¹ The arguments presented below are pitched at a high level of generality. Consequently, I have isolated ‘the peasant’ as the most useful general social category with which to investigate rural society.Google Scholar

² As the ‘dry’ region is categorized by a type of cultivation, it is not meant to include those parts of ‘dry’ districts in which ‘wet’ rice cultivation was to be found. In the districts of hinterland Tamilnad it thus excludes about 20 per cent of Tinnevelly, Trichinopoly and Madura where rice cultivation took place along the banks of rivers and large tanks.Google Scholar

³ Calculated from Dharma Kumar's estimate of population in 1886, Kumar, D., Land and Caste in South India (Cambridge, 1965), p. 116Google Scholar and Census of India 1921 Madras. Volume XIII. Part II (Madras, 1922), p. 4.Google Scholar

⁴ Reports on the Settlement of the Land Revenue in the Districts of the Madras Presidency for Fasli 1294 (1884–85) (Madras, 1886), pp. 40–44;Google ScholarReports on the Settlement of the Land Revenue in the Districts of the Madras Presidency for Fasli 1330 (1920–21) (Madras, 1922), pp. 17–20. (Hereafter this series of reports is abbreviated as Land Revenue Reports for Fasli…)Google Scholar

⁵ Ibid.

⁶ Allowing for changes in the area covered by the statistics, between 1884–85 and 1920–21 the area under cotton grew by 40 per cent and that under ground-nut by 100 per cent. By the mid-1920s, these two crops occupied about 15 per cent of the acreage of most dry districts. Agricultural Statistics of British India. Quinquennial series (Calcutta, 1884–1885 to 1920–1921), Vol. I, ‘Area under Crops’.Google Scholar

⁷ The fluctuations remained sufficient to make it difficult to give an accurate idea of the scale of the price rise. But, roughly, dry grains were selling between 50 and 70 per cent more in the years 1910–17 than in 1880–87. During the shortages of 1918–20, prices went even higher. Calculated from ‘Statements showing the prices of food grains’ in Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1290 (1880–81) to Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1335 (1925–26).Google Scholar

⁸ Calculated from ‘Statements of the Ryots’ Holdings', Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1290 (1880–1881) to Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1335 (1925–26).Google Scholar

⁹ See Agricultural Statistics of British India. Quinquennial Series, 1884–1885 to 1920–21, ‘Live-Stock’.Google Scholar

¹⁰ See comments on land prices in Reports of the Provincial Banking Enquiry Committee, 1929–30 (Calcutta, 1931) ‘Madras’ [RPBC], p. 79.Google Scholar

¹¹ For example, see the district board campaigns in Ramnad, Madura and Coimbatore to get a railway to the West Coast, Hindu, 1 February and 17 May 1915.Google Scholar

¹² Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1310 (1900–01), pp. 71–7.Google Scholar

¹³ Nicholson, F. A., Report regarding the possibilities of introducing Agricultural Banks into the Madras Presidency (Madras, 1895) [RAB], Vol. I, p. 232.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1310 (1900–01), pp. 71–7. The problem of the zemindari ryot, who appears occasionally in the dry and more often in the wet region, is more difficult. However, on the basis of landholding size and rent payment, there is evidence of little real distinction between him and the government ryot. Most commentators thought that the structure of landholdings under zemindars was roughly the same as that under government and that, although zemindari rents were higher, they were collected less regularly.Google ScholarRaghavaiyangar, S. Srinivasa, Memorandum on the Progress of the Madras Presidency during the Last Forty Years of British Administration (Madras, 1892), p. 76; RPBC, pp. 7–8.Google Scholar

¹⁵ RPBC, p. 14.Google Scholar

¹⁶ RPBC, p. 108.Google Scholar

¹⁷ See Madras Provincial Banking Enquiry Committee (Madras, 1930) [MPBC], Vol. V. ‘Reports by Investigators’ for examination of ‘dry’ villages in Madura, Coimbatore and Bellary districts.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Nicholson, F. A., RAB, Vol. I, p. 230.Google Scholar

¹⁹ RPBC, p. 119; Royal Commission on Agriculture in India, Appendix, Vol. XIV (London, 1928), p. 269.Google Scholar

²⁰ RPBC, p. 121.Google Scholar

²¹ Royal Commission on Agriculure in India, Appendix, Vol. XIV, p. 270.Google Scholar

²² Except for cattle; and the cattle trade was highly decentralized, being carried on and financed by itinerant pedlars.Google Scholar

²³ Both these factors applied also to zemindari ryots. RPBC, p. 106; ‘Report on Kurnool’ pp. 4–5 in Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1312 (1902–3); MPBC, Vols. II–V, in passim.Google Scholar

²⁴ RPBC, p. 110.Google Scholar

²⁵ Royal Commission on Agriculture in India, Appendix, Vol. XIV, p. 269. MPBC, Vols. II–V, in passim.Google Scholar

²⁶ Indian Central Cotton Commission. General Report on Eight Investigations into the Finance and Marketing of Cultivators' Cotton. 1925–28 (Bombay, n.d.), p. 21.Google Scholar

²⁷ Royal Commission on Agriculture in India, Appendix, Vol. XIV, p. 268.Google Scholar

²⁸ RPBC, p. 106; MPBC, Vol. III, pp. 658, 946; ‘Report on Kurnool’, pp. 4–5 in Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1312 (1902–3).Google Scholar

²⁹ RPBC, p. 112, 123; Royal Commission on Agriculture in India, Appendix, Vol. XIV, p. 268.Google Scholar

³⁰ None of the evidence, not even the individual village surveys, attempts to distinguish exactly who was involved in rural trade. In most of the dry region this would have been difficult anyway because at every harvest urban merchants or their agents set out from the towns with empty carts and picked up what they could from which-ever villages they passed through. There was little routine in this aspect of marketing. However, in some localities it is clear that these trading groups had established something of a more permanent relationship with the economy. Yet almost all the evidence indicates that rich ryots were heavily involved in trade and controlled most—varying in different reports between 60 and 90 per cent—of the rural credit. Allowing for the fact that, here and there, non-landowning trading groups were important, I have chosen to concentrate on the ryot-rural capitalist who was much the most typical commercial agent in the region as a whole.

