1869
Afzal Khan ousts Sher Ali--Sher Ali regains the Amirship
--Foresight of Sir Henry Rawlinson--The Umballa Durbar
In January, 1869, Sir John Lawrence, after a career which was
altogether unique, he having risen from the junior grades of
the Bengal Civil Service to the almost regal position of
Governor-General,[1] left India for good. He was succeeded as Viceroy
by Lord Mayo, one of whose first official acts was to hold a durbar at
Umballa for the reception of the Amir Sher Ali, who, after five years
of civil war, had succeeded in establishing himself on the throne
of Afghanistan, to which he had been nominated by his father, Dost
Mahomed Khan.[2]
Sher Ali had passed through a stormy time between the death of the
Dost, in June, 1863, and September, 1868. He had been acknowledged as
the rightful heir by the Government of India, and for the first three
years he held the Amirship in a precarious sort of way. His two elder
brothers, Afzal and Azim, and his nephew, Abdur Rahman (the present
Ruler of Afghanistan), were in rebellion against him. The death of
his favourite son and heir-apparent, Ali Khan, in action near
Khelat-i-Ghilzai, in 1865, grieved him so sorely that for a time his
reason was affected. In May, 1866, he was defeated near Ghazni (mainly
owing to the treachery of his own troops) by Abdur Rahman, who,
releasing his father, Afzal, from the prison into which he had been
cast by Sher Ali, led him in triumph to Kabul, and proclaimed him Amir
of Afghanistan.
The new Amir, Afzal, at once wrote to the Government of India
detailing what had occurred, and expressing a hope that the friendship
of the British, which he so greatly valued, would be extended to him.
He was told, in reply, that the Government recognized him as Ruler of
Kabul, but that, as Sher Ali still held Kandahar and Herat, existing
engagements with the latter could not be broken off. The evident
preference thus displayed for Sher Ali caused the greatest vexation to
the brothers Afzal and Azim, who showed their resentment by directing
an Envoy who had come from Swat to pay his respects to the new Amir
to return to his own country and set on foot a holy war against the
English; the Waziri _maliks_[3] in attendance at the court were
dismissed with presents and directions to harass the British frontier,
while an emissary was despatched on a secret mission to the Russians.
After his defeat near Ghazni, Sher Ali fled to Kandahar, and in the
January of the following year (again owing to treachery in his army)
he met with a second defeat near Khelat-i-Ghilzai, and lost Kandahar.
On this fact being communicated to the Government of India, Afzal Khan
was in his turn recognized as Amir of Kabul and Kandahar. But he was
at the same time informed that the British Government intended to
maintain a strict neutrality between the contending parties in
Afghanistan. John Lawrence, in his letter of the 20th of February,
said that 'neither men, nor arms, nor money, nor assistance of any
kind, have ever been supplied by my Government to Amir Sher Ali. Your
Highness and he, both equally unaided by me, have fought out the
battle, each upon your own resources. I purpose to continue the same
policy for the future. If, unhappily, the struggle for supremacy in
Afghanistan has not yet been brought to a close, and hostilities are
again renewed, I shall still side with neither party.'
This reply altogether failed to satisfy Afzal and Azim. They answered
it civilly, but at the same time they sent a copy of it to General
Romanofski, the Russian Governor of Tashkent, who was informed by
the new Amir that he had no confidence in the 'Lord _sahib's_ fine
professions of friendship, and that he was disgusted with the British
Government for the ingratitude and ill-treatment shown towards his
brother Azim.[4] He looked upon the Russians as his real and only
friends, hoped soon to send a regular Ambassador to the Russian camp,
and would at all times do his utmost to protect and encourage Russian
trade.'
In October of this year (1867) Afzal Khan died, and his brother Azim,
hastening to Kabul, took upon himself the Amirship. Abdur Rahman had
hoped to have succeeded his father, but his uncle having forestalled
him, he thought it politic to give in his allegiance to him, which he
did by presenting his dead father's sword, in durbar, to the new Amir,
who, like his predecessor, was now acknowledged by the Government of
India as Ruler of Kabul and Kandahar.
The tide, however, was beginning to turn in favour of Sher Ali. Azim
and Abdur Rahman quarrelled, and the former, by his extortions and
cruelties, made himself detested by the people generally.
In March, 1868, Sher Ali's eldest son, Yakub Khan, regained possession
of Kandahar for his father. In July father and son found themselves
strong enough to move towards Ghazni, where Azim Khan's army was
assembled. The latter, gradually deserted by his soldiers, took to
flight, upon which Sher Ali, after an absence of forty months, entered
Kabul on the 8th of September, and re-possessed himself of all his
dominions, with the exception of Balkh, where Azim and Abdur Rahman
(now reconciled to each other) still flew the flag of rebellion.
