045 || align="center" | 39,500 || align="center" | 37,719 || align="center" | 11,256 || align="center" | 3,404 || align="center" | 211,926 || align="center" | 311,038
|-
! colspan="9" | '''Grand Total, British and Indian troops''' !! 350,538
|}
|}
In the [[Indian Rebellion of 1857]] almost the entire Bengal army, both regular and irregular, revolted.<ref name=igi-338/> It has been suggested that after the annexation of Oudh by the East India Company in 1856, many sepoys were disquieted both from losing their perquisites, as landed gentry, in the Oudh courts and from the anticipation of any increased land-revenue payments that the annexation might augur.<ref name=brownp88>{{Harvnb|Brown|1994|p=88}}</ref> With British victories in wars or with annexation, as the extent of British jurisdiction expanded, the soldiers were now not only expected to serve in less familiar regions (such as in [[Burma]] in the [[Anglo-Burmese Wars]] in 1856), but also make do without the "foreign service," remuneration that had previously been their due, and this caused resentment in the ranks.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|p=171}}, {{Harvnb|Bose|Jalal|2003|p=90}}</ref> The Bombay and Madras armies, and the Hyderabad contingent, however, remained loyal. The Punjab Irregular Force, not only didn't revolt, but also played an active role in suppressing the mutiny.<ref name=igi-338/> The rebellion would lead to a complete reorganization of the Indian army in 1858 in the new [[British Raj]].
==Trade: 1770-1860==
{{Quote box|quote="It was stated in evidence (in 1813) that the cotton and silk goods of India, up to this period, could be sold for a profit in the British market at a price from 50 to 60 per cent. lower than those fabricated in England. It consequently became necessary to protect the latter by duties of 70 or 80 per cent. on their value, or by positive prohibition. Had this not been the case, had not such prohibitory duties and decrees existed, the mills of Paisley and of Manchester would have been stopped in their outset, and could hardly have been again set in motion, even by the powers of steam. They were created by the sacrifice of the Indian manufactures. Had India been independent, she would have retaliated; would have imposed preventive duties upon British goods, and would thus have preserved her own productive industry from annihilation. This act of self-defence was not permitted her; she was at the mercy of the stranger. British goods were forced upon her without paying any duty; and the foreign manufacturer employed the arm of political injustice to keep down and ultimately strangle a competitor with whom he could not contend on equal terms."
|width = 33%
| align = right
|source=[[James Mill]] and [[Horace Hayman Wilson]] on grant of duty-free trade to British manufactures in India and imposition of duty on goods exported to England by Indian manufacturers
<ref>{{Harvnb|Mill|Wilson|1845|p=539}}</ref>}}
After gaining the right to collect revenue in Bengal in 1765, the Company largely ceased importing [[Bullion#Bullion|gold and silver]], which it had hitherto used to pay for goods shipped back to Britain.<ref name=robb-131-134>{{Harvnb|Robb|2004|pp=131-134}}</ref> In addition, as under [[Mughal Empire|Mughal rule]], land revenue collected in the [[Bengal Presidency]] helped finance the Company's wars in other part of India.<ref name=robb-131-134/> Consequently, in the period 1760-1800, Bengal's [[money supply]] was greatly diminished; furthermore, the closing of some local mints and close supervision of the rest, the fixing of exchange rates, and the standardization of [[coinage]], paradoxically, added to the economic downturn.<ref name=robb-131-134/> During the period, 1780-1860, India changed from being an exporter of processed goods for which it received payment in [[bullion]], to being an exporter of [[raw materials]] and a buyer of [[manufactured goods]].<ref name=robb-131-134/> More specifically, in the 1750s, mostly fine cotton and silk was exported from India to markets in Europe, Asia, and Africa; by the second quarter of the 19th century, raw materials, which chiefly consisted of raw cotton, opium, and indigo, accounted for most of India's exports.<ref name=peers-48-49>{{Harvnb|Peers|2006|pp=48-49}}</ref> Also, from the late 18th century British cotton mill industry began to lobby the government to both tax Indian imports and allow them access to markets in India.<ref name=peers-48-49/> Starting in the 1830s, British textiles began to appear in—and soon to inundate—the Indian markets, with the value of the textile imports growing from £5.2 million 1850 to £18.4 million in 1896.<ref>{{Harvnb|Farnie|1979|p=33}}</ref> The [[American Civil War]] too would have a major impact on India's cotton economy: with the outbreak of the war, American cotton was no longer available to British manufacturers; consequently, demand for Indian cotton soared, and the prices soon quadrupled.<ref>{{Harvnb|Misra|1999|p=18}}</ref> This led many farmers in India to switch to cultivating cotton as a quick cash crop; however, with the end of the war in 1865, the demand plummeted again, creating another downturn in the agricultural economy.<ref name=peers-48-49/>
At this time, the East India Company's trade with China began to grow as well. In the early 1800s demand for Chinese tea had greatly increased in Britain; since the money supply in India was restricted and the Company was indisposed to shipping bullion from Britain, it decided upon [[opium]], which had a large underground market in China and which was grown in many parts of India, as the most profitable form of payment.<ref name=peers-49>{{Harvnb|Peers|2006|p=49}}</ref> However, since the Chinese authorities had banned the importation and consumption of opium, the Company engaged them in the [[First Opium War]], and at its conclusion, under the [[Treaty of Nanjing]], gained access to five Chinese ports, [[Guangzhou]], [[Xiamen]], [[Fuzhou]], [[Shanghai]], and [[Ningbo]]; in addition, [[Hong Kong]] was ceded to the [[British Crown]].<ref name=peers-49/> Towards the end of the second quarter of the 19th century, opium export constituted 40% of India's exports.<ref>{{Harvnb|Washbrook|2001|p=403}}</ref>
<Center>
<Gallery>
Image:East india company factory sonargaon2.jpg|Photograph of East India Company factory in Painam, [[Sonargaon]], [[Bangladesh]], a major producer of the celebrated [[Dhaka]] [[muslin]]s.
Image:West view mellor muslin mill2.jpg|"Mellor Mill" in [[Marple, Greater Manchester|Marple]], Geater Manchester, England, was constructed in 1790-93 for manufacturing muslin cloth.
Image:Opium godown store patna2.jpg|Opium ''Godown'' (Storehouse) in [[Patna]], [[Bihar]] (c. 1814). Patna was the centre of the Company opium industry.
Image:Indigo factory bengal2.jpg|[[Indigo dye]] factory in [[Bengal]]. Bengal was the world's largest producer of [[Indigofera tinctoria|natural indigo]] in the 19th century.
