UNIT 2 AGRARIAN RELATIONS DURING BRITISH

RULE IN INDIA
Structure
2.0 Objectives
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Impact of British Rule in Eastern India
2.2.1 Permanent Settlement
2.2.2 Transfer of Zamindari Rights
2.2.3 Indebtedness and Alienation of Land
2.2.4 Tenancy
2.2.5 Tenancy Acts
2.3 Impact in Northern and Central India
2.3.1 Impact of Land Revenue System
2.3.2 Land Transfers
2.3.3 Landholding Structure and Tenancy
2.4 Impact of British Rule in Western India
2.4.1 Changes in Agrarian Society
2.4.2 Stratification
2.4.3 Tenancy
2.5 Impact of British Rule in South India
2.5.1 Changes in Agrarian Structure
2.5.2 Tenancy
2.6 Agricultural Labourers
2.7 Land Tenure System and Agricultural Growth
2.8 Let Us Sum Up
2.9 Key Words
2.10 Some Useful Books
2.11 Answers/Hints to Check Your Progress Exercises

2.0 OBJECTIVES
On going through this unit, you will be able to explain:
• regional variations in landed property relations during British Rule;
• the impact of British rule on village economic system; and
• the poor agricultural growth during colonial regime.

2.1 INTRODUCTION
During the British rule there was widespread destruction of village communities,
formation of land market, rising rents, indebtedness, formation of layers of intermediaries,
frequent famines and impoverishment of the population as a result of some direct and
indirect influences of the British rule.

There is a subtle difference between ‘agrarian relations’ and ‘land relations’. Agrarian
relation is a much broader term and includes credit and marketing facilities apart from
land relations. On the other hand, land relation depicts the land tenure system and
ownership. In this Unit we will discuss the agrarian relations during the British rule
in India. As there were considerable variations in the land tenure system across
regions we bring out the important features of this regime at a regional level.

17
Indian Agriculture :
Institutional Perspectives 2.2 IMPACT OF BRITISH RULE IN EASTERN INDIA
The East India Company took over the Dewani (financial rights) of Bengal, Bihar and
parts of Orissa in the year 1765. Immediate interest of the company was to collect
the maximum amount of income in the quickest possible time. The company required
large amount of money to (a) finance trade and commerce, and (b) maintain the
army for strengthening and expansion of the rule. To realize the higher land revenue,
the zamindari were auctioned to the highest bidders.

The policy of maximizing land revenue altered the composition of landed society.
Many old zamindars could not compete in the race. The highest bidders at the public
auction in many cases were people who made fortunes through their association with
the new administration and through participation in the new trade and commerce. The
peasants were literally robbed by these zamindars, in order to pay up the company’s
dues, and were often forced to abscond. This reckless process, which continued till
the permanent settlement, resulted frequently in famines, loss of human life and large
areas of land were rendered as waste. Between 1765 to 1793 the revenue demand
of the company nearly doubled.

2.2.1 Permanent Settlement

The Permanent Settlement of 1793, in Bengal and Bihar, besides declaring the zamindars
‘proprietors of the soil’, fixed forever their dues to the state. It was argued that this
would ensure not only the security of revenue, but also the prosperity of the company’s
commerce. A thriving commerce was the vital need of the British and agriculture
provided variety of goods for export. It was more important also because that was
the time of the commencement of the Industrial Revolution in Britain. It was thought
that the creation of private property in land would create the right conditions for
investment in agriculture. Landed property would acquire a value and the large capital
possessed by many natives in Calcutta, which they were employing in usury, or
monopolizing salt, or other necessaries of life would be appropriated to the more
useful purpose of purchasing and improving lands. Moreover, the creation of a class
of loyal supporters (zamindars) for the stability of British rule was another important
objective.

However, their expectations were only partially fulfilled. As far as the creation of a
class of loyal supporters is concerned, the British substantially succeeded in it. But
zamindars, new as well as old, failed to become agarian capitalists, and preferred to
remain fedual landlords. Capital was invested not for agricultural development but for
purchasing of land. Moreover, in due course of time, a long chain of intermediaries
cropped up between the state and the tiller. The Zamindars were expected to pay a
fixed sum as revenue to the government. This revenue amounted to 90 per cent of
the rent collected by the zamindars, in 1793. However, with increase in prices, the
value of money eroded. The state lost because its revenues in terms of money were
permanently fixed while the value of money had drastically fallen. The peasant lost
because rents were not regulated and the increased value of agricultural produce was
transferred to the hand of the zamindars and intermediaries.

The Bengal model was, however, not replicated in parts of Orissa and Assam. It was
realized that the freezing of the land revenue demand, which constituted by far the
most important source of the government income at that time, would be sheer folly.
Both in Orissa and Assam settlements were temporary and the revenue demand was
increased form time to time.

