Everything about British Raj totally explained
British Raj (
rāj, lit. "reign" in
Hindustani) primarily refers to the British rule in the
Indian subcontinent between 1858 and 1947; it can also refer to the
region of the rule, or the
period of dominion. The region, commonly called
India in contemporary usage, included areas directly administered by the
United Kingdom (contemporaneously, "British India") as well as the
princely states ruled by individual rulers under the
paramountcy of the
British Crown. After 1876, the resulting
political union was officially called the
Indian Empire and issued passports under that name. As
India, it was a of the
League of Nations, and a member nation of the
Summer Olympics in 1900, 1920, 1928, 1932, and 1936.
The system of governance was instituted in 1858, when the rule of the
British East India Company was transferred to the Crown in the person of
Queen Victoria (and who, in 1876, was proclaimed
Empress of India), and lasted until 1947, when the British Indian Empire was
partitioned into two sovereign
dominion states, the
Union of India (later the
Republic of India) and the
Dominion of Pakistan (later the
Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the
People's Republic of Bangladesh).
Geographical extent of the Raj
The British
Indian Empire included the regions of present-day
India,
Pakistan, and
Bangladesh, and, in addition, at various times,
Aden (from 1858 to 1937),
Lower Burma (from 1858 to 1937),
Upper Burma (from 1886 to 1937),
British Somaliland (briefly from 1884 to 1898), and
Singapore (briefly from 1858 to 1867). Burma was directly administered by the British Crown from 1937 until its independence in 1948. Among other countries in the region,
Ceylon (now
Sri Lanka), which was ceded to the
United Kingdom in 1802 under the
Treaty of Amiens, was a British
Crown Colony, but not part of British India. The kingdoms of
Nepal and
Bhutan, both having fought wars with the British and subsequently signed treaties with them, were recognized by the British as independent states. The Kingdom of
Sikkim was established as a
princely state after the
Anglo-Sikkimese Treaty of 1861, however, the issue of sovereignty was left undefined. The
Maldive Islands were a British
protectorate from 1867 to 1965, but not part of British India.
British India and the Native States
The British Indian Empire (contemporaneously
India) consisted of two divisions:
British India and the
Native States or
Princely States. In its Interpretation Act of 1889, the British Parliament adopted the following definitions:
The expression British India shall mean all territories and places within [[BritishCrown |
Suzerainty over 175 Princely States, including some of the largest and most important, was exercised (in the name of the
British Crown) by central government of British India under the Viceroy; the remaining, approximately 500, states were dependents of the provincial governments of British India under a Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, or Chief Commissioner (as the case might have been). A clear distinction between "dominion" and "suzerainty" was supplied by the jurisdiction of the courts of law: the law of British India rested upon the laws passed by the British Parliament and the legislative powers those laws vested in the various governments of British India, both central and local; in contrast, the courts of the Princely States existed under the authority of the respective rulers of those states.
