British East India Company was another successor state since Britain’s control from 1757 was increased through it. Since 1858 the British government directly governed India, attaining the tag name British Raj, which significantly influenced the people residing within India. The company was founded as a private entity accorded a royal charter by the British regime in 1600 when Queen Elizabeth 1 approved East Africa India Company. Merchants interested in trading in Asia to acquire spices, cotton, and indigo dye to sell to England to gain profit founded the company.[1] On the first account, these merchants sailed to the East Indies, present-day Indonesia, and the Philippines and attempted to compete with Dutch but failed terribly since the Portuguese and the French merchants had already settled there, prompting them to focus on southern India.[2] A succession of states refers to the relations within the global reach in which a successor state attains the sovereign status on a territory previously under another state’s sovereignty. The concepts emanate from the fact that there is the transmission of rights, obligations as well as property from the previously established state to a new state.[3]. This argumentative essay will explore reasons demonstrating that the East India Company was another successor state.
The proponents of East India Company established that the company acquired control of significant portions of India and exerted a crucial political and economic impact across the region. As a result of the company’s establishment, the British regime essentially doubled its control of India under the leadership of the British Raj. In contrast, the company’s political prowess ceased to exist. Although there are no official documents to consider the company as a “successor state” in the traditional sense, it was in a position to take colossal control as well as influence in the territories where it had operations in a similar way a government institution would operate across the globe. [4] Despite its origin as a trading company, East India Company expanded to become an ultimate power representative of the British Empire in the crown. Before the company was founded, India had become a treasure trove, particularly for the Europeans, and demand for spices had grown. However, only Spain and Portugal traded the spice commodities, effectively instigating a monopoly status and granting them a significant impetus worldwide. However, this monopoly state ceased when England defeated the Spanish. As a result of the adequate anchor as well as the gaps eminent in the spice trade, the British took advantage and used this chance wisely, intending to establish a maritime trade among East India and, as a result, created the British East India Company initially as a joint stock company.
East India Company was a successor state because the British government accorded I a royal charter in 1600 that granted it the legal status to operate like an independent state. The charter of 1609 also strengthened the company because the company was accorded the power to have armed military forces responsible for offering protection to the company’s assets.[5]. As a result, the company became a powerful force within the territory of India. Moreover, these forces were made more substantial by forming alliances with local rulers alongside the extensive land grants offered to the company executives. The East India Company had been making huge profits from the Indian subcontinent before the establishment of the factory at Masulipatanam.
The company could control Indian politics by utilizing resources alongside immersing influence. For instance, its perceptions and policies were well represented in the court of the Mughal emperor in Delhi. Consequently, it effectively became possible to the company to discuss its agenda on taxation issues as well as other significant factors that were hindering the operations of the company. The efforts allowed the company to construct forts along with trading posts within the country while also controlling and influencing some large segment regions within India. This was because of the company’s expansion of trading and wealth growth, allowing it to put vast influence over Indian politics alongside society. It is through this company’s political eminence and reinforcement through the military operations that made the British colonized and also control a huge chunk of the India subcontinent, and that continued until India attained independence in 1947[6].
The East India Company had significant growth in the country’s economic development. The provision of employment opportunities to the majority of the local people in the country was attainable, particularly in the construction of the ports and trading posts. In addition, the merchants took part in numerous activities related to their primary goal of undertaking trading activities with the East Indies. As a result, they employed a significant labor force responsible for sourcing and collecting commodities that included spices, and textiles, among other valuable things at the time, derived from the East indies. Some employment opportunities for the people in India included employing people to organize and outfit ships ready for voyages towards the east Indies and accountants to keep records of the company’s financial transactions alongside the business dealings. Establishing employment for the people is effective since it allows the company to attain a successor state without any challenges.
