ASSIGNMENT

DRIVE FALL 2013

SEMESTER III
BAC 304 HISTORY OF INDIA FROM 1707 1947

CONTACT ME TO GET FULLY SOLVED SMU

ASSIGNMENTS/PROJECT/SYNOPSIS/EXAM GUIDE PAPER
Email Id: mrinal833@gmail.com
Contact no- 9706665251/9706665232/
www.smuassignmentandproject.com
COST= 100 RS PER SUBJECT

Q. No 1 Write a short note on the Treaty of Srirangapattina.

Answer:
The parties to the treaty were Tipu Sultan and the English along with their allies.
The terms of the treaty are listed as follows:
Former treaties between the English and the sovereigns of Mysore were reaffirmed.
Fifty per cent of Tipus territories were to be distributed among the allies of the British.
Tipu had to pay three crores and thirty lakh rupees, in gold or bullions, as indemnity. Out of this amount,
a crore and sixty-five lakh rupees had to be paid immediately, while the remaining amount could be paid
in three installments, within the span of a year.
All captives of war were to be freed.
Till the time, the treaty was completely realized, Tipus two sons, Abdul
Khaliq (eight years) and Muiz-ud-din (five years old), to remain in English custody. Both of them were
looked after well and it is believed that
Cornwallis had even gifted them gold watches.
The main cause of Tipu Sultans failure was that he had three foes that had to keep under control
individually. If Tipu were given the task of only tackling the English, he would have been successful.

Such an assumption is confirmed by Cornwallis comment, Tipus looties were the best troops in the
world for they were always doing something to harass their enemies and Munros observation that
Cornwallis could not have reduced Tipu without the assistance of the Marathas.
Another reason for Tipus failure lay in the fact that he was stronger in his offensive attacks rather than in
his defensive actions. Hence he remained unsuccessful in defending Bangalore and Srirangapattinam.
Also, had he decided to proceed beyond Arikere on 15 May 1791 after defeating the English troops and
taking advantage of their weakness he would have inflicted formidable damage to them. Even Haider Ali
had made a similar miscalculation during the Second AngloMysore War However, it must be noted that
the European army was generally superior to the Tipus forces as they had access to more advanced
military equipments and had a more structured military organization.
Despite having modernized their troops Haider Ali and Tipu Sultan failed to raise an equally strong
infantry and artillery as possessed by the English army. The English enjoyed the advantage of getting
constant supplies of men, money and material from England, as well as from the Nizam and the Marathas.
However, Tipu had to constantly struggle to maintain his supplies of recruits and money as they were
often disrupted by Maratha incursions. Overcoming all such drawbacks, Tipu had faced the English and
their allies bravely and had kept them at bay for almost two years. Even after the Treaty of
Srirangapattinam, his indomitable spirit could not be dampened. The English had realized that without
surrendering Mysore, they could not become the Power Paramount in
India. This led Lord Wellesley, as soon as he became Governor-General, to draw Tipu Sultan into the
Subsidiary Alliance, and Tipus reluctance perpetuated the Fourth AngloMysore War (MarchMay
1799).

2 Describe the The Pitts India Act of 1784.

Answer: The British government had passed the Regulating Act in 1773, but this Act was not successful.
So, in order to control its defects an Act of Settlement was passed by the British parliament in 1781.
The Act of Settlement of 1781, however, could not cure the defects of the
Regulating Act and an agitation for an effective control over the Companys
Indian affairs continued. The matter was raised in the Parliament and the
Parliament appointed two committees.
The committee recommended for the recall of the Governor-General Warren Hastings and the Chief
Justice Sir Elijah Impey.

But the Court of Proprietors refused to recall them. This demonstrated the inadequate degree of
parliamentary control over the East India Company and its administration. To remedy this situation, the
Pitts India Act was passed by the Parliament. Some of the important features of this Act were as follows:
The Act distinguished between commercial and political functions of the Company.
The Court of Directors was allowed to manage commercial affairs of the
Company, but for political affairs, Board of Six Commissioners, known as
Board of Control, was appointed to control such affairs.
The Commissioners were appointed by the King and were to hold office during his pleasure.
The Board was empowered to superintend, direct and control all operations of the civil and military
governments of the British possessions in the East
India. But the Court of Directors were still strong, they had retained their vast patronage and had a right to
appoint and dismiss their servants in India, initiating policies and receiving all information from India.
The function of Board of Control was merely to revise and control over the doings of Directors.

