NCERT solutions for Themes In Indian History Part I, II, and III [English] Class 12 chapter 9 - Colonialism And The Countryside: Exploring Official Archives [Latest edition]

Buchanan described the ways in which the jotedars of Dinajpur in North Bengal resisted being disciplined by the zamindar and undermined his power:

Landlords do not like this class of men, but it is evident that they are absolutely necessary, unless the landlords themselves would advance money to their necessitous tenantry …

The jotedars who cultivate large portions of lands are very refractory, and know that the zamindars have no power over them. They pay only a few rupees on account of their revenue and then fall in balance almost every kist (instalment); they hold more lands than they are entitled to by their pottahs (deeds of contract). Should the zamindar’s officers, in consequence, summon them to the cutcherry, and detain them for one or two hours with a view to reprimand them, they immediately go and complain at the Fouzdarry Thanna (police station) for imprisonment and at the munsiff ’s (a judicial officer at the lower court) cutcherry for being dishonoured and whilst the causes continue unsettled, they instigate the petty ryots not to pay their revenue consequently …

Referring to the condition of zamindars and the auction of lands, the Fifth Report stated:

The revenue was not realised with punctuality, and lands to a considerable extent were periodically exposed to sale by auction. In the native year 1203, corresponding with 1796-97, the land advertised for sale comprehended a jumma or assessment of sicca rupees 28,70,061, the extent of land actually sold bore a jumma or assessment of 14,18,756, and the amount of purchase money sicca rupees 17,90,416. In 1204, corresponding with 1797-98, the land advertised was for sicca rupees 26,66,191, the quantity sold was for sicca rupees 22,74,076, and the purchase money sicca rupees 21,47,580. Among the defaulters were some of the oldest families of the country. Such were the rajahs of Nuddea, Rajeshaye, Bishenpore (all districts of Bengal), … and others, the dismemberment of whose estates at the end of each succeeding year threatened them with poverty and ruin, and in some instances presented difficulties to the revenue officers in their efforts to preserve undiminished the amount of public assessment.

The following report, titled ‘The ryot and the moneylender’, appeared in the Native Opinion (6 June 1876) and was quoted in Report of the Native Newspapers of Bombay:

They (the ryots) first place spies on the boundaries of their villages to see if any Government officers come, and to give timely intimation of their arrival to the offenders. They then assemble in a body and go to the houses of their creditors, and demand from them a surrender of their bonds and other documents, and threaten them in case of refusal with assault and plunder. If any Government officer happens to approach the villages where the above is taking place, the spies give intimation to the offenders and the latter disperse in time.

This is an example of a petition from a ryot of the village of Mirajgaon, Taluka Karjat, to the Collector, Ahmednagar, Deccan Riots Commission:

The sowkars (sahukars)… have of late begun to oppress us. As we cannot earn enough to defray our household expenses, we are actually forced to beg of them to provide us with money, clothes and grain, which we obtain from them not without great difficulty, nor without their compelling us to enter into hard conditions in the bond. Moreover, the necessary clothes and grain are not sold to us at cash rates. The prices asked from us are generally twenty-five or fifty per cent more than demanded from customers making ready money payments … The produce of our fields is also taken by the sowkars, who at the time of removing it assure us that it will be credited to our account, but they do not actually make any mention of it in the accounts. They also refuse to pass us any receipts for the produce so removed by them.

When debts mounted, the peasant was unable to pay back the loan to the moneylender. He had no option but to give over all his possessions – land, carts, and animals – to the moneylender. But without animals he could not continue to cultivate. So he took land on rent and animals on hire. He now had to pay for the animals which had originally belonged to him. He had to sign a deed of hire stating very clearly that these animals and carts did not belong to him. In cases of conflict, these deeds could be enforced through the court.

The following is the text of a deed that a peasant signed in November 1873, from the records of the Deccan Riots Commission:

I have sold to you, on account of the debt due to you, my two carriages having iron axles, with their appurtenances and four bullocks … I have taken from you on hire under (this) deed the very same two carriages and four bullocks. I shall pay every month the hire thereof at Rupees four a month, and obtain a receipt in your own handwriting. In the absence of a receipt, I shall not contend that the hire had been paid.

In a petition to the Deccan Riots Commission, a ryot explained how the system of loans worked:

A sowkar lends his debtor Rs 100 on bond at Rs 3-2 annas per cent per mensem. The latter agrees to pay the amount within eight days from the passing of the bond. Three years after the stipulated time for repaying the amount, the sowkar takes from his debtor another bond for the principal and interest together at the same rate of interest, and allows him 125 days’ time to liquidate the debt. After the lapse of 3 years and 15 days, a third bond is passed by the debtor … (this process is repeated) at the end of 12 years … his interest on Rs 1000 amounts to Rs 2028-10 annas -3 paise.