In Orissa, between 1805 and 1897, land revenue of the government increased by 93
percent. But in Assam the peasants surrendered to the State a larger proportion of
18
their total agricultural output than peasants in other parts of eastern India. Since the
British had their distinct professional army and an elaborate administrative bureaucracy,
the labour services of the paiks became redundant (see unit 1). The paiks were given
a cash tribute, which was quite high as compared to the nominal tax on paik’s land
during Ahom rule. Moreover, the old Assamese aristocracy, to which the Ahom king
trusted the defence of the state and a large part of the administration, also became
superflous under the new system. Their revenue-free estates were gradually
confiscated.

2.2.2 Transfer of Zamindari Rights

As we know, the high land revenue demand, specially during the early British period,
and the unprecedented rigour in its collection, created serious difficulties for many
zamindars, which led to ruin of their estates. Moneyed persons were interested in
buying these, and a market in land gradually developed. In addition to selling land,
zamindars also leased out portions of their zamindaris thus creating further layers of
intermediaries between the state and actual cultivators.

2.2.3 Indebtedness and Alienation of Land

Whatever was the condition before British rule, the pervasiveness of rural indebtedness
during British rule remains an incontrovertible fact. Rural credit provided two sources
of control: the dependence of a considerable number of peasants on a regular supply
of credit, eventually involving surrender by them of a large part of their produce to
the creditors, and the acquisition by creditors of the lands of defaulting peasants.

An important source of peasants’ miseries was their undefined rent relations with
zamindars, who abused their legal powers towards increasing their rental income.
There was an increase in cultivation of cash crops such as indigo, opium and jute,
during British rule. However, it contributed to the growth of rural indebtedness. An
unremunerative indigo cultivation was largely forced on the cultivators by European
planters through various devices. Opium cultivation, though not always forced, was
vulnerable to the fluctuations of weather which resulted in frequent losses and
indebtedness of the peasants. The cultivators of jute normally borrowed money from
money lenders and jute traders, and, in return surrendered part or whole of their
crops to the creditors, at lower prices. This affected them adversely thus perpetuating
their indebtedness. Sudden slump in jute prices also affected them adversely thus
increasing their dependence on moneylenders. Indebtedness of the peasants resulted
in distress sale of land holdings and such sales increased in number over the years.
Indebtedness and certain other factors converted the peasants into agricultural labourers.

2.2.4 Tenancy

The peasants who thus lost land were not necessarily driven out of land, except
where the new owners cultivated them directly with hired labourers. The old peasants
many a time cultivated their sold plots on a crop sharing basis. The share-cropping
(barga) system did not result from rural credit relations alone, though its growth was
considerably due to these. The barga system also prevailed where the owners, for
various reasons, were unable to organise the cultivation of their lands. Some owners
preferred the barga system where this ensured an increased rental income. Because
of an increased demand for land by the peasants, share-cropping became more
profitable for the land owner.

2.2.5 Tenancy Acts

With the Permanent Settlement the zamindars acquired exclusive property rights in
land. Moreover, the entry of new zamindars destroyed all the customary rights of the
peasants. The zamindars who bought the zamindari estates were trying to obtain
19
Indian Agriculture : maximum return for their investments. To get the maximum out of the peasantry, they
Institutional Perspectives
committed such excesses that the government was forced at times to intervene to
stop a possible revolt. Two major tenancy acts were enacted in Bengal after the
Permanent Settlement: the Rent Act of 1859 and the Bengal Tenancy Act of 1885,
which was amended a number of times in the 1920s and 1930s. The tenancy act put
some restrictions on the rights of the landlords to check the excesses committed by
them.

Under the tenancy act occupancy rights were conferred on those ryots and under-
ryots who had been in possession of any land for twelve consecutive years. The
‘occupancy rights’ of a ryot or an under-ryot also included rights of inheritance,
transfer and mortgage. The occupancy ryot could not be ejected right away by the
landlord even for non-payment of rent. However, court could sell his land for failure
to pay rents. Rents of these tenants could be enhanced only under certain specified
conditions.

Such occupancy ryots did not necessarily cultivate their holdings on their own and
many of them, specially some big ryots, further leased out their lands to the tenants
and share croppers rarely having any tenancy rights (non-occupancy tenants). One
of the motives of the big ryots behind subletting their holdings was the considerable
margin between the rent that the non-occupancy-tenants paid and the one they
themselves paid. There was no legal protection against an increase of rent of these
non-occupancy tenants and share-croppers by the occupancy tenants. By the year
1940, as many as one-third of peasants households were constituted of such inferior
tenants, cultivating as much as one-fifth to one-fourth of all land.

Check Your Progress 1

1) What was the immediate impact of the East India Company taking over Dewani
rights of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa?

.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................

2) What were the objectives behind Permanent Settlement?

.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................

