CHAPTgR SIX Working of th« Slnancial Syitwi in tlM Naratha Confiedaraey 1 8 5 chapter s i x rh« Working of the Financial S y s f m in the Maratha Confederacyt A Stxidy of Financial Relaticaras The Maratha Sardars and the Peshwa had* as already noted, different items of income and evolved an intricate system of sharing the income* It is intended to stw3y the working of the sharing of the inccxne ainoncr the Peshwa and different Maratha sarfars# and to find out whether or not f^arathas had evolved any system for it. In view of the ccxistant internal conflicts among the Marathas and the general disturbed condition of the countr^^one should expect cmly a working system with variations at different places* To understand the operation of such a system the Dabhade and the Gaikwad in Gujrat and Holkar# Shinde and Pawar in what the Marathas called as the Hindustan have been selected. (A) Gujrat I . Financial Relaticais Between Dabhade and the Peshwa It was Khanderao Dabhade, who in the first quarter of the eighteenth century had established the ccmtrol of the Marathas in Gujrat by incessant attacks* As a result of this# Gujrat, in additicMi to Baglan, was regarded as the separate s{:^ere of 1 8 6 senapatl Dabhade^* The Internal conflicts in the Mughal Eir-plre and the entry of energetic ancJ ambitious Peshwa Bajirao, however, complicated the situaticm* Saxbulandkhan* the ^ qovemor of Gujrat, in 1726, gave the grant of chauth to the S Next year the Governor made an agreement with th«^ /^^^P^shwa that the tiiautdh and gardeshmukhi/ WBUlJ«fec granted to ' hlm,y provided he ousted Kanthaji Xadam Bande and Pilaji 3 Gaikwad from Gujrat. Udaji Pawar, a sardar of the Peshwa, could not oust Kadam Bande and Gaikwad from the province* The Chauth and isardeshmukhi# therefore# w r e granted to 4 them by the governor* £»hahu gave official sancticm to this change by giving half the share of the income from Gujrat held by Chiroaji ^ppa cm'behalf of the Peshwa to Senapati Dabhade#^/Thus by the end of 1728, both the Mughal Subhedar / ’\ j and the Chhatrapati had given penrlssicxi to the Senapati ? and his two assistants — Kadam Bande and Gaikwad to collect Chauth and &ardeshmukhi from Gujrat* When the position of the Senapati had officially become secure both from Delhi and Satara, Chimaji Appa invaded the province in 1729 Decenber. He attacked Kadam Bande, the agent of the Senapati, at Pawagad and acquired the fort*® Petlad T and Dholka were plundered 22 March 1730* And on the t- / ' ^ ve#y-«e*fc--day the Mughal Subhedar concluded an agreement with Chimaji.® I\ » • 1 8 7 • According to the agreement, the Peshwa gained (1) Sardesh* mukhi or 1 0 per cent of the whole revenue# both of the land and customs, (2) Chauth or cme*fourth of whole collections of the land and the customs, and (3) five per cent of the revenues of the city of Ahinedabad* The district of Surat was, however, to be ex«npt from both Chauth and Sardesiwukhi* Chimaji Appa returned to Poona on 8 July 1730 and then went to iftnbraj to inform the Qihatrapati of the agreemeit with Sarbulandkhan* Grant Duff says that in order to pacify the benapati the ntokajia of Gujrat and a part of ^rdeshmukhi 9 were assigned to the Senapati* The Peshwa, it appears, opened negotiatiCMis directly with the Senapati to share their conquests in Malwa and Gujrat* The senapati, however, on the basis of the order of the Chhatrapati declined for such an arrangement, as Shahu had given Malwa to the Peshwa and Gujrat to the Senapati as their respective spheres*^® Even Shahu scrupulously maintained this division of the spheres of activity as is evident from his reprimands of Dabhade on 2 1 Way 1728 for collecting mcviey from MalwaV^ This was the 12 consistent policy of both Khanderao and Trimbakrao Dabhade* Thus the Senapati was following the authority of the Chhatrapati* And, as is evident from the invasicwi of Chimaji Appa, the Peshwa was relying upon the power of his military i s s strength rather than the arrangements made by the head of the state. These activities of the Peshwa and his brother threw Dabhade in the arins of the Nlaan?.^^ There were merely rumours about Shahu seriously thinking of assigning the collection of the dues to the Peshwa.The Chhatrapati, as a matter of fact, transferred one»half mokasa of Gujrat from Chimaji Appa to Senapatl Trimbakrao Dabhade and the remaining half was given to his brother Yashwantrao Dabhade. The Peshwa was ordered not to Interfere in the province of Gujrat. Chimaji Appa, In defiance to orders of Shahu, made again another pact with Abhay Singh* the new governor of Gujrat in February 1731» The Peshwa agreed to accept thirteen lacs in lieu of Chauth. Of these, Chimaji received six lacs In cash; the remainder were to be received after he left the province* Chimaji agreed to expel Pilajl and Kanthajl from Gujrat.For the execution of the agreementigr< necessary orders 17 were issued by the Mughal officials* The Peshwa and his brother# therefore, made agreements with the Mughal officials and did not respect the agreements made by their own Chhatrapati. Dabhade and Bajirao, theirefore, to protect their conflicting claims# took to arms by the end 0 of the year resulting ultimately in the battle of DabhAl, in 1 8 9 which Trlntoakrao Dabhade, on April 1, 1731, was defeated and killed. After the battle, Chimajl Appa is reporte-3 to have said that they killed Dabhade and the Maharaja (i*e* Shahu) IB could do no harm to them. Unabai Dabhade, the widow of the slain general, by her leadership and vigour and the assistance of the Gaikwads, regained ehauth and Sardeshmukhi of Gujrat* The relaticHiship betwcien the Chhatrapati, the Peshwa, the Senapati and the other Maratha sardars and their conflict» ing interests vividly describe the nature of the l-laratTia State, in which the Chhatrapati was losing his pov;er and position, due to the defiant attitude of Peshwa Bajirao and Chimaji Appa* II* Financial Relations Between Gaikwad and the Peshwa With the Gaikwad8 coming into prominence in Gujrat we can gain some information about the inccxne of Gujrat* The Gaikwads collected a number of dues in Gujrat and these became a source of conflict among the Maratha sardars and the Peshwa. The Peshwa received from the Gaik^^ad naaar for the title r o T ^ n a Wiaskhel and galabadi which was a fixed amount to be paid to the Peshwa. These payments to the Peshwa had to be made by the Gaikwad only with the loans from the bankers* All these aspects are intended to be stiKlied here* 1 9 0 1. Income From Gujrat « The income of Damaji Gaikwad from Gujrat during the period of throe years i«e* 1751-*52 to 1753-*54 can be known 19 from a document called hlsheb sud band i.e* a docunent inquiring into the accounts* tVhlle the Income from the year 1751*^52 is shown as rupees 18,48,165 those for the next two years were rupees 40,25,126 and rupees 51,26,197. The income from Gujrat can also be ^ofi^erstood from two lamabandls which qive the revenue/ from India* In tlie first llst^® of the year 1789, the income from Gujrat is shown as 21 rupees 89,62,803; in the other belonging to the year 1803-04, the income is indicated as rupees 1,45,24,850* The difference between the t%#o figures perhaps indicates that the first figure indicates the total revenue from Gujrat while the second denotes the inccane of the Peshwa 22 from the province. According to another vadi , the Income from the m ^a^s in Gujrat was explained to the Pesh%« by Damaji Gaikwad in 1758-59; the income for six years — from 1753-54 to 1758-59 — was shown as rupees 2,58,00,000* The annual income from the yMt» by calculation, becomes rupees 4 3 , 0 0 , 0 0 0 , which is approximately half of the figure given in the jamabandl of the year 1789. 1 9 1 2* Collecticm of Quest A Source of Conflict Ainong th» Marathaa The Marathas In the region under tlwir occupatl<»i collected a number of dues* The dues were collected by officials of different Haratha authorities and the officials also made unauthorised collecticais* The irregularities of collection affected the relaticaiship ainong the Karatha sardars and the Peshwa* How the collection of dues in Gujrat operated in the eighteenth century will throw light cm this aspect* The Oaikwads, as noted earlier* collected ghasdana and nmlukhgiri* They also collected sukadiiv CQllestlpn, of The Gaikwads used to collect JSiikadi from the ^akatdars in Gujrat* Sukadi, meaning sweetmeat* was an amot^nt of m<xiey collected frwn the officials like ^katdars or kamavisdars in a paragana* The amount differed from a paragana to paragana. Sayajirao Gaikwad* on 27 Decanber, 1769, wrote eighteen letters^^ to the officials in the different paraganas in prant Gujrat« The largest amount «i this account was collected from Barodai while Vitthal Pandurang Jakatdar was ordered to send rupees 9, OCX), Narbheram Desai was asked to supply rupees 30,000. Trimbak Mukund from the city of Ahmedabad and Jiwaji Shamraj of paragana Sor were each asked to send rupees 15,000. Sayajirao Gaikwad asked rupees 5,000 1 9 2 and rupees 2,000 from the paraganas of Petlad and Dhavalke* Still smaller amounts were ordered from the officials of other paraganas* When Raghunathrao in his caiflict with the Barbhai \ entered Gujrat, he sent his raxits)to different mahals for the 24 collection of the Sukadi and harassed the kantavisdars* Fat^hsingrao Gaikwad felt that Raghunathrao in financial difficulty must have sent his swars for the collection of Sukadiy he, therefore, ordered his officials in the paragana to pay the horsemen of Raghunathrao in proportiai to the