The proponents argue that the British East India Company attained a successor state as this company accumulated vast power as well as autonomy in India, making it operate as a sovereign state. They noted several factors that effectively demonstrate the extent of the company’s power alongside independence. The first account was based on the idea that the British East India Company had acquired its military personnel that the company used to conquer alongside expanding its territory, controlling a significant region within china. The company’s military consisted of soldiers drawn from Europe and native Indian sepoys. The company ensured that its military personnel effectively outnumbered the army under the control of the local rules. As a result, it successfully utilized its military prowess to forcedly control and influence the Indian subcontinent while also sustaining its management within the territory.
Those who resisted the company’s control and regime experienced military force and became subdued in the uprising. For instance, in most cases, retribution, perceived as excessive and unjust to the local people in India, was adopted. As a result, the company gained a bad reputation for suppression alongside military brutality, leading to most people increasing discontent among the people within India against the British rule they implied as their enemy. For instance, the Indian Rebellion of 1857 was famous as the sepoy Mutiny. The rebellion was ignited by the dissatisfaction of the company’s Indian soldiers. The sepoys did not like the new regulations advanced, including the use of the greased cartridges that people believed were made of animal fat. As such, this rebellion increased and attained a widespread uprising against British rule in india that saw many Indian soldiers and civilians joining the war. The company responded to this rebellion using a combination of military forces and asserted some diplomacy. Since the company military was large and trained, it could suppress this war in numerous regions by adopting brutal tactics, including massacres whipping an entire village, and indiscriminate civilian killings. The company also adopted diplomacy when the atmosphere was conducive to acquiring support from the local leaders. In return, it promised them autonomy alongside another concession as appreciation for their agreement to collaborate with the British rulers.
Another East India Company military combat occurred during the Indian Rebellion between 1824 to 1826 in the southern region of the Indian state of Vellore. This military combat led Indian soldiers to feel the company was not doing enough to meet their welfare, especially on treatment and compensation aspects. However, this rebellion did not last long as the company’s military retaliated with significant loss of life among the rebels as well as civilians. Consequently, the company’s military combats reveal similar characteristics among the nations that use power to attain successor state status.
Another reason that suggests that the British East India Company had become a successor state is how it administered and governed the territories it controlled. When the company was founded, it primarily concentrated on trading pacts, with its employees being the agents for the British merchants with East India. However, this status lasted only a short time because when the company attained more power and influence in most India parts, it started to practice more control on the larger territories where it operated. For instance, it would begin by enacting structures and institutions, including the court systems, and developing means for revenue collection in addition to establishing its military forces. The company’s territorial control expanded as time elapsed. At the onset of the 18th century, the company had accumulated significant huge parts within its control, such as Bengal, Bombay, and Madras.
Moreover, passing the Regulatory Act in 1765 was the climax because it permitted the company to administer while also governing those specific areas within its approach and control. British East India Company continued its expansion scheme because the company continued to expand over India after decades, gaining considerable control of India’s coastal regions. EIC’s administration of such territories is perceived as a sovereign authority. This is because the company had its courts alongside the legal systems that British subjects, as well as Indian subjects, were meant to follow them. Such administration tactics are attributed to a nation that is described to function as a sovereign power. Although EIC was founded as a private company, its nature of operational wise is regarded as a de facto government within india and exercised its control on the territories it controlled as shaping the society’s culture alongside the region. Therefore, the company’s governance along with administration is similar to a successor state.
The political and economic influence of the East India Company suggests that the company was a successor state within the Indian region. The EIC was accorded a royal charter granting it a monopoly status in trade between Britain and the East Indies. During the 18th and 19th centuries, EIC accumulated significant economic and political influence in most parts of the country, effectively establishing British Colonial rule within India. In addition, the company’s actions, alongside a degree of power, gave some historians a notion that the company operates as a successor state in India. Through looking at the lens of political influence, EIC acquired considerable power over the Indian Princes as well as rulers. Since the company had a private army that was deployed to protect the company’s trade interests as well as expand its territories.
Moreover, the company also used this army on intervening missions when a local conflict emerged, with some cases dictating the outcomes of such disputes. In addition, the company utilizes such power to effectively make treaties alongside the agreements with the Indian rulers and effectively capitalize on solidifying its influence within the region. As a result of the profits generated from the trading activities, the company gained financial strength to leverage its military base while also increasing the political governance in the region, which is attributed to a successor state. In addition, the company also made some policies that had a lasting influence on India’s society, which is still relevant in contemporary society.