3 State the major traits of Maharaja Ranjit Singhs personality.

Answer: Of Ranjit Singh, author Baron Hiigal writes, I must call him the most ugly and unprepossessing
man I saw throughout the Punjab. The scars of small pox on his face formed many dart pits in his greyish
brown skin his short straight nose, the skinny lips do not impress anyone. Though his physical features
were ugly, yet he commanded a great popularity among its subject. He was very much loved by his
subjects both civilians and, military men. He possessed a remarkable memory. Whenever a foreigner
came to his Court he asked a hundred thousand questions about India, Europe, Bonaparte, this world, and
the next world. He was very inquisitive of all sorts of information.
Ranjit Singh was a great patron of learning and encouraged education.
He patronized scholars. Treatise such as Zafarnama, Fatehnama Guru Khalsa ji ka etc. was written at his
instance. He was a devout Sikh and submitted to the religious codes and practices. He considered himself
a servant of the Khalsa and spent his own money to build the golden dome of the Golden Temple at
Amritsar.
Maharaja Ranjit Singh was a fearless general. He shared some of the qualities of Julius Caesar, Napoleon
Bonaparte and Alexander the Great.
According to historian NK Sinha: A good general who shared conspicuous personnel bravery of
Noshehra and remarkable tenacity of Mankera, he was more conspicuous in the organizational than in
operation at part of campaigns.

One of his French officers described him as a man without passions. This remark, however, true of Ranjit
Singh is certainly inapplicable to him as a soldier. He was seen to weep as some of his old soldiers
approached him with petitions and showed him their wounds. The personal devotion and loyalty that he
inspired smoothed the path of duty. But few chiefs exercised more rigid control over the conduct of their
troops than he did.
Ranjit Singh was a born ruler of men. Men obeyed by instinct and because they had no power to disobey.
The control which he exercised even in the closing years of his life over the whole Sikh people nobles and
priests was the measure of his greatness. He founded a grand Sikh kingdom in Punjab. He consolidated
the numerous petty states into a kingdom and wrested from Kabul the fairest of its provinces and he gave
the omnipotent English no cause for interference.
One of the greatest achievements of Ranjit Singhs rule was that he ensured that India could not be
invaded from the north-west. He started his military career by rendering help to Zaman Shah, the ruler of
Kabul but later he ended the menace of Afghan invasion on Punjab. A fearless warrior and statesman it
was with his genius that a centralized state came into being.
However, like all leaders the Maharaja had some shortcomings. He was charmed by dancing girls, and
addicted to opium, wine etc. He did not have political foresight and thus failed to create an enduring state.
In some ways he himself paved the way for the downfall of the Sikh empire. According to historian
GL Chopra, Ranjit Singh has been held responsible for the ultimate decline of his kingdom. It is
generally said that he committed the grave blunder of allowing the acquisition of vast territorial power
find influence by the Dogra chiefs. This view on the whole has a substantial element of truth.

4 Explain the first and the second phase of the growth and development of modern industrialization
in India.
Answer: The growth and development of modern industrialization in India can be divided into three
distinct phases, which are as follows:
(i) First phase (Up to 1914)
(ii) Second phase (1914-1939)
(iii) Third phase (1939-1947)
(i) First phase (up to 1914): The second half of the 19th Century witnessed the establishment of
machine-based industries on a large scale. The period of 1850s and 1860s also witnessed the growth of
plantation industries, (i.e. indigo, tea, coffee, rubber, etc), jute mills and coal mines. With the

encouragement from the Government of India, most industries were started and managed by British
capitalists.
The main emphasis was given to the production of export goods in areas of natural advantage, together
with a growing tendency to produce goods for domestic market in those areas where competition with
their imported counterparts was not serious. Thus, all these industries had a very standard growth. Indians
had large share in the textile industry and was mostly confined in Bombay and Calcutta.
British capitalism did not permit Indian enterprise to compete with it, and whenever necessary thwarted
its natural growth. The colonial situation retarded the development of a healthy and independent industrial
bourgeoisie. Indian capitalists were engaged in comprador activities such as import and distribution of
piece goods and other manufactures and supply of various primary produce and raw materials to big
European corporation for processing in India or abroad.
(ii) Second phase (1914-1939): This period was marked with the production of consumer goods for the
mass market within India. Foreign imports fell to a very low level while there was increase in
Government purchases for war purposes.
From 1920s onwards, the established industries like cotton, jute, tea and coal did not yield similar profits
whereas, industries like, paper, glass, sugar, cement, matches, magnesium chloride, sulphuric acid and
even steel got firmly established by1930s. Also there was a spread of industries to other areas.
The interwar period showed a sharp conflict between foreign capital and indigenous enterprises. In 1917,
a Munitions Board was established to control the purchase and manufacture of government stores and
munitions of war. But it indirectly gave a great stimulus to industrial information and advice, by placing
orders with Indian firms and in some other ways.
The Government of India was pressurized by the growing nationalist movement and the Indian capitalist
to grant some kind of tariff protection to Indian industries. Therefore, the tactical European monopoly of
large areas of modern business and industry was thus, brought to an end.