3) In what respect was the Government at loss due to Permanent Settlement?

.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................

20 .......................................................................................................................
4) What was the condition of tenants in Eastern India after the tenancy acts?

.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................

2.3 IMPACT IN NORTHERN AND CENTRAL INDIA

In Northern India there was an intermixing of various kinds of revenue systems. Both
Zamindari and Mahalwari systems were introduced in this region. Initially it was
Bengal type permanent settlement that was favored, but later, after 1811, considerations
of enhancement of revenue led to abandonment of fixed revenue system. So even in
the case of zamindari areas only a small proportion was under permanent settlement,
the rest were settled temporarily. In Punjab and parts of United Provinces, Mahalwari
system was introduced where the unit of assessment was the village and payment of
revenue became the joint responsibility of the village proprietary body. Each individual
cultivator contributed his share in the revenue. Initially the burden of revenue was
very heavy. The British laid claim to about 85 per cent of the rental. In principle it
was reduced to two-thirds after 1833 and to one-half after 1855. But in actual
practice this principle was not adhered to.

In the central parts of India, in the early decades of British rule, heavy assessments
were the rule. They assessed the lands too high, demanded an impossible revenue,
and impoverished the people. The mistake was realized at a later date and was
condemned in the strongest terms. It was only in 1834 that a long settlement for
twenty years was concluded in these territories, which was allowed to continue till the
early 1860s. Under the new settlement of 1864, that was introduced in the Central
Provinces, malaguzars or revenue-payers were recognized as the proprietors of the
soil with a right to sell or mortgage their property. Tenancy rights were conferred on
the cultivators. In principle it was decided that the land revenue would be limited to
one-half of the rental of estates. But the principle was not adhered to when the
assessments were made. Settlement officers did not accept the actual rental of
estates. They estimated what the rental should be from their own calculations, and
based the land revenue demand on those estimated rentals. Thus, the rental considered
as the basis of assessment was higher than the actual rents received by the land
owners. As a result, land revenue demanded was higher than 50 per cent of actual
rental.

2.3.1 Impact of Land Revenue System

We noticed that land revenue was to be paid in cash, not in kind. Secondly, the
amount of revenue was kept fixed for a period of twenty or thirty years, under
permanent settlement. Consequently, the revenue of the state did not increase. On
the other hand, the payment of revenue in cash generated a pressure on the cultivators.
They were forced to produce cash crops like indigo, sugarcane and wheat. Moreover,
they had to borrow money for payment of tax. Sometimes they took advance from
the village money lender. Everywhere the local grain dealer-cum-moneylender, who
was in some cases also the village accountant (patwari), found his position strengthened.
The cultivator was moved more by his immediate cash requirements to meet revenue
21
Indian Agriculture : and rent installment and to pay marriage expenses rather than by the mere prospect
Institutional Perspectives
of higher profits from valuable crops. In fact, the profits tended to make their way
into the middleman’s pocket. In the Shahjahanpur district the fatal effects of accepting
the inducement of urban Khandsaris or sugar factories became so notorious that the
Chandel Rajputs inhabiting the Ramganga tract in the Khundur pargana refused to
grow sugarcane rather than risk the loss of their independence and proprietary title
to alien creditors.

2.3.2 Land Transfers

With the introduction of transferable proprietary rights in land, the land sales increased.
The Board of Revenue on revenue administration of North West Province commented
in 1854. “In no country in the world probably do landed tenures so certainly, constantly
and extensively change hands. These mutations are effecting a rapid and complete
revolution in the position of the ancient proprietors of the soil.” Behind this alienation
and mortgage of land lay the much larger problem of indebtedness. It was estimated
that 10 per cent of agricultural land had already passed into the hands of what district
officers termed ‘the wily mahajan and sleek, impassive bania’. Yet official opinion
remained opposed to any tampering with free trade in land. It was because of the
realization that legislative inference might seriously upset the provision of rural credit
and jeopardize the security of the land revenue. Similarly in the districts of Central
Provinces, by the time of the 1864 Settlement almost the whole of the profits was
taken away by the moneylenders. While mortgage was growing rapidly, decrees were
being carried out through the civil courts in the 1870s. Continuous transfer of land
from cultivators to moneylenders prompted legislation in the shape of Bundelkhand
Alienation Act of 1903. But despite the Alienation Act the professional moneylenders
in Bundelkhand remained a permanent part of the rural scene and sustained their hold
over peasants. These moneylenders-cum-traders were more interested in rent-receiving
or in controlling the disposal of peasant grown cash crops than in directly engaging
in agriculture. So the introduction of legal private property rights in land tended to
lengthen the claim of intermediaries above the actual cultivator and left the peasant
based small scale traditional cultivation intact. British hopes of the emergence of
capitalist agriculture, which would take benefits of economies of scale, did not
materialise.

