Ryotwari Settlement: Land Revenue System in British India | History Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

Ryotwari Settlement

Factors and forces that shaped Ryotwari Settlement (Genesis of the Ryotwari Settlement in Madras Presidency)

• The establishment of British rule in South and South-Western India brought new problems of land settlement.
• Lord Cornwallis expected that his Permanent Settlement or the zamindari system would be extended to other parts of India.
• When Wellesley came to India, he and Henery Dundas shared a faith in the Bengal system.
• In 1798, Wellesley ordered the extension of the zamindari system to Madras Presidency.
• The problem was to find a sizeable zamindar class as in Bengal.
• Officials believed there were no zamindars with large estates to settle with.
• The introduction of the zamindari system would upset the existing state of affairs.
• Many Madras officials, led by Reed and Munro, recommended settlement with the actual cultivators.
• Between 1801 and 1807, the Madras authority introduced the zamindari system in large areas.
• The local poligars were recognized as zamindars in some areas.
• In areas without poligars, villages were aggregated into estates and sold at auction.
• There was growing disillusionment with the Permanent Settlement in British official circles.
• The Permanent Settlement provided no means to raise government income.
• Increased income from land was being garnered by the zamindars.
• This distrust for large landlords was influenced by the Scottish Enlightenment.
• Ideas from the Scottish Enlightenment celebrated the importance of the yeoman farmer.
• Scottish officials like Thomas Munro and Mountstuart Elphinstone initiated changes in revenue administration.
• Utilitarian ideas began to influence policy planning in India.
• David Ricardo's theory of rent suggested a revision of the existing system.
• According to Ricardo, rent was the surplus from land, and the state had a claim to a share.
• This theory provided an argument to eliminate the zamindars and claim a larger share of income.
• However, theories alone did not guide policies in India.
• A more powerful reason for a new settlement was the financial crisis of the Madras Presidency.
• The financial crisis was worsened by the rising expenses of war.
• This situation led to the genesis of the Ryotwari Settlement in Madras Presidency.
• Ryotwari Settlement was implemented in Madras and Bombay Presidencies and later introduced in Sind & Assam.

Ryotwari Settlement in Madras (features of Ryotwari Settlement)

Ryotwari Experiment

• Introduced by Alexander Reed in Baramahal, Madras Presidency, in 1792, and later continued by Thomas Munro.
• Initially introduced in Kanara by Munro in 1799-1800.
• Expanded to the Districts of Bellary and Cuddapah in 1801-02.
• Further introduced in Nellore,Arcot, and Coimbatore in 1807.
• Extended to the entire Madras Presidency in 1820 when Munro became Governor.
• Revenue was collected directly from villages instead of through zamindars.
• The system evolved to assess each cultivator or ryot individually.
• State demand was initially set at 50% of estimated produce, leading to severe assessments and widespread distress.
• In this system:
  (i) Land revenue was paid directly by ryots(cultivators) to the government.
  (ii) Cultivators became landowners
  (iii) Registered landholders were responsible for direct payment of land revenue.
  (iv) They had rights to sub-let, transfer, mortgage, or sell their land.
  (v) Eviction from holdings was prevented as long as state revenue was paid.
• Created individual proprietary rights in land, vested in peasants rather than zamindars.
• Defined the state as the supreme landlord, with individual peasants as landowners.
• Land revenue was increased every 20 to 30 years.
• Field assessments determined rent payable on each field through general surveys.
• Annual agreements between government and cultivators were established.
• Detailed land surveys were required to fix revenue based on soil quality, field area, and average produce.
• In practice, estimates were often inaccurate, leading to high revenue demands that were difficult to collect.
• The system faced challenges and was nearly abandoned after Munro's departure in 1807.

2nd phase of Ryorwari 

• In around 1820, the situation started to change when Thomas Munro returned to India as the governor of Madras.
• His reason for introducing the Ryotwari system was that he believed it was the ancient Indian land-tenure system, making it suitable for Indian conditions. However, this reference to the past served the interests of the British Empire.
• Munro argued that the British Empire needed a unified concept of sovereignty, which the Ryotwari system could provide. He believed that security and administration of the empire required the elimination of powerful poligars and direct collection of revenue from individual farmers under British supervision.
• He justified his position by claiming that historically, land in India was owned by the state, which collected revenue from peasants through a hierarchy of officials paid with inam land.
• According to Munro, the state’s power over land was based on military strength. When this strength waned, poligars seized land, undermining sovereignty. He argued that this alienation needed to be reversed.
• He dismissed contrary views, such as those of Francis Ellis, who believed that property rights were traditionally conferred on communities or tribes.
• Munro maintained that the Ryotwari system would reduce the revenue burden on farmers while increasing land revenue for the state by eliminating intermediaries.
• London supported this system because it placed authority and power directly in British hands, achieving what the Cornwallis system could not.
• Facing a chronic shortage of funds, the Madras government decided to implement the Ryotwari Settlement in most parts of the presidency.

Problems with Munro's Revenue System:

• The revenue system evolved into something very different from what Munro had envisioned.
• While it increased government revenue, it caused significant distress for cultivators.
• In many regions, no proper surveys were conducted.
• The tax for a ryot was determined arbitrarily based on village accounts, a practice known as putcut settlement.
• The revenue assessed for a ryot was applied to the entire farm, without considering variations in irrigation and productivity.
• When surveys were conducted, they were often poorly planned and rushed, leading to over-assessment of taxes.
• Despite Munro's recommendation to allow cultivators the freedom to choose the amount of land they wished to farm, this "right of contraction or relinquishment" was effectively eliminated by 1833.
• As a result, cultivating peasants became increasingly impoverished and indebted.
• With the exception of Coimbatore, there was virtually no land market in Madras.
• The Ryotwari system did not eradicate village elites as intermediaries between the government and the peasantry.
• By recognizing the privileged rents and special rights of mirasidars, the existing village power structure remained largely intact.
• This process was underpinned by colonial knowledge, collaboratively produced by officials and Tamil writers.
• Stereotypes about these traditional village elites made mirasidars central to the British ideal of a stable agricultural community.
• Consequently, these mirasidars gradually integrated into the revenue establishments, with some acquiring large and profitable irrigated land.
• Post-1816, revenue officials combined revenue collection and police duties in rural areas.
• This led to increased coercion, bribery, and corruption among subordinate officials of the Collectorate.
• The excesses of revenue officials were vividly documented in the Madras Torture Commission Report of 1855.
• Members of the British Parliament raised concerns about the brutal practices employed against defaulters.
• The peasantry fell deeper into poverty, often resorting to moneylenders to pay land revenue.

3rd phase of Ryotwari Settlement

In 1855, a detailed survey and settlement plan was initiated based on 30% of the gross produce, with actual implementation starting in 1861.

• The 1864 rule capped state revenue demands at 50% of the net produce value, establishing a 30-year settlement period. However, many directives remained largely unimplemented.
• The reformed system of 1864 brought some agricultural prosperity and expanded cultivation, although it faced setbacks due to the Madras famines of 1865-66 and 1876-78. Recovery in the Presidency was relatively swift.
• Dharma Kumar's analysis challenges common beliefs, showing that land did not increasingly shift to wealthy farmers and moneylenders. Inequality only rose in affluent, irrigated areas like the Godavari delta, while it declined elsewhere. There was no widespread dispossession due to indebtedness, and absentee landlordism, except in Tirunelveli, decreased overall. Tenant protection was minimal across the presidency.
• The Ryotwari system's impact on Madras agrarian society varied regionally, strengthening village magnates' power where they existed and heightening social conflict. David Ludden's research in Tirunelveli district illustrated how local mirasidars exploited the system for advantageous rents and transformed collective rights into individual property rights. Despite tenant resistance, the Madras government showed little interest in safeguarding tenant rights.
• In the wet zones, mirasidars thrived more than in dry or mixed zones. Willem Van Schendel's study of the Kaveri delta in Tanjavur district revealed the mirasidars' peak influence over land and labor, exacerbating local social polarization. Although mirasidari power diminished in the late 19th century due to internal community differentiation and the rise of new commercial groups, it did not vanish.
• In other Tamil districts, similar patterns emerged, with Tiruchirapalli's wet taluks reflecting the mirasidars' dominance. In South Arcot and Chingleput, privileged landownership rights faced challenges from actual cultivators. Vast areas of Tamilnad, with ample cultivable land, were characterized by numerous owner-cultivators and a small group of middle landowners.
• In the Andhra districts of the Madras Presidency, the Ryotwari system led to peasant differentiation. By the early 20th century, a wealthy class of big landholders, termed peasant-bourgeoisie by A. Satyanarayana, emerged, managing large farms and leasing surplus lands to landless tenants and sharecroppers. The intermediate strata also prospered under stable economic conditions. In contrast, the majority of poor peasants endured dire conditions, exploited by rich ryots, creditors, and lessors, forced to hire themselves under harsh circumstances, and clinging to small land parcels.

The Ryotwari Settlement in the Bombay Presidency

Introduction of the Ryotwari System:

• The Ryotwari system was first implemented in the Bombay Presidency after the annexation of Gujarat in 1803.
• It was later extended to the Peshwa’s territories in 1818 under the guidance of Mountstuart Elphinstone.

