Land Revenue Policies of British in India: Systems, Impacts and Legacy

The British colonial administration in India significantly transformed the agrarian landscape by introducing new land revenue policies. These policies, including the Ijaradari, Zamindari, Mahalwari, and Ryotwari systems, reshaped land ownership, tenancy, and revenue collection. Driven by economic motives, these changes aimed to maximize revenue for the British Empire but had profound and often adverse effects on the rural economy and social structure of India.

Land Revenue Policies of British in India: Transformation and Impact

Pre-British Agrarian Structure

• British Transformations in Agrarian Structure: The British imperial rulers of India initiated extensive transformations in the country’s agrarian structure. 
  • The introduction of new land tenures, revised concepts of land ownership, tenancy alterations, and increased state demands for land revenue set off profound changes in the rural economy and social relationships. 
  • These governmental policies marked the beginning of a distorted era of modernization.

• Pre-British Agrarian Structure: In the pre-British agrarian structure, village communities in India operated as units of local self-government and land revenue administration, following a system where the idea of absolute land ownership was nonexistent. 
  • Different classes associated with the land possessed specific rights, with cultivators enjoying the right to cultivate and secure tenure, contingent on paying a fixed share of the produce to the overlord.

• Role of the Patil: The Patil, or village headman, served as the mamlatdar, handling the roles of collector, magistrate, and head farmer. 
  • They forwarded the state’s land revenue demand to the ruler or nawab, with internal village arrangements for cultivation, land allocation, irrigation facilities, and revenue collection decided by the Patil in consultation with village Panchayats based on local customs.

• Economic Motives of British Conquerors: The British conquerors, driven by economic motives, aimed to maximize their economic gains from India. 
  • With industrial and mercantile interests favoring Free Trade principles, the East India Company relied heavily on land revenue as the primary source of state income. 
• Neglect of Village Communities: Considering India as a vast estate, early British administrators believed the Company was entitled to the entire economic rent, neglecting village communities. 
  • Initially, land revenue was farmed out excessively, leading to agricultural decline, abandoned areas, and widespread famines, prompting reconsideration of land revenue policies.

British Land Revenue Policies

• Introduction of Land Tenure Systems: The British introduced three types of land tenures in India: the Zamindari tenure, Mahalwari tenure, and Ryotwari tenure. 
  • The British rulers adopted various forms of land tenure to suit different regions in India.

The Zamindari System

• Permanent Settlement: The Permanent Settlement, introduced in 1793 by Lord Cornwallis in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa, marked a significant shift in British colonial policy in India. 
  • Aimed at addressing economic challenges faced by the East India Company, the settlement had far-reaching consequences on the agrarian landscape, particularly in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa.
• Economic Rationale Behind the Permanent Settlement: Cornwallis recognized the shortcomings of the existing revenue system, which impeded economic growth and agricultural prosperity. 
• The Physiocratic school of thinking, emphasizing the primacy of agriculture, influenced the decision to fix land revenue permanently. 
• The Company hoped that this would not only ensure a regular surplus but also incentivize landlords to invest in land improvement.
• Implementation of the Permanent Settlement: The settlement vested land ownership rights in zamindars, recognizing them as proprietors of their estates. 
  • The fixed land revenue, set at a high rate (e.g., 89% in Bengal), aimed at maximizing tax collection for the Company. 
  • However, this left the rent to be collected by zamindars from cultivators unsettled, leading to issues like rack-renting and tenant evictions.
• Impact on Zamindars and Peasants: While zamindars gained newfound status as landowners, they faced challenges in meeting fixed revenue demands. 
• The ‘sun-set’ law allowed the government to auction off zamindari estates if the fixed amount wasn’t paid, leading to the decline of some old zamindari houses. 
• Peasants, on the other hand, lost customary occupancy rights, facing the burden of high revenue assessment and illegal cesses.
• Subsequent Modifications: Over the years, the Permanent Settlement faced criticism and underwent modifications. 
  • The Bengal Rent Acts of 1859 and 1885 provided some relief to cultivators, recognizing their occupancy rights. 
  • However, the power dynamics between zamindars and tenants persisted, with the jotedar class gaining influence in some regions.
• Scholarly Critique: Scholars like Daniel Thorner questioned the notion of absolute ownership granted to zamindars, highlighting the continued influence of the imperial authority. 
• The high land revenue demands and uncertainties in rent collection led to frequent auction sales of zamindari estates, impacting both zamindars and tenants.