</Gallery>
</Center>
Another major, though erratic, export item was [[indigo dye]], which was extracted from [[Indigofera tinctoria|natural indigo]], and which came to be grown in Bengal and northern [[Bihar]].<ref name=metcalf-metcalf-76>{{Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|p=76}}</ref> In late 17th and early 18th century Europe, blue apparel was favored as a fashion, and blue uniforms were common in the military; consequently, the demand for the dye was high.<ref name=bose-jalal-71-72>{{Harvnb|Bose|Jalal|2003|pp=71-72}}</ref> In 1788, the East India Company offered advances to ten British planters to grow indigo; however, since the new (landed) property rights defined in the [[Permanent Settlement]], didn't allow them, as Europeans, to buy agricultural land, they had to in turn offer cash advances to local peasants, and sometimes coerce them, to grow the crop.<ref name=bando-125>{{Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|p=125}}</ref> The European demand for the dye, however, proved to be unstable, and both creditors and cultivators bore the risk of the market crashes in 1827 and 1847.<ref name=metcalf-metcalf-76/> The peasant discontent in Bengal eventually led to the ''Indigo rebellion'' in 1859-60 and to the end of indigo production there.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|p=125}}, {{Harvnb|Bose|Jalal|2003|pp=71-72}} </ref> In [[Bihar]], however, indigo production continued well into the 20th century; the centre of indigo production there, [[Champaran]] district, became the staging ground, in 1917, for [[Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi]]'s first experiment in [[non-violent resistance]] against the [[British Raj]].<ref name=bose-jalal-71-72/>
==Law==
Beginning with the [[Mayor's Court]], established in 1727 for civil litigation in Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras, justice in the interior came under the company's jurisdiction. In 1772 an elaborate judicial system, known as ''[[adalat]]'', established civil and criminal jurisdictions along with a complex set of codes or rules of procedure and evidence. Both Hindu [[pundit (India)|pandits]] and Muslim qazis ([[sharia]] court judges) were recruited to aid the presiding judges in interpreting their customary laws, but in other instances, British common and statutory laws became applicable. In extraordinary situations where none of these systems was applicable, the judges were enjoined to adjudicate on the basis of "justice, equity, and good conscience." The legal profession provided numerous opportunities for educated and talented Indians who were unable to secure positions in the company, and, as a result, Indian lawyers later dominated nationalist politics and reform movements.
==Education==
Education for the most part was left to the charge of Indians or to private agents who imparted instruction in the vernaculars. But in 1813, the British became convinced of their "duty" to awaken the Indians from intellectual slumber by exposing them to British literary traditions, earmarking a paltry sum for the cause. Controversy between two groups of Europeans - the "[[Orientalist]]s" and "Anglicists" - over how the money was to be spent prevented them from formulating any consistent policy until 1835 when [[William Cavendish Bentinck]], the governor-general from 1828 to 1835, finally broke the impasse by resolving to introduce the [[English language]] as the medium of instruction. English replaced [[Persian language|Persian]] in public administration and education.
==Social Reform==
The company's education policies in the 1830s tended to reinforce existing lines of socioeconomic division in society rather than bringing general liberation from ignorance and superstition. Whereas the Hindu English-educated minority spearheaded many social and religious reforms either in direct response to government policies or in reaction to them, Muslims as a group initially failed to do so, a position they endeavored to reverse. Western-educated Hindu elites sought to rid Hinduism of its much criticized social evils: the [[caste system]], child marriage, and ''sati''. Religious and social activist [[Ram Mohan Roy]] (1772-1833), who founded the [[Brahmo Samaj]] (Society of Brahma) in 1828, displayed a readiness to synthesize themes taken from Christianity, [[Deism]], and [[Monism#Hinduism|Indian monism]], while other individuals in Bombay and Madras initiated literary and debating societies that gave them a forum for open discourse. The exemplary educational attainments and skillful use of the press by these early reformers enhanced the possibility of effecting broad reforms without compromising societal values or religious practices.
==Infrastructure Development==
The 1850s witnessed the introduction of the three "engines of social improvement" that heightened the British illusion of permanence in India. They were the [[railroad]]s, the [[telegraph]], and the uniform [[mail|postal service]], inaugurated during the tenure of Dalhousie as governor-general. The first railroad lines were built in 1850 from Howrah ([[Haora]], across the [[Hughli River]] from [[Calcutta]]) inland to the coalfields at [[Raniganj]], Bihar, a distance of 240 kilometers. In 1851 the first electric telegraph line was laid in Bengal and soon linked [[Agra]], Bombay, Calcutta, Lahore, [[Varanasi]], and other cities. The three different presidency or regional postal systems merged in 1854 to facilitate uniform methods of communication at an all-India level. With uniform postal rates for letters and newspapers - one-half anna and one anna, respectively (sixteen annas equalled one [[rupee]]) - communication between the rural and the metropolitan areas became easier and faster. The increased ease of communication and the opening of highways and waterways accelerated the movement of troops, the transportation of raw materials and goods to and from the interior, and the exchange of commercial information.
