Introduction

• British administration in India until 1858 was primarily under the control of the East India Company.

• Though the British Government passed various Acts and regulated the Company’s administration, the complete takeover by the Crown occurred in 1858.

• The East India Company, initially a purely commercial corporation, gradually transformed into a governmental body.

• The British began trading in 1600 A.D., while other foreign powers like the Portuguese, Dutch, and French were already involved in trade in the region.

• The British competed with these European powers to capture trade in the East and acquire territorial supremacy.

• This expansion was facilitated by the collapse of the Mughal Empire and the mutually destructive wars between princes and nawabs.

• For example, through the Carnatic Wars, the British secured the Northern Circars, which had previously been under French control.

• The Battle of Plassey (1757) and the Treaty of Allahabad (1765) gave the British control over the Diwani of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa, granting them the right to administer and collect revenue from these provinces.

• Between the Battle of Plassey (1757) and the Sepoy Mutiny (1857), the British had virtually captured all of India, and India became the brightest jewel in the British Crown.

The Nature of Administration

Characteristic Features of the East India Company

• The East India Company was established on 31st December 1600 as a monopoly mercantile company granted the right by the British crown to trade in the eastern parts.

• A trading station with a number of factors was called a Factory, and a settlement of factories was under an Agent.

• Factor referred to an agent transacting business as a substitute for another in mercantile affairs.

• Employees were graded as apprentices, writers, factors, and merchants.

• Recruitment of officials and their nomenclature, terms, and conditions of service were governed by practices appropriate to commercial business.

• Patronage was the main method of recruitment and promotion, controlled by the Proprietors or Directors of the Company.

• In the early years, officials were frequently moved from one district to another and had no formal training on the job. They learned through trial and error, often ignorant of local laws, customs, and languages.

• The Company’s servants had low salaries and were often known to be corrupt.

• The system of governance was commercial in character, mainly governed by a Council.

• The Council had both executive and legislative powers, with the Governor or Governor-General having the casting vote.

• As the Company acquired more territorial sovereignty, power shifted towards the head or Chairman of the Council, although collective rule and responsibility remained a key principle.

• The system was also a government by Boards, including the Board of Trade, Military Board, and Board of Revenue, the latter with the longest history and most distinguished record.

• Railway Board was another addition, allowing for counseling, discussion, deliberation, and legislative and judicial activities.

• The Company was a government by record, with transactions initially being brief. As political dealings increased, record keeping became more cumbersome and voluminous.

• Notes, minutes, despatches, and reports became integral to administration, ensuring control in a hierarchical government structure, especially since the Company’s headquarters was in England.

• Record keeping helped prevent absolutism and uncontrolled power by maintaining documentation and accountability.

• The East India Company mismanaged administration, exemplified by Clive’s Double or Dual Government in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa.

• Under this system, the Company took direct responsibility for defending the territories, while internal matters like revenue collection were left to the Nawab and his officers working on behalf of the Company.

• The Company was unfamiliar with local customs and practices, and thus left the revenue collection system intact.

• This led to exploitation, with maximum revenue extracted from the people, which severely affected the Company’s reputation, as the Nawab and his men pocketed wealth at the expense of the Company.