The Mahalwari System

• • In the Mahalwari System, the revenue settlement revolves around the village or mahal (estate) as the primary unit. The land within the village is collectively owned by the village community, referred to technically as the ‘body of co-shares.’ This collective body holds joint responsibility for the payment of land revenue, although individual accountability also exists. If any co-sharer abandons their land, it is reclaimed by the entire village community. Furthermore, the village community assumes ownership of common land within the village, including areas such as forest land and pastures.

• Land Settlements in North-Western Provinces and Oudh

• • The North-Western Provinces and Oudh, approximately modern Uttar Pradesh (U.P.), fell under British rule through different events. The surrender of districts by the Nawab of Oudh in 1801 and acquisitions after the Second and last Anglo-Maratha Wars marked significant territorial changes. Henry Wellesley, the first Lt Governor of the Ceded Districts, initiated a land revenue settlement with zamindars and farmers, elevating the State demand substantially over the Nawab’s. However, this approach faced challenges due to its rigidity and the Company’s unfamiliar demands.

• The Regulation of 1822

• • The Secretary to the Board of Commissioners, Holt Mackenzie, highlighted the existence of village communities in Northern India in 1819. Regulation VII of 1822 then provided legal backing to recommendations, settling land revenue at 80% of rental value for zamindars and 95% for common tenancy. This system faced breakdown due to excessive state demand and harsh collection methods.

• Reforms and Land Settlements by Merttins Bird

• • Following a comprehensive review, Regulation IX of 1833 introduced reforms to simplify procedures and set average rents for different soil classes. Merttins Bird oversaw the implementation, conducting surveys, fixing assessments, and setting state demands at 66% of the rental value for a 30-year settlement. This work, initiated in 1833, concluded under James Thomson’s administration (Lt. Governor, 1843-53).

• Issues and Saharanpur Rules of 1855

• The 66% rental demand formula proved harsh, leading to dissatisfaction. Lord Dalhousie issued fresh Directions, and under the revised Saharanpur Rules of 1855, the state revenue demand was limited to 50% of the rental value. However, in practice, Settlement officers evaded these rules, interpreting them in a way that heavily impacted agricultural classes and contributed to widespread discontent, notably during the Revolt of 1857-58.

The Ryotwari System

• Introduction of the Ryotwari System: The Ryotwari System, introduced in British India by Thomas Munro and Alexander Reed in 1820. 
  • It was started in the Baramahal district of Tamil Nadu and later spread to Madras, parts of Bombay, East Bengal, Assam and Kurg (Karnataka). 
• Coverage and Scope: It covered 51% of British India. Ryots (farmers) were given the ownership and other rights (Pattas) over the land and were required to pay the revenue directly to the government. 
• Assessment and Taxation: The lands were surveyed and assessed before being taxed. This process ensured that each plot of land was evaluated for its revenue potential.
• Departure from the Permanent Settlement: It marked a significant departure from the Permanent Settlement and aimed to address issues related to revenue extraction and agrarian governance. 
• Direct Proprietorship: This system recognized individual cultivators, or ryots, as direct proprietors responsible for land revenue payment to the state. 

