The Pitt’s India Act Of 1784

At the age of 24, Pitt the Younger became England's youngest Prime Minister in 1783. Pitt was a brilliant administrator who championed efficiency and reform while inspiring a new generation of brilliant administrators. 

 

•    The East India Company Act 1784, also known as Pitt's India Act, was an Act of the British Parliament intended to correct the flaws in the Regulating Act of 1773 by bringing the East India Company's rule in India under British control. In 1773, the British government passed the Regulating Act to regulate the Company's operations. 

 

•    The Act established a system in which it supervised (regulated) the Company's work but did not assume power. Within a few years, the Act had proven to be a failure, and the British government decided to become more involved in the Company's affairs. 

 

•    Pitt's India Act established a system in which the British government and the British East India Company shared control of India. These transformations lasted until 1858.

 

1.    The Pitts India Act of 1784 separated the East India Company's political functions from its commercial activities.

 

2.    In terms of politics, the company, which had previously operated as a semi-autonomous entity, was made directly subordinate to the British government. A Board of Commissioners, dubbed the Board of Control, was established to facilitate this.

 

3.    The members of this Board of Control were the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary of State, and four Privy Councillors, all of whom were nominated by the King.

 

4.    The Secretary of State was appointed as the Board of Control's President. This Board of Control was given complete authority over all civil and military government and revenue matters

 

5.    Full access to the company's records was granted to the board of directors. It had the authority to send Governors to India and to change them.

 

1.    The Pitts India Act of 1734 established a joint government in India between the company and the British crown. So, what is India's fate now? The company and the British government would be decided by the people (indirectly).

 

2.    The Court of Directors would represent the company, while the Board of Control would represent the Crown.

 

3.    There was a secret committee of three directors tasked with relaying the Board's orders to India. This secret committee was supposed to serve as a conduit between the Board of Directors and the Court of Directors.

 

4.    The Board of Control lacked executive authority. It didn't have any patrons. Its strength was hidden. It had access to all of the Company's papers, and all dispatches that were not strictly commercial required its approval. In an emergency, the Board could send its own draught to the Secret Committee of the Directors to be signed and sent out in its name.

 

•    The Governor General's council was now reduced to three members, one of whom was to be the King's army in India's commander-in-chief. The governor general, who is a crown appointee, was given the authority to veto majority decisions. In the event that the members present at a meeting of the council are evenly divided in opinion at any time, the Governor General is given the right to cast a vote.

 

•    The Governors of the Presidencies of Bombay and Madras were stripped of their independence, and Calcutta was given greater powers in matters of war, revenue, and diplomacy, effectively making Calcutta the capital of the Company's Indian possessions.

 

•    The British Government now had indirect control over the Governor General Council through the Board of Control.

 

•    Lord Cornwallis was appointed as the second governor-general of Bengal by a supplementary act passed in 1786, and he then became the effective ruler of British India under the authority of the Board of Control and the Court of Directors. Act of 1786: Governor General is given the power to override the council and is also given the title of Commander-in-Chief.

 

•    Property Disclosure: Within two months of starting their posts, all civil and military officers of the East India Company were required to provide the Court of Directors with a full inventory of their property in India and Britain. 

 

•    Officials who were found to be corrupt were subjected to harsh punishment. Pitt's India Act established a constitution that remained largely unchanged until the company's rule in India ended in 1858.

 

•    This Act corrected many of the flaws in the Regulating Act of 1773. By making the Governor-General supreme over the subordinate governments of Bombay and Madras, it put an end to an inefficient division of authority in India. 

 

•    By reducing the Governor General Council to three members, it addressed one of the Regulating Act 1773's flaws, as it became easier for the Governor General to obtain a majority in any decision, and in the event of a tie, he had the final say. It was determined that the act was a failure. 

 

•    This was because it became clear very quickly that the lines between government control and the company's powers were hazy and subjective. 

 

•    The act was naive in that it divided responsibility among the Board of Control, the Court of Directors, and the Governor General in Council, but no boundaries could be set because the issue was subjective rather than objective. 

 

•    The British government felt compelled to respond to humanitarian demands for improved treatment of local people in British-occupied territories. Nepotism was accused of the Board of Control.