One of the newly-installed Amir's first acts was to inform the Viceroy
of his return to Kabul, and of the recovery of his kingdom. He
announced his desire to send some trusted representatives, or else
proceed himself in person, to Calcutta, 'for the purpose of showing
his sincerity and firm attachment to the British Government, and
making known his real wants.'
Sir John Lawrence, in his congratulatory reply, showed that a change
had come over his policy of non-interference in the internal affairs
of Afghanistan, for he stated that he was 'prepared, not only to
maintain the bonds of amity and goodwill which were established
between Dost Mahomed and the British Government, but, so far as may be
practicable, to strengthen those bonds'; and, as a substantial proof
of his goodwill, the Viceroy sent Sher Ali £60,000, aid which arrived
at a most opportune moment, and gave the Amir that advantage over his
opponents which is of incalculable value in Afghan civil war, namely,
funds wherewith to pay the army and bribe the opposite side.
The energetic and capable Abdur Rahman Khan had in the meantime
collected a sufficient number of troops in Turkestan to enable him to
move towards Kabul with his uncle Azim. On nearing Ghazni, he found
himself confronted by Sher Ali; the opposing forces were about equal
in strength, and on both sides there was the same scarcity of ready
money. Suddenly the report was received that money was being sent from
India to Sher Ali, and this turned the scale in his favour. Abdur
Rahman's men deserted in considerable numbers, and a battle fought
on the 3rd January, 1869, resulted in the total defeat of uncle and
nephew, and in the firmer consolidation of Sher Ali's supremacy.
The change in policy which induced the Government of India to assist
a struggling Amir with money, after its repeated and emphatic
declarations that interference was impossible, was undoubtedly brought
about by an able and elaborate memorandum written by the late Sir
Henry Rawlinson on the 28th July, 1868. In this paper Rawlinson
pointed out that, notwithstanding promises to the contrary, Russia was
steadily advancing towards Afghanistan. He referred to the increased
facilities of communication which would be the result of the recent
proposal to bring Turkestan into direct communication, _viâ_ the
Caspian, with the Caucasus and St. Petersburg. He dwelt at length upon
the effect which the advanced position of Russia in Central Asia would
have upon Afghanistan and India. He explained that by the occupation
of Bokhara Russia would gain a pretext for interfering in Afghan
politics, and 'that if Russia once assumes a position which, in virtue
either of an imposing military force on the Oxus, or of a dominant
political influence in Afghanistan, entitles her, in Native
estimation, to challenge our Asiatic supremacy, the disquieting effect
will be prodigious.'
'With this prospect before us,' Sir Henry asked, 'are we justified
in maintaining what has been sarcastically, though perhaps unfairly,
called Sir John Lawrence's policy of "masterly inaction"? Are we
justified in allowing Russia to work her way to Kabul unopposed, and
there to establish herself as a friendly power prepared to protect the
Afghans against the English?' He argued that it was contrary to
our interests to permit anarchy to reign in Afghanistan; that Lord
Auckland's famous doctrine of 'establishing a strong and friendly
Power on our North-West Frontier' was the right policy for India,
'that Dost Mahomed's successful management of his country was in a
great measure due to our aid, and that, if we had helped the son as we
had helped the father, Sher Ali would have summarily suppressed
the opposition of his brothers and nephews.' Rawlinson then added:
'Another opportunity now presents itself. The fortunes of Sher Ali are
again in the ascendant; he should be secured in our interests without
delay.'
Rawlinson's suggestions were not at the time supposed to commend
themselves to the Government of India. In the despatch in which they
were answered,[5] the Viceroy and his Councillors stated that
they still objected to any active interference in the affairs of
Afghanistan; they foresaw no limits to the expenditure which such a
move would entail, and they believed that the objects that they had at
heart might be attained by an attitude of readiness and firmness on
the frontier. It is worthy of note, however, that, after Sir Henry
Rawlinson's memorandum had been received by the Indian Government, and
notwithstanding these protests, the sum of £60,000 was sent to Sher
Ali, that Sir John Lawrence invited him 'to come to some place in
British territory for a personal meeting in order to discuss the best
manner in which a limited support might be accorded,' and that five
days from the time of writing the above-mentioned despatch, John
Lawrence sent a farewell letter to Sher Ali, expressing the earnest
hope of the British Government that His Highness's authority would be
established on a solid and permanent basis, and informing him that a
further sum of £60,000 would be supplied to him during the next few
months, and that future Viceroys would consider, from time to time,
what amount of practical assistance in the shape of money or war
materials should periodically be made over to him as a testimony of
their friendly feeling, and to the furtherance of his legitimate
authority and influence.
Sher Ali expressed himself as most grateful, and came to Umballa full
of hope and apparently thoroughly well disposed towards the British
Government. He was received with great state and ceremony, and Lord
Mayo was most careful to demonstrate that he was treating with an
independent, and not a feudatory, Prince.