Elphinstone's Report:

• Elphinstone, as Governor of Bombay, submitted a report in 1819 highlighting key aspects of the Maratha Government.
• He noted the importance of village communities and mirasi tenure, where hereditary peasant proprietors paid fixed land taxes.

Chaplain's Reports:

• Chaplain, the Commissioner of the Deccan, provided reports in 1821 and 1822 on past revenue settlement practices and offered valuable suggestions.

Revenue Collection Challenges:

• Initially, revenue was collected through local headmen, but this proved insufficient.
• Direct collection from peasants began in 1813-14, leading to issues similar to those in the Madras system.

High Revenue Rates:

• Revenue rates set were excessively high, causing distress among peasants.
• Crop failures and falling prices forced many to mortgage their lands or migrate to areas with lower rates.

Land Survey and Assessment:

• A land survey by R.K. Pringle aimed to classify land and set revenue at 55% of net produce value.
• This system, introduced in 1830, faced criticism for over-assessment and oppression of peasants.
• Many cultivators abandoned their fields due to dissatisfaction, leading to a decline in cultivable land.

Reformed Bombay Survey System:

• In 1835, the faulty system was replaced by a reformed Bombay Survey System designed by G. Wingate and H.E. Goldsind.
• This practical settlement aimed to lower demands to reasonable levels for regular payment.
• Assessment considered past payments, expected price rises, soil quality, and location.
• Fields were assessed individually, allowing cultivators flexibility in field selection.
• The new assessment began in 1836, covering most of the Deccan by 1847.
• Despite improvements, the assessments were often based on guesswork and tended to be severe.

The General Impact of the Ryotwari Settlement

• The Ryotwari Settlement had a significant impact on agrarian society in western India, leading to a major historical controversy and rural uprisings, particularly in the Bombay Deccan in 1875.
• The American Civil War (1861-65) temporarily boosted the demand for Bombay cotton, causing a price surge. This boom allowed survey officers to increase land assessments by 66% to 100% without giving cultivators the right to appeal in court.
• The Deccan experienced agrarian riots in 1875 as a result of these changes.
• In response, the government enacted the Deccan Agriculturists’ Relief Act in 1879, providing relief against moneylenders but failing to address the excessive state demand, which was seen as the root cause of the problems.
• Historians like Neil Charlesworth argue that the Wingate settlements introduced between 1840 and 1870 did not cause significant changes in western India. The settlements diminished the power of the village Patil, who became an ordinary peasant and a paid government employee. However, this erosion of power had begun before British rule, with the British merely completing an ongoing process.
• The settlements did not universally displace all village elites. In Gujarat, the rights of bhagdars,narwadars, and Ahmedabad taluqdars were respected, leading to greater political and social stability in these regions. It was mainly in central Deccan that a power vacuum emerged, allowing for a more active role for Marwari and Gujarati banias.
• Some historians argue that the new settlements made revenue assessments less burdensome and inequitable for peasants. If indebtedness was widespread by the mid-nineteenth century, it was long-standing and not primarily due to land revenue demands. They also contend that there is no evidence of significant land purchases by traders and moneylenders.
• Historians such as H. Fukazawa and Ian Catanach support the idea that dispossession and land transfer from agriculturists to non-agriculturists occurred in the Deccan in the mid-nineteenth century but did not necessarily lead to the Deccan riots.
• In contrast,Ravinder Kumar and Sumit Guha argue that the Ryotwari Settlement caused significant social upheaval by undermining the authority of village headmen, leading to a status revolution in Maharashtra villages. This discontent eventually culminated in the Deccan riots.
• The social effects of the Ryotwari system in Madras and Bombay were less dramatic than those of the Permanent Settlement. However, the older forms that persisted were altered by imperialism.
• The Ryotwari Settlement did not establish a system of peasant ownership. Instead, the state replaced multiple zamindars with a single zamindar—the government. The government later claimed that land revenue was rent, not a tax.
• The ryot’s rights of land ownership were undermined by several factors:Exorbitant land revenue fixed in most areas,Government's right to enhance land revenue at will,Obligation to pay revenue even during droughts or floods.
• The system was not permanent. Farmers suspected that the net average income had been wrongly determined, and the land revenue payable was often inflated.
• Despite a scientific basis, government officials frequently erred in determining revenue and raised rates.
• Revenue officials were strict and cruel in collecting land revenue, leading farmers to borrow money from mahajans at high-interest rates, resulting in many becoming debtors.
• The government did not provide assistance to farmers during natural calamities and offered no help in increasing production. Farmers had to pay land revenue regardless of droughts or floods.
• The two major issues of the Ryotwari system in Bombay were over-assessment and uncertainty. There was no provision for appealing against over-assessment, and collectors informed cultivators of future assessment rates with the option to accept or reject the new terms.