2.3.3 Landholding Structure and Tenancy

The picture presented by the Zamindari Abolition Committee’s report of 1948 was a
startling one. In North Western Provinces, the landholding structure was such that the
greater part of land was held by relatively small group of large landholders. Altogether
a mere handful of zamindars, just 1.3 per cent of the total population held more than
half of the land. Yet it must be remembered that large proportion of such ‘estates’
had no physical existence as larger local landholdings but were simply bundles of rent-
collecting rights over scattered parcels of land. Thus a large part of land in this region
was cultivated by one or the other type of tenants. Similarly, in Punjab just 3.5 per
cent of the total landowners owning above 50 acres of land owned more than one-
fourth of the total area in 1924. By 1939 their proportion in total landowners came
down to 2.4 per cent but area owned increased to 38 per cent. Invariably these bigger
owners in Punjab were leasing out their lands to the tenants. This is also borne out
by the fact that in 1924 around 120,900 owners owned more than 50 acres of land
whereas only 20,000 cultivated more than 50 acres. In Punjab, which was generally
considered as the land of peasant proprietors, between 1891-92 and 1939-40, area
cultivated by the tenants increased from 10.6 million acres to 17.8 million acres
whereas its proportion in the total cultivated area increased from around 46 per cent
to 57 per cent (total cultivated area also increased from 23.1 million acres to 31.2
million acres during this period). Around 85 per cent of all the ‘tenants at will’ were
without any security of tenure and they were normally paying very high rents.
22
2.4 IMPACT OF BRITISH RULE IN WESTERN INDIA
The system of revenue collection adopted in this part was basically the ryotwari
system. Settlement was normally for a fixed period of 30 years, which meant that the
revenue demand could be enhanced after that period. Under the ryotwari settlement,
the ryoti cultivator is directly under the state. He is recognized as proprietor and can
sublet, mortgage or transfer by gift or sale his plot of land. He cannot be ejected so
long as he pays the revenue, which is fixed.

With the introduction of new land revenue system in Western India, the miras and
upart tenures were merged and the occupant of the land had the same rights
irrespective of their earlier status. The hereditary village and higher officials (patils,
desais and desmukhs) were prohibited from collection of customary perquisites from
people. In addition to this, exclusion of these hereditary officials from revenue
administration also tended to lower their independence.

2.4.1 Changes in Agrarian Society

In the 1860s the American Civil War stimulated the international demand for Indian
cotton (which was earlier fulfilled by North America) and large investments in railways
and irrigation also facilitated exports. During this period, there was a sharp rise in
prices of agricultural commodities, specially of cotton. The first to benefit from the
boom were the traders and moneylenders but cultivators also got some benefit. But
new settlements were due in many districts in the late 1860s. On the basis of
prevailing high prices the new settlements of land revenue raised the assessment.
Between 1856-57 and 1870-71 the total revenue of Bombay Presidency went up by
37 per cent (and by a further 18 per cent by 1890). Prices began to decline after 1870
and by 1876 many agricultural prices had fallen to 1860 level. Thus it became difficult
for the ryots to pay the increased revenue and they went to the moneylenders for
loans. Increasing indebtedness of the cultivators culminated in the Deccan riots in
1875 against moneylenders.

In addition to heavy land revenue demand, the new legal system had also given the
village moneylender more freedom. As we know from the previous Unit, during the
Maratha rule, the moneylenders knew that the government would not support them
if they tried to confiscate peasant’s land for recovery of debt. But the British courts
were much more rigid in enforcing the land transfer and the cultivators were often
ignorant of the new laws.

But what the banias were interested in, was control of the crops, and the trade. By
the middle of the nineteenth century the moneylenders controlled nearly all the internal
trade in both grains and cotton in the Deccan. Their main interest was to preserve
this control through advancing loans to the peasants who were required to sell their
crops to them at a much lower price than prevailing market prices. However, not only
the banias but the prosperous members of the traditional cultivating castes, the
kunbis, also took to moneylending. In fact these agriculturist moneylenders had a
much greater apetite for land than the mercantile castes and possibly the land transfers
in favour of the kunbis may have been of greater importance than transfers to
traditional moneylenders. In 1930, it was reported that only 29 per cent of the peasants
in Konkan were free from debt, and in the north Konkan much of the land held by
peasants had passed into the hands of creditors, whether professional moneylenders
or large peasants.

2.4.2 Stratification

There was rise of the rich peasantry and increasing stratification of the peasantry
during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The cultivation of cash crops such as 23
Indian Agriculture : sugarcane, tobacco, groundnut and cotton expanded. The small section of the cultivators
Institutional Perspectives
who had a surplus to market made large profits, and invested them back into agriculture
mainly into irrigation. They also bought carts and instead of handing over their grain
to the local shahukar at his price they could seek better markets. These rich farmers,
who had been able to seize the new market opportunities, often replaced the traditional
moneylenders as sources of credit in the village. These commercialized agriculturists
also often purchased the land of small cultivators, who were often in heavy debt. Data
collected for the Royal Commission on Agriculture showed that in 1924-25, 86 per
cent of the total cultivated area was held by large owners each having more than 25
acres and they formed just 12 per cent of the total landowners.

2.4.3 Tenancy

There were landlords and tenants in south Konkan, north Kanara and in inam lands
in the Deccan even before the British period. But there appears to have been a
significant growth in the number of tenants, especially from the 1880s onwards. Many
former revenue officials and moneylenders were leasing out their land to the tenants.
It seems that well-to-do owner cultivators started withdrawing from cultivation and
leased out their land during the first half of the twentieth century. In Gujarat land
owned by non-cultivating holders increased from 24 per cent to 30 per cent of the
agricultural area between 1916-17 and 1942-43 while their number rose from 65,000
to 1,01,000.

Most of these tenants were tenants-at-will. The majority of tenants in Maharashtra

paid in kind; the general rate was half the crop, with the landlord paying the land
revenue. This system was particularly advantageous to the landlords when prices
were rising.

2.5 IMPACT OF BRITISH RULE IN SOUTH INDIA

The first half of the nineteenth century was a period of experimentation with methods
of collecting the land revenue. As the British extended their rule over South India,
they were faced with the question of whom to settle with for the land revenue.
Whether revenue be taken directly from individual cultivators or contracts be made
with intermediaries. In general, the policy adopted was that, for the sake of political
stability, there should be minimum disturbance of the traditional rights. However, the
British did not always uphold this principle.

Initially in certain districts ryotwari settlements were introduced. But soon after the
introduction of Permanent Settlement in Bengal, similar arrangements were made in
certain districts of Madras Presidency.

The land revenue was fixed in perpetuity, the zamindaris were made both inheritable
and transferable, and uncultivated land were given to the zamindars tax free. The
zamindars were a diversified group. Some claimed descent from kings or military
chieftains, others from tax officials. Yet others were new men who had bought
estates. The zamindaris were varied in size. Some were enormous, sometimes covering
almost the whole of a district while others consisted of just a few villages. Though
the land revenue and tenure in this part of India was basically ryotwari, by 1830 over
a third of the Presidency was under zamindari system. Thereafter, the area under
zamindari declined. Whenever zamindars were unable to pay the revenue as demanded,
the government consfiscated their estates and converted them to ryotwari. But even
then around one-fourth of the area remained under zamindari system until the 1940s.

In this part of India, the division of rights between the peasants and the zamindars
remained undefined. It appears that the peasants of the southern zamindarsis were
24
in general more secure than those in northern zamindaris. When the Permanent
Settlement was introduced, it was assumed that the zamindars would collect half the
gross produce and pay two-thirds of that to the government in cash, retaining one-
third for the expenses of his revenue establishment and his personal income. But the
actual collection from the peasants were much higher than this.

For sometime the land revenue collection from the villages in most areas was contracted
out to middlemen, who might be former rent collectors, or the leading cultivators of
the village, or in some cases, speculators with little experience of the revenue system.
These leases were initially to last for three or five years followed by decennial leases.
But by 1822, it was decided that the ryotwari system should be introduced in all the
non-zawmindari areas, as and when the village leases expired. Under the ryotwari
system, in principle, the land revenue was generally fixed at half the gross produce
on unirrigated lands and three-fifths on irrigated lands. Besides the land revenue and
the amounts officially set aside for community purposes and village officials, there
was unrecorded plunder by revenue officials. The cultivator was thus often left with
very little.

2.5.1 Changes in Agrarian Structure

During the later half of the nineteenth century, the area under cultivation increased
faster than the population. Large irrigation works were completed on the Godavari
and the Krishna. The cultivation of cotton, groundnut and oilseeds increased. The
building of roads and railways facilitated trade. Between 1881-82 and 1915-16, price
of gains rose by 100 per cent or even more. The terms of trade moved in favour of
agriculture. The burden of land revenue fell. The cultivator was able to invest in land.
Progress was rapid in some regions, notably the Krishna-Godavari delta. This led to
tremedous increase in prices of land. In one village, Peddapadu in east Godavari, N.G.
Ranga calculated in 1926 that the price of fertile land had risen from Rs. 40 to Rs.
1500 per acre in sixty years. The real income of the village had increased by 250 per
cent during the same period. The rich peasants widened the sphere of their activities
and invested in rice mills, mica and other industries. They extended their money-
lending business and went into banking.

