Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The policy of the British East India Company was not to outright ban slavery, but to remove all legal basis that recognized the institution; the owning of slaves were not criminalized, but slaves were no longer recognized as slaves by law and thus not prevented to leave if they did so, and the slave owners not economically compensated for their ...
The Indian Slavery Act, 1843, also known as Act V of 1843, was an act passed in British India under East India Company rule, which outlawed many economic transactions associated with slavery. The act states how the sale of any person as a slave was banned, and anyone buying or selling slaves would be prosecuted under the law, the offence ...
The Indian indenture system was a system of indentured servitude, by which more than 1.6 million workers [1] from British India were transported to labour in European colonies, as a substitute for slave labour, following the abolition of the trade in the early 19th century.
Slavery in the Madras Presidency during the British Raj affected close to 20% of the population. Madras Presidency was an administrative subdivision (presidency) of British India. At its greatest extent, the presidency included most of southern India. The landlords were predominantly higher caste individuals.
The East India Company officers lived lavish lives, the company finances were in shambles, and the company's effectiveness in India was examined by the British crown after 1858. As a result, the East India Company lost its powers of government and British India formally came under direct Crown control, with an appointed Governor-General of ...
As a notable exception to the rest of the British Empire, the act did not extend to any of the territories administered by the East India Company, including the islands of Ceylon and Saint Helena, [27] in which the company had been independently regulating, and in part prohibiting the slave trade since 1774; with regulations prohibiting the ...
[37] [38] John MacKenzie, the last speaker in the debate, later wrote that though many of Tharoor's arguments were correct, others were based in falsehoods; noting that India has had a history of imperial formations preceding the British, where the people were exploited for the benefit of the rulers in every case, MacKenzie also argued that ...
[10] Revolutionary violence had already been a concern in British India; consequently in 1915, to strengthen its powers during what it saw was a time of increased vulnerability, the Government of India passed the Defence of India Act, which allowed it to intern politically dangerous dissidents without due process and added to the power it ...