THIRD PERIOD: IMPERIAL GOVERNMENT.
1798-1836.
§1 Lord Mornington (Marquis of Wellesley), 1798-1805: last war
against Tippu, 1799. §2. Carnatic confiscated and annexed to Madras
Presidency. §3. Wellesley's scheme of a paramount power. §4. Second
Mahratta war: successes of Arthur Wellesley and Lake. §5.
Disastrous war with Holkar. §6. Return to non-intervention. §7.
Sepoy mutiny in Madras army. §8. Lord Minto, 1807-13: wars and
alliances against France. §9. Evils of non-intervention in
Rajputana: troubles in Nipal. §10. Lord Moira (Marquis of
Hastings), 1813-23: war with Nipal, 1814-15. §11. Revival of the
paramount power: Pindhari and Mahratta wars, 1817-18. §12. Lord
Amherst, 1823-28: wars with Burma and Bhurtpore. §13. Lord William
Bentinck, 1828-35; abolition of Suttee. §14. Suppression of Thugs.
§15. Administrative reforms. §16. North-West Provinces: Joint
Village Proprietors. §17. Madras and Bombay Presidencies: Ryotwari
Settlements. §18. Changes under the Charter of 1833. §18. Sir
Charles Metcalfe, 1835-36.
[Sidenote: French menaces, 1798.]
In 1798 British India was confronted on all sides by France or
Frenchmen. An army of sepoys, drilled and commanded by French officers,
was maintained by the Nizam in the Deccan. Another French officered army
was maintained by Sindia in Western Hindustan, between the Jumna and the
Ganges. Napoleon Buonaparte was invading Egypt, and threatening to
conquer the world.
[Sidenote: Asiatic aspirations of Napoleon.]
The successes and crimes of the French Revolution had filled Europe with
indignation and despair. Napoleon Buonaparte had risen, like another
Chenghiz Khan or Timour, to take the world by storm. He had driven the
British from Toulon, conquered Italy, wrested the Netherlands from
Austria, threatened to invade the British Isles, and then had landed in
Egypt, won the battle of the Pyramids, and proclaimed himself to be a
follower of the Prophet. Not a man in Europe or Asia could penetrate the
designs of the young Corsican. Alexander of Macedon had invaded Egypt as
a prelude to the conquest of Persia and India. Napoleon might follow in
his footsteps after the lapse of twenty-two centuries. He might restore
the Caliphat of Bagdad on the banks of the Tigris, or resuscitate the
sovereignty of the Great Mogul over Northern India, from the banks of
the Indus to the mouths of the Ganges.
[Sidenote: Tippu's alliance with France.]
§1. The first duty of Lord Mornington was to get rid of the French sepoy
battalions in the Deccan and Hindustan, and to provide for the defence
of India against France and Napoleon. Within three weeks of his landing
at Calcutta the note of alarm was sounded in Southern India. Tippu,
Sultan of Mysore, had formed a hostile alliance with France against
Great Britain. It appeared that Tippu had been groaning under his
humiliation by Lord Cornwallis, and burning to be revenged on the
British government. He hesitated to ally himself with the Mahrattas or
the Nizam, and coveted an alliance with a European power. Accordingly he
secretly sent emissaries to the French governor of Mauritius, to
conclude a treaty with France and Napoleon against Great Britain. The
idea fired the imagination of the French at Mauritius, and the fact of
the treaty was published in the _Mauritius Gazette_, and republished in
the Calcutta newspapers for the edification of the new Governor-General.
[Sidenote: Explanations demanded.]
Lord Mornington naturally concluded that Tippu was in collusion with
Napoleon, and that a French fleet might soon be sailing from Egypt down
the Red Sea to help Tippu in the invasion of the Carnatic, or to help
Sindia to restore the supremacy of the Great Mogul over Oudh and Bengal.
In the first instance he called upon Tippu for an explanation, and
proposed to send an envoy to Seringapatam to arrange for a better
understanding between the two governments.
[Sidenote: Tippu dumbfoundered.]
Meanwhile Tippu was amazed and bewildered. To have his secret designs
suddenly published in successive newspapers, and then to be called upon
for an explanation, seems to have stupefied him. He replied that the
French were liars, and refused to receive an envoy from Lord Mornington.
To have overlooked the offence would have been sheer madness.
Accordingly Lord Mornington determined to revive the old alliance with
the Nizam and the Mahrattas against Tippu; and meanwhile to get rid of
the French sepoy battalions.
[Sidenote: French battalions disbanded at Hyderabad.]
The Nizam welcomed a British alliance as offering a means of escape from
the crushing demands of the Mahrattas. He was glad enough for the
British to disband his French sepoy battalions, which drained his
resources, and were threatening to mutiny for arrears of pay. A British
force was moved to Hyderabad, the disbandment was proclaimed, and a
battle was expected. Suddenly, the French sepoys raised an uproar, and
the French officers rushed into the British lines for protection. It was
the old Asiatic story of mutiny for want of pay, and when the British
advanced the money, the sepoys went away rejoicing, and the French
officers were thankful for their deliverance.
[Sidenote: Mahrattas evade a British alliance.]
Lord Mornington next began his negotiations with the Mahrattas, but they
raised up a host of difficulties. The Peishwa at Poona was a young
Brahman, sharp and suspicious. He was jealous of the British alliance
with the Nizam, which boded no good as regarded future payments of
chout, but he was anxious to keep on good terms with the British.
Accordingly he promised to send a contingent to join the British in the
war against Tippu, but at heart he had no intention of doing anything of
the kind. With him an alliance with the Christian or the Mohammedan was
a mere question of money. He was anxious to sell his alliance to the
highest bidder. Accordingly he entertained Tippu's envoys at Poona in
the hope that the Sultan might eventually offer higher terms than the
British for the services of a Mahratta army.
[Sidenote: Destruction of Tippu, 1799.]
In 1799 Lord Mornington began the war against Mysore. A British army
from Madras, under the command of General Harris, invaded it from the
east, whilst another force from Bombay invaded it from the west. The two
armies soon closed round Tippu. He saw that he was environed by his
enemies, and that resistance was hopeless. He sued for terms, but was
told to cede the half of his remaining dominions and pay up two millions
sterling. He refused to surrender on such crushing conditions, and
retired to his fortress at Seringapatam, resolved to die sword in hand
rather than become a servant or a pensioner. In May, 1799, Seringapatam
was taken by storm, and the dead body of Tippu was found in the gateway.
[Sidenote: Cruelty of Tippu.]
The fate of Tippu might have been regretted but for his cruel treatment
of British prisoners in former wars. At Bangalore, British captives were
chained together, starved, threatened, and tormented until some were
driven to become Mohammedans. The consequence was, that during the
advance on Seringapatam British soldiers were burning for revenge, and
Sir David Baird, one of the greatest sufferers, begged for the command
of the storming party as a relief to his outraged feelings. When the war
was over, the death and downfall of the tyrant was celebrated in songs
which were reverberated from India to the British Isles, and the old
strains are still lingering in the memories of some who are yet
living.[17]
[Sidenote: Hindu Raj restored.]
Lord Mornington annexed part of Mysore territory to the Madras
Presidency, and gave another share to the Nizam; and he proposed, as
will be seen hereafter, to give a third share to the Mahrattas; but he
converted the remainder into a Hindu kingdom. Accordingly an infant
scion of the Hindu Raja, who had been deposed by Hyder Ali some forty
years previously, was placed on the throne of Mysore in charge of a
British Resident and a Brahman Minister until he should attain his
majority. The subsequent career of the Raja will be brought under review
hereafter.
[Sidenote: Annexation of the Carnatic.]
§2. Soon after the capture of Seringapatam a clandestine correspondence
was discovered in the palace between the Nawab of the Carnatic and the
deceased Tippu. The treachery was undeniable. At the same time the
discovery enabled the British to get rid of a dynasty that had oppressed
the people and intrigued with the enemies of the East India Company for
half a century. Nawab Mohammed Ali, whom the British had placed on the
throne of the Carnatic in opposition to the French, had died in 1795.
His son and successor had followed in the steps of his father, but no
complaints reached him, for he was smitten with mortal disease. Lord
Mornington, now Marquis of Wellesley, waited for his death, and then
told the family that their rule was over. The title of Nawab was
preserved, and pensions were liberally provided, but the Carnatic was
incorporated with the Madras Presidency, and brought under British
administration like the Bengal provinces.
[Sidenote: Scandals of Nawab rule.]
The annexation of the Carnatic delivered Madras from a host of scandals
which had been accumulating for some forty years. The old Nawab had
removed from Arcot to Madras, and carried on costly intrigues with the
Company's servants in India, and with influential persons in the British
Isles, in the hope of getting the revenues into his own hands, and
leaving the East India Company to defend his territories out of their
own resources. He loaded himself with debt by bribing his supporters
with pretended loans, which existed only on paper, bore exorbitant
interest, and were eventually charged on the public revenue. All this
while, he and his officials were obstructing British operations in the
field by withholding supplies, or treacherously informing the enemy of
the movements of the British army. Since the annexation of the Carnatic
in 1801 all these evils have passed into oblivion, and the public peace
has remained undisturbed.
[Sidenote: Wellesley's political system.]
§3. The war with Tippu taught Lord Wellesley that it was impossible to
trust the Mahrattas. They would not join the British government against
a common enemy unless paid to do so; and they were always ready to go
over to the enemy on the same terms. Accordingly Lord Wellesley proposed
to maintain the peace of India, not by a balance of power, but by
becoming the sovereign head of a league for the prevention of all future
wars.
[Sidenote: Subsidiary alliances.]
With these views Lord Wellesley proposed that neither the Nizam nor the
Mahrattas should take any French officers into their pay for the future;
that neither should engage in any war or negotiation without the consent
of the British government; and that each should maintain a subsidiary
force of sepoys, drilled and commanded by British officers, which should
be at the disposal of the British government for the maintenance of the
peace of India.
[Sidenote: Nizam accepts.]
The Nizam accepted the subsidiary alliance. He provided for the
maintenance of a Hyderabad Subsidiary Force by ceding to the British
government all the territories which he had received on account of the
Mysore wars. By this arrangement all money transactions were avoided,
and the subsidiary force was paid out of the revenues of the ceded
districts.
[Sidenote: Mahrattas refuse.]
The Mahratta rulers utterly refused to accept subsidiary alliances in
any shape or form. They did not want British protection, and they would
not permit any interference by mediation or otherwise with their claims
for chout against the Nizam. The Peishwa would not maintain a subsidiary
force, but he was willing to take British battalions of sepoys into his
pay, provided he might employ them against Sindia or any other
refractory feudatory. He would not pledge himself to abstain from all
wars or negotiations without the consent of the British government. He
was willing to help the British in a war with France, but he would not
dismiss the Frenchmen in his service.
[Sidenote: Sindia refuses British alliance against Afghans.]