At this conference Sher Ali began by unburdening himself of his
grievances, complaining to Lord Mayo of the manner in which his two
elder brothers had each in his turn been recognized as Amir, and
dwelling on the one-sided nature of the treaty made with his father,
by which the British Government only bound itself to abstain from
interfering with Afghanistan, while the Amir was to be 'the friend of
the friends and the enemy of the enemies of the Honourable East India
Company.' His Highness then proceeded to make known his wants, which
were that he and his lineal descendants on the throne that he had
won 'by his own good sword' should be acknowledged as the _de jure_
sovereigns of Afghanistan; that a treaty offensive and defensive
should be made with him; and that he should be given a fixed subsidy
in the form of an annual payment.
It was in regard to the first of these three demands that Sher Ali was
most persistent. He explained repeatedly and at some length that to
acknowledge the Ruler _pro tempore_ and _de facto_ was to invite
competition for a throne, and excite the hopes of all sorts of
candidates; but that if the British Government would recognize him and
his dynasty, there was nothing he would not do in order to evince his
gratitude.
These requests, the Amir was informed, were inadmissible. There could
be no treaty, no fixed subsidy, no dynastic pledges. He was further
told that we were prepared to discourage his rivals, to give him warm
countenance and support, and such material assistance as we considered
absolutely necessary for his immediate wants, if he, on his part,
would undertake to do all he could to maintain peace on our frontier
and to comply with our wishes in matters connected with trade.
As an earnest of our goodwill, the Amir was given the second £60,000
promised him by Sir John Lawrence, besides a considerable supply of
arms and ammunition,[6] and was made happy by a promise that European
officers should not be required to reside in any of his cities. Before
the conference took place, Lord Mayo had contemplated British agents
being sent to Kabul in order to obtain accurate information regarding
events in Central Asia, but on discovering how vehemently opposed Sher
Ali was to such an arrangement, he gave him this promise. Saiyad Nur
Mahomed, the Minister who accompanied the Amir, though equally averse
to European agents, admitted that 'the day might come when the
Russians would arrive, and the Amir would be glad, not only of British
officers as agents, but of arms and troops to back them.'
One request which the Amir made towards the close of the meeting the
Viceroy agreed to, which was that we should call Persia to account for
her alleged encroachments on the debatable ground of Sistan. This,
which seemed but an unimportant matter at the time, was one of the
chief causes of Sher Ali's subsequent estrangement; for the committee
of arbitration which inquired into it decided against the Amir,
who never forgave what he considered our unfriendly action in
discountenancing his claims.
The Umballa conference was, on the whole, successful, in that Sher Ali
returned to his own country much gratified at the splendour of his
reception, and a firm personal friend of Lord Mayo, whose fine
presence and genial manner had quite won the Amir's heart, although he
had not succeeded in getting from him everything he had demanded.
[Footnote 1: I should have mentioned that Sir John Lawrence was not
the only instance of a Bengal civilian rising to the position of
Governor-General, as a predecessor of his, Sir John Shore, afterwards
Lord Teignmouth, was appointed Governor-General in 1792, and held that
office until 1798.]
[Footnote 2: Dost Mahomed had several sons. Mahomed Akbar and Ghulam
Haidar, the two heirs-designate in succession, died before their
father. Sixteen other sons were alive in 1863, of whom the following
were the eldest:
1. Mahomed Afzal Khan, aged 52 years } By a wife not of Royal blood.
2. Mahomed Azim Khan " 45 " } " " " " " " "
3. Sher Ali Khan " 40 " } By a favourite Popalzai wife.
4. Mahomed Amir Khan " 34 " } " " " " "
5. Mahomed Sharif Khan " 30 " } " " " " "
6. Wali Mahomed Khan " 33 " } By a third wife.
7. Faiz Mahomed Khan " 25 " } " " " "
Afzal Khan had a son Abdur Rahman Khan, the present Amir of
Afghanistan, and Sher Ali had five sons--Ali Khan, Yakub Khan, Ibrahim
Khan, Ayub Khan, and Abdulla Jan.]
[Footnote 3: The headmen of villages in Afghanistan are styled
_maliks_.]
[Footnote 4: Azim Khan behaved well towards the Lumsden Mission, and
it was reported that he encouraged his father, Dost Mahomed Khan, not
to disturb the Peshawar frontier during the Mutiny.]
[Footnote 5: Dated 4th January, 1869.]
[Footnote 6: Besides the remainder of the aggregate sum of twelve
lakhs, 6,500 more rifles were forwarded to the frontier for
transmission to the Amir, and in addition four 18-pounder smooth-bore
guns, two 8-inch howitzers, and a Mountain battery of six 3-pounders
complete, with due proportion of ammunition and stores, together with
draught bullocks and nine elephants.]
* * * * *