³¹ Nicholson, F. A., RAB, Vol. I, p. 230.Google Scholar See also, Statement exhibiting the Moral and Material Progress and Condition of India during the year 1901–02 and the nine preceding . PP 1903, Vol. XLIV, p. 354.

³² RPBC, p. 79.Google Scholar

³³ Nicholson, F. A., RAB, Vol. I, p. 232; RPBC, pp. 79, 106.Google Scholar

³⁴ Ibid.

³⁵ Nicholson, F. A., RAB, Vol. I, p. 232.Google Scholar

³⁶ MPBC, Vol. II, p. 298.Google Scholar

³⁷ MPBC, Vol. III, p. 664.Google Scholar See also Report on the Famine in the Madras Presidency during 1896 and 1897 (Madras, 1898), Vol. I, p. 50.Google Scholar

³⁸ Raghavaiyangar, S. Srinivasa, Memorandum on the Progress of the Madras Presidency, p. 75.Google Scholar

³⁹ In the villages investigated by the Cotton Commission in Bellary district, about 35 per cent of the ryots worked the land of other ryots as well as their own. Indian Central Cotton Commission. General Report on Eight Investigations into the Finance and Marketing of Cultivators' Cotton. 1925–28, p. 50.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ MPBC, Vol. III, p. 699.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Nicholson, F. A., RAB, Vol. I, p. 232.Google Scholar

⁴² Appendix to the Report of the Indian Famine Commission, 1898, being Minutes of Evidence, etc. Volume II. Madras Presidency, p. 101, PP, 1899, Vol. XXXII; Report on the Famine in the Madras Presidency during 1896 and 1897 (Madras, 1898), Vol. I, p. 48; Vol. II, p. 139.Google Scholar

⁴³ Nicholson, F. A., RAB, Vol. I, p. 230.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Indian Central Cotton Committee. General Report on Eight Investigations into the Finance and Marketing of Cultivators' Cotton. 1925–28, p. 14.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ ibid., p. 16.

⁴⁶ RPBC, p. 109; Royal Commission on Agriculture in India, Volume III. Evidence taken in the Madras Presidency (London, 1927), p. 55.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ RPBC, pp. 112, 123, 108; Royal Commission on Agriculture in India, Appendix, Vol. XIV, p. 233, 268; MPBC, Vol. III, pp. 319, 750, 946, 972; Indian Central Cotton Committee. General Report on Eight Investigations into the Finance and Marketing of Cultivators' Cotton 1925–28, p. 64.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ See biography of K. Audinarayana Reddi in Reforms (Franchise) B, March 1921, 34–99, National Archives of India, New Delhi [NAI].Google Scholar

⁴⁹ In North Arcot district, where there was a great deal of military and railway contracting available, the leading contractors were drawn from the locally dominant Palli caste. One of the most famous, A. Dhanakoti Mudaliar, who came from a rich landowning family, extended his contracting empire to Madras city where he was a member of the Corporation in the 1880s. Also, see biography of M. Venkatarajaghaoulu Reddiar in Hindu, 19 May 1919.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ For example, the Vellakina Gounder family, of which V. C. Vellingiri Gounder was a member, built a cotton mill in Coimbatore district in the 1930s. For examples of Land-owning families involved in urban commerce see biographical notes on Gounder, K. S. Ramaswami in Directory of the Madras Legislature (Madras, 1938), p. 231;Google Scholar on Reddy, M. Vydyalinga in Sastri, V. L. (ed.), Encyclopaedia of the Madras Presidency and the Adjacent States (Cocanada, 1920), p. 767.Google Scholar

⁵¹ For examples, see biographical notes on G. Eswara Reddi, ibid., p. 751; C. S. Ratnasabhapati Mudaliar, ibid., p. 609; and for involvement with urban co-operative banks, P. S. Kumaraswami Raja in Directory of the Madras Legislature, p. 144; V. K. Palamsami Gounder, ibid., p. 196; K. A. Nachiappa Gounder, ibid., p. 176.

⁵² RPBC, pp. 87–9.Google Scholar

⁵³ Nicholson, F. A., RAB, Vol. I, p. 230; RPBC, pp. 87, 173–5, 181–2.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ On average, about 1–1 ½ per cent of the cropped area per annum. Unfortunately, from 1913–14, the Madras Government ceased to keep central records of the acreage transferred but there is little reason to think that the pattern of transfers established in the 1884–1914 period altered radically before the depression. See Agricultural Statistics of British India. Quinquennial Series. 1884–1885 to 1912–1913, ‘Land Transfers’.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ These figures cover both joint and single pattas. Although there were administrative differences between the two, it would in practice have been difficult to find any real distinctions. Most single pattas were regarded as joint-family property although legally registered only in the name of one member. The growth in the number of joint patta holders in the twentieth century was due more ‘to the growing desire on the part of the people to secure documentary evidence in support of their joint interest in land’ than to any change in the character of landholding itself. Hence I have put single and joint pattas together as units of possession. Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1310 (1900–01), p. 26. Table I calculated from ‘Statement of the Rent-Roll’ in Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1296 (1886–87) and Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1335 (1925–26).Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Calculated from Ibid.

⁵⁷ The quotation continues ‘…Nevertheless, the lifelong dependence of the borrower upon the landlord and a variety of free services to be rendered to the latter during agricultural seasons are features closely associated with this system. It is not unusual that the smaller agriculturist borrowers are obliged to sell their produce to the apparently obliging landlord’. MPBC, Vol. III, p. 1034;Google Scholar see also Ibid., p. 770.