Sindia was still more obstinate and contemptuous. Mahadaji Sindia was
dead. His successor, Daulat Rao Sindia, was a young man of nineteen, but
already the irresponsible ruler of a large dominion in Western
Hindustan. He was all-powerful at Delhi, and was bent upon being equally
all-powerful at Poona. He collected chout from the princes of Rajputana,
and, with the help of his French-officered battalions of sepoys, he had
established a supremacy over the valleys of the Jumna and Ganges from
the banks of the Sutlej to the frontier of Oudh at Cawnpore. Lord
Wellesley would not venture to offer a subsidiary alliance to a prince
so puffed up with pride as young Sindia. The Afghans, however, were
threatening to invade India, and Lord Wellesley invited Sindia to join
in an alliance against the Afghans. But Sindia would not hamper himself
with a British alliance. He was not afraid of the Afghans. At any rate
he waited for the Afghans to appear before taking any steps to prevent
their coming.
[Sidenote: British fears of France and Russia.]
Lord Wellesley was not afraid of Afghans alone, but of French or
Russians, who might make their way through Persia, join the Afghans,
resuscitate the Great Mogul, and establish a European empire in his name
as the rightful representative of Aurangzeb. Accordingly Lord Wellesley
sent the once famous Sir John Malcolm on a mission to Persia to
persuade the Shah to bar out the French and prevent the Afghans from
invading India. Meanwhile, he anxiously waited some turn in Mahratta
affairs which would bring their rulers into a more compliant mood
towards the British government.
[Sidenote: Provinces taken from Oudh.]
Lord Wellesley, however, determined that the Nawab Vizier of Oudh should
contribute something further towards the defence of India against
invasion. The Nawab Vizier maintained a rabble army that was costly and
useless, and he depended entirely on British troops for his defence
against Afghans and Mahrattas. He was urged to disband his rabble army
and replace it by battalions of sepoys trained and commanded by British
officers; but he was impracticable, and Lord Wellesley got over the
difficulty by taking half his territory for the maintenance of the
required battalions. This was an arbitrary proceeding, but it was
justified on the score of state necessity and self-preservation. It
pushed the British frontier westward to Cawnpore on the Ganges, where it
was close to Sindia and his French sepoy battalions, and would be face
to face with any foreign invasion from the north-west. The new
territories were called "ceded provinces," and eventually were
incorporated with what are now known as the North-West Provinces.[18]
[Sidenote: Sindia master of Holkar.]
Meanwhile the Mahratta empire was falling into the hands of Sindia. This
ambitious feudatory tried to pose as the protector of his suzerain the
Peishwa. The two, however, were perpetually plotting against each
other; the soldier and the Brahman were each trying to be master. About
this time Holkar died, and Sindia hastened to Indore and put an imbecile
son of Holkar on the throne, as a preliminary step to appropriating the
territory and revenues.
[Sidenote: Rise of Jaswant Rao Holkar.]
At this moment a bandit prince appeared at Indore with an army of
predatory horsemen, brigands and outlaws, the scum of Central India. He
was a bastard son of the deceased Holkar, and was known as Jaswant Rao
Holkar. He was routed by Sindia's French battalions, but the scattered
horsemen soon rallied round his banners, and he went off to the south to
threaten Poona and the Peishwa.
[Sidenote: Flight of the Peishwa.]
The Peishwa was wild with terror. Under his orders a brother of Jaswant
Rao Holkar had been dragged to death by an elephant through the streets,
and he had reason to believe that Jaswant Rao was bent on revenge. His
army was reinforced by Sindia, but the united forces were utterly routed
by Jaswant Rao outside the city of Poona. Accordingly he fled away to
the coast, and embarked on board a British ship for the port of Bassein,
about twenty miles to the north of Bombay.
[Sidenote: Peishwa accepts subsidiary alliance, 1802.]
The Peishwa was ready to make any sacrifice to procure British help.
Accordingly he accepted the subsidiary alliance on the condition that
the British restored him to Poona. The terms were soon arranged, and the
treaty was signed at Bassein on the last day of December, 1802. The
Peishwa ceded territories for the maintenance of a Poona Subsidiary
Force, and sacrificed his position as suzerain of the Mahratta
confederacy. For the future he was bound to abstain from all wars and
negotiations, even with his own feudatories, excepting by the knowledge
and consent of the British government.
[Sidenote: Surprise of the Mahratta feudatories.]
§4. The Mahratta feudatories were bewildered and stupefied by the treaty
of Bassein. In a single day the British government had become their
suzerain in the room of the Peishwa; the Christian governor of Calcutta
was lord over the Brahman Peishwa of Poona. True, the Peishwa was
restored to his throne at Poona, but only as the creature of the British
government, not as the suzerain of the Mahrattas. Sindia's hope of
ruling the Mahrattas in the name of the Peishwa was shattered by the
treaty. The Raja of Berar was equally down-hearted. The Gaekwar of
Baroda accepted the subsidiary alliance, and ceased to play a part in
history. Jaswant Rao Holkar was out of the running; he was an outlaw and
an interloper.
[Sidenote: Vacillations of Sindia and the Bhonsla.]
The whole brunt of the struggle against the British supremacy, if there
was to be any struggle at all, thus fell on Daulat Rao Sindia of Gwalior
and the Bhonsla Raja of Berar. Meanwhile the two Mahratta princes moved
restlessly about with large armies, drawing nearer and nearer to the
Nizam's frontier as if to enforce their claims to chout. They would not
accept a subsidiary treaty, and they would not break with the British
government. They tried to tempt Jaswant Rao to join them, but the young
brigand only played with them. He got them to recognise his succession
to the throne of Indore, and then returned to his capital, declaring
that he must leave Sindia and the Bhonsla to fight the British in the
Deccan, whilst he went away north to fight them in Hindustan.
[Sidenote: Wellesley's campaign in the Deccan, 1803.]
Lord Wellesley was well prepared for an outbreak. His younger brother,
Colonel Arthur Wellesley, was watching Sindia and the Bhonsla in the
Deccan, whilst General Lake, commander-in-chief of the Bengal army, was
watching the French sepoy battalions of Sindia in Hindustan. Sindia was
vacillating and irresolute, but his language was growing more hostile.
He said he was waiting for Jaswant Rao Holkar; he talked of collecting
chout in the Nizam's territory; and he expressed doubts whether there
would be peace or war. At last he was told that he was breaking the
public peace, and must take the consequences.
[Sidenote: British victory at Assaye.]
The battle of Assaye was fought on the Nizam's frontier on 23rd
September, 1803. It was the old story of a British army of five thousand
men fighting an Asiatic army of fifty thousand. The Mahratta artillery
worked terrible execution on the British army, and one-third of its
European force was left dead or wounded in the field. But the Bhonsla
Raja fled at the first shot, and Sindia soon followed his example.
General Wellesley's victory at Assaye crushed the hopes of the
Mahrattas. Sindia especially took his lesson to heart. It was followed
by the capture of fortresses and another victory at Argaum; and by the
end of 1803 the campaign in the Deccan was over, and Sindia and the
Bhonsla came to terms.
[Sidenote: General Lake's campaign in Hindustan.]
Meanwhile, General Lake had fought a brilliant campaign in Hindustan.
Directly he heard that war had begun in the Deccan he left Cawnpore, on
the British frontier, and pushed his way to Delhi. He defeated the
French sepoy cavalry and captured the fortress at Alighur. Next he
defeated the French sepoy infantry and entered Delhi in triumph. He was
received with open arms by the poor old Padishah, Shah Alam, who once
again threw himself upon British protection. He left Delhi in charge of
Colonel Ochterlony, marched down the right bank of the river Jumna,
captured the city of Agra, and brought the campaign to a close by a
crowning victory at Laswari, which broke up the French sepoy battalions
for ever, and placed the British government in possession of the relics
of the Mogul empire in Hindustan.
[Sidenote: British power paramount.]
The campaigns of Wellesley and Lake established the British government
as the paramount power in India. Sindia was driven by Wellesley to the
northward of the Nerbudda river, and by Lake to the southward of the
Jumna. The Bhonsla Raja was deprived of Berar on one side and Cuttack on
the other, and was henceforth known only as the Raja of Nagpore. The
British government had acquired the sovereignty of the Great Mogul and
that of the Peishwa of the Mahrattas. It took the princes of Rajputana
under its protection, and prepared to shut out Sindia and Holkar from
Rajput territories. Only one Mahratta prince of any importance remained
to tender his submission, and that was Jaswant Rao Holkar of Indore.
[Sidenote: Relations with Holkar.]
§5. The British government was not responsible for the usurpation of
Jaswant Rao Holkar. It was willing to accept him as the _de facto_ ruler
of the Indore principality, and to leave him alone, provided only that
he kept within his own territories, and respected the territories of the
British and their allies.
[Sidenote: Holkar's pretensions.]
Jaswant Rao Holkar, however, was a born freebooter, a Mahratta of the
old school of Sivaji. He was not ambitious for political power like
Sindia, and he wanted no drilled battalions. He was a Cossack at heart,
and loved the old free life of Mahratta brigandage. Like Sivaji, he was
at home in the saddle, with spear in hand, and a bag of grain and goblet
of water hanging from his horse. He and his hordes scoured the country
on horseback, collected plunder or chout, and rode over the hills and
far away whenever regular troops advanced against them. Indore was his
home and Western India was his quarry; and never perhaps did he collect
a richer harvest of plunder and chout than he did in Rajputana during
the latter half of 1803, when Lake was driving Sindia and the French out
of Hindustan, and Wellesley was establishing peace in the Deccan.
[Sidenote: Difficulties as regards "chout".]
Jaswant Rao Holkar looked at the British government from his own
individual point of view. He was no respecter of persons; he despised
the Peishwa, and had got all he wanted from Sindia and the Bhonsla. The
British government was his _bête noire_; it had grown in strength, and
was opposed to the collection of chout. He wanted it to guarantee him in
the possession of Holkar's principality, and to sanction his levying
chout after the manner of his ancestors; and he refused to withdraw from
Rajputana until these terms were granted. If his pretensions were
rejected, he threatened to burn, sack, and slaughter his enemies by
hundreds of thousands. Such was the ignorant and refractory Mahratta
that defied the East India Company and the British nation.
[Sidenote: Lake attacks Holkar.]
[Sidenote: Disastrous retreat of Monson, 1804.]
The reduction of Jaswant Rao Holkar was thus a political necessity. In
April, 1804, General Lake entered Rajputana, and drove Jaswant Rao
Holkar southward into Indore territory. In June the rains were
approaching, and General Lake left Colonel Monson to keep a watch on
Holkar, with five battalions of sepoys, a train of artillery, and two
bodies of irregular horse, and then withdrew to cantonments. Colonel
Monson pushed on still further south into Indore territory, but in July
everything went wrong. Supplies ran low. Expected reinforcements failed
to arrive. Jaswant Rao turned back with overwhelming forces and a large
train of artillery. In an evil hour Monson beat a retreat. The rains
were very heavy. The British guns sunk in the mud and were spiked and
abandoned. Terrible disasters were incurred in crossing rivers. The
Rajputs turned against him. His brigade was exposed to the fire of
Holkar's guns and the charges of Holkar's horse. About the end of August
only a shattered remnant of Monson's brigade managed to reach British
territory.
