Consequences of British
Tenure Systems
Land becomes a property
|
|
Before British
|
During British rule
|
1.
Private ownership of land did not exist land
belonged to the village community
2.
Land was never treated as the property of the
kings - benevolent or despotic, Hindu, Muslims or Buddhist.
3.
Land was not treated as individual cultivator’s property
either.
|
1.
Introduced private ownership of land
2.
This divided village into 1) landlords 2) tenants
3) labourers
3.
This material transformation the agrarian society
in India witnessed profound social, economic, political, cultural and
psychological change.
|
Panchayat Lost Prestige
|
|
Land
matters and civil disputes were adjudicated by Panchayat within the village.
|
1.
Farmer had to approach British courts for matters
related to Revenue, property attachment, debt-mortgage etc.
2.
Panchayats lost their power and prestige.
|
Food
insecurity
|
|
Farmers
usually grew foodcrops- wheat, maize, paddy, jowar, bajra and pulses.
|
1.
Since British demand revenue in CA SH, farmers
resorted to growing cash crops: indigo, sugarcane, cotton=> Area under
food crop cultivation declined.
2.
Then, Lacks of People would die of starvation during
famines.
3.
Even after independence and before green
revolution- India was not self-sufficient in grain production.
4.
At independence India was faced with an acute food
shortage near-famine conditions in many areas.
5.
Between 1946 and 1953 about 14 million tonnes of
food grains worth Rs 10,000 million had to be imported = ½ total capital
investment in the First Five Y ear Plan (1951–56).
|
Canals
|
|
1.
Kings constructed ponds, canals and wells to
improve agriculture
2.
Irrigation taxes were moderate
|
1.
British did construct new canals:- More area brought under
cultivation, particularly in Punjab. But most canals caused salinity and
swamps=>declined productivity over the years.
2.
T axes on Irrigation were quite high. Therefore
Canal irrigation was used to grow sugar, cotton and other cash crops, instead
of food crops=>food insecurity, starvation and death during famines.
|
Cash economy & indebted farmers
|
|
1.
Land Revenue was paid in kind.
2.
Village was a self-sufficient economy with
cooperative units.E.g. blacksmith would make farm-tools, would get yearly payments
in grains/kind.
3.
Moneylending, mortgaging were negligible.
4.
Collective village life based on common economic
interests and resultant cooperative relation.
|
1.
British obliged the farmers to pay revenue in cash
and not in kind.
2.
The land revenue was increased arbitrarily to
finance British wars and conquests. But the farmers had no right to appeal in
the court of law.
3.
Farmers had no understanding of cash economy +
frequent droughts and famines
4.
Hence they had to borrow money from unscrupulous
grain traders and money-lenders=> compound interest rate, perpetual indebtedness.
5.
Eventually, the typical Indian villager was
stripped of all savings, caught in debt trap, mortgaging almost everything-whether
personal jewelry, land and livestock, or tools and equipment.
6.
A new village came-where existence was based on
competition & struggle among independent individuals.
|
Rural Industry
destroyed
|
|
1.
India was steadily becoming more urbanized,
2.
Significant portion of the Indian population living
in large or small towns.
3.
Even in Villages, there was skilled artisans like
weavers, potters, carpenters, metal-workers, painters etc.
|
1.
De-urbanization and de-industrialization of India
2.
Greater pressures on agriculture since large
categories of highly skilled artisans and non-agricultural workers were
thrown out of work.
3.
When the British left, India had become a village-based
agricultural economy.
4.
Trade tariffs and excise duties were set so as to
destroy Indian industries, and squeeze domestic trade.
5.
Bihar and Bengal: severe restrictions were placed
on the use of inland water-ways causing fishing and inland shipping and transportation
to suffer.
|
Lack of
Capitalist Agriculture
In
most economies, the evolution is traditional farming=>capitalist farming
methods. But in India, it did not happen, why?
1.
Large
landowners in zamindari and ryotwari areas leased out their lands in small
pieces to tenants.
2.
Small
tenants continued to cultivate them with traditional techniques= low
productivity.
3.
Rich
farmers/ zamindars lacked the risk bearing mindset for capitalist mode of production
(i.e. invest more money in seeds, fertilizer, animal husbandry, contract
farming, large-scale capitalist
agriculture using hired wage labour under their direct supervision. etc).
4.
Even
if they wanted to take ‘risk’, government did not give any agricultural
support, credit, insurance etc. yet demanded high taxes.
5.
It
is not surprising, therefore, that Indian agriculture, which was facing
long-term stagnation, began to show clear signs of decline during the last
decades of colonialism.
Serfdom
Before:
slavery/bonded labour /Begari almost non-existent.
But
During British raj:-
1.
Zamindars
gave loan to farmers/laborers and demanded free labour in return.
2.
This
practice prevented farmers/laborers to bargaining wages.
3.
Even
in ryotwari areas, upper caste controlled the land. Lower caste was reduced to
sharecroppers and landless laborers.
Cash economy
& indebted farmers
1.
Farmers
shifted from food crop to Cash crops. But cash crops need more inputs in terms
of seeds, fertilizer, and irrigation, hence farmer had to borrow more. This
brought moneylenders, Shroff, Mahajan, Baniya, into limelight- they were in control
of village land without any accountability.
2.
Thus
British land revenue system transfered ownership of land from farmer to
moneylender. Towards about the end of the colonial period, the total burden on
the peasant of interest payments on debt and rent on land could be estimated at
a staggering Rs 14,200 million
3.
According
to RBI ’ s survey in 1954: 93% moneylenders.
No comments:
Post a Comment