5 Describe the events leading to the downfall of the East India Company and the establishment of
the British Crown in India?
Answer: The Revolt of 1857 proved to be a huge blow to the East India Company in
India and eventually led to its downfall. It was only after the Queens proclamation and later through
Government of India Act, 1858, that the Crowns rule was established in India. Under the Crown rule, a
new post Secretary of State for

India was created which was assisted by a newly-appointed Indian council comprising of 15 members.
The shift to a Crown rule was considered to be more formal and real as the British were already
regulating the companys rule since the enactment of the Regulating Act of 1773 and Pitts India Act of
1784.
The British Parliament passed the Regulating Act of 1773 to overhaul the management of East India
Company in India. However, this act did not prove to be constructive in providing long-term solutions to
the Companys affairs. The
Regulating Act of 1773 was followed by the Pitts India Act in 1784. This act intended to address the
shortcomings of the Regulating Act of 1773. According to this act, the British Government took over the
right to rule India from the East
India Company.
Through the Charter Act of 1853, the East India Company was permitted to rule India till further order.
The East India Companys stronghold on the Indian subcontinent was disliked and opposed by many in
England as well as in India.
Many people who were hostile to the East India Companys rule in India wanted to establish a British
Crowns rule in its place. A perfect opportunity came in the disguise of the Revolt of 1857, where the
British government could end East
India Companys rule and establish its direct rule. The British government entirely blamed the East India
Company for the outbreak of the revolt and therefore validating their right to control the Indian
subcontinent.
With a large chunk of the population against them, the East India Company tried to defend itself. It had
some support from John Stuart Mill, a well-known scholar of the 19th Century. Mills argued in defense of
the East India Company, emphasizing on their service both in India as well as in England. The chairman
of the East India Company, Ross Mangles contended that it was necessary to have a non-political
intermediate like the East India Company for the smooth functioning of administration in India. However,
the British Government had already taken a decision to end its control and whatever diminutive support
the
East India Company had fell on deaf ears.
Citing reasons for ending the East India Company reign in India, the British
Government introduced the Bill for Better Government of India. This bill was initiated in February 1858,
by the then Prime Minister of UK, Lord Palmerston.
In his address to the House of Commons, he pointed out that, the principle of our political system is that
all administrative functions should be accompanied by ministerial responsibility to parliament but in this
case the chief function in the government of India are committed to a body not responsible to parliament,

not appointed by the crown, but elected by persons who have no more connection with India than consists
in the simple possession of so much Indian Stock. Palmerston then went on to discuss the many flaws of
the East India Companys rule especially mentioning its irresponsible, cumbrous and complex nature. The
fact that it was based on a system of dual government further fueled their decision to remove the East
India Company. Finally after a long debate, the Bill for Better
Government of India was passed and was formally approved on August 1858.