⁵⁸ ibid., p. 699.

⁵⁹ Royal Commission on Agriculture in India. Appendix, Vol. XIV, p. 233.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ For interesting discussions on the importance of expanding marriage ties among South Indian peasants see Elliot, Carolyn M., ‘Caste and Faction Among the Dominant Caste: the Reddis and Kammas of Andhra’ in Kothari, R. (ed.), Caste in Indian Politics (New Delhi, 1970), pp. 129–71. Also, J. Maner, ‘The Evolution of Political Arenas and Units of Social Organizations: the Lingayats and Vokkaligas of Princely Mysore’ (forthcoming).Google Scholar

⁶¹ R. E. Frykenberg and N. Mukherjee, ‘The Ryotwari System and Social Organization in the Madras Presidency’ and Frykenberg, R. E., ‘Village Strength in South India’ in Frykenberg, R. E. (ed.), Land Control and Social Structure in Indian History (Madison, 1969), pp. 217–26; 227–47.Google Scholar

⁶² The administrative village, of course, was not necessarily the same as the economic village or village circle we have discussed above. Nor were either necessarily the same as the ‘physical’ village of habitation. Village, as used in this article, is shorthand for the unit of face-to-face relations in rural society. Later, we shall be discussing the actual size and shape of this unit.

⁶³ See Stein, B., ‘Integration of the Agrarian System of South India’ in Frykenberg, R. E. (ed.), Land Control and Social Structure in Indian History, pp. 207–12.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Administration Report of the Madras Police for the year 1885 (Madras, 1886), [Madras Police…], p. 4.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Nicholson, F. A., RAB, Vol. I, p. 312.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Misra, B. B., The Administrative History of India 1834–1947 (Oxford, 1970), p. 461.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Garstin, J. H. to Secretary, Revenue Department, 3 April 1884 in G.O. 787 (Revenue) dated 24 June 1884, Tamil Nad Archives [TNA].Google Scholar

⁶⁸ For a critique of the weaknesses of the revenue department written by senior officials inside it, see G.O. 173 (Revenue) dated 20 February 1902, TNA.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Frykenberg, R. E., Guntur District 1788–1848. A History of Local Influence and Central Authority in South India (Oxford, 1965).Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Thomas, H. S., Report on Tanjore Remissions in Fasli 1294 (A.D. 1884–85) (Madras, 1885).Google Scholar

⁷¹ Ampthill to Hamilton, 6 August 1902, Ampthill Papers, Eur. MSS. 233/7. India Office Library [IOL].Google Scholar

⁷² See, Madras District Gazetteers: Francis, W., The Niligiris (Madras, 1908), Vol. I, p. 281;Google ScholarHall, J. F., South Kanara (Madras, 1938), Vol. II, p. 28;Google ScholarRichards, F. J., Salem (Madras, 1918), Vol. I, Part II, pp. 35–6;Google ScholarFrancis, W., Madura (Madras, 1906), Vol. I, pp. 203–4;Google ScholarSelections from the Madras Records Vol. XXII (Madras, 1870), p. 18; ‘Report on Coimbatore’, pp. 2–3 in Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1280 (1870–71).Google Scholar

⁷³ Report of the Indian Famine Commission. Appendix. Volume III. Condition of the Country nd People, PP 1881, Vol. LXXI, Part 2, p. 416.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ MPBC, Vol. III, p. 679.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ See Madras Police 1878–1900. And their ‘provincial’ policemen were ineffective: ‘Dishonesty in investigation is, we are told, prevalent everywhere…’, Statement of the Police Committee on the Administration of the District Police in the Madras Presidency (Madras, 1902), p. 50.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ For an assessment of the workings of the reforms, see Madras Police 1885, pp. 1–5.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Madras Police 1896, p. 35. For similar reports on headmen in Coimbatore, Cuddapah, Tinnevelly, Madura, Chingleput and North Arcot, see Madras Police 1888, App. C, pp. xxi–xxii; ibid., 1895, pp. 33, 185; ibid., 1912, p. 10.

⁷⁸ ‘But many Reddis or Village Magistrates keep gangs of retainers—generally Yerikalas—who, when not committing depredations, act as bravos in paying off old scores against rivals’. Report on Cuddapah in Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1314 (1904–05), p. 72.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Madras Police 1897, p. 12.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ For example in 1918, the police were called out in answer to 5,290 false complaints and found themselves involved in 4,160 false prosecutions. Madras Police 1918, pp. 18–21.Google Scholar

⁸¹ In the later nineteenth century although relatively few village headmen tried civil cases, they nonetheless covered about two-thirds of the litigation in their competence. Nicholson, F. A., RAB, Vol. I, p. 312.Google Scholar

⁸² Ibid.

⁸³ See Report on the Administration of Civil Justice in the Presidency of Madras 1881–1925 (annual series); Report on the Administration of Criminal Justice in the Presidency of Madras 1881–1925 (annual series).Google Scholar

⁸⁴ In 1881, village munsiffs heard 47,656 civil cases; in 1910, they heard 96,597; and between 1913 and 1918, with the help of panchayats, they heard an annual average of 126,959. Report on the Administration of Civil Justice in the Presidency of Madras in 1881 (Madras, 1882), p. 31;Google Scholaribid., 1910, p. 4; ibid., 1920, p. 3.

