British Paramountcy over the Princely States | History Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

Introduction

• European traders who arrived in India organized themselves into trading companies, each granted a charter by their respective governments.
• The charters empowered these companies to wage war, conclude treaties, conquer and occupy territories, and build fortresses. They had the authority to negotiate with local rulers such as kings, Nawabs, and chieftains.
• The English gradually gained the upper hand and began conquering India. By 1856-57, most of India came under the British East India Company's rule, with the exceptions of Goa, Diu, and Daman (Portuguese possessions) and Pondicherry (a French possession).
• The British Government supported and encouraged the ambitions of the trading company. Initially, the British Company established trading centers called "factories" with the permission of local authorities, but these were essentially forts. As a result, the merchant members of the company also became warriors.

Evolution of British Paramountcy

• Lord Warren Hastings served as the first de facto Governor-General of India from 1773 to 1785.
• Under Hastings, the British East India Company adopted an aggressive policy of territorial expansion. The Company, claiming paramount authority, aimed to establish its power as superior to that of Indian states through a series of wars.
• Following these conquests, territories such as Goa, Daman and Diu, Dadra and Nagar Haveli remained Portuguese possessions, while Pondicherry, Mahe, and Karaikal were French possessions in India.
• On November 1, 1858, the Government of India was transferred from the East India Company to the British Crown, marking a significant shift in control.

Key events in the establishment of British power in India included:

• Victory in the three Deccan Wars (1746-48, 1748-54, 1756-63) against the French, securing British dominance in South India.
• The battles of Plassey (1757) and Buxar (1764) which made the British masters of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa.
• The Pitt’s India Act of 1784, which brought the East India Company under British Government oversight.
• Lord Cornwallis annexing significant portions of Tipu Sultan’s territory under British Government directives.
• Lord Wellesley’s implementation of the ‘Subsidiary Alliance’ (1798-1805), bringing Hyderabad and other states under British influence.
• Lord Hastings subduing the Marathas, Rajputana, and Gurkhas (1813-1823).
• Lord Amherst defeating the Burmese.
• The two Sikh Wars (1845-46 and 1849) leading to the annexation of Punjab.
• The annexation of Oudh in 1856.
• Lord Dalhousie’s “Doctrine of Lapse” leading to the annexation of several smaller principalities.

Economy and Policy under British Paramountcy 

Introduction:

• In 1800 CE, India was a major player in global manufacturing, contributing 20% of the world's output.
• By 1900, however, India was associated with poverty, with exports making up only 1.7% of global trade.
• During British rule, over 30 million people in India died of starvation, more than 10% of the population.

Paul Kennedy's Analysis:

• In his book 'The Rise and Fall of Great Powers,' Paul Kennedy discusses the shift in fortunes between India and Britain from 1750 to 1900.
• This period marked the rise of British power in India and the decline of Indian prosperity.

Impact of British Rule on Indian Manufacturing:

• After 1818, when the British solidified their control over India, Indian manufacturing declined rapidly.
• In contrast, British manufacturing increased significantly.
• This trend highlighted the negative impact of British rule on India's economy.

British Expansion in India:

• The British expanded their control over key regions in India over the years:
• Bengal (and Bihar) in 1757
• Mysore in 1799
• The Maratha Empire in 1818
• The Sikh kingdom of Punjab in 1849

Promotion of British Trade:

• With the establishment of political authority, the British promoted their trade and commerce at the expense of Indian trade.
• They employed restrictive trade practices to undermine Indian commerce.

Duties on Indian Goods:

• During the early stages of the Industrial Revolution, Indian goods faced duty rates of 70 to 80 percent, making it difficult for them to compete in the market.
• Even later, machine-made British goods had a duty advantage of 10 to 27 percent over Indian goods made by traditional methods.

Price Disparities:

• British historian Wilson noted that Indian cotton and silk goods could be sold in British markets at prices 50 to 60 percent lower than those made in England.
• If not for the high duties on Indian textiles, British mills would have struggled to compete.

Import Duties Disparities:

• A report from a parliamentary inquiry in 1840 revealed significant differences in import duties:
• British cotton and silk goods were imported into India at duties of 3.5 percent and 2 percent, respectively.
• In contrast, Indian goods imported into Britain faced much higher duties:10 percent for cotton,20 percent for silk, and 30 percent for woollen goods.

The Policy of Subordinate Isolation

Introduction of British Paramountcy under Lord Hastings:

• Lord Hastings aimed to establish British paramountcy over Indian princely states.
• His treaties with the states emphasized subordinate cooperation rather than equality, diminishing their external sovereignty.

Interference and Control:

• British residents gained significant power, interfering in internal matters and imposing decisions on rulers.
• Residents acted more like dictators than ambassadors, meddling in private affairs and supporting rebellious subjects against the rulers.

Expansion of the Subsidiary System:

• Lord Hastings expanded the subsidiary system to 145 states in Central India, 145 in Kathiawar, and 20 in Rajputana.
• This aimed to isolate these states while avoiding direct annexation.
• However, it led to maladministration and irresponsibility among rulers.

Recognition of Princely States:

• While princely states were theoretically recognized as separate entities in treaties, many were practically annexed.

Justification for Annexation:

• Annexation was justified on the grounds of misgovernment by native rulers.
• The Court of Directors in 1841 encouraged the retention of territory and revenue through just and honorable means.

Increased British Influence:

• Post-Hastings, the East India Company gained greater influence in the internal administration of princely states.
• British Residents became key communicators between the Government of India and state rulers, gradually increasing their power and status.

Doctrine of Lapse and Misgovernment:

• Lord Dalhousie used the doctrine of lapse and misgovernment to justify annexations.
• The Company’s supremacy and subordinate cooperation led to its dominance in India.
• British Residents took over administrative and military functions of Indian states.

Changes in the East India Company:

• The Charter Act of 1833 shifted the Company’s focus towards commercial activities.
• This marked a change in attitude towards Indian states, emphasizing annexation and control over misgovernment.

Governor-General Policies:

• Governor-generals of this era were annexationists, using annexation as a primary method for territorial expansion.
• Annexations were often based on the need for revenue or failures in native governance, especially when natural heirs failed.

Chaos and Supremacy:

• Despite the East India Company’s supremacy by 1818, relations between Indian states and the Company remained chaotic and contradictory.

Conclusion

• The paramountcy policy of the Governor-General is a controversial claim to superiority that has been challenged by Indian citizens.
• This policy was established to offer a clear framework for governing India. However, it has faced criticism from those who believe that the Indian Constitution supports a more democratic system of governance.
• Despite the criticism, the paramountcy policy remains in place, and its influence is still felt across Indian society.