[Sidenote: Reaction against British supremacy.]
For a brief period British prestige vanished from Hindustan, and Jaswant
Rao Holkar was the hero of the hour. Sindia forgot his wrongs against
Jaswant Rao, and his defeats at Assaye and Argaum, and declared for
Holkar. Fresh bodies of bandits and outlaws joined the standard of
Holkar to share in the spoil of his successes. With Mahratta audacity
Jaswant Rao pushed on to Delhi, to capture Shah Alam and plunder
Hindustan in the name of the Great Mogul. He was beaten off from Delhi
by the small garrison under Colonel Ochterlony, but the Jhat Raja of
Bhurtpore received him with open arms in that huge clay fortress, the
stronghold of the predatory system of the eighteenth century, which to
this day is the wonder of Hindustan. Holkar left his guns in the
fortress and went out to plunder; and Lake, instead of following him up,
wasted four months in a futile attempt to capture the Bhurtpore
fortress without a siege train.
[Sidenote: Reversal of Lord Wellesley's policy, 1805.]
§6. The retreat of Monson was not only a disastrous blow to British
prestige, but ruined for a while the reputation of Lord Wellesley.
Because a Mahratta freebooter had broken loose in Hindustan, the Home
authorities imagined that all the Mahratta powers had risen against the
imperial policy of the Governor-General. Lord Wellesley was recalled
from his post, and Lord Cornwallis was sent out to take his place, to
reverse the policy of his illustrious predecessor, to scuttle out of
Western Hindustan, to restore all the ceded territories, to surrender
all the captured fortresses, and to abandon large tracts of country to
be plundered and devastated by the Mahrattas, as they had been from the
days of Sivaji to those of Wellesley and Lake.
[Sidenote: Death of Lord Cornwallis.]
[Sidenote: Sir George Barlow's half measures, 1806.]
Before Lord Cornwallis reached Bengal the political outlook had
brightened. Jaswant Rao Holkar was flying into the Punjab from General
Lake, and was soon brought to bay. Daulat Rao Sindia was repenting his
desertion from the British alliance. The Jhat Raja of Bhurtpore had
implored forgiveness and paid a heavy fine. But Lord Cornwallis was
sixty-seven years of age, and had lost the nerve which he had displayed
in his wars against Tippu; and he would have ignored the turn of the
tide, and persisted in falling back on the old policy of conciliation
and non-intervention, had not death cut short his career before he had
been ten weeks in the country.
Sir George Barlow, a Bengal civilian, succeeded for a while to the post
of Governor-General, as a provisional arrangement. He had been a member
of Council under both Wellesley and Cornwallis, and he halted between
the two. He refused to restore the conquered territories to Sindia and
the Bhonsla, but he gave back the Indore principality to Holkar,
together with the captured fortresses. Worst of all, he annulled most of
the protective treaties with the Rajput princes on the ground that they
had deserted the British government during Monson's retreat from Jaswant
Rao Holkar.
[Sidenote: Non-intervention: sad results.]
For some years the policy of the British government was a half-hearted
system of non-intervention. Public opinion in the British Isles, as
expressed by Parliament and Ministers, was impressed with the necessity
for maintaining friendly relations with the Mahrattas, and for
abstaining from any measure which might tend to a renewal of
hostilities. The fact was ignored that Mahratta independence meant
plunder and devastation, and that British supremacy meant order and law.
Accordingly the Mahratta princes were left to plunder and collect chout
in Rajputana, and practically to make war on each other, so long as they
respected the territories of the British government and its allies. The
result was that the Peishwa was brooding over his lost suzerainty;
Sindia and the Bhonsla were mourning over their lost territories; and
Jaswant Rao Holkar was drowning his intellects in cherry brandy, which
he procured from Bombay, until he was seized with delirium tremens, and
confined as a madman. All this while an under-current of intrigue was at
work between Indian courts, which served in the end to revive wild hopes
of getting rid of British supremacy, and rekindling the old aspirations
for war and rapine.
[Sidenote: Sepoy revolt at Vellore, 1806.]
§7. In 1806 the peace of India was broken by an alarm from a very
different quarter. In those days India was so remote from the British
Isles that the existence of the British government mainly depended on
the loyalty of its sepoy armies. Suddenly it was discovered that the
Madras army was on the brink of mutiny. The British authorities at
Madras had introduced an obnoxious head-dress resembling a European hat,
in the place of the old time-honoured turban, and had, moreover,
forbidden the sepoys to appear on parade with earrings and caste marks.
India was astounded by a revolt of the Madras sepoys at the fortress of
Vellore, about eight miles to the westward of Arcot. The fallen families
of Hyder and Tippu were lodged in this fortress, and many of Tippu's old
soldiers were serving in the garrison; and these people taunted the
sepoys about wearing hats and becoming Christians, whilst some secret
intriguing was going on for restoring Mohammedan ascendency in Southern
India, under the deposed dynasty of Mysore.
[Sidenote: Slaughter of British officers.]
The garrison at Vellore consisted of about four hundred Europeans and
fifteen hundred sepoys. At midnight, without warning, the sepoys rose in
mutiny. One body fired on the European barracks until half the soldiers
were killed or wounded. Another body fired on the houses of the British
officers, and shot them down as they rushed out to know the cause of the
uproar. All this while provisions were distributed amongst the sepoys by
the Mysore princes, and the flag of Mysore was hoisted over the
fortress.
[Sidenote: Suppression of mutiny; recall of Bentinck.]
Fortunately the news was carried to Arcot, where Colonel Gillespie
commanded a British garrison. Gillespie at once galloped to Vellore with
a troop of British dragoons and two field guns. The gates of Vellore
were blown open; the soldiers rushed in; four hundred mutineers were cut
down, and the outbreak was over. The Home authorities wanted a
scapegoat; and Lord William Bentinck, the governor of Madras, and Sir
John Craddock, the commander-in-chief of the Madras army, were recalled.
Fifty years afterwards, when the Bengal army broke out in mutiny on the
score of greased cartridges, many an old officer wished that a
Gillespie, with the independent authority of a Gillespie, had been in
command at Barrackpore.
[Sidenote: Lord Minto, 1807-13: lawless condition of Bundelkund.]
§8. In 1807 Lord Minto succeeded Barlow as Governor-General. He broke
the spell of non-intervention. South of the river Jumna, between the
frontiers of Bengal and those of Sindia and Holkar, are the hills and
jungles of Bundelkund. For centuries the chiefs of Bundelkund had never
been more than half conquered. They never paid tribute to Mogul or
Mahratta unless compelled by force of arms; and they kept the country in
constant anarchy by their lawless acts and endless feuds.
[Sidenote: British conquest.]
When the Peishwa accepted the British alliance, he ceded Bundelkund for
the maintenance of the Poona Subsidiary Force. Of course the cession was
a sham. The Peishwa ceded territory which only nominally belonged to
him, and the British were too happy in concluding a subsidiary alliance
to inquire too nicely into his sovereign rights over Bundelkund. The
result was that the chiefs of Bundelkund defied the British as they
defied the Peishwa, and Sir George Barlow sacrificed revenue and
ignored brigandage rather than interfere with his western neighbours.
Lord Minto found that there were a hundred and fifty leaders of banditti
in Bundelkund, who held as many fortresses, settled all disputes by the
sword, and offered an asylum to all the bandits and burglars that
escaped from British territory. Lord Minto organised an expedition which
established for a while something like peace and order in Bundelkund,
and secured the collection of tribute with a regularity which had been
unknown for centuries.
[Sidenote: Dangers in the Punjab.]
Lord Minto's main work was to keep Napoleon and the French out of India.
The north-west frontier was still vulnerable, but the Afghans had
retired from the Punjab, and the once famous Runjeet Singh had founded a
Sikh kingdom between the Indus and the Sutlej. As far as the British
were concerned, the Sikhs formed a barrier against the Afghans; and
Runjeet Singh was apparently friendly, for he had refused to shelter
Jaswant Rao Holkar in his flight from Lord Lake. But there was no
knowing what Runjeet Singh might do if the French found their way to
Lahore. To crown the perplexity, the Sikh princes on the British side of
the river Sutlej, who had done homage to the British government during
the campaigns of Lord Lake, were being conquered by Runjeet Singh, and
were appealing to the British government for protection.
[Sidenote: Mission to Runjeet Singh, 1808-9.]
In 1808-9 a young Bengal civilian, named Charles Metcalfe, was sent on a
mission to Lahore. The work before him was difficult and complicated,
and somewhat trying to the nerves. The object was to secure Runjeet
Singh as a useful ally against the French and Afghans, whilst protecting
Sikh states on the British side of the Sutlej, namely, Jhind, Nabha,
and Patiala.
Runjeet Singh was naturally disgusted at being checked by British
interference. It was unfair, he said, for the British to wait until he
had conquered the three states, and then to demand possession. Metcalfe
cleverly dropped the question of justice, and appealed to Runjeet
Singh's self-interest. By giving up the three states, Runjeet Singh
would secure an alliance with the British, a strong frontier on the
Sutlej, and freedom to push his conquests on the north and west. Runjeet
Singh took the hint. He withdrew his pretensions from the British side
of the Sutlej, and professed a friendship which remained unbroken until
his death in 1839; but he knew what he was about. He conquered Cashmere
on the north, and he wrested Peshawar from the Afghans; but he refused
to open his dominions to British trade, and he was jealous to the last
of any attempt to enter his territories.
[Sidenote: Missions to Persia and Afghanistan.]
About the same time Lord Minto sent John Malcolm on a second mission to
Persia, and Mountstuart Elphinstone on a mission to Cabul to provide
against French invasion. Neither mission was followed by any practical
result, but they opened up new countries to European ideas, and led to
the publication of works on Persia and Afghanistan by the respective
envoys, which have retained their interest to this day.
[Sidenote: Capture of Mauritius and Java.]
Meanwhile the war against France and Napoleon had extended to eastern
waters. The island of the Mauritius had become a French depôt for
frigates and privateers, which swept the seas from Madagascar to Java,
until the East India Company reckoned its losses by millions, and
private traders were brought to the brink of ruin. Lord Minto sent one
expedition, which wrested the Mauritius from the French; and he
conducted another expedition in person, which wrested the island of Java
from the Dutch, who at that time were the allies of France. The
Mauritius has remained a British possession until this day, but Java was
restored to Holland at the conclusion of the war.
[Sidenote: Anarchy in Rajputana.]
§9. During the struggle against France difficulties were arising in
Western Hindustan. The princes of Rajputana had been engaged in wars and
feuds amongst themselves from a remote antiquity, but for nearly a
century they had been also exposed to the raids and depredations of
Mahratta armies. Lord Wellesley had brought the Rajput princes into
subsidiary alliance with the British government, but the treaties had
been annulled by Sir George Barlow, and war and pillage were as rampant
as ever. The evil had been aggravated by the rise of Afghan adventurers,
who had conquered territories and founded new kingdoms in central India
amidst the prevailing anarchy; whilst a low class of freebooters, known
as Pindharies, plundered the villagers in the skirts of the Mahratta
armies, or robbed and pillaged the surrounding territories, with a
savage ferocity which rendered them a pest and terror.
