It was easier for rich Indians or poor Indians to live under british rule?

Answer 1

sort of like:

Following the Indian Rebellion of 1857, the Act for the Better Government of India (1858) made changes in the governance of India at three levels: in the imperial government in London, in the central government in Calcutta, and in the provincial governments in the presidencies (and later in the provinces).[15]

In London, it provided for a cabinet-level Secretary of State for India and a fifteen-member Council of India, whose members were required, as one prerequisite of membership, to have spent at least ten years in India and to have done so no more than ten years before.[16]Although the Secretary of State formulated the policy instructions to be communicated to India, he was required in most instances to consult the Council, but especially so in matters relating to spending of Indian revenues.[15] The Act envisaged a system of "double government" in which the Council ideally served both as a check on excesses in imperial policy-making and as a body of up-to-date expertise on India.[15] However, the Secretary of State also had special emergency powers that allowed him to make unilateral decisions, and, in reality, the Council's expertise was sometimes outdated.[17] From 1858 until 1947, twenty seven individuals served as Secretary of State for India and directed the India Office; these included: Sir Charles Wood (1859-1866), Marquess of Salisbury (1874-1878) (later Prime Minister of Britain), John Morley (1905-1910) (initiator of the Minto-Morley Reforms), E. S. Montagu (1917-1922) (an architect of theMontagu-Chelmsford reforms), and Frederick Pethick-Lawrence (1945-1947) (head of the 1946 Cabinet Mission to India). The size of the advisory Council was reduced over th