Province of British India
Minor Province
Under suzerainty of the Central Government
Five Large States
| Five large Princely States in direct political relations with the Central Government in India |
| Name of Princely State |
Area in Square Miles |
Population in 1901 |
Approximate Revenue of the State (in hundred thousand Rupees) |
Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler |
Gun-Salute for Ruler |
Designation of local political officer |
| Gwalior |
25,041 |
2.93 million (Chiefly Hindus) |
163 |
Maharaja, Maratha, Hindu |
19 (21 within Gwalior) |
Resident at Gwalior |
| Indore |
9,500 |
0.85 million (Chiefly Hindu) |
72 |
Maharaja, Maratha, Hindu |
19 (21 within Indore) |
Resident at Indore |
| Bhopal |
6,859 |
0.66 million (mostly Hindu) |
29 |
Nawab(m)/Begum(f), Afghan, Muslim |
19 (21 within Bhopal) |
Political Agent in Bhopal |
| Rewah |
13,000 |
1.33 million (chiefly Hindu) |
29 |
Maharaja, Baghel Rajput, Hindu |
17 |
Political agent in Baghelkhand |
| 144 smaller and minor states |
22,995 |
2.74 million (Chiefly Hindu) |
129 |
|
|
|
| Total |
77,395 |
8.51 million |
421 |
|
|
| 20 Princely States forming the Rajputana Agency |
| Name of Princely State |
Area in Square Miles |
Population in 1901 |
Approximate Revenue of the State (in hundred thousand Rupees) |
Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler |
Gun-Salute for Ruler |
Designation of local political officer |
| Udaipur (Mewar) |
12,691 |
1.02 million (Chiefly Hindus and Bhils) |
24 |
Maharana, Sisodia Rajput, Hindu |
21 (including two guns personal to the then ruler) |
Resident in Mewar |
| Jaipur |
15,579 |
2.66 million (Chiefly Hindu) |
62 |
Maharaja, Kachwaha Rajput, Hindu |
21 (including two guns personal to the then ruler) |
Resident at Jaipur |
| Jodhpur (Marwar) |
34,963 |
1.94 million (mostly Hindu) |
56 |
Maharaja, Rathor Rajput, Hindu |
17 |
Resident in the Western States of Rajputana |
| Bikaner |
23,311 |
0.58 million (chiefly Hindu) |
23 |
Maharaja, Rathor Rajput, Hindu |
17 |
Political agent in Bikaner |
| 16 other states |
42,374 |
3.64 million (Chiefly Hindu) |
155 |
|
|
|
| Total |
128,918 |
9.84 million |
320 |
|
|
Baluchistan Agency
| 2 Princely States forming the Baluchistan Agency |
| Name of Princely State |
Area in Square Miles |
Population in 1901 |
Approximate Revenue of the State (in hundred thousand Rupees) |
Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler |
Gun-Salute for Ruler |
Designation of local political officer |
| Kalat |
71,593 |
0.37 million (Chiefly Sunni Muslims) |
8 |
Khan or Wali, Brahui, Sunni Muslim |
19 |
Political Agent in Kalat |
| Las Bela |
6,441 |
56 thousand (Chiefly Sunni Muslim) |
2 |
Jam, Kureshi Arab, Sunni Muslim |
|
Political Agent in Kalat |
| Total |
78,034 |
0.43 million |
10 |
|
|
Under suzerainty of a Provincial Government
Burma (52 States)
| 52 States in Burma: all except the Karen States were included in British India |
| Name of Princely State |
Area in Square Miles |
Population in 1901 |
Approximate Revenue of the State (in hundred thousand Rupees) |
Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler |
Gun-Salute for Ruler |
Designation of local political officer |
| Hsipaw (Thibaw) |
5,086 |
105,000 (Buddhist) |
3 |
Sawbwa, Shan, Buddhist |
9 |
Superintendent, Northern Shan States |
| Kengtung |
12,000 |
190,000 (Buddhist) |
1 |
Sawbwa, Shan, Buddhist |
9 |
Superintendent Southern Shan States |
| Mongnai |
2,717 |
44,000 (Buddhist) |
0.5 |
Sawbwa, Shan, Buddhist |
9 |
Superintendent Southern Shan States |
| 5 Karen States |
4,830 |
45,795 (Buddhist and Animists) |
0.5 |
|
|
Superintendent Southern Shan States |
| 44 Other States |
42,198 |
792,152 (Buddhist and Animist) |
8.5 |
|
|
|
| Total |
67,011 |
1,177,987 |
13.5 |
|
|}
| 30 States under the suzerainty of the Provincial Government of Bengal |
| Name of Princely State |
