Page 205 - DHIS204_DHIS205_INDIAN_FREEDOM_STRUGGLE_HINDI

Indian Freedom Struggle (1707–1947 A.D.)

Notes never losing sight of the object desired, taking advantage of every turn of fortune—all qualities
invaluable for success in intrigue.” It was contended that the circulation of the Chapatis was
originated by the Hindus and the rebellion was successfully engineered by the emissaries of the
Peshwa under the guidance of Nana Sahib.
The ‘absentee soverieigntyship’ of the British rule in India was an equally important political
factor which worked on the minds of the Indian people against the British. The Pathans and the
Mughals who had conquered India had, in course of time, settled in India and become Indians.
The revenues collected from the people were spent this very country. In the case of the British, the
Indians felt that they were being ruled from England from a distance of thousands of miles and
the country was being drained of her wealth.
Administrative and Economic Causes: The annexation of Indian states produced startling economic
and social effects. The Indian aristocracy was deprived of power and position. It found little
chance to gain the same old position in the new administrative set-up, as under the British rule all
high posts, civil and military, were reserved for the Europeans.
In the military services, the highest post attainable by an Indian was that of a Subedar on a salary
of Rs. 60 or Rs. 70 and in the civil services that of Sadr Amin on a salary of Rs. 500 per month. The
chances of promotion were very few. The Indians thought that British were out to reduce them to
‘hewers of wood and drawers of water.”
The administrative machinery of the East India Company was ‘inefficient and insufficient’. The
land revenue police was most unpopular. Many districts in the newly-annexed states were in
permanent revolt and military had to be sent to collect the land revenue. In the district of Panipat,
for example, 136 horsemen were maintained for the collection of land revenue, while only 22 were
employed for the performance of police duties.
Many talukdars, the hereditary landlords (and tax-collectors for the Government) were deprived
of their positions and gains. Many holders of rent-free tenures were dispossessed by the use of a
quo-warranto—requiring the holders of such lands to produce evidence like title-deeds by which
they held that land. Large estates were confiscated and sold by public auction to the highest
bidders. Such estates were usually purchased by speculators who did not understand the tenants
and fully exploited them. It was Coverly Jackson’s policy of disbanding the native soldiers and of
strict inquiry into the titles of the talukdars of Oudh that made Oudh the chief centre of the
Rebellion. The Inam Commission appointed in 1852 in Bombay confiscated as many as 20,000
estates. Thus, the new land revenue settlements made by the East India Company in the newly-
annexed states drove poverty in the ranks of the aristocracy without benefiting the peasantry
which groaned under the weight of heavy assessments and excessive duties. The peasants whose
welfare was the chief motive of the new revenue policy did not like the passing of the old ways.
They fell in the clutches of unprincipled moneylenders; they often visited their dispossessed
landlords and with tears in their eyes expressed their sympathy for them. The taluqdars of Oudh
were the hardest hit.
The ruthless manner in which the Thomasonian system was carried into effect may be clear from
the resumption of the revenue of free villages granted for the temple Lakshmi in Jhansi.
Social and Religious Causes: Like all conquering people the English rulers of India were rude
and arrogant towards the subject people. However, the English were infected with a spirit of
racialism. The rulers followed a policy of contempt towards the Indians and described the Hindus
as barbarians with hardly any trace of culture and civilisation, while the Muslims were dubbed as
bigots, cruel and faithless.
The European officers in India were very exacting and over-bearing in their social behaviour. The
Indian was spoken as nigger and addressed as a suar or pig, an epithet most resented by the

200 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY