The British East India Company was an essential part of Britain’s growing influence throughout the world and later, its transformation into a strong economic nation. Founded in 1600 with the royal seal of approval from Queen Elizabeth I, the company built boats for its first voyages to the East Indies a year later. Over the course of time, as the company’s profits increased and its value and prestige grew, it became a large political force and a vital piece of the British economy. The British East India Company was a very important piece of developing systems of commerce and trade today. (?)
Queen Elizabeth I signed off on trade because it would increase the amount of interactions between Britain and other countries and believed it could greatly benefit the country itself in the long run. This shows that even Queen Elizabeth I was willing to expand the borders of England and make it a more prosperous, profitable country by taking a risk with a company that might have failed. The British East India Company, at first, started out as a small enterprise with the goal to bypass eastern ...
It was expected to result in a favorable balance of trade, with imports not exceeding exports. The significance of this term is that this system allowed gold and silver to flow into England, bringing economic expansion. As a result, these mercantile policies laid the ground for overseas colonization and allowed England to rise as a challenge to Spanish power in the New World.
The East India Company enjoyed the exclusive legal right – a privilege granted by the British government – to import products from the Far East into Britain. Chinese tea, which was said to be more valuable than gold, was the company’s most lucrative commodity, accounting for over 90 percent of its commercial profits.
Trade was a vital part of the economy of both England and the British colonies. The colonies would provide a majority of raw materials that would be shipped to England where then they would process raw materials into goods and sell them at markets provided by the colonies. Within this system both England and the colonies depended on each other for commerce. To further enforce this system on their oversees empire England enacted the Navigation Laws. In 1650 the first of these laws was aimed at keeping trade between the colonies limited only to their mother country, England. The law restricted trade of such shippers as the Dutch, by stating all goods must be transported on English vessels to or from the colonies. This helped keep money within British control, but also increased both England’s and the colonies’ merchant marine. Further laws were passed, but none that imposed strict regulations on the colonies. In fact the colonies received advantages from the mercantile system of England. As colonies of England they had the rights of Englishmen. They also had some opportunities of self-government. As compared economically to the average Englishmen of the time, the average American colonist was more often better off. In some markets, such as tobacco, the colonies had great advantages. Although not allowed to trade tobacco with any other country; they were guaranteed a monopoly on the English market. One of the major advantages of British imperialism was the protection supplied by the British army. With the strong soldiers providing defense against natives and other inter colonial disputes and the mighty British navy protecting their commerce on the seas; the colonies benefited from great advantages provided by their oversees “rulers';.
British Imperialism in India and China Imperialism is the domination of a weaker country by a stronger country. For instance, Britain dominated India and China in the mid 1880s to the beginning of the 20th century. Imperialism has had both a positive and negative effect on the countries involved. Britain was imperialistic for many reasons, it could dominate because it had the technology and power to do so.
But this changed when William Pitt became British Prime Minister. He imposed a “free trade policy”, which destroyed Ireland’s new industries, particularly linens, by eliminating independent Irish shipping. A condition of “Free trade” was that Ireland should not trade with any country where trading would clash with the interests of the East India Company; England’s mightiest corporation, who were heavily involved particularly in the lucrative trade with India. This was typical of the British belief in protectionist economics. The role of parliament was to protect the interests of the powerful few who effectively pay rolled the government by their industry and profits against the pligh... ...
Though it seems that British policy may have stifled trade in the Atlantic colonies by regulating trade and dividing territories from Canada to the islands of the Caribbean, It is more likely that the policies helped more than hurt American trade. America directly benefited from the establishment of Jamestown, even though the Virginia Company was a near failure. The Massachusetts Bay colony provided a place for puritans to settle. When the Navigation Acts were imposed upon the early colonists, along with the writs of assistance and the various taxes that Great Britain thought were necessary, the colonists mostly ignored them. The Navigation Acts didn’t prevent smuggling, and was more likely a symbolic gesture. By the end of the French and Indian War, America was strong, even though the war cost over £2 million.
Britain’s restrictive trade policies were one of several reasons why the colonists were justified in breaking away from their mother country. Their policies regulated all trade, ruining their economic opportunity. The greediness of Great Britain did not allow for the economy of the colonies to flourish. In “Causes of the American Discontents,” published in 1768, Benjamin Franklin states, “these people are not content with making a monopoly of us, forbidding us to trade with any other country of Europe and compelling us to buy everything of them… Thus they get all our money from us by trade, and every profit...” As Franklin explained, the colonies were forbidden to trade with anyone else besides England. Britain took economic advantage of the colonies, essentially taking money from their own people.
Undoubtedly the British drove the economy with trade, they created commerce by using the navy as a well-protected and highly effective transoceanic transportation company.
Some believe that India’s non-participation in the Industrial Revolution was due to British colonization. At the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, India had clout as a world leader in cotton textiles (Majumdar 62). The British plundering subsequently lead to the destruction of the textile industry, and eventually the economy. It is believed that much of the money necessary to the Industrial Revolution was obtained by the looting of India. After all, India had the three things necessary to start an endeavor such as this: raw materials, wealth, and a market. The Industrial Revolution itself began only a few years after the colonization of India (Majumdar 62). In the end, India was unable to participate in the Industrial Revolution. According to Majumdar, “Consequences of not being able to participate in the Industrial Revolution included not democratizing invention and the democratization of markets”. India’s own industrial revolution began after Independence in 1947, wh...
One facet of this unique system involved the numerous economic differences between England and the colonies. The English government subscribed to the economic theory of mercantilism, which demanded that the individual subordinate his economic activity to the interests of the state (Text, 49). In order to promote mercantilism in all her colonies, Great Britain passed the Navigation Acts in 1651, which controlled the output of British holdings by subsidizing. Under the Navigation Acts, each holding was assigned a product, and the Crown dictated the quantity to be produced. The West Indies, for example, were assigned sugar production and any other colony exporting sugar would face stiff penalties (Text, 50). This was done in order to ensure the economic prosperity of King Charles II, but it also served to restrict economic freedom. The geographical layout of the American colonies made mercantilism impractical there. The cit...
Marshall, Peter. "The British Presence in India in the 18th Century." BBC News. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/empire_seapower/east_india_01.shtml (accessed April 4, 2014).
Imperialism in India British imperialism in India had many positive and negative effects on both the mother country, Britain and the colony, India. Many people would argue which effects were more prominent in these countries, and some would agree that they were equal. But in both cases, there were actually both. In India, the British colonization had more positive effects than negative. For instance, when the British colonized India they built 40,000 miles of railroad and 70,000 miles of paved roadway.
Throughout the years Britain had always tried to use the Chinese markets to their advantage. This is what was seen as the biggest and only cause towards starting the First Opium War. Although the British were gaining a profit from selling their own goods to Chinese consumers, they were not making enough to counter the massive amount of spending they were doing on Chines... ... middle of paper ... ...
"All the leadership had spent their early years in England. They were influenced by British thought, British ideas, that is why our leaders were always telling the British "How can you do these things? They're against your own basic values.". We had no hatred, in fact it was the other way round - it was their values that made us revolt." -Aruna Asaf Ali, a leader of the Indian National Congress. (Masani, quoted in Wood, 32, 1989)
With major control over India, the British used a combination of firepower & guile to consolidate their power over the country by expanding from their base areas along the coast into the interior (Duiker 31). Some territories were also taken over the privately run East India Company, which at the time was given authority to administer Asian territories under British occupation, while others were ruled by local maharajas (Duiker 31). British governance brought order and stability to a society that had recently been wrecked by the wars from the different empires (Duiker 31).