Area in Square Miles |
Population in 1901 |
Approximate Revenue of the State (in hundred thousand Rupees) |
Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler |
Gun-Salute for Ruler |
Designation of local political officer |
| Sikkim |
2,818 |
59,014 (chiefly Buddhist and Hindu) |
1 |
Maharaja, Tibetan, Buddhist |
15 |
Political Officer, Sikkim |
| Cooch Behar |
1,307 |
566,974 (chiefly Hindu and Muslim) |
24 |
Maharaja, Kshattriya, Brahmo |
13 |
Commissioner of Rajshahi (ex officio Political Agent) |
| Hill Tippera |
4,086 |
173,325 (chiefly Hindu) |
7 |
Raja, Kshattriya, Hindu |
13 |
Commissioner of Chittagong (ex officio Political Agent) |
| Bhutan |
20,000 |
250,000 (Buddhist) |
2 |
Deb Raja, Bhotia, Buddhist |
|
Commissioner of Rajshahi (ex officio Political Agent) |
| 26 Other States |
30,441 |
2,949,231 |
44 |
|
|
|
| Total |
58,652 |
3,998,544 |
78 |
|
|}
| 5 States under the suzerainty of the Provincial Government of Madras |
| Name of Princely State |
Area in Square Miles |
Population in 1901 |
Approximate Revenue of the State (in hundred thousand Rupees) |
Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler |
Gun-Salute for Ruler |
Designation of local political officer |
| Travancore |
7,091 |
2,952,157 (chiefly Hindu and Christian) |
100 |
Maharaja, Kshattriya, Hindu |
21 (including two guns personal to the then ruler) |
Resident in Travancore and Cochin |
| Cochin |
1,362 |
812,025 (chiefly Hindu and Christian) |
27 |
Raja, Kshattriya, Hindu |
17 |
Resident in Travancore and Cochin |
| Padukkottai |
1,100 |
380,440 (Hindu) |
11 |
Raja, Kallar, Hindu |
11 |
Collector of Trichinopoly (ex officio Political Agent) |
| 2 minor states |
416 |
43,464 |
3 |
|
|
|
| Total |
9,969 |
4,188,086 |
141 |
|
|
Bombay (354 States)
| 354 states under the suzerainty of the Provincial Government of Bombay |
| Name of Princely State |
Area in Square Miles |
Population in 1901 |
Approximate Revenue of the State (in hundred thousand Rupees) |
Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler |
Gun-Salute for Ruler |
Designation of local political officer |
| Kolhapur |
2,855 |
910,011 (chiefly Hindus) |
48 |
Maharaja, Kshatriya, Hindu |
19 |
Political Agent for Kolhapur |
| Cutch |
7,616 |
488,022 (chiefly Hindus) |
20 |
Maharao, Jadeja Rajput, Hindu |
17 |
Political Agent in Cutch |
| Khairpur |
6,050 |
199,313 (chiefly Muslims) |
13 |
Mir, Talpur Baloch, Muslim |
15 |
Political Agent for Khairpur |
| Junagarh |
3,284 |
395,428 (chiefly Hindus) |
27 |
Nawab, Pathan, Muslim |
11 |
Agent to the Governor in Kathiawar |
| Navanagar |
3,791 |
336,779 (chiefly Hindus) |
31 |
Jam Sahib, Jadeja Rajput, Hindu |
11 |
Agent to the Governor in Kathiawar |
| 349 other states |
42,165 |
4,579,095 |
281 |
|
|
|
| Total |
65,761 |
6,908,648 |
420 |
|
|}
| Two states under the suzerainty of the Provincial Government of the United Provinces |
| Name of Princely State |
Area in Square Miles |
Population in 1901 |
Approximate Revenue of the State (in hundred thousand Rupees) |
Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler |
Gun-Salute for Ruler |
Designation of local political officer |
| Rampur |
899 |
533,212 (chiefly Hindus and Muslims) |
33 |
Nawab, Pathan, Muslim |
13 |
Commissioner for Bareilly (ex officio Political Agent) |
| Tehri (Garhwal) |
4,180 |
268,885 (chiefly Hindus) |
3 |
Raja, Kshatriya Hindu |
11 |
Commissioner of Kumaun (ex officio Political Agent) |
| Total |
5,079 |
802,097 |
36 |
|
|
| 15 States under the suzerainty of the Provincial Government of the Central Provinces |
| Name of Princely State |
Area in Square Miles |
Population in 1901 |
Approximate Revenue of the State (in hundred thousand Rupees) |
Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler |
Gun-Salute for Ruler |
Designation of local political officer |
| Kalahandi |
3,745 |
