48.7.1 British Aims and Metropolitan Attitudes (c.1730–1773)

OCR Specification focus:
‘Attitude and ambitions of the British Crown and Parliament toward India, c.1730–1773.’

The mid-eighteenth century was pivotal in shaping Britain’s imperial relationship with India. The Crown and Parliament’s ambitions reveal the fusion of political, economic and strategic considerations.

The Context of British Expansion into India

By c.1730, Britain was emerging as a significant trading and naval power. The East India Company (EIC), a chartered trading company, was the primary vehicle for Britain’s involvement in India. Originally focused on commerce, particularly in textiles and spices, the Company gradually became entangled in local politics and military affairs.

The Crown and Parliament initially exercised a hands-off approach, granting the Company autonomy through its royal charter. However, as India’s economic value grew and European rivalries intensified, metropolitan attitudes shifted. The question of control, regulation and profit became central to Britain’s imperial vision.

Crown and Parliamentary Attitudes

The Crown’s Role

The monarchy’s involvement in Indian affairs during this period was largely indirect. The Crown conferred legitimacy upon the East India Company through royal charters, allowing it to govern and wage war in the Crown’s name.

This meant that while monarchs benefited from prestige and wealth, responsibility for day-to-day governance remained with the Company.
The Crown, however, retained interest in the symbolic authority over overseas dominions, which tied into the wider prestige of empire.

Parliament’s Increasing Concern

Parliament’s attitude evolved significantly between 1730 and 1773:

In the early period, MPs were content to let the EIC pursue profits with minimal interference.
As reports of corruption, military campaigns, and vast personal fortunes (so-called “nabobs”) reached Britain, scrutiny increased.
By the 1770s, Parliament was debating the morality, sustainability, and political risks of leaving India in the hands of a private company.

A labelled map of European settlements in India, 1501–1739, highlighting British bases alongside rival French, Dutch and Portuguese posts. It illustrates why securing ports such as Calcutta and Madras became central to British strategy. The date range slightly precedes 1773 but accurately frames the competitive environment shaping British metropolitan attitudes. Source

This growing concern culminated in the Regulating Act of 1773, the first major attempt by Parliament to assert direct oversight over the Company’s activities.

British Ambitions in India

Economic Goals

Britain’s ambitions were fundamentally shaped by economic imperatives. The Crown and Parliament shared an interest in securing wealth from India’s trade.

Textiles: India was a leading exporter of fine cottons and silks, vital to British merchants.
Spices and raw materials: These provided lucrative markets and underpinned Britain’s growing commercial power.
Revenue extraction: As the Company gained territorial control, collecting land taxes became central to Britain’s economic ambitions.

Strategic Objectives

Britain’s ambitions were not solely commercial. The Crown and Parliament also recognised the strategic importance of India.

India was a potential counterweight to French influence in Asia.
Ports such as Calcutta and Madras offered bases for naval and commercial dominance in the Indian Ocean.
India’s resources strengthened Britain’s position in the wider balance of power.

Political and Imperial Aspirations

The gradual shift from trade to governance reflected deeper ambitions:

The establishment of Company armies and alliances with Indian rulers indicated Britain’s intent to wield political influence.
Parliament began to see India not only as a source of wealth but as a territory whose governance reflected directly on Britain’s international reputation.
By 1773, the view had emerged that imperial oversight was essential for both stability in India and Britain’s domestic politics.

Shifting Metropolitan Perceptions

Public Debate and Criticism

The eighteenth century witnessed increasing public debate in Britain over the morality and consequences of imperialism in India.

Critics denounced the greed and corruption of Company officials.
Newspapers and pamphlets described the enormous fortunes repatriated by nabobs, creating resentment and fears of undue influence on British politics.

Enlightenment Thought and Critiques of Empire

The Enlightenment also shaped metropolitan attitudes:

Some thinkers argued that commerce could be a civilising force, justifying Britain’s presence in India.
Others condemned exploitation and warned that misrule would damage Britain’s reputation and future prosperity.