But the depression of the 1930s hit both the rich as well as the poor. Agricultural
prices and employment fell sharply. Payment of fixed revenue became difficult. It
was difficult for the farmers to pay back their loans. Grain looting and attacks on rich
moneylenders and landlords were symptoms of the widespread agrarian distress. The
rural economy as a whole grew much poorer in the 1930s. Moreover, during the 20th
century, population was growing faster than agricultural output. Until 1916 or so, the
increase in agricultural output probably managed to match the increase in population;
from then on the two diverged. Foodgrains output per head was 30 per cent lower
in 1946 than in 1916.

Indebtedness of rural population increased during the 19th century. The same trend
continued during the early 20th century and during the Great Depression; the burden
of debt became so pressing that the government was forced to take action. The debt
conciliation boards set up by the government during the depression scaled down debts
in some cases but over the 1930s the volume of debt rose further. It was only during
Second World War, when agricultural prices rose sharply, that, probably, there was a
fall in the real burden of debt.

2.5.2 Tenancy

According to Dharma Kumar, there is little evidence regarding the growth of tenancy
during British rule. The most common arrangement was share cropping and the tenant
commonly got half the crop on dry lands but his share could be less on fertile, irrgiated
25
Indian Agriculture : lands ranging from one-third to one-fourth of the crop. The tenants’ share also
Institutional Perspectives
depended on input sharing arrangements. Generally, the landlord paid the land revenue
and made substantial repairs to well and water channels. The tenant provided the
manure. The quantities of manure per acre and the number of manuring was
occasionally prescribed. Usually the leases were oral but were continued for long
periods. Tenants in ryotwari areas had no legal standing, and they being a weak party,
tenancy disputes were rare. Whether because of the relative infrequency of tenancy
disputes or because of an implicit assumption that tenancy could not be a problem
under a system of ‘peasant proprietorship’ like ryotwari, hardly any measures were
taken in Madras presidency to protect tenants.

2.6 AGRICULTURAL LABOURERS

In the traditional village economy of pre-British India, the small cultivator was the
focal point and there was no scope for a distinct class of persons working solely as
agricultural labourers on the lands of others. The absence of such a separate class
of agricultural labourers is also strikingly borne out by the fact that none of the
accounts, which contain a detailed list of the traditional occupations in Indian village
communities refer to agricultural labour as the sole occupation of a sizeable part of
the population. In sharp contrast to this the 1931 census figure shows that nearly 38
per cent of the entire agricultural population was composed of landless agricultural
labourers. This reveals that the structure of the traditional Indian agrarian society had
undergone a great transformation under the British rule.

The number and proportion of agricultural labourers had not been evenly spread
throughout the country. In Bombay, Madras and Central provinces their proportion
was more than half of the total agricultural population in 1931. It was 58 per cent in
Bombay, 53 per cent in Madras and 52 per cent in Central Provinces. S.J. Patel calls
this Southern Triangle of India as the ‘land of the landless labourers’. The second
region, where the proportion of agricultural labourers to the toal agricultural working
population was between 22 to 35 per cent, comprises Bihar, Orissa, Bengal and
Assam, i.e., eastern India. Separately, their proportion was 35 per cent in Bihar and
Orissa, 33 per cent in Bengal and 22 per cent in Assam (including plantation workers).
The third region comprises those areas where the proportion of agricultural labourers
to the total agricultural population was still lower, i.e., less than 20 per cent in 1931.
The United Provinces (22 per cent), Punjab (14 per cent), North-West Frontier
Province (18 per cent) were in this region.

The tremendous increase in the proportion of agricultural workers was the result of
a great social and economic transformation that went on in India during the nineteenth
and the twentieth centuries. An important change which took place during the nineteenth
century was in the organisation of village communities. The agarian society of India,
before British Rule, was founded on the integrated units of cultivation and handicrafts.
Groups of cultivators and artisans, supplementing each other’s needs, lived together
in substantially self-sufficient village communities. The cultivators and the artisans
lived together for centuries on the basis of traditional arrangements regulating the
exchange of the cultivators’ products and the artisans’ services. Each cultivator
carried on the cultivation of his farm with the assistance of his family. In such a
society, there was no room for the existence of an independent and distinct class of
agricultural labourers whose main source of livelihood was work on the land of others
for which they received wages in kind or cash. During the 19th century, the village
communities were confronted with economic, social and political changes of a far
reaching character, which served ultimately to bring about their disintegration. One of
the reasons of their disintegration was the decline of domestic industries. With the
Industrial Revolution in England, exports of British manufactured goods to India rose
sharply. The construction of a network of railways during the later half of the 19th
26
century further stimulated it. The net result was a decline of handicrafts in India
without being compensated by modern industrialisation. Many artisans left their earlier
profession and became agricultural labourers.