284,465 (chiefly Hindus) |
4 |
Raja, Kshatriya, Hindu |
9 |
Political Agent for the Chattisgarh Feudatories |
| Bastar |
13,062 |
306,501 (chiefly Animists) |
3 |
Raja, Kshatriya, Hindu |
|
Political Agent for the Chattisgarh Feudatories |
| 13 other states |
12,628 |
1,339,353 (chiefly Hindus) |
16 |
|
11 |
|
| Total |
29,435 |
1,996,383 |
21 |
|
|
| 34 states under the suzerainty of the Provincial Government of the Punjab |
| Name of Princely State |
Area in Square Miles |
Population in 1901 |
Approximate Revenue of the State (in hundred thousand Rupees) |
Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler |
Gun-Salute for Ruler |
Designation of local political officer |
| Bahawalpur |
15,000 |
720,877 (chiefly Muslims) |
24 |
Nawab, Daudputra, Muslim |
17 |
Political Agent for Phulkian States and Bahawalpur |
| Patiala |
5,412 |
1,596,692 (chiefly Hindus and Sikhs) |
57 |
Maharaja, Sidhu Jat, Sikh |
17 |
Political Agent for Phulkian States and Bahawalpur |
| Nabha |
928 |
297,949 (chiefly Hindus and Sikhs) |
12 |
Raja, Sidhu Jat, Sikh |
15 (including 4 guns personal to the then ruler |
Political Agent for Phulkian States and Bahawalpur |
| Jind |
1,259 |
282,003 (chiefly Hindus and Sikhs) |
15 |
Raja, Sidhu Jat, Sikh |
11 |
Political Agent for Phulkian States and Bahawalpur |
| Kapurthala |
630 |
314,351 (chiefly Muslims and Hindus) |
13 |
Raja, Ahluwalia, Sikh |
11 |
Commissioner of the Jullundur Division (ex-officio Political Agent) |
| Faridkot |
642 |
124,912 (Sikhs, Hindus, and Muslims) |
4 |
Raja, Barar Jat, Sikh |
11 |
Commissioner of the Jullundur Division (ex-officio Political Agent) |
| 28 other states |
12,661 |
1,087,614 |
30 |
|
|
|
| Total |
36,532 |
4,424,398 |
155 |
|
|
Assam (26 States)
| 26 States under the suzerainty of the Provincial Government of Assam |
| Name of Princely State |
Area in Square Miles |
Population in 1901 |
Approximate Revenue of the State (in hundred thousand Rupees) |
Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler |
Gun-Salute for Ruler |
Designation of local political officer |
| Manipur |
8,456 |
284,465 (chiefly Hindus and Animists) |
4 |
Raja, Kshatriya, Hindu |
11 |
Political Agent in Manipur |
| 25 Khasi States |
3,900 |
110,519 (Khasis and Christians) |
0.5 |
|
|
Deputy Commissioner, Khasi and Jaintia Hills |
| Total |
12,356 |
394,984 |
4.5 |
|
|
Organization of the British Raj
Following the
Indian Rebellion of 1857, the
Act for the Better Government of India (1858) made changes in the governance of India at three levels: in the imperial government in
London, in the central government in
Calcutta, and in the provincial governments in the presidencies (and later in the provinces).
In London, it provided for a cabinet-level
Secretary of State for India and a fifteen-member
Council of India, whose members were required, as one prerequisite of membership, to have spent at least ten years in India and to have done so no more than ten years before. Although the Secretary of State formulated the policy instructions to be communicated to India, he was required in most instances to consult the Council, but especially so in matters relating to spending of Indian revenues. From 1858 until 1947, twenty seven individuals would serve as Secretary of State for India and direct the
India Office; these included: Sir
Charles Wood (
1859 -
1866),
Marquess of Salisbury (
1874 -
1878) (later three-time Prime Minister of Britain),
John Morley (
1905 -
1910) (initiator of the
Minto-Morley Reforms),
E. S. Montagu (
1917 -
1922) (an architect of the
Montagu-Chelmsford reforms), and
Frederick Pethick-Lawrence (
1945 -
1947) (head of the
1946 Cabinet Mission to India). The size of the advisory Council would be reduced over the next half-century, but its powers would remain unchanged; in 1907, for the first time, two Indians would be appointed to the Council.