[Sidenote: The Rana, or suzerain.]
The hereditary suzerain of the Rajputs was a prince known as the Rana of
Oodeypore. The Rana claimed descent from Rama, the hero of ancient Oudh,
and incarnation of Vishnu or the Sun, whose mythical and divine glory is
celebrated in the Ramayana. Unfortunately the living Rana was a weak and
helpless prince, who was the dependent of his own feudatories, whilst
his territories were at the mercy of Mahrattas and Afghans. He had a
daughter who was regarded as a prize and treasure, not on account of her
beauty or accomplishments, for she was only an immature girl, but
because her high birth would ennoble her bridegroom and her future sons
or daughters.
[Sidenote: War for the Rana's daughter.]
From 1806 to 1810 the Rajas of Jeypore and Jodhpore were fighting for
the hand of this daughter of the Rana. The girl herself had no voice in
the matter. In Rajput traditions a princess is supposed to choose her
own bridegroom in an assembly of Rajas, by throwing a garland round the
neck of the happy lover. But in modern practice the "choice" has fallen
into disuse, and a gilded cocoa-nut is sent by the father of the
princess to some selected Raja as typical of an offer of her hand. The
cocoa-nut for the Oodeypore princess had been sent to a Raja of
Jodhpore, but he died before the marriage, and the cocoa-nut was sent to
the Raja of Jeypore. Then followed a contention. The new Raja of
Jodhpore claimed the princess, on the ground that the offer had been
made, not to the individual, but to the throne of Jodhpore. The Raja of
Jeypore, however, had accepted the cocoa-nut, and insisted on his
rights. The contention became a war to the knife, and nearly every
prince in Rajputana took a part in the contest. Strange to say, the Rana
himself, the father of the princess, looked on as a neutral whilst
Jeypore and Jodhpore were fighting for his daughter. Meanwhile his
territories, known as the garden of Rajputana, were ravaged by Sindia
and an Afghan adventurer named Amir Khan, until nothing was to be seen
but ruined harvests and desolated villages.
[Sidenote: Non-intervention.]
Amidst this terrible turmoil, the princes and chiefs of Rajputana
implored the British government to interfere. They asserted that there
always had been a paramount power in India; that such a power had been
formerly exercised by the Great Mogul; that the East India Company had
acquired that power; and that the British government was bound to stop
the war. The Rana of Oodeypore offered to cede half his territories if
the British government would protect the other half. Jeypore and
Jodhpore offered to submit their claims to British arbitration, and
pledged themselves to abide by the decision. Lord Minto had only to
declare which bridegroom he recognised, and his dictum would have been
accepted. But Lord Minto shrunk from the exercise of a sovereignty which
would have been a violation of the sacred dogma of non-interference, and
have carried British influence outside British territories. Accordingly,
the war was stopped by a tragedy. The Rana settled the marriage dispute
by poisoning his daughter. The young princess is said to have drunk the
fatal draught with the courage of a heroine, knowing that it would save
her father; but the unhappy mother was overpowered by grief, and died
broken-hearted.
[Sidenote: Ghorka conquest of Nipal.]
Meanwhile war clouds were gathering on the southern slopes of the
Himalayas. Down to the middle of the eighteenth century, the territory
of Nipal had been peopled by a peaceful and industrious race of
Buddhists known as Newars, but about the year 1767, when the British had
taken over the Bengal provinces, the Newars were conquered by a Rajput
tribe from Cashmere, known as Ghorkas. The Ghorka conquest of Nipal was
as complete as the Norman conquest of England. The Ghorkas established a
military despotism with Brahmanical institutions, and parcelled out the
country amongst feudal nobles known as Bharadars.
[Sidenote: Ghorka rule.]
Ghorka rule in Nipal was for many years distracted by tragedies in the
royal family, and civil wars between the Bharadars for the post of
minister. The Newars were more down-trodden than the Anglo-Saxons under
the Norman kings. The Ghorka army was all-powerful, but plots and
assassinations were common enough in the court and capital at Khatmandu,
and the deposition of a minister or a sovereign might be the work of a
day.
[Sidenote: Ghorka aggressions.]
During the early years of the nineteenth century the Ghorkas began to
encroach on British territory, annexing villages and revenues from
Darjeeling to Simla without right or reason. They were obviously bent on
extending their dominion southward to the Ganges, and for a long time
aggressions were overlooked for the sake of peace. At last two districts
were appropriated to which the Ghorkas had not a shadow of a claim, and
it was absolutely necessary to make a stand against their pretensions.
Accordingly, Lord Minto sent an ultimatum to Khatmandu, declaring that
unless the districts were restored they would be recovered by force of
arms. Before the answer arrived, Lord Minto was succeeded in the post of
Governor-General by Lord Moira, better known by his later title of
Marquis of Hastings.
[Sidenote: Lord Moira--Marquis of Hastings, 1813-23.]
§10. Lord Moira landed at Calcutta in 1813. Shortly after his arrival an
answer was received from the Ghorka government, that the disputed
districts belonged to Nipal, and would not be surrendered. Lord Moira at
once fixed a day on which the districts were to be restored; and when
the day had passed without any action being taken by the Ghorkas, a
British detachment entered the districts and set up police stations.
[Sidenote: Ghorka council of war.]
Meanwhile the Ghorkas had been alarmed by the letter of Lord Moira. A
great council of Bharadars was summoned to Khatmandu, and the question
of peace or war was discussed in a military spirit. It was decided that,
as the British had been unable to capture the mud fortress of Bhurtpore,
which was the work of men's hands, they could not possibly capture the
mountain fortresses on the Himalayas, which were the work of the
Almighty. Accordingly, the council of Bharadars resolved on war, but
they did not declare it in European fashion. A Ghorka army suddenly
entered the disputed districts, surrounded the police stations, and
murdered many of the constables, and then returned to Khatmandu to await
the action of the British government in the way of reprisals.
[Sidenote: Ghorkas superior to Mahrattas.]
The war against the Ghorkas was more remote and more serious than the
wars against the Mahrattas. The Mahrattas fought in the plains, and
trusted in their artillery; but when their gunners were shot or
bayoneted, as in the battle of Assaye, they seemed to have lost all life
and energy, and were broken up into loose bodies of runaways. The
Ghorkas, on the other hand were resolute and hardy mountaineers, with a
Rajput pride, and military instincts like the ancient Spartans. Their
nerves had not been enfeebled by opium, and they exulted in the strength
of their mountain fortresses, which they deemed impregnable against all
the world.
[Sidenote: Difficult invasion of Nipal.]
Those who have ascended the Himalayas to Darjeeling or Simla may realise
something of the difficulties of an invasion of Nipal. The British army
advanced in four divisions by four different routes. They had first to
make their way through a belt of marsh and jungle at the foot of the
mountains. They had then to climb precipices and shelves which would
have daunted the army of Hannibal. Moreover, it was impossible to storm
the fortresses without artillery; and dragging up eighteen-pounders in
the teeth of snow-storms and mountain blasts, opening up roads by
blasting rocks, and battering down obstructions with field guns, were
tasks which would have tested the genius of the ablest commanders.
[Sidenote: Successes of Ochterlony 1814-15.]
The operations of 1814 nearly proved a failure. One general took fright
at the jungle, and galloped back to the plains, leaving his division
behind. General David Ochterlony, who advanced his division along the
valley of the Sutlej, gained the most brilliant successes. He was one of
the half-forgotten heroes of the East India Company. He had fought
against Hyder Ali in the days of Warren Hastings, and beaten back Holkar
from the walls of Delhi in the days of Lord Wellesley. For five months
in the worst season of the year he carried one fortress after another,
until the enemy made a final stand at Maloun on a shelf of the
Himalayas. The Ghorkas made a desperate attack on the British works, but
the attempt failed; and when the British batteries were about to open
fire, the Ghorka garrison came to terms, and were permitted to march out
with the honours of war.
[Sidenote: Peace with Nipal, 1816.]
The fall of Maloun shook the faith of the Ghorka government in their
heaven-built fortresses. Commissioners were sent to conclude a peace.
Nipal agreed to cede Kumaon in the west, and the southern belt of forest
and jungle known as the Terai. It also agreed to receive a British
Resident at Khatmandu. Lord Moira had actually signed the treaty, when
the Ghorkas raised the question of whether the Terai included the forest
or only the swamp. War was renewed. Ochterlony advanced an army within
fifty miles of Khatmandu, and then the Ghorkas concluded the treaty, and
the British army withdrew from Nipal. The Terai, however, was a bone of
contention for many years afterwards. Nothing was said about a
subsidiary army, and to this day Nipal is outside the pale of subsidiary
alliances; but Nipal is bound over not to take any European into her
service without the consent of the British government.
[Sidenote: Imperial policy of Lord Hastings.]
§11. Lord Moira, now Marquis of Hastings, next turned his attention to
the affairs of Malwa, the homes of Sindia and Holkar, between Bundelkund
and Rajputana. Before leaving the British Isles, he had a strong sense
of the danger of Lord Wellesley's policy, and a strong faith in the
wisdom of non-intervention. But a brief experience of the actual
condition of India compelled him to recant. The hordes of Pindharies
were swelling into armies. They ravaged the territories of British
allies, and threatened those under British rule. Lord Hastings declared
that British power would never prosper in India until it assumed the
headship of a league like that projected by Lord Wellesley. But the Home
authorities were still afraid of the Mahrattas, and Lord Hastings was
told that no league was to be formed in India, and no steps taken
against the Pindharies, that were likely to be in any way offensive to
the Mahrattas.
[Sidenote: Pindhari raids.]
In 1815-16, the last year of the Ghorka war, the Pindharies extended
their raids to British territory. The horrors committed by these
miscreants are indescribable. Villages were environed by Pindharies,
and the inhabitants robbed and tortured. Fathers piled firewood round
their dwellings, and perished in the flames with their wives and
families, rather than fall into the hands of Pindharies; whilst in some
villages, the whole female population threw themselves into wells to
escape a worse fate. George Canning described Pindhari atrocities in a
speech which aroused parliament to a sense of its duties and
responsibilities; and it was resolved to make war on Sindia, Holkar, or
any other power in India, which should attempt to shield the Pindharies
from the just resentment of the British nation.
[Sidenote: Disaffection of Mahrattas.]
