Lord Ripon (1880-1884): His Reforms, Ilbert Bill Controversy

After the fall of Lord Lytton, the liberal Prime Minister of England handed over the responsibility of governing India to Lord Ripon (George Frederick Samuel Robinson, 1st Marquess of Ripon). There was a significant difference between his predecessor Lytton’s administrative methods and Lord Ripon’s. He was so rational and discerning that he had no difficulty in investigating the growing resentment among educated Indians. Therefore, he took such political, administrative, and economic reform measures that pleased the educated and upper-class Indians, and at the same time, the general population also breathed a sigh of relief.

Lord Ripon Reforms

Lord Ripon implemented several important reform works in various fields during his reign from 1880 to 1884, which are:

Repeal of the Vernacular Press Act (1882)

• After arriving in Calcutta, Lord Ripon said, “Judge me by my acts and not by my words.” Ripon realized that India was being stirred in political, social, and cultural spheres towards the end of the nineteenth century. At that time, Lord Lytton’s repressive policies were like fuel to a fire. Therefore, he initially attempted to calm public opinion by gradually amending the various objectionable laws introduced by Lord Lytton.
• For this reason, he first suppressed the ‘Vernacular Press Act‘ of 1878, introduced by Lord Lytton, through Act III of 1882. However, he retained the power to confiscate any seditious writing through the ‘Sea Customs Act’ of 1878 by the postal department. Lord Ripon’s well-intentioned law somewhat pacified the Indians.

Factory Reforms (1881)

In 1881, through the ‘First Factory Act,’ he prohibited the employment of children under 7 years old in factory work. He reduced the daily working hours for children under 12 years old. Dangerous machinery was made mandatory to be enclosed by fencing. Penalties were established for mill owners who failed to comply with these laws, and inspectors were appointed to enforce the law. Although the Factory Act did not fully meet the workers’ genuine demands, it is true that he was the first to draw attention to the problems of factory workers.

Mysore Rendition (1881)

In 1831, Lord William Bentinck had taken over the Mysore state due to misgovernance, but it was later revealed that the allegations of mismanagement were greatly exaggerated. Therefore, Lord Ripon was determined to rectify the mistake and in 1881, he returned the administration of the state to Chamaraja Wadiyar X.

Local Self-Government (1882)

• One of Lord Ripon’s notable reforms was the ‘Local Self-Government Act’ of 1882. He thought that it was possible to educate the people of India about democracy and political ideology through a system of local self-government. He said that by granting more power to local self-governing institutions like municipalities and corporations and removing bureaucratic interference in their work, Indians could truly learn self-governance. He wanted to create a representative system in the European democratic style, where intelligent and influential people could take an active role in local affairs. To fulfil this purpose he passed the ‘Local Self-Government Act.’ He told the bureaucracy to abandon this idea because the people of India were not worthy of self-government. For these reasons, he is also known as the Father of Local self-Government in India.
• He gave several instructions to the provincial governments. These are:
  • Local self-government system should be introduced in every district. These district bodies will be called Local Boards.
  • The smaller the local boards, the better, as this would improve communication between representatives and the general public.
  • Multiple local boards should be established in each district.
  • Government members in Local Boards would not exceed one-third of the total members. Board chairpersons would be elected. Non-government members would also be elected.
  • Boards could be advised and guided by the government. Generally, government permission would not be required for board work.
  • For borrowing loans, transferring board property, or creating bylaws for board management, the local board must obtain prior permission from the government.
  • Boards must allocate funds to carry out their specific responsibilities.
  • If a Local board fails to perform its assigned duties, the provincial government can cancel its illegal activities.
  • However, interference in board work should not be done without absolute necessity.

He spoke of forming municipalities and corporations in cities. Many consider Lord Ripon’s ‘Local Self-Government Act’ as a major step in democratic and political education for Indians.

Economic Reforms

• Lord Ripon also reformed the revenue department. He organized the government revenue department. The total revenue was divided into three parts: central, provincial, and joint. The central government took responsibility for revenue, customs, postal department, railways, military department, salt tax, mint, and land revenue department. Provincial government revenue was allocated from the total central government revenue at a specific rate. Provincial governments were given responsibility for roads, public health, police, and general administration. Lord Ripon reduced salt tax rates. He followed a free trade policy.

Educational Reforms

• In 1882, Lord Ripon appointed a commission led by Sir William Hunter to investigate and recommend improvements in the educational status of Indians, known as the ‘Hunter Commission.’ The commission was formed to determine how effectively Wood’s Despatch policies had been implemented and to provide recommendations to the government.
• To improve education, the commission recommended that the responsibility for establishing primary schools should be given to local boards, municipalities, and corporations. The ‘Grant-In-Aid’ system at the secondary level was considered quite satisfactory. They recommended dividing secondary education into two parts and establishing schools for university-level education in languages, mathematics, and other educational subjects, as well as vocational education such as commercial and technical education. The commission recommended removing government control over higher education. They urged taking initiatives for women’s education and expanding education among the Muslim community. Most of the Hunter Commission’s recommendations were indeed accepted by the government.

