Historians investigate changes in the Bombay Deccan countryside through the lens of a significant peasant revolt.  These upheavals offer rich insights into the life, grievances, and broader context of the time.

Peasant Revolt of 1875

Location: It originated in Supa, Poona, where peasants, or ryots, demanded and destroyed the account books (bahi khatas) and debt bonds held by shopkeepers and moneylenders. 

• Expansion: This revolt expanded to over 30 villages. The consistent pattern involved attacking sahukars (moneylenders), burning account books and bonds.
• Significant Upheaval: Given its magnitude, authorities related this uprising to the pivotal 1857 revolt, which led to significant repressive measures such as a high number of arrests and military deployments were made.

Historical Context

New Systems: As the British expanded their rule in India, they initiated new revenue systems. 

• Drastic Changes:While the Permanent Settlement system of Bengal wasn’t universally applied, due to its inherent limitations in revenue increase, new territories annexed in the 19th century received temporary revenue settlements. 
• Ryotwari Settlement: Influenced by economist David Ricardo, British officials sought to optimize these new systems. 
• Bombay Deccan: In the Bombay Deccan, the ryotwari settlement was introduced. 
  • This system directly settled revenue with the ryot based on soil productivity, with a periodic reassessment every 30 years.

Impact of the New Revenue System

Exploitative Demand: The ryotwari system’s revenue demand was so excessive that many peasants deserted their villages.

• Regions: This impact was most profound in areas with poor soil and erratic rainfall. 
• Regressive Taxation: Aggressive revenue extraction techniques by officials further exacerbated peasant distress. 
• Deepen Crisis: A drastic reduction in agricultural product prices during the 1830s, coupled with the 1832-34 famine, deepened the crisis. 
• Vicious Debt Cycle: Faced with dwindling resources and heightened demands, peasants increasingly turned to moneylenders, which began a problematic cycle of debt.
• Increasing Indebtedness: By the 1840s, the extent of peasant indebtedness was alarmingly high. 

The Cotton Boom (1860s)

Dependence on American Cotton: Prior to the 1860s, 75% of Britain’s raw cotton imports came from America, leading to concerns about over-reliance. 

• Alternative Sources: The Cotton Supply Association (1857) and the Manchester Cotton Company (1859) aimed to diversify sources. India, with its suitable environment and cheap labour, was identified as a key potential supplier.

• Impact of the American Civil War: The war drastically reduced American cotton exports to Britain. 
  • Over Reliance: This led to increased British reliance on Indian cotton, with merchants in Bombay advancing credits to encourage cotton production.
• Booming Indian Cotton Production: From 1860 to 1864, cotton cultivation in the Bombay Deccan region doubled. 

• • By 1862, India was providing over 90% of Britain’s cotton imports. 

    

• Varied Impact on Producers: While some profited, many peasants found themselves in deeper debt due to rapid cotton expansion.

 Credit Dried Up:

• End of the American Civil War: The war’s end in 1865 saw the revival of the American cotton industry, leading to a decline in Indian cotton exports and prices.

• Retreat of Credit: Recognizing the declining demand, merchants and sahukars in Maharashtra became wary of offering long-term credits and began demanding repayments.
• Rising Revenue Demand: The British colonial administration dramatically increased revenue demands, complicating the situation for ryots, who were already grappling with falling cotton prices.

The Experience of Injustice:

• Tensions with Moneylenders: Ryots grew frustrated with moneylenders who, after initially offering easy credit, began refusing loans, violating long-standing customary norms.

• Erosion of Customary Norms: Pre-colonial norms, such as capping interest at the principal amount, were disregarded, with some moneylenders charging excessive interest.
• Manipulation of the Limitation Law: The 1859 law, intended to prevent indefinite interest accumulation, was twisted by moneylenders, who forced ryots to renew their bonds every three years.
• Distrust of Bonds and Deeds: The British emphasis on formal documentation was alien to the ryots, who became wary of the written word, fearing deceit by moneylenders.
• Testimonies to the Deccan Riots Commission: Numerous ryot petitions documented injustices, exorbitant interest rates, and exploitative practices by moneylenders. 
• Exploitative Practices: They also highlighted issues like refusal of loan receipts, fictitious account entries, and unwarranted acquisition of peasants’ properties.

The Deccan Riots Commission

• Setting Up of the Commission: Despite the escalating revolt in the Deccan, the Bombay Government initially downplayed its significance. 
• Investigation: However, the broader Indian Government, haunted by the events of 1857, pushed for a thorough investigation. 
• Commission: This led to the establishment of a commission of enquiry, the findings of which were eventually submitted to the British Parliament in 1878 as the “Deccan Riots Report”.

Official Bias and Interpretation: 

• Inherent Biases: When analyzing such documents, it’s pivotal to recognize nature and inherent biases of the officials. 
• Root Cause Finding: The commission was explicitly tasked to evaluate whether government-imposed revenue demands were the root cause of the revolt. 
• Blame on Moneylenders: Post-investigation, they absolved the government, placing blame squarely on moneylenders. 
• Blame Shifting: This narrative was recurrent in colonial records, underscoring a consistent hesitancy by the colonial regime to accept any blame for popular uprisings or dissatisfaction.

Conclusion

The Bombay Deccan revolt exposed the harsh realities of British colonial rule. The Ryotwari system, coupled with a crippling debt cycle and volatile cotton market, squeezed peasants. The Deccan Riots Commission, reflecting colonial bias, deflected blame from the government to moneylenders. This revolt highlighted the plight of Indian farmers under British rule.