Meanwhile the Mahratta princes had become unruly and disorganised. Lord
Wellesley had bound them to the British government by subsidiary
alliances; but these ties had been loosened by his successors, excepting
in the case of the Peishwa. Accordingly the Mahratta princes were
smitten by a common desire to throw off British supremacy, and return to
their old life of war and plunder. The Peishwa was labouring to recover
his lost suzerainty, with the help of Sindia, Holkar, Nagpore, and the
leaders of the Pindharies. Sindia was more amenable to British
authority, and would have been guided by the advice of the British
Resident at his court, but, under the policy of non-intervention, the
Resident had been told to confine his attention to British interests,
and not to interfere with Sindia. The result was that Sindia was
secretly negotiating with the Peishwa, the Ghorkas, and even with
Runjeet Singh of the Punjab, for joint attacks on the British
government. Holkar had died of cherry brandy; the army of Indore was in
mutiny for arrears of pay, and its leaders were in secret communication
with the Peishwa; whilst an infant Holkar and his regent mother had shut
themselves up in a remote fortress as a refuge against the disaffected
soldiery. Amir Khan the Afghan, the most powerful prince of the period,
had established a principality at Tonk, in Rajputana, and commanded a
large army of drilled battalions, and a formidable train of artillery.
[Sidenote: Contumacy of the Peishwa.]
Lord Hastings wanted to crush the Pindharies, but to avoid all collision
with the Mahrattas. The Peishwa, however, seemed bent on provoking
British interference. A Brahman envoy, from the Gaekwar of Baroda, had
been sent to Poona, under a British guarantee, to settle some obsolete
dispute about chout, and, in spite of the guarantee, the Brahman had
been barbarously murdered, under the orders of the Peishwa and his
minister. Lord Hastings accepted the explanation of the Peishwa that he
was innocent of the murder, but ordered the Mahratta minister to be
imprisoned in the fortress of Thanna, near Bombay. Later on the minister
escaped from the fortress with the connivance of the Peishwa, and was
secretly protected by the Peishwa, and it seemed impossible to condone
the offence.
[Sidenote: Elphinstone and Malcolm.]
At this crisis Mr. Mountstuart Elphinstone, one of the ablest of the old
Bengal civilians, was Resident at Poona; whilst Sir John Malcolm, of the
Madras army, was negotiating with the Mahratta princes for their
co-operation in the war against the Pindharies. Elphinstone found that
the Peishwa was secretly intriguing with his exiled minister, and
levying troops to an extent that meant mischief. Accordingly he
threatened the Peishwa with the displeasure of the British government,
and required him to deliver up three important fortresses as a pledge
for his future good behaviour. The Peishwa then artfully invited Sir
John Malcolm to come and see him, and so talked him over that Malcolm
believed in his good faith, and advised that the fortresses should be
given back. Elphinstone had no such confidence in the Peishwa;
nevertheless he restored the fortresses, as he would not throw cold
water on Malcolm's good intentions.
[Sidenote: Pindhari war: Mahratta plots.]
By this time Lord Hastings had planned his campaign against the
Pindharies. The British force was overwhelming, for it was known that
the three predatory powers--Sindia, Holkar, and Amir Khan--were bent on
sheltering the Pindharies by enlisting them as soldiers or hiding them
in the jungles until the danger had passed away. They had no conception
of the scale on which Lord Hastings had planned his campaign. They knew
that a force was advancing from the south, and that it would probably
comprise an army from Madras, the Hyderabad Subsidiary Force, and the
Poona Subsidiary Force; but they fondly imagined that, if the Pindharies
were kept out of the way, the British forces would soon return to
cantonments, and that the Pindharies would then revenge the attack on
their homes by fresh raids on British territories.
[Sidenote: Mortification of Sindia.]
Lord Hastings, however, was bent on disarming Sindia, Holkar, and Amir
Khan before exterminating the Pindhari gangs, and thus guarding against
the possible revival of the gangs after the conclusion of the war.
Daulat Rao Sindia was suddenly asked to give a friendly reception to the
Madras army coming from the south. He hesitated, vacillated, and asked
for time to consider the proposition. He was told that consideration
was out of the question; that he was pledged to co-operate with the
British forces against the Pindharies; that a large Bengal army was
advancing from the north over the river Jumna, under the direct orders
of Lord Hastings in person; and that the Pindharies would be environed
and exterminated by the two armies. Sindia was utterly taken by
surprise. He knew that it would be sheer madness to fight against the
Governor-General. He hastened to receive the Madras army, and was lavish
in his professions of loyalty. He was then charged with having violated
treaties by carrying on secret negotiations with Nipal and Runjeet
Singh. He solemnly protested his innocence, but two of his messengers to
Nipal had been arrested on the way, and his own letters addressed to the
Ghorka government were placed in his hands in open durbar by the British
Resident, who simply stated what they were. The letters in question were
damnatory. Sindia had proposed that Ghorkas and Mahrattas should join in
a common attack on the British government.
[Sidenote: Sindia submits.]
Sindia bent to his destiny. He saw that he was checkmated at every turn.
He was dumbfoundered, and made no attempt to defend himself. Nothing
further was done. Lord Hastings left him in possession of his
territories, but took the Rajput princes under British protection, and
bound over Sindia to co-operate against the Pindharies, and to prevent
the formation of any gangs for the future.
[Sidenote: Amir Khan submits.]
Amir Khan was growing old, and was glad to make any terms which would
leave him in possession of his principality. He disbanded his battalions
and sold his cannon to the British government, on condition of being
recognised as hereditary ruler of Tonk. No cause for uneasiness
remained, excepting the disaffected Peishwa of Poona, the mutinous army
of Holkar, and some suspicious movements on the part of the Bhonsla Raja
of Nagpore.
[Sidenote: Destruction of the Pindharies.]
When the rains were over the British armies began to move. There were
120,000 troops under arms, the largest force that had ever taken the
field in India under British colours; twice as many as Lord Wellesley
assembled in 1803-4, and four times as many as Lord Cornwallis led
against Tippu in 1791-92. The Pindharies found themselves abandoned by
Sindia and Amir Khan, and environed by the armies from Bengal and
Madras. Many were shot down, or put to the sword, or perished in the
jungle, or were slain by villagers in revenge for former cruelties.
Others threw themselves on British protection, and were settled on
lands, and became peaceful and industrious cultivators. Within a few
years no traces of the Pindhari gangs were to be found in India.
[Sidenote: Hostility of the Peishwa.]
All this while the Peishwa was at Poona, bent on mischief. He resumed
his levy of troops and his secret intrigues with other princes. The
Poona Subsidiary Force was called away to the northward to co-operate
against the Pindharies, but Mr. Elphinstone obtained a European regiment
from Bombay, and posted it at Khirki, about four miles from the British
Residency.
[Sidenote: Treachery, defeat, flight.]
The Peishwa was baffled by the European regiment. He affected to regard
it as a menace, and threatened to leave Poona unless it was sent back to
Bombay, but he was quieted by its removal to Khirki. He was relying on
the support of Sindia and Amir Khan, and was assured that the Bhonsla
Raja of Nagpore and the army of Holkar were preparing to join him. On
the 5th November, 1817, Mr. Elphinstone left the British Residency at
Poona, and followed the European regiment to Khirki. That same afternoon
the Peishwa attacked the British force at Khirki with an army of 26,000
men, but was beaten back with heavy losses. At night the British
Residency was plundered and set on fire, and the magnificent library of
Mr. Elphinstone was utterly destroyed. Twelve days afterwards the
Subsidiary Force returned to Poona, and the Peishwa was seized with a
panic and fled away from his dominions, never to return.
[Sidenote: Plottings at Nagpore.]
The next explosion was at Nagpore. The Bhonsla Raja, who fled from
Assaye, was dead, and a nephew named Appa Sahib had succeeded to the
throne. Appa Sahib tried to ingratiate himself with the British, but was
playing the same double game as Sindia and the Peishwa. Mr. Jenkins was
Resident at Nagpore, and when news arrived of the attack on Khirki, Appa
Sahib expatiated to him on the treachery of the Peishwa and his own
loyalty. All this while, however, he was in secret correspondence with
the Peishwa, and levying troops for the coming war against the British.
[Sidenote: British preparations.]
The British Residency was separated from the city of Nagpore by the
Sitabuldi hill. On the 25th of November, 1817, eight days after the
flight of the Peishwa, all communication with the Residency was stopped
by Appa Sahib, and the Raja and his ministers were sending their
families and valuables out of the city of Nagpore. Mr. Jenkins foresaw
an outbreak, and ordered the Nagpore Subsidiary Force to occupy
Sitabuldi hill. There was no European regiment as at Khirki, and only
1,400 sepoys fit for duty, including three troops of Bengal cavalry,
and there were only four six-pounders.
[Sidenote: Victory on Sitabuldi hill.]
At evening, 26th December, 1817, Appa Sahib advanced against the hill
Sitabuldi with an army of 18,000 men, including 4,000 Arabs and
thirty-six guns. The battle lasted from six o'clock in the evening until
noon the next day. The British force was literally overwhelmed by the
enemy. The Arabs were closing round the Residency, when Captain
Fitzgerald charged them with the three troops of Bengal cavalry. The
sudden attack surprised and bewildered the Arabs. The British sepoys on
the hill saw the confusion, and rushed down the slope and drove the
Arabs before them like sheep. The memory of this victory has been
preserved down to our own time. The hill Sitabuldi is a monument to the
loyalty and valour of the Bengal cavalry. Every visitor to Nagpore makes
a pilgrimage to Sitabuldi to behold the scene of one of the most
glorious triumphs of the old sepoy army in India. Appa Sahib fled from
Nagpore, but Lord Hastings refused to annex the principality; and an
infant grandson of the predecessor of Appa Sahib was placed upon the
throne, under the guardianship of Mr. Jenkins.
[Sidenote: Defeat of Holkar's army at Mehidpore.]
On the 21st December, five days before the battle of Sitabuldi, the army
of Holkar had been defeated by Sir John Malcolm at Mehidpore. Holkar's
soldiers had received their arrears of pay from the Peishwa, and
declared for the Peishwa. Malcolm approached them with the Madras army,
and they murdered the regent mother on suspicion of negotiating with the
British, and began the battle of Mehidpore by plundering the British
baggage. Holkar's army was defeated; the principality of Indore was
placed at the disposal of Lord Hastings. The infant Raja was left on
the throne, and Holkar's state was brought into subsidiary alliance with
the British government, and required to cede territory for the
maintenance of a subsidiary army.
[Sidenote: Peishwa at Satara.]
Nothing remained to complete the pacification of India but the capture
of the Peishwa. He had fled southward to Satara, to strengthen his cause
by releasing the captive Raja and setting up the old standard of Sivaji.
But British prestige had been effectually restored by Lord Hastings, and
the restless movements of the Peishwa were little more than feverish
efforts to escape from his British pursuers.
[Sidenote: Glorious action at Korygaum.]
One glorious battle was fought on New Year's Day, 1818, a victory of
Bombay sepoys which is celebrated in Deccan songs of triumph to this
day. A detachment of 800 Bombay sepoys was drawn up at the village of
Korygaum, on the bank of the river Bhima, near Satara, under the command
of Captain Staunton. On the opposite bank was the army of the Peishwa,
numbering 25,000 horse and 6,000 Arab infantry. Staunton had but ten
British officers and twenty-four British gunners with two six-pounders.