In Calcutta, the
Governor-General remained head of the Government of India and now was more commonly called the
Viceroy on account of his secondary role as the
Crown's representative to the nominally sovereign
princely states; he was, however, now responsible to the Secretary of State in London and through him to
British Parliament. A system of "double government" had already been in place in the
East India Company rule in India from the time of Pitt's
India Act of 1784. All laws enacted by
Legislative Councils in India, whether by the
Imperial Legislative Council in Calcutta or by the provincial ones in Madras and Bombay, required the final assent of the Secretary of State in London; this prompted Sir Charles Wood, the second Secretary of State, to describe the Government of India as "a despotism controlled from home." Moreover, although the appointment of Indians to the Legislative Council was a response to calls after the
1857 rebellion, most notably by Sir
Sayyid Ahmad Khan, for more consultation with Indians, the Indians so appointed were from the landed aristocracy, often chosen for their loyalty, and far from representative. Even so, the "tiny advances in the practise of representative government were intended to provide safety valves for the expression of public opinion which had been so badly misjudged before the rebellion." . Indian affairs now also came to be more closely examined in the British parliament and more widely discussed in the British press.
Although the Great Uprising of 1857 had shaken the British enterprise in India, it hadn't derailed it. After the rebellion, the British became more circumspect. Much thought was devoted to the causes of the rebellion, and from it three main lessons were drawn. At a more practical level, it was felt that there needed to be more communication and camaraderie between the British and Indians; not just between British army officers and their Indian staff, but in civilian life as well. The Indian army was completely reorganised: units composed of the Muslims and Brahmins of the
United Provinces of Agra and Oudh, who had formed the core of the rebellion, were disbanded. New regiments, like the Sikhs and Baluchis, composed of Indians who, in British estimation, had demonstrated steadfastness, were formed. From then on, the Indian army was to remain unchanged in its organization until 1947.
It was also felt that both the princes and the large land-holders, by not joining the rebellion, had proved to be, in
Lord Canning's words, "breakwaters in a storm." In 1784, the British Parliament passed
Pitt's India Act which created a Board of Control for overseeing the administration of East India Company.
Hastings was succeeded in 1784 by
Cornwallis, who promulgated the
Permanent Settlement with the
zamindars.
Image:India british expansion 1805a.jpg|Map of India showing British Expansion between 1805 and 1910.
Image:Cornwallis.nationalgallery.jpg|Lord Cornwallis, the Governor-General who established the Permanent Settlement in Bengal.
Image:Richard Colley Wellesley.jpg|Richard Wellesley, 1st Marquess Wellesley, who rapidly expanded the Company's territories with victories in the Anglo-Maratha Wars and Anglo-Mysore Wars
Image:Company rule paddy fields madras2.jpg|Paddy fields in the Madras Presidency, ca. 1880. Two-thirds of the presidency fell under the Ryotwari land revenue system.
At the turn of the 19th century, Governor-General
Wellesley began what became two decades of accelerated expansion of Company territories. This was achieved either by
subsidiary alliances between the Company and local rulers or by direct military annexation. The subsidiary alliances created the
Princely States (or
Native States) of the Hindu
Maharajas and the Muslim
Nawabs, prominent among which were:
Cochin (1791),
Jaipur (1794),
Travancore (1795),
Hyderabad (1798),
Mysore (1799),
Cis-Sutlej Hill States (1815),
Central India Agency (1819), Kutch and Gujarat Gaikwad territories (1819),
Rajputana (1818), and
Bahawalpur (1833).
In the
Charter Act of 1813, the British parliament renewed the Company's charter but terminated its monopoly, opening India to both private investment and missionary work.