On the other hand, the opponents of the idea that the British East India Company established a successor state argued that the company lacked the legal capacity and the required resources to develop such a state. Instead, they allude that the British government, alongside the military, was responsible for India’s colonization alongside the control of India, and since the British East India Company was just a mere private corporation whose power and legitimacy was primarily limited.
Some opposition based their argument on the fact that the company was only performing its commercial responsibility as an enterprise whose primary interests were pegged on increasing trading pacts and profits generations and not establishing a state administration. The company was liquidated in 1858 by the British government and not this successor state itself. This reveals that the company had yet to be established as a successor state since such would have prevented the British government from dissolving the company. The fact that the company was only licensed to carry out the trade on behalf of the government implied that it had the authority to undertake any role deemed appropriate to the company.
Moreover, other opposers alluded that the company could control certain territories of the region and did not get the opportunity to control the entire Indian subcontinent; hence it had been granted limited jurisdiction. Consequently, the company should not be looked at as a successor state but rather a British colonialism’s conduit and never near any aspect of an independent governing body. The company was a vehicle of the British government to control the trading activities and also assert some power control over the local Indians within the region. They suggest that the company did not possess characteristics that would lead to labeling it as a successor state. For instance, the British government did not recognize the company as a successor state or any other players within the international space with its ability to control a specific region similar to other nations that were accorded equal status. Legitimacy is another characteristic the company did not possess that successfully prevented the company from being recognized as a successor state. The company depended on its generated profits, which needed to be improved to sustain the form and population. Since it was established under the laws and regulations of the British government and was also dissolved using similar status may point out that the company had not attained a sovereign authority.
In conclusion, the proponents of the notion that the British East India Company had become a successor state that the company had vast control over significant portions of India and exerted a crucial political and economic influence within the region. They pegged their argument that the royal charter and the military prowess of the company contributed to the company’s operation as an independent state. In addition, the company also had control based on the territories and governance systems through the local rulers and land grants to the company executives. However, the arguments claim that the company had not attained the status of a successor state because it was based on commercial enterprise with a primary motive of making profits and trading while also needing the legal mandate to create a shape.
Bibliography
BBC News. “British Colonialism in India – the British Empire – KS3 History – Homework Help for Year 7, 8 and 9. – BBC Bitesize.” BBC News. BBC, April 5, 2022. https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/topics/z7kvf82/articles/zx8sf82.
The Lawyers & Jurists. “The Term State Succession under International Law Signifies the Transmission of the Rights and Obligations of One State to Another in Consequence of Territorial Sovereignty’.” The Lawyers & Jurists, 2013. https://www.lawyersnjurists.com/article/the-term-state-succession-under-international-law-signifies-the-transmission-of-the-rights-and-obligations-of-one-state-to-another-in-consequence-of-territorial-sovereignty/.
History.com. “Charter Granted to the East India Company.” History.com. A&E Television Networks, July 21, 2010. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/charter-granted-to-the-east-india-company.
[1] BBC News, “British Colonialism in India – the British Empire – KS3 History – Homework Help for Year 7, 8 and 9. – BBC Bitesize,” BBC News (BBC, April 5, 2022), https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/topics/z7kvf82/articles/zx8sf82.
[2] BBC News
[3] The Lawyers & Jurists, “The Term State Succession under International Law Signifies the Transmission of the Rights and Obligations of One State to Another in Consequence of Territorial Sovereignty’,” The Lawyers & Jurists, 2013, https://www.lawyersnjurists.com/article/the-term-state-succession-under-international-law-signifies-the-transmission-of-the-rights-and-obligations-of-one-state-to-another-in-consequence-of-territorial-sovereignty/.
[4] East India Company
[5] History.com, “Charter Granted to the East India Company,” History.com (A&E Television Networks, July 21, 2010), https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/charter-granted-to-the-east-india-company.
[6] BBC News
write