⁸⁵ For comments on the arbitrary nature of assessment see Proceedings of the Board of Revenue, No. 46 (Ordinary) dated 15 January 1892, TNA. Also Report on the Administration of the Income Tax under Act II of 1886 in the Madras Presidency for the year 1888–89 (Madras, 1890), p. 39.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ Appendix to the Report of the Indian Famine Commission, 1898, being Minutes of Evidence, etc. Volume II. Madras Presidency. PP, 1899, Vol. XXXII, pp. 33, 165, 169; Report on the Famine in the Madras Presidency during 1896 and 1897 (Madras, 1898), Vol. II, p. 203.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Takavi loans were administered through the regular revenue machinery.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Village officers were ex-officio members of village unions—collections of villages brought together for administrative purposes. By 1920, there were nearly 600 of these, with an average annual income of Rs 3,000. G.O. 1337 (Local and Municipal, Local) dated 13 July 1921, TNA.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ See Garstin, J. H., Report on the Revision of Revenue Establishments in the Madras Presidency (Madras, 1883).Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Radical police reform was recommended after an inquiry ordered by Lord Curzon. See Statement of the Police Committee on the Administration of the District Police in the Madras Presidency (Madras, 1902).Google Scholar

⁹¹ During our period, the Government of India took, under various headings, between 68 and 78 per cent of Madras revenues.

⁹² G.O. 369 (Revenue) dated 25 March 1885, TNA; India Office, Public and Judicial Department, File 251 of 1888, IOL.Google Scholar

⁹³ Madras Police 1897, p. 5.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Some fragments of evidence on their landholdings, however, are available. For example, according to a report of 1865, the village officers of Bellary held 650,000 acres of land in the district. Francis, W., Bellary (Madras, 1904), Vol. I, p. 175; or again 168 Cuddapah village officers mentioned in a resettlement operation, admitted to paying Rs 22,507 a year in land revenue between them. ‘Report on Cuddapah’ p. 10 in Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1285 (1875–76).Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Government of India, Home Judicial Files 1–2 of 1922, NAI.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ In 1916, Home Rule League agitators picked up the cause of indentured labourers and demanded that the Government restrict emigration to Burma and Ceylon because of the appalling conditions of service there. In fact, as the British recognized, this move was intended less to aid the labourers than to connect with the protests of landlords in several parts of Madras who feared that emigration was taking away their cheap labour supply. The government acted quickly and imposed restrictions in order to prevent the development of a serious threat to order. Home Political Deposit, March 1917, 32 and 33; April 1917, 61, NAI.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ G.O. 361 (Education) dated 24 May 1894, TNA.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ See Hindu, 1 August 1919.Google Scholar

⁹⁹ For example, in 1870, the village officers of Trichinopoly surrendered 16,304,37 acres of inam land and had to pay about Rs 10,000 p.a. assessment on it. In return, the cesses collected by government and distributed to them increased from Rs 642 p.a. to Rs 1,72,340 in 1875. ‘Report on Trichinopoly’, p. 10. in Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1280 (1870–71); and ibid., for Fasli 1285 (1875–76), p. 68.

¹⁰⁰ ‘The irregularities committed by these servants (which are very frequent) cannot, however, be well punished by suspension or dismissal as it has been found by experience that such a course causes great inconvenience to the public service…’, ‘Report on Cuddapah’, p. 21 in Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1285 (1875–76).Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ For discussion of the bill, see G.O. 1958 (Revenue) dated 14 August 1920, TNA. Also, Government of India, Home Judical Files 1–2 of 1922, NAI.Google Scholar

¹⁰² Madras Police 1919, Appendix D, p. x.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ Madras Police 1912, p. 9; ibid., 1915, pp. 17–18.

¹⁰⁴ Madras Police 1907, pp. 5–6; ibid., 1912, p. 33; ibid., 1914, pp. 72–76.

¹⁰⁵ Madras Police 1915, p. 18.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ Royal Commission on Agriculture in India. Appendix, Vol. XIV, pp. 256–8.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ Report on the Administration of the Abkari Revenue in the Presidency of Fort St. George for the year 1915–16 (Madras, 1916), p. 4.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ Forest panchayats developed out of a report by the Forest Committee in 1913. The government hoped that they ‘will go far to remove or reduce the friction of forest subordinates and the public which has been such an unsatisfactory feature of past administration’. Quoted in Hindu, 14 April 1915.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ Royal Commission on Agriculture in India. Appendix, Vol. XIV, p. 256.Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ Report on the Administration of Civil Justice in the Presidency of Madras. 1920–1930 (annual series).Google Scholar

¹¹¹ For example, by 1907, of all the Vellala sub-castes in Trichinopoly district, ‘only a few of the sub-divisions, namely the Kodikkals, Kongas and Aru-nadus, have caste panchayats’. Hemingway, F. R., Trichinopoly (Madras, 1907), Vol. I, p. 102.Google Scholar

¹¹² The story emerged in the course of a trial which was fully reported in the Hindu, 20, 22, 29 and 30 June and 16 July 1925; see also P. Kesava Pillai to S. M. V. Osman, the Collector of Anatapur, 1 July 1922, and P. Kesava Pillai to C. P. Ramaswami Iyer, 14 May 1925, P. Kesava Pillai Papers, Nehru Memorial Museum, New Delhi [NMM].Google Scholar

¹¹³ The dry districts in general and Coimbatore, Salem, Cuddapah and Anantapur in particular, had much the highest murder rates in the presidency. Superior police officials invariably attributed the prevalence of the crime to faction. See Madras Police 1910, p. 15; ibid., 1918, p. 12; ibid., 1920, p. 14.

¹¹⁴ As important, and subject to the same pattern of growth, were the temple committees. See Baker, C. J., ‘Political Change in South India (1919–1937)’ (Fellowship dissertation, Queens' College, Cambridge, 1972), pp. 65–74.Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ A. Subbarayalu Reddiar to P. S. Sivaswami Iyer, 12 April 1912. P. S. Sivaswami Iyer Papers, NAI.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ See article on Tindivanum taluk board in Hindu, 9 August 1897.Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ Memorandum 31–4L, dated 5 February 1915, in Confidential Proceedings of the Madras Government, 1916, Volume 23, IOL.Google Scholar

¹¹⁸ Madhaviah, A., Thillai Govindan (London, 1916), p. 118.Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ The earliest district board railway was that constructed in Tanjore in 1897–98. See Hindu, 10 and 17 June 1896.Google Scholar

¹²² Venkatarangaiya, M., The Development of Local Boards in the Madras Presidency (Bombay, 1939), pp. 66–7.Google Scholar

¹²³ Hindu, 5 February 1918.Google Scholar

¹²⁴ Ibid.

