History of Salt Management in Rajputana is very interesting. It played an important role in economy of princely states.
In Rajasthan salt has been lavishly provided by nature and spread out in salt-impregnated lakes and marshes. Geologically the age of salt is still undecided.[1]
Salt in Rajputana has been manufactured from times immemorial. Besides Sambhar lake, other sources of salt deposits were at Didwana, Pachpadra, Phalodi, Luni tract (all in erstwhile state of Jodhpur), Kuchor-Rew as a area (in old Jaipur state), Bharatpur stripe (in the erstwhile Bharatpur state) and Lunkaransar Tal (in old Bikaner State).
All these names indicate that salt is lying scattered in Rajasthan. The large quantity yielding salt works, viz., Sambhar, Didwana, Luni tract, Pachpadra source were worked out during the period of our study, and the uneconomic sources were left out.[2]
Trade Marts
The Sambhar salt (called sambhari) found its market in Rajputana and in the regions now called Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and Madhya Pradesh in the Mughal period.[3] The Pachpadra salt, called Kausia, was favoured in the markets of the erstwhile Jodhpur state and Central India. It was supplied through agencies of contractors to Nasirabad, Beawar, Rohera, Mandsaur, Jaora, Ujjain, Mhow, Khandwa, Harda, Seoni, Sohag- pur and Ratlam etc.[4]
The Didwana salt (called Dindu) found its largest number of consumers in some parts of Rajputana viz., in the areas of Jodhpur State and the Bikaner State and the area now called the Punjab and Haryana. By road it was supplied to Bhiwani, Hissar, Balsamand, Sirsa, the Patiala State,[5] Muzaffarnagar and Saharanpur.[6]
The British administration opened depots at Delhi, Agra, Pali, Neemuch besides the depots at the places of manufacture. A depot was opened at Erinpura from which the salt from Pachpadra used to be transported to other places.
The Erinpura depot was removed in 1881 to Bithura and then to Pali whence the salt was carried to Jubbulpore and other places in Central Provinces. The Delhi depot was opened on 17th March 1882, “Pali was the entrepot for the eastern and western regions where the production of India, Kashmir and China were interchanged for those of Europe, Africa, Persia and Arabia”.[7]
Tod writes in his Annals, “The Salt lakes at Pachpadra, Didwana and Sambharare mines of wealh, and their product is exported over the greater part of Hindustan”.[8]
Mode of Transport
Till the opening of the railways, salt was carried by the Banjaras from one place to another through packoxen moving six or eight miles a day.[9]
Tod noted that this method employed thousands of hands and was almost entirely in the hands of the Banjaras who exported to every region of Hindusthan, from the Indus to the Ganges.[10] after the opening of railways, it was carried to all its markets and depots in less time and more economically than compared to the situation in the sixties of the nineteenth century.[11]
Salt Monopoly
Salt has been always sold to the consumer only after being subjected to some duty. “Under the Mohammadan rule a revenue was realized from salt by means of imports on the privilege of manufacture and by duties on its transportation from the places of manufacture to the interior of the country. The British, not slow to take benefit, tried to monopolize the trade in salt.
In 1765-67 Lord Clive effected the monopoly of the manufacture and sale of salt with the object of securing half of the earned revenue for the Company and the remaining half for the servants of the Company.[12]
This policy was discontinued in 1772 when the right to manufacture salt was farmed out by Government to private individuals, only to be abandoned after eight years. In 1780, Warren Hastings introduced a system to control the manufacture and sale of salt by the servants of Company.
As per agreement, the manufacture was done by the Mulanghis at the different places of manufacture. The sale price to merchants was fixed @ Rs. 2/- per maund, but the Company got it at the price ranging between Annas eight to Annas fourteen and added Rs. 1/2/- to Rs. 1/8/- as duty to sell it to merchants at Rs. 2/- per maund.[13]
For the protection of revenue, a preventive system was adopted and a double line of chokis was established along the frontier of British territory. This system worked well, however, with some changes upto 1862.
The customs line of choki6s, starting from Ballab garh (in the then Delhi District), ran along the northern border of the then Jhajjar territory by Hansi, Hissar, Sirsa to Fazilka to tax the Rajputana salt entering the then cis-Sutlej districts.[14]
During 1835 to 1844 the Sambhar lake was Administered by the British, [15] after the Shekhawati affair. In 1856, Mr. Vansittart, the then Commissioner of Customs, probably comprehending the considerable revenue prospects of the salt trade, suggested to the Government to secure the control of the salt sources of all the states by negotiating ‘commercial treaties’ with them, so as to en able the Government to enforce a regulated system of excise. Colonel Bruce reported on the prospects of doubling the British revenues after commercial treaties with the Rajput states.[16]
The Bsitish administration decided to take the salt sources on lease from the rulers of the Indian states including the states of Rajputana. Firstly, it would lessen the burden on the finances caused by the main tenance of a customs-line extending for nearly 25000 miles.[17] Secondly, the trade in salt would pay freight to railways. Thirdly, the interests of the Government would be better safeguarded, as the trade in salt would be regulated uniformly.[18]
The rulers of the Indian States, owning the salt sources, entered into commercial relationship with the British Government. This policy was inaugurated by the lease of the Sambhar lake in 1869-70, granted to the British Government by the rulers of Jodhpur[19] and Jaipur.[20]
The manufacture of salt in the said states was closed and compensation was to be given to them to make good the loss of revenue previously realized by the rulers. In Ajmer-Merwara also it was decided to pay compensation to the Istamarars for the closures of Salt works on their estates.[21]
Thus, the states and their jagirdars lost their rights to manufacture salt in their own territories or estates, and were required to buy salt from the Salt administration. The salt monopoly of Rajputana went totally in the hands of British by 1882.