Land Revenue and Tenancy Reforms

• Lord Ripon also reformed land revenue settlement policies. Some European civilians had been proposing a land revenue system similar to Bengal’s Permanent Settlement across India for the past 20 years. Ripon knew that the Permanent Settlement in Bengal had not given farmers land rights, and zamindars could arbitrarily increase revenues. Therefore, instead of accepting this proposal, he suggested a revised proposal, stating that in districts where land surveys had been conducted and revenue records created, settlements should be made on the condition that revenues would not be increased for farmers except in cases of value appreciation. Lord Ripon’s proposal could not be implemented because zamindars strongly opposed it, and even the Secretary of State for India, Spencer Cavendish, Marquess of Hartington, opposed the proposal.
• Concerned about agricultural issues and in response to the growing farmer movements, Ripon formed a ‘Rent Commission’ in 1880 in Bengal to investigate farmers’ complaints. Although the famous ‘Bengal Tenancy Act‘ was passed in 1885 after Ripon’s departure, its foundation and introduction were made possible by this Rent Commission. The commission’s recommendations (1882) initiated a lengthy discussion about the rights and responsibilities of tenants, which later supported the creation of the 1885 ‘Bengal Tenancy Act’. This law restored the land rights that farmers had lost under the Permanent Settlement.

Ilbert Bill Controversy (1883-1884)

• Another notable event during Lord Ripon’s reign was the Ilbert Bill Controversy. On February 2, 1883, Ilbert, a law member of the Viceroy’s Council, introduced a bill. This bill removed the disparity between Indian and European judges, stating that Indian judges could now try European offenders. However, Indian judges were not given the right to impose the death penalty on European offenders. However, Europeans and Anglo-Indians living in India protested against this bill. Their dissatisfaction had reached such a level that many characterized this protest as a ‘White Mutiny.’
• Initially, Lord Ripon supported the Ilbert Bill. But he observed that even the Liberal government of England and Liberal members of the British Parliament did not fully support him. He was then compelled to compromise with the Anglo-Indians and it was decided that European trials would have an equal number of European and Indian jurors.
• Educated Indians did not view Ripon’s compromise favourably and protested. However, contemporary Indian nationalist leaders understood that escalating protests could nullify Ripon’s other reforms. Surendranath Banerjee, Dadabhai Naoroji, Pherozeshah Mehta, Mahadev Govind Ranade, and other early nationalists viewed Ripon with respect and believed that Ripon had taken every step in the interest of India and its people. Therefore, at that moment, they considered supporting Ripon rather than opposing him to be more advantageous.

Evaluation of Lord Ripon’s Governance Policy

• Lord Ripon’s reforms certainly had a positive aspect. His reforms had increased the aspirations of educated upper-class Indians. Ripon’s reforms awakened the dream of Indians to become partial participants in political power. Surendranath Banerjee made an enthusiastic comment about Lord Ripon, saying, “His genuine sincerity towards Indians, high idealism, fair policy, and hatred towards racial discrimination have transformed Ripon into a beloved figure for Indians.” He was the first to create the notion in Indians’ minds that many English rulers saw the right to rule India as a sacred duty. Unlike Lytton, who viewed Indians as subjugated slaves of the British government, Ripon was the first to take the correct steps to transform paternalistic governance into participatory governance.
• However, it must be noted that Lord Ripon did not adopt these reformative measures solely for the welfare of Indians. It is true that he believed in liberalism. He was a loyal follower of contemporary Liberal British politician William Gladstone. But one cannot forget that he came to this country as a representative of British imperialist rule. He was much more aware of the growing public discontent in India compared to his predecessor Lytton. The decisions he made regarding self-governance suggest that he wanted to provide Indians with greater freedom, but in reality, this was not the case. The actual objective was to slightly expand the scope of Indian cooperation in British rule. He himself had said, “……the hourly increasing necessity of making the educated natives the friends, instead of enemies of our rule.”
• Therefore, Dr. Sarvepalli Gopal rightly said that Ripon understood that British rule in India could not be strengthened by neglecting the growing middle and educated classes. They would have to gradually hand over the responsibility of governing India to them; otherwise, the decline of the British Empire was imminent. Therefore, most of his reforms were not implemented due to opposition from the British bureaucracy and the British in India. Even Ripon’s critics did not appreciate his pro-Indianism. In their view, he was an ‘Indophile,’ and the seeds of aspiration he planted in Indians’ minds through permanent self-governance systems and other reforms ultimately led to the destruction of the British Empire.

Lord Ripon FAQs