Staunton occupied the village, but was environed by the Peishwa's army,
and cut off from all supplies and water. The Mahrattas were mad to
capture the village. Three times they tried to storm it with rockets,
but were beaten back by sheer pluck and desperation. Raging with hunger
and thirst, Bombay sepoys and British officers and gunners fought like
heroes, whilst the Peishwa looked on in anger and despair from a
neighbouring hill. Staunton lost a third of his sepoys and eight out of
his ten officers, but the Mahrattas left six hundred killed and wounded
on the field. Next morning the Mahrattas refused to renew the fight,
and the army of the Peishwa moved away.
[Sidenote: Extinction of the Peishwa, 1818.]
Such a humiliation must have taken away all hope from the Peishwa. For
six months longer he kept out of the reach of his pursuers, but was at
last environed by British troops under Sir John Malcolm. He threw
himself on the mercy of the British government, and eventually talked
over Sir John Malcolm, as he had done a year or two previously in the
matter of the three fortresses. From feelings of pity for an Asiatic
prince who had ruined himself by his own treachery, Malcolm gave his
personal guarantee that the British government would pay a pension to
the conquered Peishwa of 80,000_l._ a year. Lord Hastings was extremely
angry at such a charge upon the yearly revenue, but would not withhold
his sanction to Malcolm's guarantee.[19] Since then there has been no
Peishwa of the Mahrattas. The ex-ruler lived in idle luxury near
Cawnpore, whilst his dominions were incorporated with the Bombay
Presidency. A futile attempt was made by Lord Hastings to revive the
extinct Raja of Satara, but in the course of years the Raja was
intriguing like the Peishwa, and the principality was eventually annexed
by Lord Dalhousie.
[Sidenote: Pacification and protection of Rajputana, 1818.]
The crowning event in the administration of Lord Hastings was the
renewal of protective treaties with the princes of Rajputana. The raids
of the Mahrattas, which had been the curse and agony of Rajputana for
nearly a century, were stopped for ever. The territory of Ajmere, in the
heart of Rajputana, which had been successively the head-quarters of
Mogul and Mahratta suzerainty, was taken over by the British government,
and is to this day the head-quarters of the Agent to the Viceroy for the
states of Rajputana, and a centre of British supremacy and paramount
power.
[Sidenote: Lord Amherst, 1823-28: demands of Burma.]
§12. Lord Amherst succeeded Lord Hastings as Governor-General in 1823.
The wars of 1817-18 had established the peace of India, by breaking up
the predatory system which had been a terror to Hindus and Mohammedans
for more than a century. But the king of Burma, to the eastward of
Bengal, was causing some anxiety by demanding the surrender of political
fugitives from his dominions who had taken refuge in British territory.
The British government refused compliance. Had the refugees been given
up, they would have been crucified, or otherwise tortured to death by
the Burmese officials. Common humanity forbade the concession, so the
refugees were required to keep the peace within British territory, and
to abstain from all plots or hostile movements against the Burmese
government.
[Sidenote: Burmese aggressions.]
For years the Burmese officials tried to bully the British government
into surrendering these refugees. They knew nothing of the outer world,
and treated the British with contempt as a nation of traders, who had
paid the Indian sepoys to fight their battles. Conciliation only
provoked them to insolence and aggression. They seized an island
belonging to the British. They overran the intervening countries of
Munipore and Assam, and demanded the cession of Chittagong. Finally,
they invaded British territory and cut off a detachment of sepoys, and
threatened, with all the bombast of barbarians, to conquer Bengal, and
bring away the Governor-General in golden fetters.
[Sidenote: Expedition to Rangoon, 1824.]
At last Lord Amherst sent an expedition under Sir Archibald Campbell to
the port of Rangoon, the capital of the Burmese province of Pegu. The
Burmese officials were taken by surprise. They sent a mob of raw levies
to prevent the British from landing, but the impromptu army fled at the
first discharge of British guns. The British landed, and found that all
the men, women, and children of Rangoon had fled to the jungle, with all
their provisions and grain. The British occupied Rangoon, but the
country round about was forest and swamp. The rains began, and the
troops were struck down with fever, dysentery, and bad food. No supplies
could be obtained except by sea from Madras or Calcutta. Nearly every
European in Rangoon who survived the rains of 1824 had reason to
remember the Burmese seaport to the end of his days.
[Sidenote: British advance to Ava.]
[Sidenote: Peace.]
When the rains were over a Burmese general of great renown approached
Rangoon with an army of 60,000 braves, and environed the place with
stockades. There was some severe fighting at these stockades, but at
last they were taken by storm, and the braves fled in a panic. The
British expedition advanced up the river Irrawaddy, through the valley
of Pegu. The people of Pegu, who had been conquered by the king of Burma
some sixty years before, rejoiced at being delivered from their Burmese
oppressors, and eagerly brought in supplies. The British expedition was
approaching Ava, the capital of the kingdom, when the king of Burma came
to terms, and agreed to pay a million sterling towards the expenses of a
war which cost more than ten millions. The British were content with
annexing two strips of sea-board, known as Arakan and Tenasserim, which
never paid the cost of administration; and left the valley of Pegu, and
even the port of Rangoon, in possession of the king of Burma. But Assam
and Cachar, between Bengal and Burma, were brought under British rule,
and eventually made up for the expenditure on the war by the cultivation
of tea.
[Sidenote: War against Bhurtpore, 1825-26.]
Meanwhile, Lord Amherst had some difficulty with the Jhat state of
Bhurtpore in Rajputana, which had defied Lord Lake in 1805, but had
eventually been brought under British protection. In 1825 the Raja died,
and the succession of an infant son was recognised by the British
government. An uncle, however, seized the throne, and shut himself up in
the mud fortress which had resisted the assaults of Lord Lake. At first
Lord Amherst was disinclined to interfere, but all the restless spirits,
who had been reduced to obedience by the wars of 1817-18, were beginning
to rally round the usurper, who had openly defied the British
government. A British force was sent to Bhurtpore, under Lord
Combermere. The mud walls were undermined, and blown up with gunpowder.
The British soldiers rushed in, the usurper was deposed, and the young
Raja was restored to the throne, under the protection of the paramount
power.
[Sidenote: Lord William Bentinck, 1828-35: peace and progress.]
§13. Lord William Bentinck succeeded Lord Amherst in 1828. His
administration was emphatically one of progress. He promoted English
education amongst Hindus and Mohammedans, and founded a medical college
at Calcutta. He laboured hard to establish steam navigation between
India and Europe _viâ_ the Red Sea, in the place of the old sailing
route round the Cape. He encouraged the cultivation of tea in Assam and
Cachar. He sought to open a trade with Central Asia up the river Indus,
but was foiled by Runjeet Singh, who was still as friendly as ever, but
resolutely bent on keeping the British out of his territories.
[Sidenote: Abolition of Suttee 1829.]
In 1829, the year after the arrival of Lord William Bentinck, he
electrified India by the abolition of suttee. In these advanced days it
is difficult to understand why British rulers did not suppress this
hateful rite the moment they had the power. But for many years
toleration and non-intervention were a kind of fanaticism with British
administrators; and the Bengalis appeared to exult in the performance of
a rite which they knew to be obnoxious to Europeans. As a matter of
fact, the number of suttees in Bengal appeared to increase under British
rule, and this was most marked in the villages round Calcutta.
[Sidenote: Relief of Hindus.]
The abolition of suttee by treating it as a capital crime was followed
by none of the evils which had been anticipated. There was no rising of
the sepoys; no discontent on the part of the masses. British rulers were
delivered from the odium of sanctioning a barbarous crime under the plea
of religious toleration; whilst the living widow was no longer compelled
to immolate herself with her dead husband, nor was her son forced by a
sense of duty to apply the torch to the funeral pile. The pride of
Brahmans and Rajputs may have been wounded when all concerned in the
performance of the ancient rite were punished by imprisonment or death,
but humanity has triumphed, and suttees have vanished from British
India, and from every state owing allegiance to British sovereignty.
[Sidenote: Thug atrocities.]
§14. The suppression of the Thugs was another work of the time. These
detestable miscreants appeared to the outer world as honest traders or
agriculturists, who occasionally went on pilgrimage or travelled for
business or pleasure. In reality they were organised gangs of murderers,
having a dialect and signs of their own. They made friends with other
travellers going the same way; halted beneath the shade of trees, and
suddenly threw their nooses round the necks of their victims, strangled
them to death, rifled them of their money and goods, and buried them
with a speed which defied detection. Sometimes the unwary traveller was
beguiled by a female to a lonely spot, and was never heard of more.
[Sidenote: Hereditary Thug gangs.]
Every boy born of Thugs was brought up in what may be called the
religion of the noose. From his cradle he was taught that he was bound
to follow the trade of his forefathers; that, like them, he was the
blind instrument of the deity of life and death. At first he acted as a
scout; then he was allowed to handle and bury the victim; and finally
tried his prentice hand at strangling. Before committing his first
murder, one of the elders acted as his Guru or spiritual guide, and
initiated him in the use of the noose as a solemn rite associated with
the worship of the goddess Durga, Bowani, or Kali, the mythical bride of
Siva, the incarnation of the mysteries of life and dissolution, who is
often represented with a noose in her hand.[20] Throughout his after
career he adored the goddess as a tutelar deity; worshipped her in
temples where Thugs officiated as priests; and propitiated her with
offerings of flesh meat and strong drinks, which were supposed to be
most acceptable to female divinity.
[Sidenote: Suppression.]
The Hindus were too fearful and superstitious to suppress the Thugs. The
Moguls had no such scruples, and often condemned Thugs to a cruel death;
but wealthy Hindus would offer large ransoms to save their lives, or
would follow the miscreants to the place of execution and regale them
with sweetmeats and tobacco. When, however, the British discovered the
secret organisation, they resolved to break up the gangs and put an end
to the hereditary association. A department was organised for the
suppression of Thugs, and chiefs and princes were called upon to
co-operate in the work of extermination. Between 1830 and 1835 two
thousand Thugs were arrested, and fifteen hundred were imprisoned for
life, or transported beyond the seas, or publicly executed. Many saved
their lives by giving evidence against their fellows, but were shut up
for the rest of their days to protect them from vengeance, and to
prevent their return to a horrible profession which had become an
hereditary instinct in Thug families. To this day the children or
grandchildren of the old Thug gangs, who were the terror of India within
the memory of living men, are manufacturing carpets, or working at some
other useful trade, within prison walls.
[Sidenote: Civil and judicial reforms.]
§15. Lord William Bentinck put a finishing touch to the civil and
judicial administration which Warren Hastings initiated and Lord
Cornwallis reformed. The district was still retained as the unit of
Indian administration, with its civil judge, and its collector and
magistrate, and necessary establishments of native officials. But the
civil judge was invested with the criminal powers of a sessions judge
for the trial of prisoners, and henceforth known as the district judge.
The four provincial courts of circuit and appeal were swept away, and
the supervision of districts was entrusted to commissioners of
divisions, each having five or six districts under his control.
Henceforth the collector and magistrate was under the control of the
commissioner, and was sometimes known as the deputy commissioner.[21]
[Sidenote: Asiatic officials.]