The sums paid under these treaties to the Darbars, including the payments made for the Sambhar lake, amounted to nearly thirty lakhs of rupees a year.[22] By 1878, besides the Sambhar lake, Pachpadra, Didwana, Phalodi and the Luni Salt track came under the British administration.
Of these the Phalodi source and the Luni tract were closed in 1887-88 and 1897-98 respectively as they proved unprofitable. The Kuchor-Rew as a source (in the erstwhile Jaipur State could not, however, be worked out, after taking it over on lease by the British in 1878,[23] and thence remained closed.
after these agreements the British Government monopolised the manufacture and sale of salt in its own hands and maintained a uniformity in levying the duty the customs line was abolished in 1879.[24] The heavy duty imposed by the British Government on salt was criticized many times but it maintained that the salt duty was “the only obligatory tax paid by the masses” to treasury,[25] and therefore, did not lower it.
Rates of Duty on Salt
The British Management, during 1843 to 1903, charged the duty on Salt varying from Rs. 1/8/- to Rs. 2/8/- per maund,[26]
Salt Manufactured in Rajputana
after 1870 the three works where salt had been manufactured were Sambhar, Didwana and Pachpadra sources. In 1905-06 the total quantity extracted was 36, 67, 160 tons of salt since 1870 (Sambhar lake) and 4, 13, 468 tons since 1878 (Pachpadra), Didwana, owing to the absence of railway connections, was unable to render effective assistance.[27] all the salt sources in Rajputana yielded an average gain of Rs. 42, 21, 137/8/- per year.
REFERENCES
[1] The Gazetteer of India, Indian Union, Vol. I, 1965, p. 158.
[2] K. L. Mod, A study Of Salt Management In Rajputana (From 1869 to 1900A. D.), Proceedings of Rajasthan History Congress, 1968, pp.178-181.
[3] Moreland, India at the death of Akbar, an Economic Study, Delhi, 1962, pp. 143 44.
[4] Administrative reports, fot the year 1880-81, p. 23.
[5] Administrative reports, for the year 1882-83, p. 24.
[6] Watt, a Dictionary of Economic Products of India, Vol. VI, Part II (1893), p. 413.
[7] Tod, Annals And Antiquities of Rajasthan, Vol. II, p. 1107.
[8] Tod, op cit., p. 1107.
[9] Moreland, op. cit., p. 227.
[10] Tod, op. cit., p. 1117.
[11] K. L. Mod, A study Of Salt Management In Rajputana (From 1869 to 1900A. D.), Proceedings of Rajasthan History Congress, 1968, pp.178-181.
[12] Manual of the Northern India Salt Revenue Department, Vol. I (Calcutta, 1906), p. 1.
[13] Manual, op. cit., p. 2.
[14] Ibid., p. 9.
[15] The lake passed into the possession of the British order to repay itself a portion of the expense incurred in restoring order in Shekhawati and the neighbouring districts. See Erskine, The Western Rajputana States and the Bikaner Agency, 1909, p. 216.
[16] Ibid., p. 14.
[17] Imperial Gazetteer of India, the Indian Empire, Vol. IV, 1907, 00.247-52. This customs-liner an from Torbela, near Attock on the Indus to the Sambhalpur district of Bengal, and was being guarded by an army of nearly thirteen thousand officers and men. It consisted of huge cactus hedge supplemented by stone-walls and ditches.
[18] K. L. Mod, A study Of Salt Management In Rajputana (From 1869 to 1900A. D.), Proceedings of Rajasthan History Congress, 1968, pp.178-181.
[19] Aitchison, a Collection of Treaties, Engagements and Sanads, Vol. III., (1932), pp. 147-51.
[20] Ibid., pp. 79-81.
[21] Ibid., p. 7, Rs. 4178 were being paid annually to the Istamarars.
[22] Manual, op. cit., p. 18; cf. Aitchison, op. cit., pp. 4-7.
[23] Manual, op. cit., p. 19.
[24] Imperial Gazetteer of India, Vol. IV, pp. 247-52.
[25] Kaye: The administration in the East India Company, pp. 665-80. also Imperial Gazetteer of India, IV, pp. 161, and 247-52. 9.
[26] Dictionary, op. cit., p. 421; Handbook of Commercial Information of India, pp. 23-24.
[27] Administrative Reports, 1905-06, p. 26; 1899-1900, p. 16.