The rule of the East India Company was brought to an end by the Government of India Act, 1858. This
act also proved effective in establishing British Crown rule in India as many changes took place with the
enactment of the Government of India Act, 1858.
The rank of Governor-General was raised to the position of Viceroy who represented the British Crown
in India. Also, the army and land previously owned by the East India Company now belonged to the
British Crown. A newly-appointed council of fifteen members was created to assist the Secretary of State
for India who took charge from the Court Director and the Board of Control. The secretary of state was
given the powers to control and conduct the government of India and was also permitted to sit in the
parliament. Provisions were also laid down for the fifteen-member council which assisted the Secretary of
State for India. According to the British Crown, eight members would be appointed by them and the
remaining seven were to be appointed by the Court of Directors. The act also stated that nine of these
members should have served India for a minimum of three years and that they should not have been
residing out of India for more than ten years during their tenure. Each member received a salary of 1200
pounds per annum from Indias exchequer.
The secretary of state was empowered through multifarious rights vested in his office. He was authorized
to take decisions and veto decisions taken by the council. The secretary of state also possesses the power
of casting vote.
Though, the secretary of state can veto against the councils decisions, he had to oblige to the councils
decisions in matters pertaining to revenue, appointments, purchase, mortgage and sale of properties of the
Government of India. The secretary of state had the right to send letters to the viceroy without discussing
the issues with the council. He was even authorized to make new rules regarding the Indian Civil
Services.
With the establishment of the British Crown in India, the power to appoint viceroys, governor-generals
and governors of presidencies rested with the British Crown itself. However, the right to appoint a
lieutenant governor was given to the Viceroy, who could only appoint one after consulting with the
British Government. Though vested with numerous powers, the secretary of state had to present a report

to the House of Commons on issues pertaining to revenue, railways, law and construction. Only in
emergency situations could the secretary of state avail Indian revenue. The Indian revenue could not be
utilized by the secretary of state without prior permission from the British parliament. The British
parliament could ask for explanations regarding governance and revenue. The parliament also had the
right to question the authority of secretary of state and remove him if they felt it was in the best interest of
the British Crown.
On 1 November 1858, at a Grand Durbar held in Allahabad, Lord Canning read out Her Majestys
proclamation. According to which no state would be annexed, nor would any forceful conversion take
place and all appointments in public service will be determined on the basis of merit and qualification. It
was also emphasized through the Queens proclamation that while framing future laws, Indian tradition
and culture would be kept in mind. It further stated that the
British Crown would provide adequate protection to the ownership of properties and succession. Farmers
would also have rights on land as long as they paid revenue.

CONTACT ME TO GET FULLY SOLVED SMU

ASSIGNMENTS/PROJECT/SYNOPSIS/EXAM GUIDE PAPER
Email Id: mrinal833@gmail.com
Contact no- 9706665251/9706665232/
www.smuassignmentandproject.com
COST= 100 RS PER SUBJECT

6 Write a short note on any five nationalists who were the members of the Indian National
Congress.
Answer: 1. Allan Octavian Hume (1829-1912): He was of Scottish descent. He joined the Bengal Civil
Service in 1849 and made a lot of efforts to remove the social maladies of the country. His superiors did
not favour him, thus, he had to retire in 1882. He took initiative to form the Indian National Congress in
1885. In 1889, he helped in setting up the British Committee of the Congress in London as well. This
committee started its journal named
India.

2. Dadabhai Naoroji (1825-1917): He was known as the Grand Old Man of India. He was associated
with the Indian National Congress right from its inception and became its president thrice: in 1886, 1893
and 1906. He was the first Indian to become a Member of the House of Commons on the Liberal Partys
ticket. During his stay in England, from 1855 to 1869, he educated British public on Indian affairs
through the London Indian Association and the East India Association. A book by Naoroji Poverty and
Un-British Rule in India was published in 1901. This book had statistics to prove that the drain of wealth
from India to Great Britain was the cause of growing poverty in India.
3. Pherozeshah Mehta (1845-1915): He was born in a middle class Parsi family of Bombay. He was one
of the founders of the Bombay Presidency Association and the Indian National Congress. He was also a
pioneer of the Swadeshi and founded the famous Bombay Chronicle in 1913.
4. Surendranath Banerjea (1848-1925): He was an eminent leader who passed the ICS examination in
1871 and started his career as an Assistant Magistrate at Sylhet. A controversy with the Government led
him to leave the job. He was the founder of the Indian Association in 1876. In 1883, he convened a
National Conference which was the precursor of the Indian National Congress. He presided over the
Congress sessions twice. He was elected the first President of the Indian National Liberal Federation in
1918 and in 1921, he became a Minister in Bengal.
5. Badruddin Tyabji (1844-1906): He was the first Indian barrister at Bombay
High Court and was nominated to Bombay Legislative Council in 1882.
He was one of the founders of the Bombay Presidency Association and the Indian National Congress. He
was the President at the third Congress session in Madras in 1887. He helped Muslims in the causes of
educational advancement and social reforms as the Secretary and then as the President of the Anjuman-iIslam of Bombay. He strongly pleaded for the education of women.