Criticism of Regulating Act

Criticism of Regulating Act

It is universally admitted that the Regulating Act had many shortcomings –

(1) A serious defect of the Regulating Act was that it did not define clearly the exact jurisdiction and powers of the Governor-General, the members of his council and the Supreme Court. Whether the omission was deliberate or unintentional, there was a lot of conflict. The relations between the Governor-General and the Supreme Court were never happy. The result was that they always pulled in different directions.

(2) The Supreme Court claimed to serve writs on the inhabitants of the country and make them appear before itself. Warren Hastings resisted this claim of the Supreme Court. In the case of Cassijurah, the Sheriff and the officers accompanying him were prevented by a company of Sepoys from executing a writ against the Raja. These sepoys maintained that they were merely acting under the orders of the Governor-General.

(3) Supreme Court claimed to have jurisdiction over the collectors of revenue of the Company for the wrongs done by them in their official capacity. It also claimed to try judicial officers of the Company for similar wrongs. It refused to recognize the jurisdiction of the provincial or country courts. It released a district treasurer who was imprisoned on a charge of embezzlement and remarked thus: “We know not what your Provincial Chief and the Council are: you might just as well have said that he was confined by the king of Fairies.” Warren Hastings tried to remove this conflict by appointing Sir Elijah Impey as the judge of the Sadar Diwani Adalat. However, this arrangement did not last long because Impey was called back home. The Regulating Act did not specify as to which law was to be applied by the Supreme Court. It was a moot point as to whether the Hindu law, Mohammedan law, Christian law or the English law was to be applied. It was also not made clear as to whether the law of the defendant was to be applied or that of the plaintiff in case the two professed different religions. As a matter of fact, the judges of the Supreme Court knew only the English law and applied the same practically in every case. Evidently, this had very unfortunate results.

(4) The Regulating Act did not contain any answer to many questions. It was not clearly defined as to who the servants of the English East India Company were and what actually constituted employment under the Company. A question could be asked as to whether farmers of revenue could be considered as servants of the Company.

(5) The Regulating Act made the position of the governor-General very weak. As a matter of fact he was merely at the mercy of the majority of the members of his council. We are told that for 6 years there was a big struggle between the Governor General and the members of his Council. He was outvoted and over-ruled and on many occasions had to follow a policy which he did not approve of. It was only after the death of Monson and Clavering that Warren Hastings was able to manage his Council. Previous to this, his position was so hard that at one time he actually instructed his agent in London to tender his resignation to the Directors.

(6) The raising of the qualifications of the voter from 500 to 1000 pound converted the Court of Director into an oligarchy. About 1246 holders of stock were disfranchised. “The whole of the regulations, concerning the Court and proprietors, relied upon two principles, which have proved fallacious, namely, that small numbers were a security against faction and disorder and that integrity of conduct would follow the greater property.”

(7) The control of Bengal over Madras and Bombay was not effective.

(8) According to Pouten Rouse, “The object of the Act was good, but the system that it established was imperfect.”

(9) According to the Report on Indian constitutional Reforms of 1918, the Regulating Act, “created a Governor-General who was powerless before his own council and an executive that was powerless before a Supreme Court, itself immune from all responsibility for peace and welfare of the country- a system that was made workable by the genius and fortitude of one great man.”

(10) The Regulating Act made a bold attempt at securing good Government in the Company’s territory in India without the Crown’s directly assuming the responsibility for the same.

The Regulating Act was the first of a long series of acts passed by Parliament to change and regulate the Government of India. It made a beginning in the system of a written constitution for British India. The right of the Parliament to interfere into the affairs of the company and to legislate for the possessions was recognized. It is a landmark in the transfer of power from the company to Parliament. The Act established a collegiate rule in place of “one-man rule.” It recognized the political functions of the Company. According to Lyall, “The system of administration set up by the Act of 1773 embodied the first attempt at giving some definite and recognizable form to the vague and arbitrary ruler ship that had developed upon the Company. From that time forward, the outline of Anglo-Indian Government was gradually filled in.”

Milan Tomic

Hi. I’m Designer of Blog Magic. I’m CEO/Founder of ThemeXpose. I’m Creative Art Director, Web Designer, UI/UX Designer, Interaction Designer, Industrial Designer, Web Developer, Business Enthusiast, StartUp Enthusiast, Speaker, Writer and Photographer. Inspired to make things looks better.