Administrative Changes After 1857 Revolt

In 1858, an Act of Parliament transferred control of the East India Company to the British Crown. Previously, authority over India had been exercised by the Company's Directors and the Board of Control, but now it would be exercised by a Secretary of State for India, aided by a Council. As a member of the British Cabinet, the Secretary of State was accountable to Parliament. As a result, the British Parliament retained ultimate control over India. By 1869, the Secretary of State had completely subordinated the Council. The India Council was mostly made up of retired British-Indian officials.

 

•    Under the Act, the Governor-General, who was also given the title of Viceroy or Crown's personal representative, would continue to govern as before. In addition to his other allowances, Viceroy was paid two and a half lakh rupees per year.

 

•    With the passage of time, the Viceroy's position in relation to the British Government in matters of policy and policy execution became increasingly subordinate. 

 

•    The Government of India was effectively controlled from London as a result of the Regulating Act, Pitt's India Act, and later Charter Acts. 

 

•    The Secretary of State could now keep a constant eye on the tiniest details of administration at all hours of the day. Neither the India Council nor the British Cabinet or Parliament had any Indian representation. Indians were unable to approach such distant rulers.

 

•    In some circumstances, Indian opinion had even less influence on government policy than it had previously. British industrialists, merchants, and bankers, on the other hand, increased their influence over the Indian government. 

 

•    In India, the Act of 1858 established an Executive Council, whose members would serve as heads of various departments and as official advisers to the Governor-General.

 

•    The members of the Council occupied a position similar to that of Cabinet ministers. Apart from the Commander-in-Chief, who headed the Army Department, there were originally five members of this Council, but by 1918, there were six ordinary members.

 

•    The Council debated all major issues and decided them by a majority vote; however, the Governor-General had the power to override any major Council decision. In fact, all power was gradually concentrated in the hands of the Governor-General.

 

•    The Indian Councils Act of 1861 expanded the Governor-Council General's to include the Imperial Legislative Council for the purpose of making laws.

 

•    The Governor-General was given the authority to appoint between six and twelve members to his Executive Council, with at least half of them having to be non-officials who could be Indian or English.

 

•    The Imperial Legislative Council lacked real power and should not be regarded as a rudimentary or ineffective legislature. It was merely a consultative body. It was unable to discuss any significant measure, let alone any financial measures, without the Government's prior approval. 

 

•    The Imperial Legislative Council had no budgetary authority. It couldn't talk about the administration's ideas, and members couldn't even ask questions about them. The Legislative Council had no authority over the executive branch of government.

 

•    Until the Governor-General approves a bill passed by the Legislative Council, it cannot become an Act. 

 

•    Any of its Acts could be disallowed by the Secretary of State. As a result, the Legislative Council's only important function was to clone official measures and give them the appearance of being passed by a legislative body. 

 

•    The Indian members of the Legislative Council were few in number and were not elected by the Indian people; rather, the Governor-General nominated them, with princes and their ministers, big zamindars, big merchants, or retired senior government officials being the most common choices.

 

•    For administrative purposes, the British divided India into provinces, three of which were known as Presidencies: Bengal, Madras, and Bombay. A Governor and his three Executive Councils, appointed by the Crown, were in charge of the Presidency. In comparison to other provinces, the Presidency Governments had more rights and powers. Lieutenant Governors and Chief Commissioners were appointed by the Governor-General to administer the other provinces. 

 

•    The Act of 1861 was a watershed moment in the history of centralization. It stipulated that legislative councils similar to those in the centre be established first in Bombay, Madras, and Bengal, and then in the rest of the provinces. 

 

•    The provincial legislative councils, which consisted of officials and four to eight non-official Indians and Englishmen, were also merely advisory bodies. They also lacked the necessary powers and a democratic legislature.

 

•    In the field of finance, the dangers of extreme centralization were most obvious. The centre gathered revenues from all over the country and from various sources, which it then distributed to the provincial governments. 

 

•    Authoritarian control was exercised by the Central Government over even the tiniest details of provincial spending. In practise, however, this system proved to be quite wasteful. 

 

•    It was impossible for the federal government to supervise a provincial government's efficient revenue collection or keep adequate tabs on its spending. 

 

•    On the one hand, the two governments were constantly at odds over minute details of administration and spending, while on the other hand, a provincial government had no incentive to save money. As a result, the authorities decided to decentralise public finance. 

 

•    Lord Mayo had taken the first step toward separating central and provincial finances in 1870. Fixed sums from central revenues were given to provincial governments for the administration of certain services such as police, jails, education, medical services, and roads, and they were instructed to administer them as they saw fit.

 

•    In 1877, Lord Lytton expanded Lord Mayo's scheme by transferring to the provinces certain other lines of expenditure such as Land Revenue, Excise, General Administration, and Law and Justice. 

 

•    A provincial government was to receive a fixed share of the income realised from certain sources such as Stamps, Excise Taxes, and Income Tax in order to cover the additional expenditure.

 

•    Lord Ripon had made some changes in 1882. The system of giving provinces fixed grants was abolished, and instead, a province was to receive the entirety of its income from certain sources of revenue, as well as a fixed share of that income.  As a result, all revenue sources were now divided into three categories: general, provincial, and those to be shared between the centre and the provinces. Every five years, the financial arrangements between the centre and the provinces were to be reviewed.

 

Due to financial constraints, the government decentralised administration even more by promoting local government through municipalities and district councils. Local bodies were first established between 1864 and 1868, but they were almost always made up of nominated members and presided over by the District Magistrates. The local bodies did not represent local self-government and were not accepted as such by the intelligent Indians. They were seen by the Indians as tools for extracting additional taxes from the people. 

 

•    In 1882, the Lord Ripon Government established a policy of administering local affairs primarily through rural and urban local bodies with a majority of non-official members.

 

•    The non-official members would be elected by the people wherever and whenever officials thought elections could be held.

 

•    The resolution also allowed a non-official to be elected as Chairman of a local body. To put this resolution into effect, the provincial acts were passed. In all of the district boards and many of the municipalities, however, elected members were in the minority. Furthermore, because the right to vote was severely restricted, elected members were elected by a small number of voters. 

 

•    Although nonofficial gradually took over as chairmen of municipal committees, district officials continued to serve as presidents of district boards.

 

•    The government also retained the right to keep a close eye on the activities of local governments and to suspend or replace them at its discretion. 

 

•    The local bodies operated like government departments and provided no good examples of local self-government.

 

•    Prior to 1857, the British had seized every opportunity to annex princely states. The British changed their policy toward the Indian States after the Revolt of 1857. The majority of Indian princes had not only remained loyal to the British, but had actively helped to suppress the Revolt. 

 

•    In 1862, Canning declared, "The Crown of England stood forward, the undisputed Ruler and Paramount Power in all India." Princes were forced to recognise Britain as the supreme power. To emphasise British sovereignty over the entire Indian subcontinent, Queen Victoria assumed the title of "Empress of India" in 1876. 

 

•    Later, Lord Curzon clarified that the princes only ruled their states as agents of the British Crown. Because they were assured of their continued existence as rulers of their states, the princes willingly accepted this subordinate position and willingly became junior partners in the Empire. 

 

•    As the supreme power, the British claimed the right to oversee the princely states' internal administration. They not only meddled in day-to-day administration through the Residents, but they also insisted on appointing and dismissing ministers and other high-ranking officials. 

 

•    The government recognised the old ruler's adopted heir after 1868, and the state was fully restored to the young Maharajah in 1881.

 

•    In 1874, Malhar Rao Gaekwad, the ruler of Baroda, was deposed after a brief trial for misrule and attempting to poison the British Resident.