¹²⁵ G.O. 1021 (Local and Municipal, Local) dated 8 August 1918, TNA.Google Scholar

¹²⁶ Hindu, 12 June 1918, 9 October 1920.Google Scholar

¹²⁷ The raja became involved with various Nattukottai Chetties, whose whole south Asian banking empire was centred on Ramnad, in a district dog-fight for control of the principal markets. G.O. 783 (Local and Municipal) dated 3 May 1922; G.O. 811 (Local and Municipal) dated 9 May 1922 TNA; Hindu, 31 July and 16 March 1922.Google Scholar

¹²⁸ G.O. 1984 (Local and Municipal) dated 7 September 1923, TNA. Dharma Raja was related to P. S. Kumaraswami Raja (see footnote 51) and their family was typical of our peasant-capitalist élite. They owned Rs 20,000 worth of land, had interests in banking and a cotton ginning factory and possessed village office.Google Scholar See Raja, A. K. D. Venkata, A Brief Life Sketch of P. S. Kumaraswami Raja (Rajapayaiyam, 1964).Google Scholar

¹²⁹ G.O. 180 (Local and Municipal, Local) dated 27 February 1920. TNA.Google Scholar

¹³⁰ Between 1920 and 1930, the electorates to the Legislative Council and to the taluk boards were roughly the same. When considering action against village officers, C. Todhunter, a senior British official, thought: ‘the village officers are likely to have so much influence over the electorate under the Montagu–Chelmsford Reforms that it would be easy for them to secure a mandate to elected members to oppose interference with hereditary right’. Note, 11/12/19 in G.O. 1958 (Revenue) dated 14 August 1920, TNA.Google Scholar

¹³¹ No exact statistics of the rural board electorates exist. On the basis of information collected for the 1920 and 1937 Legislative Council reforms, it seems probable that, between 1920 and 1930, about 2½ per cent of the rural population could vote in rural board elections and, between 1930 and 1937, about 13 per cent. See Madras Government Evidence to the Southborough Committee on Franchise 1918–19. (Calcutta, 1919), Appendix 1; Government of India, Home Political, File 129 of 1937, NAI.Google Scholar

¹³² While on the Legislative Council, P. Kesava Pillai was popularly known as ‘the Honourable Member for Forests and Jails’.Google Scholar

¹³³ See Report of the Forest Committee, (Madras, 1913), 2 vols.Google Scholar

¹³⁴ Appendix to the Report of the Indian Famine Commission, 1898, being Minutes of Evidence, etc. Volume II. Madras Presidency, p. 214, PP, 1899, Vol. XXXII.Google Scholar

¹³⁵ P. Kesava Pillai to Dr Subbarayon, 5 December 1926, P. Kesava Pillai Papers, NMM.Google Scholar

¹³⁶ The movement developed from incidents which had led to the murder of some Gounders in a toddy shop brawl. Its most concrete form was the drive by Vellingiri Gounder and his henchmen to close down all the toddy-shops in their area. See C. J. Baker, ‘Political Change in South India’, pp. 353–4.Google Scholar

¹³⁷ ibid., pp. 241–2; Hindu, 25 November 1926.

¹³⁸ Ayyar, R. V. Krishna, In the Legislature of Those Days (Madras, 1956), p. 45.Google Scholar

¹³⁹ Indian Statutory Commission. 1930. Oral Evidence taken at Madras, Vol. I, 5th meeting, p. 19.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁰ Hindu, 22 and 24 September and 1 and 7 October 1913.Google Scholar

¹⁴¹ The Cult of Incompetence, being an impartial enquiry into the record of the First Madras Ministry (Madras, 1923), pp. 37–9.Google Scholar

¹⁴² Rao, A. Kaleswara, Na Jivita Katha-Navya Andhramu (Vijayawada, 1959), p. 333 (Telugu).Google Scholar

¹⁴³ Biographies of Madras Legislative Councillors in Reforms (Franchise) B, March 1921, 34–99, NAI.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁴ V. C. Vellingiri Gounder possessed marriage connexions with several of the pattagar families—the religious leaders—of the Gounder community. Besides religious status, the families were among the richest in the Coimbatore–Salem area. A. Thangavelu Naicker was related to the largest landowning Palli families in the Arcot region and was the nephew of A. Dhanakoti Mudaliar, the Arcot and Madras city contractor. K. Audinarayana Reddi was credited with connexion to many of the principal Reddis of Nellore.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁵ Results in Reforms (Franchise) B, March 1921, 34–99, NAI.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁶ Results in Hindu, 10 to 21 September 1930.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁷ These were K. M. Dorasami, R. K. Venugopal Reddi and K. Ramachandra Padayachi.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁸ For brief biographies see Directory of the Madras Legislature (Madras, 1938).Google Scholar

¹⁴⁹ Reddi landowners consistently took one district Legislative Council seat and the family of the Venkatagiri zemindars the other.

¹⁵⁰ Notably T. Foulkes of the Salem zemindari, S. Ellappa Chetty and P. Subarayon, who owned the small Kumaramangalam estate.

¹⁵¹ P. Kesava Pillai to Dr Subbarayon 5 December 1926, P. Kesava Pillai Papers, NMM.Google Scholar

¹⁵² In 1891, about 40 per cent of the 850,000 people returning themselves as Kammas did not specify a sub-caste and another 35 per cent claimed one particular sub-caste—that found predominantly in the Kistna area. Census of India. 1891. Madras (Madras, 1893), Vol. XIII, Part 1 pp. 237–38.Google Scholar

¹⁵³ Census of India. 1881. Madras (Madras, 1883), Vol. II, p. 140.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁴ Rao, A. V. Raman, Economic Development of Andhra Pradesh (1766–1957) (Bombay, 1958), pp. 86–90.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁵ Quoted in Spate, O. H. K., India and Pakistan. A General and Regional Geography (London, 1954), p. 690.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁶ These figures calculated from ‘Statement of the Rent-Roll’ in Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1310 (1900–01).Google Scholar

¹⁵⁷ Royal Commission on Agriculture in India. Appendix, Vol. XIV, p. 270.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁸ Rao, A. V. Raman, Economic Development of Andhara Pradesh (1766–1957), pp. 251–54. The market towns of the delta area were among the fastest growing in the presidency.Google Scholar See Census of India. 1921. (Madras, 1922), Vol. XIII, Part 2, pp. 8–12.Google ScholarCensus of India. 1931 (Madras, 1933), Vol. XIV, Part 2, pp. 10–16.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁹ RPBC, p. 119.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁰ RPBC, pp. 219–20; MPBC, Vol. III, pp. 740–3, 1146.Google Scholar

¹⁶¹ Rich delta ryots were, of course, as much involved in credit and trade in their own right as wealthy ryots in the dry districts. MPBC, Vol. III, p. 743.Google Scholar

¹⁶² In the Godaveri delta villages investigated by the Banking Commission, co-operative credit loans accounted for about one-third of all admitted loans. This was far higher than the average of dry district villages investigated. MPBC, Vol. V, pp. 86–255. Commercial expansion in the 1920s stimulated the development of several joint-stock banks, such as the Andhra Bank, and land banks, such as that started by the raja of Pithapuram.Google Scholar

¹⁶³ RPBC, p. 106.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁴ Royal Commission on Agriculture in India. Appendix, Vol. XIV, pp. 268–9.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁵ See Elliot, Carolyn M., ‘Caste and Faction among the Dominant Caste: the Reddis and Kammas of Andhra’ in Kothari, R., (ed.), Caste in Indian Politics, pp. 129–71.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁶ Rao, A. V. Raman, Economic Development of Andhra Pradesh (1766–1957), p. 192.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁷ MPBC, Vol. III, p. 744.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁸ Land Revenue Reports for Fasli 1315 (1905–06), p. 72.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁹ The comment particularly referred to the district munsiffs' courts at Bezwada and Masulipatam. Report on the Administration of Civil Justice in the Presidency of Madras in 1890 (Madras, 1891), p. 14.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁰ In 1890, for example, the zemindar of Telaprole, in Kistna, alone filed 2382 cases. Ibid., p. 15. Kistna, Godaveri and, after 1905, Guntur were usually in the top half dozen districts in the presidency for the number of cases filed in ratio to population. See Reports on the Administration of Civil Justice in the Presidency of Madras (annual series).

¹⁷¹ Statistics of Criminal Courts in the Madras Presidency for the year 1915 (Madras, 1916), p. 2.Google Scholar

¹⁷² Report on the Administration of Civil Justice in the Presidency of Madras in the year 1900 (Madras, 1901), p. 5.Google Scholar

¹⁷³ Census of India. 1931 (Madras, 1933), Vol. XIV, Part 1, p. 283;Google ScholarIbid., Part 2, pp. 276–7.

¹⁷⁴ Venkatarangaiya, M., The Freedom Struggle in Andhra Pradesh (Andhra) (Hyderabad, 1968), Vol. II, pp. 266–76.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁵ MPBC, Vol. V, pp. 86–255; Census of India. 1931, Vol. XIV, Part 2, p. 283.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁶ Sastri, V. L. (ed.), Encyclopaedia of the Madras Presidency and the Adjacent States (Cocanada, 1920), p. 501.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁷ Madras Police 1884, p. 7.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁸ The delta towns easily led the Madras mofussil in the size and scope of their vernacular journalistic activity. By 1925, for example, Rajahmundry had at least 5 daily or weekly vernacular newspapers with a combined circulation estimated at 4,700; Masulipatam maintained at least 5 with a circulation of 8,000; and Ellore at least 3 with a circulation of about 2,000. Government of India, Home Political, File 261 of 1926, NAI.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁹ See, for example, the report on the foundation of the Guntur Cotton, Paper and Jute Mills Company, which involved the Lingamalee, Pydah and Majeti families, in Hindu, 13 September 1904. A Guntur Chamber of Commerce, consisting almost entirely of Komatis, was founded in about 1911 to regulate district commerce. See Hindu, 29 January 1913.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁰ For a description of the expansion of Komati religious and communal activity see the petitions of Komatis from various Andhra towns against the Hindu Religious Endowments Act of 1926 in G.O. 3666 (Local and Municipal) dated 8 September 1928. State Archives, Hyderabad. From 1907, a Komati caste conference developed from Guntur.Google Scholar

¹⁸¹ Report of the Director of Criminal Intelligence, 9 April 1910, Home Political B, June 1910, 17–25, NAI; also G.O. 216 (Local and Municipal, Municipal) dated 3 February 1914, TNA.Google Scholar

¹⁸² These developments, which were the result of administrative activity, received legislative ratification under the Zemindari Village Officers' Services Acts of 1894 and 1895. For discussions of the ways in which government had undermined the zemindars' authority in their estates see G.O. 351 (Revenue) dated 3 March 1925; G.O. 875 (Revenue) dated 12 June 1925, TNA. The presence of zemindars, of course, influenced the social and political life of the localities in which they lived. Zemindars both drew and spent a large income, which gave them many dependents. However, our main concern is the peasantry and there was as little difference in administrative organization as in economic organization between ryotwari and zemindari peasants. Indeed, many zemindari village officers joined the rent-strike against government in 1921–22.Google Scholar