Lord William Bentinck also introduced an Asiatic element into British
administration, which was the first real movement in that direction. He
appointed natives of India to be "deputy collectors," and created a
higher class of native judges to those appointed by Lord Cornwallis.
They are known in the present day as "subordinate judges." The further
development of these political experiments belong to the later history.
[Sidenote: North-West Provinces.]
§16. Hitherto the "North-West Provinces" had been a mere appendage of
Bengal. They were known as the Upper Provinces, whilst Bengal, Behar,
and Orissa were known as the Lower Provinces. But a territory which
extended from Assam to the Punjab was too vast for the supervision
of the Governor-General of Bengal in Council. Accordingly the
North-West Provinces were separated from Bengal and placed under a
Lieutenant-Governor, without a Council, but with a separate Sudder
Court and Board of Revenue.[22]
[Sidenote: Hindu village communities.]
The Hindu people in the North-West Provinces are more masculine and
independent than those of Bengal. In Bengal the Hindu village
communities had nearly faded away under the domination of zemindars. In
the North-West Provinces the village communities had survived every
revolution, and have been compared to little commonwealths, each having
an individual and domestic life of its own, unchanged by the storms and
troubles of the outer world. The village community paid a yearly
revenue,--a share of the crops or a commutation in money,--to whatever
power might be uppermost, Mogul or Mahratta, Mohammedan or Hindu. The
members took a keen interest, individually and collectively, in settling
the yearly rate to be paid by the whole village to the government of the
day. But otherwise they cared not who was the reigning authority, Sindia
or Lord Wellesley; nor who was the French general of the sepoy
battalions of Sindia, nor who was the British commander-in-chief of the
armies of the Governor-General.
[Sidenote: Constitution of Hindu villages.]
The village community was originally a brotherhood, consisting of a
tribe, family, or clan, who settled in a particular locality, and
distributed the land, or the produce of the land, amongst themselves.
The area was called a village, but was more like an English parish. The
village community managed its own affairs, and claimed a joint
proprietorship in all the land within the village area. They rented out
waste lands to yearly tenants, strangers and outsiders, who were treated
as tenants, and shut out from the management. Some of these tenants
acquired rights of occupancy by prescription or length of possession,
whilst others were only tenants at will.
[Sidenote: Hereditary officials and artisans.]
The village commonwealth had its own hereditary officials, such as a
village accountant, who kept a record of all transactions between the
joint proprietors, and all accounts between the joint proprietors and
their tenants. There was also a village constable or guide, who watched
the crops and looked after strangers. Sometimes, when a brotherhood had
decayed, a head man ruled the village in their room; and the headman,
with the help of the accountant and constable, managed all the domestic
affairs of the village, and conducted its relations with the outer
world. To these were added hereditary artisans, such as a carpenter,
potter, blacksmith, barber, tailor, washerman, and jeweller. In like
manner there was an hereditary schoolmaster, astrologer, and priest, who
were generally Brahmans. The higher officials were remunerated with
hereditary lands, held rent free; but the others were paid by fees of
grain or money. Traces of these institutions are still to be found in
Behar and Orissa, but in Bengal proper the village life has died out.
Hereditary artisans still remain, but hereditary officials have become
the servants of the zemindar.
[Sidenote: Land revenue.]
These village communities contributed a yearly revenue to the government
of the day, either as joint proprietors or through a head man. In theory
they claimed possession of the land because they had cleared the jungle,
and cultivated and occupied a virgin soil. But they paid a revenue to
the Raja in return for protection, or to satisfy the superior right of
the sovereign, or as black-mail to prevent the Raja from carrying off
their crops and cattle.
[Sidenote: Talukdars or zemindars.]
After the Mohammedan conquest the mode of collection differed according
to circumstances. Sometimes officials were appointed by the sovereign.
Sometimes a local magnate, or a revenue farmer, was employed, who
collected the revenue from a group of villages, and paid a yearly block
sum to the sovereign. They were middle-men, getting what they could out
of the village communities, and paying as little as they could to the
government of the day. These local chiefs, or revenue contractors, were
known in the North-West Provinces as talukdars. They corresponded to the
zemindars of Bengal, and often, like them, assumed the rights of
ownership over the villages.
[Sidenote: Settlement with joint village proprietors.]
Lord Wellesley ordered that the land revenue in the North-West Provinces
should be settled with the talukdars at fixed rates, like the perpetual
settlement with the zemindars in Bengal. Fortunately, there was a
preliminary inquiry into the conflicting rights of talukdars and village
proprietors, which terminated in favour of the villagers. Lord William
Bentinck travelled through the North-West Provinces, and eventually the
land revenue was settled direct with the joint village proprietors.
[Sidenote: Madras villages: Hindu colonisation.]
§17. The Madras Presidency seems to have been originally distributed
into village communities of joint proprietors. A Hindu legend has been
preserved to this day, which tells the story of old Hindu colonisation.
A Raja of the southern country had a son by a woman of low birth. The
people refused to accept the prince as their Raja. Accordingly the young
man crossed the river Palar with a band of emigrants, and cleared the
forest to the northward, near the site of the modern city of Madras. For
six years the emigrants paid no share of the crops to the Raja. In the
seventh year they were brought under the revenue administration.[23]
[Sidenote: Joint village proprietors.]
The modern history of this locality is equally interesting. It was ceded
by the Nawab of the Carnatic to the East India Company during the wars
of the eighteenth century, and was known as the Company's Jaghir. It was
found to be in the possession of joint village proprietors of the same
constitution as those described in the North-West Provinces, and a
settlement of the land revenue was made with these joint proprietors.
[Sidenote: Disappearance.]
During the latter half of the eighteenth century the rights of the joint
village proprietors in Southern India faded away under the tyranny of
Asiatic rulers, but the hereditary officials, artisans, and
professionals still survived. Few, if any, joint village proprietors in
their full entirety could be found in any villages under the Nawab's
officials; whilst those within the Company's Jaghir had been duly
respected and preserved by the British officials. Under such
circumstances it was proposed to settle the revenue of the Carnatic
territory, acquired in 1801, with individual ryots or landholders under
what was afterwards known as the ryotwari system.
[Sidenote: Perpetual settlement ordered.]
Lord Wellesley, however, interfered, and ordered that perpetual
settlements should be concluded with zemindars. Somehow this zemindari
settlement had a fascination for British statesmen of the period. It was
believed that the creation of an aristocracy of landlords would
guarantee the permanence of British rule in India. Accordingly, Lord
Wellesley was deaf to all arguments in favour of a ryotwari settlement,
and threatened to remove any public servant in the Madras Presidency who
should hesitate to carry out his orders.
[Sidenote: No zemindars.]
Madras had no alternative but to submit. There were zemindars in the
Telugu country to the northward, which had been conquered centuries
previously by the Mohammedan Sultans of Golconda; and with these
zemindars it was easy to conclude a perpetual settlement. But there were
no zemindars in the Tamil country to the southward.
[Sidenote: Zemindars created.]
In this extremity there was no alternative but to manufacture zemindars.
Accordingly zemindars were created in the Madras Presidency by the old
Bengal process of grouping villages together, selling them by auction,
and treating the lucky buyer as a zemindar. But the new zemindars failed
to pay the stipulated revenue. The groups of villages were again brought
into the market, and as Lord Wellesley had left India, the estates were
bought in by the Madras government, and the revenue resettled with
individual ryots or cultivators.[24]
[Sidenote: Military bond-holders.]
In Malabar and Canara on the western coast the proprietors of land did
not live in villages. They were landholders of the old military type,
clinging to their lands with hereditary tenacity, employing serfs or
slaves to cultivate them, and paying no revenue except feudal service
and homage to their suzerain. Eventually Malabar and Canara were
conquered by Tippu of Mysore, and the landholders were compelled to pay
revenue, or to surrender their lands.
[Sidenote: Thomas Munro: ryotwari settlement.]
Thomas Munro is the real author of the ryotwari settlement. He was a
cadet in the Madras army, who landed at Fort St. George about the time
that Hyder Ali was desolating the Carnatic. In 1792 he was employed in
settling the revenue in Malabar and Canara, which had been ceded by
Tippu to Lord Cornwallis; and there he formed his ideas of a settlement
direct with individual landholders. The controversy between Madras and
Bengal raged for years, but in the end Thomas Munro was victorious. He
converted the Board of Control and Court of Directors to his views. He
was knighted, and appointed Governor of Madras. He died in 1827, after
having triumphantly introduced the ryotwari. The zemindars in the Telegu
country still retain their estates with the proprietary rights of
landlords.
[Sidenote: Bombay: Mountstuart Elphinstone.]
Meanwhile the Bombay Presidency had been vastly enlarged by the
acquisition of the dominions of the Peishwa. Mr. Mountstuart
Elphinstone, the contemporary of Sir Thomas Munro, was appointed
Governor of Bombay. He introduced the ryotwari settlement into the
Mahratta country, and framed a code of laws which remained in force
throughout the Bombay Presidency until 1860, when it was superseded by
the Penal Code.
[Sidenote: Madras collectorates.]
Lord William Bentinck's system of commissioners of divisions was
introduced into the North-West Provinces and Bombay; but the Madras
Presidency was without commissioners or divisions, and was distributed
into twenty large districts or collectorates, which on an average are as
large as Yorkshire. In Bengal and the North-West Provinces the districts
on an average are no larger than Devonshire. In each Madras district
there was a collector, who might be described as a proconsul, and a
civil and sessions judge, corresponding to those in the other
Presidencies. The administration of the Madras Presidency, revenue and
judicial, has always been distinguished by a larger element of Asiatic
officials than either Bengal, Bombay, or the North-West Provinces.
[Sidenote: Charter Act of 1833: India Thrown open.]
§18. The last and most important changes in the rule of the East India
Company were carried out during the administration of Lord William
Bentinck, under the charter Act of 1833. Before, however, dealing with
this radical reform, it may be as well to review the successive stages
in the relations of the East India Company towards parliament and the
crown.
[Sidenote: Company and Crown, 1600-1688.]
During the seventeenth century, the first of the Company's existence, it
mainly depended on the favour of the crown. It had obtained a charter of
exclusive trade from Queen Elizabeth. It prevailed on James I. to send
Sir Thomas Roe as ambassador to India, to propitiate the Great Mogul and
secure his good offices for the Company's trade. It sold 600,000 lbs. of
pepper to Charles I. on the security of bonds on the customs, and
enabled that sovereign to raise £60,000 for the expenses of his war with
Parliament. Oliver Cromwell however did not approve of trade monopolies.
The Lord Protector was willing to help the English Company to fight the
Dutch Company, but he was of opinion that every Englishman had as much
right as the Company to trade in the Eastern seas. Charles II. and James
II. renewed the Company's original monopoly and privileges, and received
presents in return, which however rarely exceeded the modest sum of
£1,200 a year.
[Sidenote: Parliament interposes, 1688-1708.]