Starting in 1772, the Company began a series of land revenue "settlements," which would create major changes in landed rights and rural economy in India. In 1793, the Governor-General
Lord Cornwallis promulgated the
permanent settlement in the
Bengal Presidency, the first socio-economic regulation in colonial India. It was named
permanent because it fixed the land tax in perpetuity in return for landed property rights for a class of intermediaries called
zamindars, who thereafter became owners of the land. However, 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. In southern India,
Thomas Munro, who would later become Governor of
Madras, promoted the
ryotwari system, in which the government settled land-revenue directly with the peasant farmers, or
ryots.
Based on the
utilitarian ideas of
James Mill, who supervised the Company's land revenue policy during 1819-1830, and
David Ricardo's
Law of Rent, it was considered by its supporters to be both closer to traditional practice and more progressive, allowing the benefits of Company rule to reach the lowest levels of rural society.
Land revenue settlements constituted a major administrative activity of the various governments in India under Company rule. 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.
Indian Rebellion of 1857
The rebellion began with mutinies by
sepoys of the
Bengal Presidency army; in 1857 the presidency consisted of present-day
Bangladesh, and the
Indian states of
West Bengal,
Bihar and
UP. However, most rebel soldiers were from the
UP region, and, in particular, from
Northwest Provinces (especially,
Ganga-Jumna Doab) and
Oudh, and many came from landowning families. Within weeks of the initial mutinies—as the rebel soldiers wrested control of many urban garrisons from the British—the rebellion was joined by various discontented groups in the hinterlands, in both farmed areas and the backwoods. The latter group, forming the
civilian rebellion, consisted of feudal nobility, landlords, peasants, rural merchants, and some tribal groups.
Image:Dalhousie.jpg|Lord Dalhousie, the Governor-General of India from 1848 to 1856, who devised the Doctrine of Lapse.
Image:1857 rebellion map.jpg|A 1912 map of the Great Uprising of 1857 showing the centres of rebellion including: Meerut, Delhi, Cawnpore (Kanpur), Lucknow, Jhansi, and Gwalior.
Image:Rani of jhansi.jpeg|Lakshmibai, The Rani of Jhansi, one of the principal leaders of the rebellion who earlier had lost her kingdom as a result of the Doctrine of Lapse.
Image:1857 cashmeri gate delhi2.jpg|Mortar damage to Kashmiri Gate, Delhi, 1858
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. Some Indian soldiers, misreading the presence of missionaries as a sign of official intent, were persuaded that the East India Company was masterminding mass conversions of Hindus and Muslims to Christianity. Changes in the terms of their professional service may also have created resentment. As the extent of British jurisdiction expanded with British victories in wars and with annexation of territory, the soldiers were now not only expected to serve in less familiar regions (such as
Lower Burma after the
Second Burmese War in 1852-53), but also make do without the "foreign service," remuneration that had previously been their due.
The civilian rebellion was more multifarious in origin. The rebels consisted of three groups: feudal nobility, rural landlords called
taluqdars, and the peasants. The nobility, many of whom had lost titles and domains under the
Doctrine of Lapse, which derecognised adopted children of princes as legal heirs, felt that the British had interfered with a traditional system of inheritance. Rebel leaders such as Nana Sahib and the Rani of Jhansi belonged to this group; the latter, for example, was prepared to accept British
paramountcy if her adopted son was recognized as the heir. The second group, the
taluqdars had lost half their landed estates to peasant farmers as a result of the land reforms that came in the wake of annexation of Oudh. As the rebellion gained ground, the
taluqdars quickly reoccupied the lands they'd lost, and paradoxically, in part due to ties of kinship and feudal loyalty, didn't experience significant opposition from the peasant farmers, many of whom too now joined the rebellion to the great dismay of the British. Heavy land-revenue assessment in some areas by the British may have resulted in many landowning families either losing their land or going into great debt with money lenders, and providing ultimately a reason to rebel; money lenders, in addition to the British, were particular objects of the rebels' animosity. The civilian rebellion was also highly uneven in its geographic distribution, even in areas of north-central India that were no longer under British control. For example, the relatively prosperous
Muzaffarnagar district, a beneficiary of a British irrigation scheme, and next door to
Meerut where the upheaval began, stayed mostly calm throughout.
Effects on economy
In the second half of the 19th century, both the direct administration of
India by the
British crown and the technological change ushered in by the industrial revolution, had the effect of closely intertwining the economies of India and Great Britain. In fact many of the major changes in transport and communications (that are typically associated with Crown Rule of India) had already begun before the Mutiny. Since Dalhousie had embraced the technological change then rampant in Great Britain, India too saw rapid development of all those technologies. Railways, roads, canals, and bridges were rapidly built in India and telegraph links equally rapidly established in order that raw materials, such as cotton, from India's hinterland could be transported more efficiently to ports, such as
Bombay, for subsequent export to England. Likewise, finished goods from England were transported back just as efficiently, for sale in the burgeoning Indian markets. However, unlike Britain itself, where the market risks for the
infrastructure development were borne by private investors, in India, it was the taxpayers—primarily farmers and farm-labourers—who endured the risks, which, in the end, amounted to £50 million. In spite of these costs, very little skilled employment was created for Indians. By 1920, with the fourth largest railway network in the world and a history of 60 years of its construction, only ten per cent of the "superior posts" in the Indian Railways were held by Indians.
The rush of technology was also changing the agricultural economy in India: by the last decade of the 19th century, a large fraction of some raw materials—not only cotton, but also some food-grains—were being exported to faraway markets. Consequently, many small farmers, dependent on the whims of those markets, lost land, animals, and equipment to money-lenders. and with many critics, both British and Indian, laying the blame at the doorsteps of the lumbering colonial administrations. India’s international profile would thereby rise and would continue to rise during the 1920s. Back in India, especially among the leaders of the
Indian National Congress, it would lead to calls for greater self-government for Indians. Now, as constitutional reform began to be discussed in earnest, the British began to consider how new moderate Indians could be brought into the fold of constitutional politics and simultaneously, how the hand of established constitutionalists could be strengthened. with the unstated goal of extending the government's war-time powers. The Rowlatt committee presented its report in July 1918 and identified three regions of conspiratorial insurgency:
Bengal, the
Bombay presidency, and the Punjab. To combat subversive acts in these regions, the committee recommended that the government use emergency powers akin to its war-time authority, which included the ability to try cases of sedition by a panel of three judges and without juries, exaction of securities from suspects, governmental overseeing of residences of suspects, The increased taxes coupled with disruptions in both domestic and international trade had the effect of approximately doubling the index of overall prices in India between 1914 and 1920. and post-war inflation led to food riots in Bombay, Madras, and Bengal provinces,
To combat what it saw as a coming crisis, the government now drafted the Rowlatt committee's recommendations into two
Rowlatt Bills. Although the bills were authorised for legislative consideration by Edwin Montagu, they were done so unwillingly, with the accompanying declaration, “I loathe the suggestion at first sight of preserving the Defence of India Act in peace time to such an extent as Rowlatt and his friends think necessary.” After more discussion by the government and parliament in Britain, and another tour by the Franchise and Functions Committee for the purpose of identifying who among the Indian population could vote in future elections, the
Government of India Act of 1919 (also known as the
Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms) was passed in December 1919. The act also provided for a
bicameral national parliament and an executive branch under the purview of the British government. Although the national federation was never realised, nationwide elections for provincial assemblies were held in 1937. Despite initial hesitation, the Congress took part in the elections and won victories in seven of the eleven provinces of British India, and Congress governments, with wide powers, were formed in these provinces. In Great Britain, these victories were to later turn the tide for the idea of Indian independence. nonetheless, a portion of the movement formed for a time an underground provisional government on the border with Nepal.