¹⁸³ Royal Commission on Agriculture in India, Vol. III, p. 316.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁴ See Madras Police for 1878–1925. G.O. 639 (Public) dated 5 June 1931, TNA.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁵ G.O. 938 (Public) dated 11 September 1931; G.O. 939 (Public) dated 11 September 1931; G.O. 980 (Public) dated 21 September 1931; G.O. 1075 (Public) dated 20 October 1931, TNA.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁶ Rao, A. Kaleswara, Na Jivita Katha–Navya Andhramu (Vijayawada, 1959), p. 19. (Telugu).Google Scholar

¹⁸⁷ Madras Police 1913, Appendix, p. 9.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁸ See comments of raja of Ramnad in Government of India, Home Judicial Files 1–2 of 1922, NAI.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁹ G.O. 1675 (Judicial) dated 18 August 1913, TNA; Madras Police 1913, Appendix, p. 9;Google Scholaribid., 1914 Appendix D, p. 72; ibid., 1919, Appendix E, p. 68.

¹⁹⁰ Madras Police 1913, Appendix, p. 9. See also report of a Legislative Council debate on village officer resignations in Hindu, 3 February 1915.Google Scholar

¹⁹¹ For reports on various village officer association meetings see Hindu, 12 November 1920; and Andhrapatrika, 4 February 1919 and 7 September 1920; Desabhimani, 8 January 1919; Gramapulana, 10 September 1921, in Reports on the Native Press in the Madras Presidency, IOL.Google Scholar

¹⁹² The most famous of the strikes was in Pedanannipad firka of Guntur district, which was not, strictly speaking, in the deltas. However, most of the original drive for a strike had come from delta villages. As early as August 1920, for example, village officers in Northern deltaic Guntur had begun their own strike. Andhrapatrika, 7 September 1920 in Reports on the Native Press in the Madras Presidency, IOL. And in December 1921, the Andhra Desa Village Officers' Association had called for resignations at Rajahmundry and had obtained them from about half the officers in this wet taluk. The Andhra Congress, which was wary of associating itself with such an obviously dangerous movement, held back from the village officers' campaign for sixteen months. Finally, in January 1922, it was forced to join in order to keep up its political credibility. It organized the strike in Pedanandipad, which was immediately adjacent to Guntur town, the Andhra PCC headquarters, with the help of P. Virayya Choudhari, a Kamma with close village officer connexions in Pedanandipad as well as political ties with Guntur town. The Pedanandipad affair was probably the least spontaneous although the most celebrated of all the strikes.Google Scholar See Venkatarangaiya, M., The Freedom Struggle in Andhra Pradesh (Andhra), Vol. III, pp. 43, 244, 250–308;Google Scholar also Venkatappayya, K., Sviya Caritra (Vijayawada, 1952), Vol. I, pp. 226–301 (Telugu).Google Scholar

¹⁹³ ‘Collector's Report about the Situation in Guntur–5’, in Venkatarangaiya, M., The Freedom Struggle in Andhra Pradesh (Andhra), Vol. III, p. 305.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁴ Ranga, N. G., Fight For Freedom (New Delhi, 1968), pp. 8–9.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁵ See, for example, the meeting of ryots at Ellore in 1894, addressed by S. Bhimasankara Rao, Rajahmundry muncipal chairman. Hindu, 12 October 1894.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁶ Hindu, 4 October 1894.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁷ Hindu, 17 April and 5, 6, 11, 12. 15 June 1896.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁸ For the Ryots' Central Association, Guntur, see Hindu, 17 September 1918; taluk conferences at Razole and Amalapuram, Hindu, 27 December 1918; Bezwada Ryots' Conference Hindu, 17 February 1919.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁹ Hindu, 7 May 1920.Google Scholar

²⁰⁰ G.O. 776 (Local and Municipal, Local) dated 21 June 1919, TNA; also K. Kotilingam to P. S. Sivaswami Iyer, n.d. but probably in the spring of 1919, P. S. Sivaswami Iyer Papers, NAI.Google Scholar

²⁰¹ G.O. 211 (Local and Municipal, Local) dated 15 February 1919, TNA. In 1921, the Guntur taluk board protested at the arrest of non-co-operators. G.O. 873 (Public) dated 18 November 1921, TNA.Google Scholar

²⁰² Baker, C. J., ‘Political Change in South India 1919–1937’, pp. 214–36.Google Scholar

²⁰³ This produced analyses of the programmes put forward by the various parties and candidates. See Naidu, P. Govindarow, The Legislative Council Elections. (Rajahmundry, 1920).Google Scholar

²⁰⁴ The group of families was based around Nidabrolu in Bapatla taluk and was led by P. V. Krishniah Choudhary, his relative N. G. Ranga, and J. Kuppuswami who was one of the richest ryotwari landlords in the district, paying over Rs 8,000 a year in land revenue. They linked up with Kamma-based factions in the Guntur and Tenali taluk boards and overthrew P. C. N. Ethirajulu Naidu's district board presidency in 1929. P. V. Krishniah Choudhary and J. Kuppuswami also became Legislative Councillors. See Baker, C. J., ‘Political Change in South India 1919–1937’, pp. 196–213.Google Scholar

²⁰⁵ This was particularly N. G. Ranga's agitation. See his The Modern Indian Peasant (Madras, 1936);Google ScholarEconomic Conditions of the Zemindari Ryots (Madras, 1933);Google ScholarRevolutionary Peasants (New Delhi, 1949). It is of interest that, until about 1930, he and his political group in Guntur, had looked to the favour of the zemindar-based Justice Party in provincial politics.Google Scholar

²⁰⁶ This was more of a break than it may sound. The Kamma movement had hit particularly hard at the Telaga caste, of which P. C. N. Ethirajulu Naidu was a member. Now the Kamma leaders had to try to win the allegiance of Telagas who were an important group in the agricultural community.Google Scholar