The railroads did not break down the social or cultural distances between various groups but tended to create new categories in travel. Separate compartments in the trains were reserved exclusively for the ruling class, separating the educated and wealthy from ordinary people. Similarly, when the Sepoy Rebellion was quelled in 1858, a British official exclaimed that "the telegraph saved India." He envisaged, of course, that British interests in India would continue indefinitely.
==Features of Company Rule==
==See also==
*[[British Raj]]
*[[Secretary of State for India]]
*[[Governor-General of India]]
*[[Government of India Act]]
*[[History of Bangladesh]]
*[[History of India]]
*[[History of Pakistan]]
==Notes==
{{reflist|2}}
==References==
<!-- ----------------------------------------------------------
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Footnotes for a
discussion of different citation methods and how to generate
footnotes using the <ref>, </ref> and <reference /> tags
----------------------------------------------------------- -->
===Contemporary general histories===
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Bandyopadhyay
| first1=Sekhar
| authorlink1=
| year=2004
| title=From Plassey to Partition: A History of Modern India
| place=
| publisher=New Delhi and London: Orient Longmans. Pp. xx, 548.
| isbn=8125025960
| url=https://www.orientlongman.com/display.asp?isbn=978-81-250-2596-2
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Bose
| first1=Sugata
| authorlink1=Sugata Bose
| last2=Jalal
| first2=Ayesha
| authorlink2=Ayesha Jalal
| year=2003
| title=Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy
| place=
| publisher=London and New York: Routledge, 2nd edition. Pp. xiii, 304
| isbn=0-415-30787-2
| url=
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Brown
| first1=Judith M.
| authorlink=
| year=1994
| title=Modern India: The Origins of an Asian Democracy
| place=
| publisher=Oxford and New York: [[Oxford University Press]]. Pp. xiii, 474
| isbn=0198731132
| url=http://www.oup.com/uk/catalogue/?ci=9780198731139
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Judd
| first1=Dennis
| authorlink=
| year=2004
| title=The Lion and the Tiger: The Rise and Fall of the British Raj, 1600-1947
| place=
| publisher=Oxford and New York: [[Oxford University Press]]. Pp. xiii, 280
| isbn=0192803581
| url=http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/HistoryWorld/India/?view=usa&ci=9780192803580
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Kulke
| first1=Hermann
| last2=Rothermund
| first2=Dietmar
| authorlink=
| year=2004
| title=A History of India
| place=
| publisher=4th edition. Routledge, Pp. xii, 448
| isbn=0415329205
| url=
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Ludden
| first1=David
| authorlink=
| year=2002
| title=India And South Asia: A Short History
| place=
| publisher=Oxford: Oneworld Publications. Pp. xii, 306
| isbn=1851682376
| url=http://www.oneworld-publications.com/cgi-bin/cart/commerce.cgi?pid=145&log_pid=yes
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Markovits
| first1=Claude (ed)
| authorlink=
| year=2005
| title=A History of Modern India 1480-1950 (Anthem South Asian Studies)
| place=
| publisher=Anthem Press. Pp. 607
| isbn=1843311526
| url=
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Metcalf
| first1=Barbara
| last2=Metcalf
| first2=Thomas R.
| authorlink=
| year=2006
| title=A Concise History of Modern India (Cambridge Concise Histories)
| place=
| publisher=Cambridge and New York: [[Cambridge University Press]]. Pp. xxxiii, 372
| isbn=0521682258
| url=
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Mill
| first1=James
| last2=Wilson
| first2=Horace H
| authorlink1=James Mill
|authorlink2=Horace Hayman Wilson
| year=1845
| title=The History of British India
| place=London
| publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] and J. Madden
| oclc=63943320
| url=http://books.google.co.in/books?id=RlQBAAAAQAAJ&dq=%22employed+the+arm+of+political+injustice%22&source=gbs_summary_s&cad=0
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Peers
| first1=Douglas M.
| authorlink=
| year=2006
| title=India under Colonial Rule 1700-1885
| place=
| publisher=Harlow and London: Pearson Longmans. Pp. xvi, 163
| isbn=058231738
| url=
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Robb
| first1=Peter
| authorlink=
| year=2004
| title=A History of India (Palgrave Essential Histories)
| place=
| publisher=Houndmills, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Pp. xiv, 344
| isbn=0333691296
| url=
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Spear
| first1=Percival
| authorlink=
| year=1990
| title=A History of India, Volume 2
| place=
| publisher=New Delhi and London: Penguin Books. Pp. 298
| isbn=0140138366
| url=
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Stein
| first1=Burton
| authorlink=
| year=2001
| title=A History of India
| place=
| publisher=New Delhi and Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. xiv, 432
| isbn=0195654463
| url=
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Wolpert
| first1=Stanley
| authorlink=Stanley Wolpert
| year=2003
| title=A New History of India
| place=
| publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 544
| isbn=0195166787
| url=
}}.
===Monographs and collections===
*{{Harvard reference | last = Anderson | first = Clare | year = 2007 | title = Indian Uprising of 1857–8: Prisons, Prisoners and Rebellion| publisher = New York: Anthem Press, Pp. 217 | isbn = 9781843312499 | url = http://atlantis.terrassl.net/anthempress.com/product_info.php?cPath=52&products_id=293&osCsid=9a2s9o8mdu8066m551rr407123 }}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Bayly
| first1=C. A.
| authorlink1=Christopher Alan Bayly
| year=1990
| title=Indian Society and the Making of the British Empire (The New Cambridge History of India)
| place=
| publisher=Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 248
| isbn=0521386500
| url=
}}.
*{{Harvard reference| last1=Bayly| first1=C. A. | authorlink1=Christopher Alan Bayly
| year=2000| title=Empire and Information: Intelligence Gathering and Social Communication in India, 1780-1870 (Cambridge Studies in Indian History and Society)| place=| publisher=Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 426| isbn=0521663601| url=}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Bose
| first1=Sumit
| authorlink1=
| year=1993
| title=Peasant Labour and Colonial Capital: Rural Bengal since 1770 (New Cambridge History of India)
| place=
| publisher=Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press.
| isbn=
| url=
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Chandavarkar
| first1=Rajnarayan
| authorlink=
| year=1998
| title=Imperial Power and Popular Politics: Class, Resistance and the State in India, 1850-1950
| place=
| publisher=(Cambridge Studies in Indian History & Society). Cambridge and London: [[Cambridge University Press]]. Pp. 400
| isbn=0521596920
| url=
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last = Farnie
| first = D. A.
| year = 1979
| title = The English Cotton Industry and the World Market, 1815-1896
| publisher = Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Pp. 414
| isbn = 0198224788
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Guha
| first1=R.
| authorlink=
| year=1995
| title=A Rule of Property for Bengal: An Essay on the Idea of the Permanent Settlement
| place=
| publisher=Durham, NC: Duke University Press
| isbn=0521596920
| url=
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last = Marshall
| first = P. J.
| year = 1987
| title = Bengal: The British Bridgehead, Eastern India, 1740-1828
| place =
| publisher = Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press
| isbn =
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last = Marshall
| first = P. J.
| year = 2007
| title = The Making and Unmaking of Empires: Britain, India, and America c.1750-1783
| publisher = Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 400
| isbn = 0199226660
| url = http://www.us.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/HistoryWorld/British/18thC/?view=usa&ci=9780199278954
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last=Metcalf
| first=Thomas R.
| authorlink=
| year=1991
| title=The Aftermath of Revolt: India, 1857-1870
| place=
| publisher=Riverdale Co. Pub. Pp. 352
| isbn=8185054991
| url=
}}
*{{Harvard reference | last = Metcalf | first = Thomas R. | year = 1997 | title = Ideologies of the Raj | publisher = Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press, Pp. 256 | isbn = 0521589371}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last = Misra
| first = Maria
| year = 1999
| title = Business, Race, and Politics in British India, c.1850-1860
| publisher = Delhi: Oxford University Press. Pp. 264
| isbn = 0198207115
}}
*{{Harvard reference | last = Porter | first = Andrew (ed.) | year = 2001 | title = Oxford History of the British Empire: Nineteenth Century | publisher = Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 800 | isbn = 0199246785 | url = http://www.amazon.com/Oxford-History-British-Empire-Nineteenth/dp/0199246785}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Tomlinson
| first1=B. R.
| authorlink1=
| year=1993
| title=The Economy of Modern India, 1860-1970 (The New Cambridge History of India, III.3)
| place=
| publisher=Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press.
| isbn=
| url=
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last = Travers
| first = Robert
| year = 2007
| title = Ideology and Empire in Eighteenth-Century India: The British in Bengal (Cambridge Studies in Indian History and Society)
| publisher: Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 292
| isbn = 0521050030
| url = http://www.cambridge.org/uk/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521861458
}}
===Articles in journals or collections===
*{{Harvard reference
| last1 = Banthia
| first1 = Jayant
| last2 = Dyson
| first2 = Tim
| year = 1999
| title = Smallpox in Nineteenth-Century India
| journal = Population and Development Review
| volume = 25
| issue = 4
| pages = 649-689
| url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0098-7921%28199912%2925%3A4%3C649%3ASINI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-K
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last = Caldwell
| first = John C.
| year = 1998
| title = Malthus and the Less Developed World: The Pivotal Role of India
| journal = Population and Development Review
| volume = 24
| issue = 4
| pages = 675-696
| url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0098-7921%28199812%2924%3A4%3C675%3AMATLDW%3E2.0.CO%3B2-%23
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Drayton
| first1=Richard
| last2=
| first2=
| chapter=Science, Medicine, and the British Empire
| pages = 264-276
| date=
| year=2001
| editor1-last=Winks
| editor1-first=Robin
| editor2-last=
| editor2-first=
| title=Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography
| volume=
| place=
| publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
| publication-year=2001
| isbn=0199246807
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Frykenberg
| first1=Robert E.
| last2=
| first2=
| chapter=India to 1858
| pages = 194-213
| date=
| year=2001
| editor1-last=Winks
| editor1-first=Robin
| editor2-last=
| editor2-first=
| title=Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography
| volume=
| place=
| publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
| publication-year=2001
| isbn=0199246807
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last = Harnetty
| first = Peter
| year = 1991
| title = 'Deindustrialization' Revisited: The Handloom Weavers of the Central Provinces of India, c. 1800-1947
| journal = Modern Asian Studies
| volume = 25
| issue = 3
| pages = 455-510
| url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-749X%28199107%2925%3A3%3C455%3A%27RTHWO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-5
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Heuman
| first1=Gad
| last2=
| first2=
| chapter=Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Abolition
| pages = 315-326
| date=
| year=2001
| editor1-last=Winks
| editor1-first=Robin
| editor2-last=
| editor2-first=
| title=Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography
| volume=
| place=
| publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
| publication-year=2001
| isbn=0199246807
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last = Klein
| first = Ira
| year = 1988
| title = Plague, Policy and Popular Unrest in British India
| journal = Modern Asian Studies
| volume = 22
| issue = 4
| pages = 723-755
| url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-749X%281988%2922%3A4%3C723%3APPAPUI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-B
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last = Klein
