4.3.2. What Happened to Weavers?

The consolidation of East India Company power after the 1760s did not initially lead to a decline in textile exports from India. British cotton industries had not yet expanded and Indian fine textiles were in great demand in Europe. So the company was keen on expanding textile exports from India.

After the East India Company gained power, they didn't stop the export of textiles from India. Instead, the demand for Indian fine textiles in Europe was high, mainly because British cotton production hadn't yet taken off. This created an opportunity for Indian weavers to continue exporting their products.

Think of how a popular restaurant might still thrive even when the local market is tough. If people love their food and it’s in demand, they can keep serving customers while others might struggle.

Once the East India Company established political power, it could assert a monopoly right to trade. It proceeded to develop a system of management and control that would eliminate competition, control costs, and ensure regular supplies of cotton and silk goods. This it did through a series of steps.

When the East India Company established its control, it aimed to eliminate competition by controlling the supply of textiles. They did this by appointing 'gomasthas' to oversee weavers, ensuring that they only sold their products to the Company, and giving the weavers loans to keep them tied to the Company’s system.

Imagine a school where a new principal wants to control all the student activities. They might appoint teachers to oversee clubs, ensuring that students can only join the clubs they approve, making it difficult for students to create their own groups.

Soon, however, in many weaving villages there were reports of clashes between weavers and gomasthas. Earlier supply merchants had very often lived within the weaving villages and had a close relationship with the weavers, looking after their needs and helping them in times of crisis. The new gomasthas were outsiders, with no long-term social link with the village.

As the East India Company's gomasthas took over the roles of local traders, they imposed strict controls on weavers, enforcing harsh rules and often using force. This led to conflicts, as the weavers were used to a more friendly and cooperative relationship with local merchants.

Think about a friendly neighborhood shop where the owner knows all the locals and helps them out. Now imagine a new chain store comes in, with workers who don’t know the community and focus only on rules. That change can lead to frustration and conflict.

In many places in Carnatic and Bengal, weavers deserted villages and migrated, setting up looms in other villages where they had some family relation. Elsewhere, weavers along with the village traders revolted, opposing the Company and its officials.

Faced with oppression and low prices for their work, many weavers left their villages to find better opportunities elsewhere. In some areas, they banded together to resist the Company’s practices, showing that they were willing to fight for better conditions.

This is similar to how workers might strike or protest when treated unfairly at their jobs, standing together to demand better pay or conditions, or even leaving for jobs in another city where they feel valued.

By the beginning of the nineteenth century we see the beginning of a long decline of textile exports from India. In 1811-12 piece-goods accounted for 33 per cent of India’s exports; by 1850-51 it was no more than 3 per cent.

As British cotton industries advanced, the demand for Indian textiles started to drop. The figures show a dramatic decrease in India's textile exports, indicating a shift in the global market dynamics, where Indian products were pushed out by cheaper British-made goods.

Consider how local farmers might struggle to sell their produce once large corporations start offering cheaper, mass-produced foods. Over time, the smaller businesses can vanish if they can't compete with the larger entities.

As cotton industries developed in England, industrial groups began worrying about imports from other countries. They pressurised the government to impose import duties on cotton textiles so that Manchester goods could sell in Britain without facing any competition from outside.

To protect their own industry, British industrialists pushed for import duties on cotton goods coming into England. This created an unfavorable environment for Indian textiles, which could no longer compete effectively in their home markets due to artificially high prices on imported goods.

It’s like when a local bakery struggles because a big supermarket starts selling baked goods at a significantly lower price due to its scale and resources, prompting the local shop to close down.

Cotton weavers in India thus faced two problems at the same time: their export market collapsed, and the local market shrank, being glutted with Manchester imports. Produced by machines at lower costs, the imported cotton goods were so cheap that weavers could not easily compete with them.

Indian weavers were caught in a bind: the drop in export opportunities and the influx of cheaper British products made it impossible for them to sustain their livelihoods. They could not match the cheaper prices offered by machine-produced textiles from Britain.

Think about a small craftsperson trying to sell handmade goods. If a factory starts offering similar products for much less money, the artisan will struggle to sell their creations to consumers looking for the best deal.

By the 1860s, weavers faced a new problem. They could not get sufficient supply of raw cotton of good quality. When the American Civil War broke out and cotton supplies from the US were cut off, Britain turned to India.

Amidst rising demands due to external conflicts, weavers found themselves in a difficult position as the price for raw cotton soared, making their cost of production unmanageable. As Britain sought to increase raw cotton from Indian markets, it resulted in shortages for local weavers.

This situation resembles a local restaurant suddenly losing its supply of a key ingredient. If tomato prices soar due to a shortage, they can't keep making their popular dish, leading to increased prices or menu limitations for customers.

--