²⁰⁷ Rao, A. Kaleswara, Na Jivita Katha–Navya Andhramu (Vijayawada, 1959), pp. 291–360 (Telugu); G.O. 919 (Local and Municipal, Municipal) dated 24 May 1921; G.O. 945 (Local and Municipal, Municipal) dated 30 May 1921; G.O. 167 (Local and Municipal, Municipal) dated 24 January 1922; G.O. 2322 (Local and Municipal, Municipal) dated 27 November 1922, State Archives, Hyderabad; Hindu, 9 June and 5 December 1922.Google Scholar

²⁰⁸ Rao, A. Kaleswara, Na Jivita Katha–Navya Andhramu, pp. 434–60.Google Scholar

²⁰⁹ N. Hanumantha Rao also played a large part in the organization of the Komati-supported cow protection movement. G.O. 216 (Local and Municipal, Municipal) dated 3 February 1914, TNA.Google Scholar

²¹⁰ See letters of E. A. Davis, Collector of Guntur, and S. V. Narasimhachari, Deputy Magistrate of Guntur, in G.O. 2461 (Home, Judicial) dated 26 November 1917, TNA. The political implications of the Komati-Brahmin publicist patronage relationship became clear in the 1890s when Guntur municipality was allowed to have a majority of elected members and to elect its chairmen. In 1892, the Komati caucus Taxpayers' Association, led by the Brahmin lawyer V. Bhavarnacharlu, won all the elected seats and put its representatives into municipal office, G.O. 1298 (Local and Municipal, Municipal) dated 5 August 1892, TNA.Google Scholar

²¹¹ Particularly, Choudhari, P. Virayya. Venkatarangaiya, M., The Freedom Struggle in Andhra Pradesh (Andhra), Vol. III, pp. 43, 244.Google Scholar

²¹² Ibid., pp. 264–70, 288–9.

²¹³ Of course, there were a number of other elements in the composition of district politics which we have had to neglect. Rich urban merchants or zemindars, particularly clever lawyers, particularly insensitive government officials, or even small social groups which had become disproportionately wealthy by means outside the main lines of the agrarian economy, could distort some of the behavioural patterns we have tried to establish.Google Scholar

²¹⁴ See Baker, C. J., ‘Political Change in South India 1919–1937’.Google Scholar

²¹⁵ In 1921, for example, Panagal tried to reward the loyal Justice Party man P. L. Ramaswami Naicker with a seat on the Salem district board. The board president, the European zemindar. T. Foulkes, however, would not have him and insisted on the nomination of a Brahmin client of his own. Panagal was forced to give way. During the course of an angry exchange of letters with Panagal, Foulkes neatly summarized the weakness of the Council ministry: ‘On general principles if Government is going to nominate members without reference to responsible local opinion, it is merely a matter of time when Government is going to land itself in difficulties’. G.O. 1295 (Local and Municipal) dated 5 July 1921, TNA.Google Scholar

²¹⁶ Such as T. Desikachari, Nyampalle Subba Rao, A. S. Krishna Rao, T. M. Narasimhacharlu and P. Siva Rao. The Cult of Incompetence, being an impartial enquiry into the record of the First Madras Ministry, pp. 37–8. Those neglected formed themselves into the ‘Anti-Ministerial’ Justice Party.Google Scholar

²¹⁷ Baker, C. J., ‘Political Change in South India 1919–1937’, pp. 451–4.Google Scholar

²¹⁸ The one exception to this would be the area around Coimbatore where non-cooperation anti-drink propaganda fitted in with V. C. Vellingiri Gounder's caste movement. Yet Vellingiri Gounder's intrinsic lack of interest in the wider purposes of the Congress campaign was clear in his refusal to resign the Legislative Council seat he had won in 1920.Google Scholar

²¹⁹ Hindu, 23 and 24 June and 16 August 1920.Google Scholar

²²⁰ Of the 47 Swarajysts elected, 20 had sat in the 1923 Council, and 4 others had stood for election in 1923 but had been defeated. Only 7 of the 47 had been members of the original Swarajya Party formed by Congress politicians in 1923–24. Gordon, R. A., ‘Aspects in the history of the Indian National Congress, with special reference to the Swarajya Party, 1919–1927’ (D. Phil thesis, Oxford University, 1970), pp. 292–4.Google Scholar

²²¹ Baker, C. J., ‘Political Change in South India 1919–1937’, pp. 406–8.Google Scholar

²²² P. S. Sivaswami Iyer to G. A. Natesan, 13 August 1920. P. S. Sivaswami Iyer Papers, NAI.Google Scholar

²²³ Hindu, 1 October 1894.Google Scholar

²²⁴ Venkatarangaiya, M., The Freedom Struggle in Andhra Pradesh (Andhra), Vol. II, pp. 177–311.Google Scholar

²²⁵ In the Rajahmundry area, for example, municipal and taluk board elections were fought on party tickets between 1921 and 1923. Hindu, 10 May 1921, 4 September 1922, 14, 19, 20 April 1923. The local position of the Congress became so strong that fights for power in local institutions were conducted within it. Hindu, 11 September 1924. In Ellore, the struggle for power between Mothey Gangaraju and Dandu Narayan Raju, which dominated local affairs between the mid-1920s and 1937, was fought at the polls on Justice Party-Congress lines. C. J. Baker, ‘Political Change in South India, 1919–1937’, p. 224.Google Scholar

²²⁶ Between 1920 and 1937, Kaleswara Rao, Venkatappayya and Pattabhisittaramayya (who was thoroughly unsuccessful) spent a great deal of time feuding with each other for Congress pre-eminence.Google Scholar

²²⁷ Directory of the Madras Legislature (Madras, 1938).Google Scholar

²²⁸ Ibid.

²²⁹ See Musgrave, P. J., ‘Landlords and Lords of the Land: estate management and social control in Uttar Pradesh 1860–1920’ in Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 6, Part 3, July 1972, pp. 257–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar