"With the accession of Lord Auckland, Bentinck's successor,

began a new era in Anglo-Indian history, in which the

long-sown seeds of fresh political complications, which even

now seem as far from solution as ever, began to put forth

fruit. All danger from French ambition had passed away: but

Russian intrigue was busy against us. We had brought the

danger on ourselves. False to an alliance with Persia, which

dated from the beginning of the century, we had turned a deaf

ear to her entreaties for help against Russian aggression, and

had allowed her to fall under the power of her tyrant, who

thenceforth used her as an instrument of his ambition. The

result of our selfish indifference appeared in 1837, when

Persia, acting under Russian influence, laid siege to Herat,

which was then under Afghan rule. While Herat was still

holding out, the Shah was at last threatened with war, and

raised the siege. Then was the time for Auckland to destroy

the Russian danger once for all, by making a friend of the

power which seemed to be the natural barrier against invasion

from the north-west. After a long series of revolutions, Dost

Mahomed, the representative of the now famous tribe of

Baruckzyes, had established himself upon the throne, with the

warm approval of the majority of the people; while Shah Sooja,

the leader of the rival Suddozyes, was an exile. The ruling

prince did not wait for Auckland to seek his friendship. He

treated the Russian advances with contempt, and desired

nothing better than to be an ally of the English. Auckland was

urged to seize the opportunity. It was in his power to deal

Russia a crushing blow, and to avert those troubles which are

even now harassing British statesmen. He did not let slip the

opportunity. He flung it from him, and clutched at a policy

that was to bring misery to thousands of families in England,

in India, and in Afghanistan, and to prove disastrous to the

political interests of all three countries. … Those who are

least interested in Indian history are not likely to forget

how the Afghan mob murdered the British Envoy and his

associates; how the British commander, putting faith in the

chiefs of a people whom no treaties can bind, began that

retreat from which but one man escaped to tell how 16,000 had

perished; how poor Auckland, unmanned by the disaster, lacked

the energy to retrieve it; how the heroic Sale held out at

Jellalabad till Pollock relieved him; how Auckland's

successor, Lord Ellenborough, dreading fresh disasters,

hesitated to allow his generals to act till, yielding to their

indignant zeal, he threw upon them the responsibility of that

advance to Cabul which retrieved the lost prestige of our

arms.

See AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1838-1842, and 1842-1869.

{1736}

Thus closed the first act of a still unfinished drama. After

celebrating the triumph of the victorious army, Ellenborough

sent Charles Napier to punish the Ameers of Scinde [see

SCINDE], who, emboldened by the retreat from Cabul, had

violated a treaty which they had concluded with the British

Government. The result of the war was the annexation of the

country: but the whole series of transactions is only

remembered now as having given rise to the dispute on the

question of the guilt of the Ameers between Napier and James

Outram. Less talked of at the time, but historically more

important, was Ellenborough's reconstitution of the British

relations with the Sindia of the day. Political disturbances

had for some time agitated that prince's court, while his army

had swollen to a dangerous size, and, like the Sikh army since

Runjeet Singh's death, which had taken place a few years

before, had passed beyond the control of the civil power. In

these two armies Ellenborough saw a danger which might disturb

the peace of Hindostan. He foresaw that the Sikh soldiers,

released from the stern discipline of Runjeet Singh, would

soon force a government which they despised to let them cross

the Sutlej in quest of plunder. Two years later his character

as a prophet was vindicated; and, if he had not now, in

anticipation of the invasion which then took place, disbanded

the greater part of Sindia's army, and over-awed the remainder

by a native contingent under the command of British officers,

the Sikhs would probably have joined their forces with the

Mahrattas. … But the Directors took a different view of

their Governor-General's conduct of affairs. In June, 1844,

all India was astonished by the news that Ellenborough had

been recalled. He had helped to bring about his own downfall,

for in the controversies with his masters in which he, like

some of the ablest of his predecessors, had found himself

involved, he had shown an unfortunate want of discretion; but,

though by bombastic proclamations and a theatrical love of

display he had sometimes exposed himself to ridicule, many of

his subordinates felt that in him they had lost a vigorous and

able ruler. Sir Henry Hardinge, who was raised to the peerage

before the close of his administration, succeeded to the

office of Governor-General, and waited anxiously for the

breaking of the storm which his predecessor had seen

gathering. The Sikhs, the Puritans of India [see SIKHS], who

were not strictly speaking a nation, but a religious

brotherhood of warriors called the Khalsa, were animated by

two passions equally dangerous to the peace of those around

them, a fierce enthusiasm, half military, half religious, for

the glory of their order, and an insatiable desire for

plunder. By giving them full scope for the indulgence of these

passions, and by punishing all disobedience with merciless

severity, Runjeet Singh had governed his turbulent subjects

for forty years: but, when he died, they broke loose from all

control; and the weak Government of Lahore found that they

could only save their own capital from being plundered by the

Khalsa army by sending it to seek plunder in British

territory. Thus began the first Sikh war."

_T. R. E. Holmes,

History of the Indian Mutiny,

chapter 1._

ALSO IN:

_Sir L. Griffin,

Ranjit Singh._

_L. J. Trotter,

The Earl of Auckland,

chapters 4-13._

INDIA: A. D. 1843.

Conquest of Scinde.

See SCINDE.

INDIA: A. D. 1845-1849.

The Sikh Wars.

Conquest and annexation of the Punjab.

"There had always been an expectation that whenever Runjeet

Singh died, there would be trouble with his soldiery; and it

soon appeared that some incursion was in contemplation, for

which the Sikh troops were prepared by an able European

training under French officers. While the strife about the

succession was going on in the Punjaub, the military element

of society there became supreme; and the government at

Calcutta considered it necessary to move troops to the

frontier to preserve peace, and reassure the inhabitants of

whole districts which dreaded the incursions of a haughty and

lawless soldiery. The Sikhs were alarmed at the approach of

English troops, and adopted the same course towards us that we

had tried with their western neighbours—they crossed the

frontier to forestall our doing it. Whether this move was a

device of the Sikh chiefs, as some say it was, to get rid of

the army, and perhaps to cause its destruction by the British,

and thus to clear the field for their own factions; or whether

war with the British was considered so inevitable that the

invasion of our territory was intended as a measure of

prudence, we need not here decide. The fact was that the Sikh

soldiery gathered round the tomb of Runjeet Singh, preparing

themselves for a great battle soon to happen; and that war was

virtually declared at Lahore in November, 1845, and fairly

begun by the troops crossing the Sutlej on the 11th of

December, and taking up a position near Ferozepore. The old

error prevailed in the British councils, the mistake denounced

by Charles Metcalfe as fatal—that of undervaluing the enemy.

The Sikhs had been considered unworthy to be opposed to the

Afghans in Runjeet's time; and now we expected to drive them

into the Sutlej at once; but we had never yet, in India, so

nearly met with our match. The battle of Moodkee was fought

under Sir Hugh Gough, on the 18th of December, and 'the

rabble' from the Punjaub astonished both Europeans and Sepoys

by standing firm, manœuvring well, and rendering it no easy

matter to close the day with honour to the English arms. This

ill-timed contempt was truly calamitous, as it had caused

miscalculations about ammunition, carriage, hospital-stores,

and everything necessary for a campaign. All these things were

left behind at Delhi or Agra; and the desperate necessity of

winning a battle was only enough barely to save the day. The

advantage was with the British in the battle of Moodkee, but

not so decisively as all parties had expected. After a

junction with reinforcements, the British fought the invaders

again on the 21st and 22nd, at Ferozeshur. On the first night

our troops were hardly masters of the ground they stood on,

and had no reserve, while their gallant enemy had large

reinforcements within reach.

{1737}

The next day might easily have been made fatal to the English

army, at times when their ammunition fell short; but the Sikhs

were badly commanded at a critical moment, then deserted by a

traitorous leader, and finally driven back. For a month after

this nothing was done by the British, and the Sikhs crossed

the Sutlej at their ease. The valour of Gough and of Hardinge,

who, while Governor-General, had put himself under the orders

of the Commander-in-Chief, had saved the honour of the

English; but their prestige was weakened among their own

Sepoys, and even the European regiments; much more among the

Sikhs; and most of all in the eyes of the vigilant surrounding

states. It was a matter of life and death now to bring up

guns, ammunition and treasure. A considerable portion fell

into the enemy's hands on the 21st of January, on its way to

the relief of Loodeeana; but the battle of Aliwal on the 28th

was again a true British fight. The Sikhs were driven into the

Sutlej; and as soon as they had collected in their stronghold

of Sobraon on the other side, they were driven thence by a

closing struggle on the 10th of February. The Sikhs were

beaten, with a slaughter of 5,000 (some say 8,000) men;

against 320 killed and 2,000 wounded on our side. The

Maharajah submitted, the road to Lahore lay open, and the

Governor-General could make his own terms. He flattered

himself that he had arranged a protectorate of the Punjaub

which would render annexation unnecessary; and all who could

believe in it rejoiced that means had been found to escape the

necessity of adding new conquests to a territory already much

too large. As the Punjaub could not pay its amount of tribute

to the Company, Cashmere and some other territory was accepted

instead, and given, as a kingdom, to Gholab Singh … on his

paying a portion of the debt, thus reimbursing the Company,

and lessening the overgrown power of the Punjaub rulers. When,

at the close of 1846, the English troops should be withdrawing

from Lahore, the Sikh chiefs begged that they might remain,

and take care of the Punjaub till the young Maharajah should

grow up to manhood."

_H. Martineau,

British Rule in India,

chapter 20._

"Lord Hardinge entrusted the government of the Punjab to a

Council of Regency, consisting of Sikh nobles under the

guidance of Sir Henry Lawrence as British Resident. He refused

to create a subsidiary army, but he left a British force to

protect the government until the boy Dhuleep Singh reached his

majority. Two-thirds of the Sikh army of the Khalsa were

disbanded. The Jullunder Doab between the Sutlej and the Beyas

was added to the British empire. … Lord Dalhousie succeeded

Lord Hardinge in 1848. Shortly afterwards the Punjab was again

in commotion. Sikh government under British protection had

failed to keep the peace. The army of the Khalsa had

disappeared, but the old love of license and plunder was

burning in the hearts of the disbanded soldiery. The Sikh

governor of Multan revolted; two Englishmen were murdered. A

British force besieged the rebels in Multan. It was joined by

a Sikh force in the service of the Council of Regency

commanded by Shere Singh. So far the revolt at Multan was

regarded as a single outbreak which would be soon suppressed

by the capture of the fortress. In reality it was the

beginning of a general insurrection. Shere Singh, who

commanded the Sikh force in the besieging army, suddenly

deserted the British force and joined his father Chutter

Singh, who was already in open rebellion. The revolt was

secretly promoted by the queen mother, and spread over the

Punjab like wildfire. The old soldiers of the Khalsa rallied

round Shere Singh and his father. The half-and-half government

set up by Lord Hardinge was unable to cope with a revolution

which was restoring the old anarchy. In November, 1848, Lord

Gough advanced against the rebel army. Then followed the

famous campaign between the Chenab and Jhelum rivers about 100

miles to the north of Lahore. In January, 1849, Lord Gough

fought the dubious battle of Chillianwallah, near the spot

where Alexander the Great crossed the Jhelum and defeated the

army of Porus. Meanwhile Multan surrendered, and the besieging

force joined Lord Gough. In February the Sikh army was utterly

defeated at Gujerat."

_J. T. Wheeler,

Indian History,

chapter 11._

"Gujrat was essentially a forenoon battle, with the whole day

before the combatants to finish their work. It commenced with

a magnificent duel of artillery; the British infantry

occupying post after post as they were abandoned by the enemy;