| first = Ira
| year = 2000
| title = Materialism, Mutiny and Modernization in British India
| journal = Modern Asian Studies
| volume = 34
| issue = 3
| pages = 545-580
| url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-749X%28200007%2934%3A3%3C545%3AMMAMIB%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Kubicek
| first1=Robert
| last2=
| first2=
| chapter=British Expansion, Empire, and Technological Change
| pages = 247-269
| date=
| year=2001
| editor1-last=Porter
| editor1-first=Andrew
| editor2-last=
| editor2-first=
| title=Oxford History of the British Empire: The Nineteenth Century
| volume=
| place=
| publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
| publication-year=2001
| isbn=0199246785
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last = Raj
| first = Kapil
| year = 2000
| title = Colonial Encounters and the Forging of New Knowledge and National Identities: Great Britain and India, 1760-1850
| journal = Osiris, 2nd Series
| volume = 15
| issue = Nature and Empire: Science and the Colonial Enterprise
| pages = 119-134
| url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0369-7827%282000%292%3A15%3C119%3ACEATFO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-9
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last = Ray
| first = Rajat Kanta
| year = 1995
| title = Asian Capital in the Age of European Domination: The Rise of the Bazaar, 1800-1914
| journal = Modern Asian Studies
| volume = 29
| issue = 3
| pages = 449-554
| url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-749X%28199507%2929%3A3%3C449%3AACITAO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last = Roy
| first = Tirthankar
| year = 2002
| title = Economic History and Modern India: Redefining the Link
| journal = The Journal of Economic Perspectives
| volume = 16
| issue = 3
| pages = 109-130
| url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0895-3309%28200222%2916%3A3%3C109%3AEHAMIR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-F}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Tomlinson
| first1=B. R.
| last2=
| first2=
| chapter=Economics and Empire: The Periphery and the Imperial Economy
| pages = 53-74
| date=
| year=2001
| editor1-last=Porter
| editor1-first=Andrew
| editor2-last=
| editor2-first=
| title=Oxford History of the British Empire: The Nineteenth Century
| volume=
| place=
| publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
| publication-year=2001
| isbn=0199246785
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Washbrook
| first1=D. A.
| last2=
| first2=
| chapter=India, 1818-1860: The Two Faces of Colonialism
| pages = 395-421
| date=
| year=2001
| editor1-last=Porter
| editor1-first=Andrew
| editor2-last=
| editor2-first=
| title=Oxford History of the British Empire: The Nineteenth Century
| volume=
| place=
| publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
| publication-year=2001
| isbn=0199246785
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Wylie
| first1=Diana
| last2=
| first2=
| chapter=Disease, Diet, and Gender: Late Twentieth Century Perspectives on Empire
| pages = 277-289
| date=
| year=2001
| editor1-last=Winks
| editor1-first=Robin
| editor2-last=
| editor2-first=
| title=Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography
| volume=
| place=
| publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
| publication-year=2001
| isbn=0199246807
}}
===Classic histories and gazetteers===
*{{Harvard reference
| last = Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV
| first =
| title = The Indian Empire, Administrative
| publisher = Published under the authority of His Majesty's Secretary of State for India in Council, Oxford at the Clarendon Press. Pp. xxx, 1 map, 552.
| year = 1907
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Majumdar
| first1=R. C.
| authorlink1
| last2=Raychaudhuri
| first2=H. C.
| authorlink2=
| last3=Datta
| first3=Kalikinkar
| year=1950
| title=An Advanced History of India
| place=
| publisher=London: Macmillan and Company Limited. 2nd edition. Pp. xiii, 1122, 7 maps, 5 coloured maps.
| isbn=
| url=
}}.
*{{Harvard reference
| last1=Smith
| first1=Vincent A.
| authorlink1
| year=1921
| title=India in the British Period: Being Part III of the Oxford History of India
| place=
| publisher=Oxford: At the Clarendon Press. 2nd edition. Pp. xxiv, 316 (469-784)
| isbn=
| url=
}}.
{{refend}}
*{{loc}} - [http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/intoc.html India] [http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/pktoc.html Pakistan]
[[Category:British rule in India]]
[[Category:British East India Company]]