Key Turning Point: The Regulating Act of 1773

The Regulating Act reflected the culmination of metropolitan attitudes between 1730 and 1773. Its significance was twofold:

It asserted Parliamentary sovereignty over the Company by introducing a governor-general in Bengal and requiring more accountability.
It recognised that India had shifted from being a commercial venture to a quasi-territorial possession requiring political oversight.

An early nineteenth-century engraving of East India House (London), the Company’s metropolitan centre of decision-making. Although engraved in 1820, it represents the headquarters that existed from 1729, anchoring debates over Company power that culminated in state regulation. Extra detail beyond the syllabus: later façade details reflect post-1773 modifications, but the image remains an accurate representation of the institution’s London base. Source

Regulating Act of 1773: The first piece of major legislation passed by Parliament to regulate the East India Company, introducing direct state oversight of Indian affairs.

The Act set a precedent for later interventions, highlighting how metropolitan attitudes had evolved from indifference to direct involvement.

Warren Hastings, depicted in a 1795 stipple engraving (after George Stubbs), served as the first Governor-General of Bengal under the Regulating Act’s new framework. The portrait exemplifies the Act’s shift from private to state-supervised governance. Extra detail beyond the syllabus: the print post-dates 1773 but accurately portrays the officeholder tied to the Act. Source

Aims and Attitudes

To consolidate, Britain’s aims and metropolitan attitudes towards India between 1730 and 1773 can be categorised as:

Economic: Securing profits from trade and revenue.
Strategic: Protecting routes, ports and naval strength.
Political: Transitioning from indirect to direct influence through parliamentary control.
Symbolic: Enhancing imperial prestige and Britain’s place in global power politics.

These aims reflected not only practical concerns but also the changing perceptions of empire’s role in Britain’s identity and governance.

FAQ

By the 1770s, a steady flow of letters, pamphlets and Company documents reached Britain, detailing both commercial profits and abuses of power.

Sensationalised accounts of corruption, extortion, and extravagant lifestyles of Company servants — the “nabobs” — shocked public opinion. These reports created pressure within Parliament to examine whether private commercial interests could responsibly manage territories of such scale and importance.

Moral debates increasingly influenced how India was discussed in Britain.

Critics claimed that the Company’s pursuit of wealth undermined British values of fairness and justice.
The exploitation of Indian rulers and peasants was contrasted with ideals of good governance at home.
Such arguments fed into Enlightenment critiques of empire, pressing Parliament to impose regulation to align imperial conduct with Britain’s self-image as a civilised power.

The creation of the Governor-General position responded to a need for coherence.

Previously, Company officials in Bengal, Madras and Bombay acted semi-independently, often making conflicting alliances and policies. By centralising authority under a Governor-General, Britain hoped to impose consistency, reduce corruption, and ensure metropolitan oversight had a clear point of contact in India.

India’s value increased because it became a frontline in European competition.

The French had strong positions in southern India, threatening British trade.
Parliament feared that unchecked Company rule might allow rivals to exploit weaknesses.
Maintaining naval bases and territorial influence in India was thus linked to Britain’s wider ambition to dominate global trade routes.

By the early 1770s, the East India Company faced serious financial crises, despite its territorial acquisitions.

Falling revenues, rising military costs, and mismanagement forced the Company to seek loans from the government. This reliance on state support convinced Parliament that direct oversight was essential. It marked a turning point in metropolitan attitudes, as the Company’s failure to self-regulate undermined the justification for its autonomy.

Practice Questions

Question 1 (2 marks):
What was the significance of the Regulating Act of 1773 in Britain’s involvement in India?

Mark Scheme:

1 mark for identifying that the Act represented the first major intervention by Parliament in the East India Company’s affairs.
1 mark for explaining that it introduced the office of Governor-General in Bengal, increasing direct oversight of Company activities.

Question 2 (5 marks):
Explain two reasons why Parliament’s attitude towards the East India Company changed between 1730 and 1773.