With Congress leaders in jail, attention also turned to
Subhas Bose, who had been ousted from the Congress in 1939 following differences with the more conservative high command; Bose now turned to the
Axis powers for help with liberating India by force. With Japanese support, he organised the
Indian National Army, composed largely of Indian soldiers of the British Indian army who had been captured
at Singapore by the Japanese. From the onset of the war, the Japanese
secret service had promoted unrest in South east Asia to destabilise the British War effort, and came to support a number of puppet and provisional governments in the captured regions, including those in
Burma, the
Philippines and
Vietnam, the Provisional Government of
Azad Hind (Free India), presided by Bose. Bose's effort, however, was short lived; after the reverses of 1944, the reinforced British Indian Army in 1945 first halted and then reversed the Japanese
U Go offensive, beginning the successful part of the
Burma Campaign. Bose's Indian National Army surrendered with the recapture of
Singapore, and Bose died in a plane crash soon thereafter. The
trials of the INA soldiers at
Red Fort in late 1945 however caused widespread public unrest and nationalist violence in India.
Post-war developments: Transfer of Power
In January 1946, a number of mutinies broke out in the armed services, starting with
that of RAF servicemen frustrated with their slow repatriation to Britain. The mutinies came to a head with
mutiny of the Royal Indian Navy in Bombay in February 1946, followed by others in Calcutta, Madras, and Karachi. Although the mutinies were rapidly suppressed, they found much public support in India and had the effect of spurring the new Labour government in Britain to action, and leading to the Cabinet Mission to India led by the Secretary of State for India,
Lord Pethick Lawrence, and including
Sir Stafford Cripps, who had visited four years before. The negotiations between the Congress and the Muslim League, however, stumbled over the issue of the partition. Jinnah proclaimed August 16, 1946,
Direct Action Day, with the stated goal of highlighting, peacefully, the demand for a Muslim homeland in
British India. The following day Hindu-Muslim riots broke out in Calcutta and quickly spread throughout India. Although the Government of India and the Congress were both shaken by the course of events, in September, a Congress-led interim government was installed, with Jawaharlal Nehru as united India’s prime minister.
Later that year, the Labor government in Britain, its exchequer exhausted by the recently concluded World War II, decided to end British rule of India, and in early 1947 Britain announced its intention of transferring power no later than June 1948.
As independence approached, the violence between Hindus and Muslims in the provinces of Punjab and Bengal continued unabated. With the British army unprepared for the potential for increased violence, the new viceroy,
Louis Mountbatten, advanced the date for the transfer of power, allowing less than six months for a mutually agreed plan for independence. In June 1947, the nationalist leaders, including Nehru and
Abul Kalam Azad on behalf of the Congress, Jinnah representing the Muslim League,
B. R. Ambedkar representing the
Untouchable community, and
Master Tara Singh representing the
Sikhs, agreed to a
partition of the country along religious lines. The predominantly Hindu and Sikh areas were assigned to the new India and predominantly Muslim areas to the new nation of
Pakistan; the plan included a partition of the Muslim-majority provinces of Punjab and Bengal.
Many millions of Muslim, Sikh, and Hindu refugees trekked across the
newly drawn borders. In Punjab, where the new border lines divided the Sikh regions in half, massive bloodshed followed; in Bengal and Bihar, where Gandhi's presence assuaged communal tempers, the violence was more limited. In all, anywhere between 250,000 and 500,000 people on both sides of the new borders died in the violence. On August 14, 1947, the new
Dominion of Pakistan came into being, with Muhammad Ali Jinnah sworn in as its first Governor General in
Karachi. The following day, August 15, 1947, India, now a smaller
Union of India, became an independent country with official ceremonies taking place in
New Delhi, and with Jawaharlal Nehru assuming the office of the
prime minister, and the viceroy, Louis Mountbatten, staying on as its first
Governor General.
Further Information
Get more info on 'British Raj'.
|
External Link Exchanges
Do you know how hard it is to get a link from a large encyclopaedia? Well we're different and will prove it. To get a link from us just add the following HTML to your site on a relevant page:
<a href="http://british_raj.totallyexplained.com">British Raj Totally Explained</a>
Then simply click through this link from your web page. Our crawlers will verify your link, extract the title of your web page and instantly add a link back to it. If you like you can remove the words Totally Explained and embed the link in article text.
As long as your link remains in place, we'll keep our link to you right here. Please play fair - our crawlers are watching. Your site must be closely related to this one's topic. Any kind of spamming, dubious practises or removing the link will result in your link from us being dropped and, potentially, your whole site being banned. |