Recruitment for the Public Services
THE assumption of the direct administration of India by the Crown led to great changes both in the spirit and details of internal administration. The administrative machinery was gradually organised with a thoroughness not possible under the Company’s regime, and the administrative principles and political ideals of England were applied to a large extent. The Indian administration became more efficient and more up-to-date. The old rivalry and jealousy between the Company and the Board of Control disappeared, and the unitary control of Parliament was established.
But the picture has its dark side also. During the old regime the periodical renewal of the Charter of the East India Company afforded an opportunity for Parliament to scrutinise affairs in India with a jealous eye. But as soon as the Secretary of State was put in sole charge of India, it ceased to evoke that interest. Theoretically, no doubt, the House of Commons was responsible for the administration of India, but few persons took an interest in matters affecting this country. In the days of the Company, a Select Committee was appointed by Parliament to report on the administration. They went thoroughly into the whole subject, exposed abuses, and suggested remedies, which were frequently adopted in the new Charter. But now the Secretary submitted an annual report before the whole House. Every member was supposed to take interest in it, but as often happens, everybody’s business became nobody’s business.
Its effect on the large increase in the powers of the Secretary of State has been referred to above, but the internal administration of India was also profoundly affected by it. The Indian officials were now responsible only to the Secretary of State, and, so long as they could satisfy him, had not to fear any other authority. The Secretary could hardly exercise any effective control over the details of administration from such a distance, but he had to defend the actions of the officials as the ultimate responsibility devolved upon him. The result was the growth of an all-powerful Bureaucracy in India headed by the members of the Superior Indian Civil Service. This service soon became a powerful corporation, and its members became in the words of Blunt–“the practical owners of India, irremovable, irresponsible, and amenable to no authority but that of their fellow members”. The members of this service were no doubt very able, and, generally speaking, honest men. But the position in which they found themselves invested them with a superiority complex, and a wide gulf was created between the rulers and the ruled. That sympathy and mutual understanding between the two, which lie at the root of all good administration, were at a discount.
Unfortunately other causes were at work to accentuate the isolation of the higher British officials. In the days of the Company English officials mixed freely with Indians, and there was a genuine good feeling and often friendship between them. The dark horrors of the Revolt generated a feeling of aversion towards Indian in the minds of the British. Perhaps this feeling would have been weakened in the normal course, and might have ultimately disappeared. But steam navigation, the Suez Canal, the telegraph and the overland route, all served to bring the British in closer touch with their home. They were no longer exiles in a foreign land, but in direct and constant touch with their own country. Gradually an English society grew up in big towns. All these factors did away with the necessity of making friends with Indians, and the British official led a more and more exclusive life so far as the Indian people were concerned. His time was divided between his office and club and he had hardly any social intercourse with Indians. In spite of long residence in India, he remained to all intents and purposes a foreigner, and knew little of their feelings, sentiments and aspirations. Blunt very correctly observed that ” the Anglo-Indian official of the Company’s days loved India in a way no Queen’s official dreams of doing now; and loving it, he served it better “.
The Indians naturally concluded that this state of things could only be improved by the appointment of a larger number of Indians in the public offices. The Charter Act of 1833 legalised the appointment of Indians even to the highest offices of state. But the provisions in the Act of l793, still un-repealed, laid down that “none but covenanted servants of the Company could hold any office with a salary of more than 800 pounds a year”. Thus no Indian could fill any high post unless he were a regular official who had entered into covenant with the East India Company, or, after 1858, with the Secretary of State. Formerly these officers were nominated partly by the Directors and partly by the Board of Control, and after nomination they received a training for two years at the East India College at Haileybury. The system of open competitive examination for these appointments was introduced in 1853 and reaffirmed in 1838. The competition was open to all natural-born subjects of Her Majesty, whether European or Indian. The maximum age for admission was at first twenty-three. In 1859 it was lowered to twenty-two, and the selected candidates were to remain on probation in England for a year. In 1866 the maximum age was still further lowered to twenty-one, and the probationers had to go through a special course of training at an approved University for two years.
It was extremely difficult for Indians to pass this examination. The journey to England was not only expensive and unfamiliar, but, in the case of the Hindus, was frowned upon by the more orthodox leaders of the community. To compete with English boys in an examination conducted through the medium of English in an English University was indeed a formidable task. It is no wonder, therefore, that comparatively few Indians were successful.
The repercussion of this state of things on the political movement in India will be discussed in a later chapter. The British Government also realised the inadequacy of the Indian element in the Superior Civil Service. In 1870 an Act was passed authorising the appointing of Indians to the higher offices without any examination, but effect was given to this only in 1879 under circumstances to be related later.
The rules adopted in 1879 ordained “that a proportion not exceeding one-sixth of the total number of covenanted Civil Servants appointed in any year by the Secretary of State should be natives selected in India by the local governments subject to the approval of the Governor- General-in-Council”. These officers were called “Statutory Civil Servants” and were recruited from “young men of good family and social position possessed of fair abilities and education”. The system was, however, subject to the same defects from which all systems of nomination were bound to suffer. Indians themselves preferred open competitive examination. But in order to give Indians a fair and equitable chance, they recommended that there should be simultaneous examinations both in England and India. For the same reason they were against the lowering of the maximum age of admission below twenty one, as it would adversely affect the Indian candidates who were to be examined in a foreign tongue. The lowering of the maximum age limit to nineteen in 1877 was regarded as a deliberate attempt to shut out Indians, and led to that agitation which culminated in the Congress movement. The Congress vigorously took up the question of simultaneous examinations and employment of Indians in larger numbers.