As we have already noted earlier, with the introduction of new land revenue system,
private property in land was strengthened and free alienation of land also granted.
Further, under the new land revenue system, government revenue was a fixed amount,
irrespective of crop output, and was to be paid in cash. Thus during periods of bad
crops or low prices the peasants were forced to borrow from moneylenders to pay
the land revenue. Once in the clutches of moneylenders they were rarely able to free
themselves from debt and the end result invariably was mortgage or sale of land. This,
in addition to commercialization, led to the proletarianisation of some poor peasants
and concentration of land with few resourceful rich peasants who later on employed
the landless on their farms. Thus decline of domestic industries and the distingeration
of the peasantry led to the transformation of the social basis of the agrarian society
in India. New classes appeared on the scene: the moneylenders and rich peasants on
the one hand, pauperized peasants and agricultural labourers on the other.

2.7 LAND TENURE STRUCTURE AND AGRICULTURAL

GROWTH
The net result of all these changes in agrarian structure in India during the British
period was stagnation of agricultural sector. During the period of 1891 to 1947 for
British India as a whole, output rose at a rate of just 0.37 per cent per annum (see
Table 2.1). Moreover, growth rate of foodgrains output was 0.11 per cent which was
significantly lower than the population growth rate of 0.67 per cent per annum.
Agricultural crop output seems to have gradually increased over the period, but the
pace was slower than population growth, especially after 1921. Foodgrains output
declined (after 1921) so that per capita output fell markedly. Commercial crop output
increased rapidly, nearly doubling over the period.

Table 2.1

Agricultural Output and Population Growth Rates in British India: 1891 to 1947

Region Percentage growth rates ( per annum) in

Foodgrains Population Non-foodgrains All crops

British India 0.11 0.67 1.31 0.37

Greater Bengal - 0.73 0.65 0.23 - 0.45

United Province 0.35 0.40 0.92 0.42

Madras 0.42 0.80 2.37 0.98

Punjab 1.10 0.93 2.40 1.57

Bombay and Sind 0.27 0.71 1.44 0.66

Central Provinces 0.29 0.58 0.07 0.48

Five Regions excluding Bengal 0.47 0.64 0.80

Source: George Blyn, Trends in Agricultural Output in India, 1891-1947

If we look at the regional trends, Greater Bengal’s steep rate of decline stands out
among the regions (Table 2.1). Though there is a marginal increase in the output of
27
Indian Agriculture : non-foodgrains in this region, it is nullified by a significant decline in foodgrains output.
Institutional Perspectives
The remaining regions all had growth rates higher than the British India average. But,
only Punjab had average growth rate of foodgrains production higher than its population
growth rate. In fact, its overall growth rate is also significantly higher than other
states. In case of United Provinces the average growth rate of foodgrains is almost
touching the population growth rate. The remaining three regions, however, had
foodgrains growth rates considerably less than their population growth.

Production could have increased only through expansion of area under production or
raising productivity. The potential for increasing yield per acre was great (considering
its initial low level), but it appears that institutional as well as material requirements
for growth were not conducive. Land tenurial structure was such that there were
layers of intermediaries between the ultimate owner and actual cultivators. The owners
of land in most cases were absentee landlords without having any contact with land.
The small cultivators, burdened by government taxes, heavy indebtedness, relatively
high rent, and exploited by middlemen, did not have any margin to invest in land. It
was not possible to invest by taking loans because of the high rate of interest and
fluctuating prices and yields. A considerable share of economic surplus accruing to
the landlords in the form of rents was being spent on lavish living. To maintain their
style of life, many among them got heavily indebted. More thrifty among the big
owners mainly invested their money in the purchase of land rather than improvement
of agriculture. For moneylenders (agriculturists as well as professionals) moneylending
was more profitable than any productive investment in land. As a result, net investment
in agriculture was almost negligible and yield rates of most crops in different regions
were either stagnant or declined.

Increasing output of cash crops was mainly due to the shift of area from foodgrains
to cash crops. Though in Punjab also, area under tenancy was quite high, but here
generally tenants (who themselves were mostly small owners) leased in from
landowners who were normally living in the village and supervising their cultivation.
Tenancy in Punjab was basically a method of labour mobilisation by those owners
whose holdings were bigger (not as big as in zamindari areas) than what could be
cultivated with family labour. Moreover, an important source of agricultural growth in
Punjab was area expansion which increased during this period from 23 million acres
to 31 million acres. Though in India as a whole the British were neglecting irrigation
works, yet in Punjab during this period there was a tremendous investment in irrigation.
Area irrigated by government canals during 1901-02 to 1939-40 in Punjab increased
from about 4.5 million acres to 12.5 million acres. In fact, irrigation was provided in
those areas of Punjab which otherwise were lying vacant due to scanty rainfall; and
with the provision of irrigation, area under cultivation also increased.

In general, the output growth was higher in ryotwari and mahalwari areas. Greater
Bengal was the area where land tenure structure was most retrogressive. There were
layers of parasitic landowners living on rental incomes. The traditional irrigation system
kept decaying. Possibly these were the reasons for deterioration of agriculture there.
In addition to it, Bengal was the region where colonial exploitation was most rapacious
and lasted for the longest period. Punjab came under British rule much later when the
burden of land revenue was relatively modest. The disintegration of handicrafts was
also on a lesser scale in the Punjab than in Bengal.

Check Your Progress 2

1) What are the reasons behind the tremendous increase in agricultural labourer
during British rule?

.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
28
 .......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................

2) What are the reasons for the lower growth in agricultural production in spite of
great potential during the first half of the 20th century?

.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................

3) Why did Punjab witness relatively higher agricultural growth than other parts?

.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................

2.8 LET US SUM UP

During British rule the traditional village economy underwent social and economic
transformation, mainly through the decline of handicrafts and domestic industries
without being compensated by modern industries. This process resulted in creation of
a whole lot of agricultural labourers. With the introduction of new land revenue
system, of course, right to alienation of land was granted and land revenue was fixed
at a particular amount irrespective of level of output, but bad crops forced the
peasants to borrow from the money-lenders.

Once trapped in the clutches of money-lenders with hardly any opportunity to free
themselves from debt, the peasants had no other option but to mortgage or part with
land. This, in addition to commercialisation of agriculture, led to the pauperisation of
poor peasants and concentration of land in a few rich landlords.

There were some variations across regions in the nature of agrarian relation during
the British period. Punjab, for instance, witnessed some growth in output during this
period. On the other hand, Bengal witnessed a decline in agricultural output. The
overall growth rate was very low.

2.9 KEY WORDS

Land tenure system : It indicates the period for and the manner in which
land is retained by a cultivator. In case of tenants it
reflects the occupancy of land, security of tenure,
inheritance and transferability of tenancy rights, etc. 29
Indian Agriculture : Industrial Revolution : The ‘Industrial Revolution’ took place in Europe in
Institutional Perspectives
general and England in particular during the eighteenth
century. It may be defined as the application of power-
driven machinery to manufacturing, which accelerated
output growth significantly. Large deposits of coal,
abundant supply of labour and technological
developments contributed to this rapid industrialisation.
Apart from the manufacturing sector it transformed
the English countryside as well through new farming
techniques in agriculture.

Great Depression : Depression is the downward phase in a business cycle.

During this phase there is decline in output and
employment in the economy. The depression that took
place globally during 1929-33, more intensely in
America, is termed as the ‘Great Depression’ because
of its severity.

Commercialisation : Traditionally Indian farmers cultivated food crops for

of agriculture self-consumption and sale in the market. Cash crops
were grown but not at a bigger scale. During their
rule, the British encouraged farmers, rather forced
them through several means, to grow cash crops such
as cotton and indigo. Cultivation of cash crops required
huge investments and involved higher risk of crop
failure. This left the farmers in indebtedness and
resulted in ultimate sale of land.
Peasant : Farmer in rural areas owning or renting a small peace
of land which he cultivates himself. Generally he is
poor with low-income level. Peasants as a social
class or group are termed peasantry.

Proprietary Title : Rights or claims to ownership of property.

2.10 SOME USEFUL BOOKS

Dharma Kumar and Meghnad Desai (Eds.), 1982, The Cambridge Economic History
of India Vol. II, Cambridge University Press. (Chs. I and II.)
Dutt, R.C., 1976, The Economic History of India, Vols. I & II, Publications Division,
Government of India, New Delhi.

Dutt, R.P., 1979, India Today, Manisha, Chs. IV and VIII

Ghosh, Emergence of Capitalism in Indian Agriculture, P.P.H., New Delhi.

Habib, Irfan, 1963, The Agrarian System of Mughal India 1556-1707, Asia Publishing
House, Bombay, (Chs. IV to IX.)

Moreland, W.H., 1968, The Agrarian System of Moslem India, Oriental Books
Reprint Corporation, Delhi.

Patel, Surendra J. 1952, Agricultural Labourers in Modern India and Pakistan,

Current Book House, Bombay.

Rayachaudhri, Tapan and Irfan Habib (Eds.), 1982, The Cambridge Economic History
of India, Vol. 1, Cambridge University Press (Ch. IX).

30
2.11 ANSWERS/HINTS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS
EXERCISES
Check Your Progress 1

1) The immediate impact was a rise in land revenue. For reasons see Section 2.2,
second paragraph.
2) See Sub-section 2.2.1 first paragraph.
3) See Sub-section 2.2.1 and answer.
4) See Sub- section 2.2.4 and 2.2.5 for answer.

Check Your Progress 2

1) See Section 2.6. See the reasons for the disintegration of village communities.
2) See Section 2.7 and answer.
3) See Section 2.7. The reasons are higher investment in irrigation, less retrogressive
land tenure system and being absorbed into the British Empire at a later date.

31