Evolution and impact of the Ryotwari System across different regions

• Land Settlements in Madras: The first land revenue settlements in Madras Presidency occurred in the Baramahal district in 1792. 
• Capt. Read and Thomas Munro initially fixed the State demand at 50% of the estimated produce, exceeding the economic rent and causing widespread misery.
• Thomas Munro’s Reforms: Governor Thomas Munro (1820-27) recognized the unfairness of early settlements and extended the ryotwari system to the entire province, except permanently settled areas. 
• Economic Burdens, Oppression, and Famine Challenges: 
• Economic Burden on Ryots: However, the demand, set at 1/3rd of the gross produce, absorbed nearly the entire economic rental. 
• Impact on Peasantry: Munro’s settlements, lasting almost thirty years, led to oppression, agricultural distress, and increased poverty among the peasantry. 
• Oppressive Collection Methods: The machinery of collection during Munro’s tenure was oppressive, resorting to torture for the collection of State dues. 
• Concerns Raised by British Parliament: British Parliament members raised concerns about practices such as preventing defaulters from eating or attending to bodily functions, physically restraining individuals, and using degrading methods like tying defaulters by their back hair or to a donkey’s or buffalo’s tail.
• • • 1855 Survey and Settlement Plan: In 1855, an extensive survey and settlement plan were initiated, fixing the State demand at 30% of the gross produce. Actual work began in 1861. 
    • Rule of 1864 and State Demand: The Rule of 1864 attempted to limit the State demand to 50% of the rental, but in practice, these instructions remained largely unimplemented. 
    • Madras Famine (1867-78): The severe Madras famine of 1867-78 exposed the dire conditions of the peasantry, highlighting the inadequacies and challenges within the Ryotwari System and the overall administration of land settlements in Madras.

• Land Settlements in Bombay

• • • Eliminating Landlords and Village Communities: In the Bombay Presidency, the Company favored the Ryotwari system to eliminate landlords or village communities that could impede their profits.

• Ryotwari System in Bombay: Survey and Assessment Issues

• • • • Governor Elphinstone’s Report (1819-27): Governor Elphinstone (1819-27) emphasized the existence of village communities and mirasi tenure in his detailed report on territories conquered from the Peshwa in 1819. 
      • Chaplain, the Commissioner of the Deccan, submitted valuable suggestions in reports from 1821 and 1822. 
      • Survey and State Demand (1824-28): A regular survey conducted by Pringle during 1824-28 fixed the State demand at 55% of the net produce. Faulty surveys and erroneous estimates led to overassessment, causing oppression of the peasantry and abandonment of fields.

• Wingate’s Survey and Ryotwari Settlement (1835-1847)

• • Lt. Wingate’s Survey (1835): Lt. Wingate of the Engineers Corps conducted a survey in 1835. 
    • The State land revenue demand was determined based on the district’s past history and people’s paying capacity. 
  • Shift in Assessment Method: A geological basis replaced the equitable field produce assessment, and the settlement was made on each field, allowing cultivators to switch fields. 
  • Assessment Issues: The assessment, largely guesswork, erred on the side of severity. 
  • Resettlement (1866): Resettlement in 1866 saw an increase of 66% to 100% due to a temporary cotton boom, with no appeal rights for cultivators. 
  • Deccan Agriculturists’ Relief Act (1879): Agrarian riots in the Deccan in 1875 prompted the Deccan Agriculturists’ Relief Act of 1879, offering relief against moneylenders but failing to address the excessive State demand.
• Major Issues in the Ryotwari System in Bombay: 
  • Over Assessment: The system faced significant over-assessment, with the revenue demand being set too high, causing undue burden on the cultivators.
  • Uncertainty: There was no provision for cultivators to appeal against over-assessment, leaving them vulnerable to the whims of collectors.
  • Choices for Cultivators: The cultivator was informed of the new assessed rate with the choice to retain or abandon the land.

Conclusion

The British land revenue policies profoundly impacted India’s agrarian society, often leading to exploitation and economic distress among farmers.

•  Each system had its unique issues, from the oppressive Ijaradari System to the rigid Zamindari, collective Mahalwari, and over-assessed Ryotwari System. 
• While the intent was to streamline revenue collection and improve agricultural productivity, the outcomes often led to widespread discontent and suffering among the peasantry, revealing the complexities and challenges of colonial governance in India.

DOWNLOAD PDF