Administrative Changes after 1858

Learning Outcomes:

1. Understand the shift in British administrative power from the East India Company to the British Crown.
2. Analyze the impact of financial and political decentralization on provincial governance.
3. Examine the British strategies for maintaining control over India through military, administrative, and social policies.

Transformation in Governance

The Revolt of 1857 marked a pivotal shift in British administration in India. Post-revolt, governance transitioned from the East India Company to the British Crown, as formalized by the Act of Parliament in 1858. This act established the role of the Secretary of State for India, a member of the British Cabinet responsible for Indian affairs, ensuring ultimate control remained with the British Parliament. The Governor-General retained operational governance in India, now titled Viceroy, but his power was increasingly subordinated to directives from London.

1. The Indian Councils Act of 1861 expanded the Governor-General’s Council, introducing non-official members to advise on legislation. However, the Imperial Legislative Council held no real power and functioned merely as an advisory body.
2. Indian representation in the council was nominal and unrepresentative, typically filled by princes and high-ranking officials chosen by the Governor-General.

Important Note: Indian opinion had minimal influence on policy, as control resided with British industrialists and merchants, further deepening the reactionary nature of administration post-1858.

Provincial Administration

Provincial Governance underwent significant restructuring as the British recognized the inefficacy of strict centralization in a vast country like India.

1. Lord Mayo’s reforms in 1870 granted provinces fixed sums from central revenues for certain services.
2. Lord Lytton’s 1877 reforms further delegated responsibilities like land revenue and general administration to provinces, funded by a share of provincial income.

While these measures appeared to promote decentralization, the central government retained ultimate control over provinces, ensuring their continued subordination to the British Crown.

Local Bodies and Financial Decentralization

Local governance was further decentralized, driven by financial strains and rising demands for civic improvements.

1. Local bodies, including municipalities and district boards, were formed between 1864 and 1868 but were dominated by nominated members under the control of District Magistrates.
2. Lord Ripon’s 1882 resolution allowed for more non-official members and limited elections, yet these bodies remained largely under government control.

Changes in the Army

The Indian Army was reorganized to prevent future revolts, ensuring European dominance in critical military roles.

1. The proportion of Europeans to Indians was increased, with key positions like artillery and, later, tanks, reserved for Europeans.
2. A policy of ‘divide and rule’ was instituted, recruiting soldiers based on caste, region, and religion to prevent unity.

This strategy effectively isolated the army from the Indian population and nationalist ideas, maintaining it as a mercenary force.

Important Note: The Indian army became a costly instrument of British imperialism, consuming a significant portion of Indian revenues while defending British interests in Asia and Africa.

Public Services and Social Policies

The British maintained a European dominance in public services, particularly in the Indian Civil Service, where Indians were significantly underrepresented. Despite some Indianization post-1918, key positions of power remained in British hands.

1. Indian participation in administration was minimal, and even those in service acted as agents of British rule.
2. Social reforms were largely abandoned post-1857, aligning with conservative Indian elites to maintain British control.

Relations with the Princely States

Post-1857, the British reversed their policy of annexing princely states, instead using them as allies in maintaining control.

1. The princes were assured of their rights and territories, provided they acknowledged British sovereignty.
2. The British interfered in the internal administration of these states, ensuring their integration with British India while using them as buffers against nationalist movements.

Foreign Policy and Military Campaigns

British foreign policy in India was driven by imperial interests, leading to aggressive military campaigns against neighboring countries like Nepal, Burma, and Afghanistan.

1. The war with Nepal in 1814 expanded British territory to the Himalayas, securing trade routes and strategic locations.
2. Burma was annexed through three wars, driven by British commercial interests and the need to counter French influence in Southeast Asia.
3. In Afghanistan, British efforts to control the region resulted in costly wars, with First and Second Afghan Wars underscoring the British desire to keep Afghanistan weak and divided.

These wars, fought primarily with Indian soldiers and funded by Indian revenues, highlight the exploitative nature of British imperialism.

Tables: Comparative Analysis

MCQ:
What was the primary reason for the British reorganization of the Indian Army after 1857?

Answer: To prevent future revolts and ensure European dominance in key military roles.