Under William of Orange the monopoly of the East Indies was again in
danger. Parliament voted that every Englishman might traffic wherever he
pleased. The Directors scattered bribes with a lavish hand; but
parliament insisted upon searching the books of the Company. Then
discoveries were made which were scandalous alike to the Company and the
nation. Every man in power, from the highest to the lowest, had taken
money from the India House. In 1693 about £90,000 had been spent in
corruption. The Duke of Leeds was impeached in the House of Commons for
taking a bribe of £5,000, and £10,000 was traced to the illustrious
William. In this extremity the King prorogued parliament, and
proceedings were brought to a close.
[Sidenote: The United Company.]
The parliamentary vote however had abolished for a while the monopoly of
the trade with the East Indies. A second East India Company was formed
and the two rivals nearly ruined each other. At last the two Companies
were united into one, and a large loan was advanced to government by the
new corporation. Under this new arrangement the trade monopoly was
secured to the united Company throughout the eighteenth century.
[Sidenote: Old East India House.]
In those early days every shop in London exhibited a sign or emblem. The
first old East India House was a quaint building with a large
entablature in front, bearing three ships in full sail and a dolphin at
each end. The business was distributed amongst the Directors, and
transacted in committees. All the Directors put their names to the
letters sent to India, and signed themselves "Your loving friends." To
this day the business of the India Office is conducted by committees,
but the "loving friends" vanished with the East India Company.
[Sidenote: New India House.]
In the early half of the eighteenth century a new India House was built
in Leadenhall Street. It was here that the Directors grew into merchant
princes, and administered the affairs of provinces, until they built up
our Anglo-Indian empire. Here too began the later conflict between the
Company and the House of Commons. George III. was bent on coercing
parliament and removing his ministers at will. But during the coalition
ministry of Lord North and Charles James Fox, there was a battle royal
between parliament and the crown.
[Sidenote: Fox's India Bill.]
In 1783 Fox introduced his bill for abolishing the Court of Directors,
and transferring their power and patronage to seven commissioners
nominated in the bill. An agitation arose which threw the whole kingdom
into a ferment. The King claimed the right of governing all countries
conquered by his subjects. Accordingly he claimed the right of
nominating the seven commissioners, and thus getting all the power and
patronage of the Court of Directors into his own hands. But the House of
Commons would not trust the King. Whigs and Tories saw that their
liberties would be endangered by such additions to the royal
prerogative, and they passed Fox's bill by large majorities.
[Sidenote: Hostility of George III.]
King George was furious. His only hope was that the obnoxious bill would
be thrown out by the Lords. He caused a message to be conveyed to every
peer, that his Majesty would withdraw his friendship from any one who
voted for the bill. Accordingly the bill was thrown out by the Lords.
Fox and Lord North were ignominiously dismissed, and William Pitt the
younger became prime minister.
[Sidenote: Pitt's India Bill.]
Pitt's India Bill of 1784 was a marvel of statesmanship. The Court of
Directors was left in the full exercise of all patronage as regards
first appointments in England to the ranks of the Indian civil services,
or to cadetships in the armies of the three Presidencies. All promotions
in India were left to the local governments and to the Governor-General
in Council. Parliament exercised a constitutional control over the
whole administration of the Anglo-Indian empire; and the patronage,
whether in England or in India, was wisely kept out of the hands of
either ministers or the crown.
[Sidenote: Abolition of monopoly.]
Under the charter act of 1813 the trade of the Company with India was
thrown open to the British nation, but the Company still retained its
monopoly of trade with China. The Company, however, suffered little by
the loss of its monopoly as regards India. It was an old-established
firm of two centuries standing. Its settlements and shipping were all in
full swing, and it continued for twenty years longer to carry on a
splendid business, which suffered but little by the rivalry of private
interlopers. Meanwhile, as already seen, it had become the paramount
power in India by its successful wars against Nepal and Burma, the
extinction of the Peishwa, the humiliation of Sindia and Holkar, and the
extermination of the predatory system.
[Sidenote: End of Company's trade.]
Under the charter act of 1833 all trading on the part of the East India
Company, whether with India or with China, was brought to a close. The
East India Docks were emptied of the Company's shipping, and the trade
of Europe in the Eastern seas was thrown open to the whole world.
[Sidenote: Licensing system.]
Another radical change was also effected. Ever since the first
establishment of the Company's settlements in India, no British born
subject, not in the service of the Company, had been permitted by law to
reside in India without having previously procured a license from the
Court of Directors. This license system was brought to a close in 1833,
and any British born subject might take up his residence in India, and
trade or travel wherever he pleased.
[Sidenote: Constitutional changes.]
The constitution of the British government in India was remodelled. The
Governor-General of Bengal was created Governor-General of India with
increased control over Madras and Bombay. The Council of India, which
hitherto consisted of the Governor-General as President, two Bengal
civilians, and occasionally the commander-in-chief of the Bengal army,
was increased by the addition of a law member. Mr., afterwards Lord,
Macaulay was appointed to the new post. His labours will be noticed
hereafter in dealing with the constitutional changes of 1853.
[Sidenote: Centralisation.]
Henceforth all legislative authority and financial control were centred
in the government of India; and the governments of Madras and Bombay
were stripped of all power to enact laws, and prohibited from creating
any new office or making any grant of money, without the consent of the
Governor-General of India in Council, or the sanction of the Court of
Directors.
[Sidenote: Stagnation at Madras and Bombay.]
The charter of 1833 was not an unmixed good. It stopped all progress in
Madras and Bombay by bringing those Presidencies too closely under the
control of Bengal. For twenty years they had no representatives in the
Council at Calcutta. They had framed their own systems of land revenue.
They were relieved of the cares of trade, which had been a worry to
Governors and Governors-General from the days of the Marquis of
Wellesley to those of Lord William Bentinck. But after the year 1833
they were more or less paralysed by the loss of all discretion and
responsibility in matters of legislation and expenditure. Great events
were about to agitate Northern India, but for twenty years Madras and
Bombay were without a history, and the work of administration was as
lifeless and monotonous as the working of a machine.
[Sidenote: Popular administration of Bentinck.]
Lord William Bentinck left India in 1835. His administration had been
eminently popular with all classes of the community; and his memory is
preserved to this day as that of a just and able ruler, who paid due
regard to the rights and claims of Asiatics as well as of Europeans.
[Sidenote: Sir Charles Metcalfe, 1835-6: coming collisions with Asiatic
powers.]
Sir Charles Metcalfe, the Bengal civilian, who was sent on a mission to
Runjeet Singh in 1808, and since then had filled some of the most
responsible posts in the Anglo-Indian empire, acted as Governor-General
between the departure of Lord William Bentinck in 1835 and the arrival
of Lord Auckland in 1836. A new era was beginning to dawn upon India.
Great Britain was about to appear, not only as mistress of an
Anglo-Indian empire, but as an Asiatic power coming more or less into
collision with four other Asiatic powers--Persia, Russia, Afghanistan
and China.
FOOTNOTES:
[17] The following fragment preserves something of the feeling of the
time:--
"Fill the wine-cup fast, for the storm is past,
The tyrant Tippu is slain at last,
And victory smiles
To reward the toils
Of Britons once again.
"Let the trumpet sound, and the sound go round
Along the bound of Eastern ground;
Let the cymbals clang
With a merry-merry bang,
To the joys of the next campaign."
[18] There was also some show of treaty rights in appropriating the
territory, but the question is obscure and obsolete. In 1775 the Nawab
Vizier had ceded the revenues of the territory for the maintenance of
a British force in Oudh, and Lord Wellesley is said to have only
closed the mortgage by taking over the country.
[19] The ex-Peishwa was born in 1775, when Warren Hastings and Philip
Francis were beginning to quarrel at Calcutta. He ascended the throne
of Poona in 1795. He concluded the treaty of Bassein with Lord
Wellesley in 1802. He was dethroned in 1818. He lived at Bithoor, near
Cawnpore, until he died, an old man of seventy-seven, in 1853. After
his death the notorious Nana Sahib claimed to be an adopted son, and
demanded a continuation of the pension of 80,000_l._ The story will be
found in Chapter VI., of the present volume, in connection with the
massacre at Cawnpore during the sepoy mutinies of 1857.
[20] Kali, the black goddess, is the tutelar deity of Calcutta. By a
strange anomaly, Calcutta is so called after the temple Kali, at the
village of Kali ghat, in the suburbs of the British metropolis. The
temple enclosure, where kids and goats are sacrificed, is not a
pleasant place to look at.
[21] In each district there was a magistrate and collector. The two
duties had been separated by Lord Cornwallis, but were generally
united in one officer, who was the head of the district and
representative of the British government. As magistrate he punished
Asiatic offenders with fine and imprisonment, and committed serious
cases for trial. He controlled the police, managed the jail, and was
generally responsible for the peace and order of the district. As
collector he received the revenues of the district, took charge of the
treasury, and controlled the district expenditure. If anything went
wrong in the district the magistrate and collector was the universal
referee and centre of authority.
The civil judge in each district was raised to the rank of a sessions
judge. He was the judicial head of the district. He heard appeals from
all the subordinate courts, tried all important civil cases, and held
a jail delivery once a month, for the trial of all prisoners committed
by the magistrate and collector. Henceforth he was known as the
district judge.
Lord William Bentinck abolished the four provincial courts of circuit
and appeal which had been established by Lord Cornwallis, declaring
that they had become mere resting-places for those civil servants who
were unfit for higher duties. In their room he appointed commissioners
of divisions, each of whom had five or six districts under his
control. Henceforth the commissioner supervised the civil and judicial
administration throughout the districts within his division. He was
the channel of all communications between the British government at
Calcutta and the district officers. Sometimes he heard appeals from
the civil and sessions judge, but as a rule such appeals went to the
Sudder Courts at Calcutta. In revenue matters he was controlled by the
Board of Revenue at Calcutta.
The district officers had European assistants, as well as
establishments of Asiatic officials.
[22] The North-West Provinces, which extend from Bengal to the Punjab,
were to have been formed into the "Agra" Presidency. The change of
name would have been extremely convenient. Later on, when the Punjab
was annexed, the term "North-West Provinces" became a misnomer. The
Punjab was _de facto_ the furthest province on the north-west. Since
then Oudh has been annexed to the North-West Provinces, and the term
"North-West Provinces and Oudh" has become cumbrous. A single name
like "Agra" would be more appropriate.
[23] See the author's _History of India from the Earliest Ages_, vol.
iii., pages 60, 280, etc.
[24] The villages in the Company's Jaghir shared the same fate. They
were sold by auction in groups, and were mostly bought up by native
servants and dependents of the British officials at Madras. In process
of time the ryotwari settlement was introduced, and then a very knotty
question was raised. Under the ryotwari settlement a certain portion
of the waste lands round a village was given to the villagers in
common for grazing and other purposes; but the culturable waste lands
were taken over by the British authorities, and valued, and rented out
accordingly, to such ryots as were willing to bring them under
cultivation. The buyers of the villages in the Company's Jaghir
claimed, however, to be proprietors of the whole of the waste lands.
For many years the demand was referred by the Board of Revenue to the
Supreme Court, and by the Supreme Court back again to the Board of
Revenue. By this time the question has perhaps been settled.