and the British cavalry breaking up the Sikh masses and

scattering them by pursuit. Of the sixty Sikh guns engaged,

fifty-three were taken. Lord Dalhousie resolved to make the

victory a final one. 'The war,' he declared, 'must be

prosecuted now to the entire defeat and dispersion of all who

are in arms against us, whether Sikhs or Afghans.' General

Gilbert hurried out with a pursuing force of 12,000, horse,

foot and artillery, the day after the battle. In the

breathless chase which followed across the plains of the

Punjab to the frontier mountain-wall, the Sikh military power

was destroyed for ever. On the 12th of March, 1849, General

Gilbert received the submission of the entire Sikh army at

Rawal Pindi, together with the last forty-one of the 160 Sikh

cannon captured by the British during the war. While the Sikh

army heaped up their swords and shields and matchlocks in

submissive piles, and salamed one by one as they passed

disarmed along the British line, their Afghan allies were

chased relentlessly westwards, and reached the safety of the

Khaibar Pass panting, and barely twenty miles in front of the

English hunters. The horsemen of Afghanistan, it was said,

'had ridden down through the hills like lions and ran back

into them like dogs.' The question remained what to do with

the Punjab. The victory of Sobraon in 1846 gave to Lord

Hardinge the right of conquest: the victory at Gujrat in 1849

compelled Lord Dalhousie to assert that right. Lord Hardinge

at the end of the first Punjab war in 1846, tried, as we have

seen, an intermediate method of ruling the province by British

officers for the benefit of the infant prince. This method had

failed. … In determining the future arrangements for the

Punjab, Lord Dalhousie had as his advisers the two Lawrences.

Sir Henry Lawrence, the former Resident at Lahore; hurried

back from his sick-leave in England on the breaking out of the

war. He was of opinion that the annexation of the Punjab might

perhaps be just, but that it would be inexpedient. His brother

John, afterwards Lord Lawrence, who had also acted as

Resident, although as much averse in general principle to

annexation as Henry, was convinced that, in this case,

annexation was not only just, but that its expediency was

'both undeniable and pressing.'

{1738}

Lord Dalhousie, after a full review of the efforts which had

been made to convert the Sikh nation into a friendly power

without annexation, decided that no course now remained to the

British Government but to annex. … The annexation of the

Punjab was deliberately approved of by the Court of Directors,

by Parliament, and by the English nation."

_W. W. Hunter,

The Marquess of Dalhousie,

chapter 3._

ALSO IN:

_Sir H. B. Edwardes and H. Merivale,

Life of Sir Henry Lawrence._

_R. B. Smith,

Life of Lord Lawrence,

volume 1, chapters 7-11._

_E. Arnold,

The Marquis of Dalhousie's Administration of British India,

volume 1, chapters 1-7._

_H. B. Edwardes,

A Year on the Punjab Frontier, 1848-49._

_Sir R. Temple,

Men and Events of My Time in India,

chapters 3-4._

INDIA: A. D. 1848-1856.

Lord Dalhousie's minor annexations.

The lapse of dependent Native States.

The case of Nana Sahib.

"In applying the doctrine of lapse to the Hindu chiefdoms, on

default of natural successors or of an heir legally adopted

with the sanction of the Ruling Power, Lord Dalhousie merely

carried out the declared law of the case, and the deliberately

formulated policy of the Government of India, years before he

arrived in the country. In so doing, however, Lord Dalhousie

became the unconscious but effective instrument by which the

old India of Lord Wellesley at the beginning of the century

was prepared for its conversion, in 1858, into the new India

of the Queen. … The fundamental question was whether we

should allow the government of a dependent State, in absence

of natural heirs, to pass like mere private property to an

adopted son. The Court of Directors had at one time permitted

the adoption of a successor in special cases to a principality

on failure of natural heirs. It declared, however, in 1834,

that such an 'indulgence should be the exception, not the

rule.' … As the evils of the old system of government by

sham royalties further developed themselves, the Government of

India determined in 1841 to enforce a more uniform policy. …

What Lord Dalhousie did, therefore, was not to invent a new

principle of Indian law, but to steadily apply an old

principle. … The first case in which this principle came to

be applied, shortly after Lord Dalhousie's arrival, was the

Native State of Satara. That Maratha principality had been

constituted by the British Government on the general break up

of the Maratha power in 1818, and confirmed to the 'sons and

heirs, and successors' of the recipient in 1819. In 1839 the

reigning prince was deposed for misconduct by the British

Government in the exercise of its Suzerain rights. By the same

rights the British Government then set up the brother of the

deposed prince on the throne. … The Raja, whom in 1839 we

had placed on the throne, applied for permission to adopt a

son. The British Government deliberately withheld the

permission; and in the last hours of his life the Raja, in

1848, hastily adopted a son without the consent of the

Government." Lord Dalhousie, with the advice of the Court of

Directors, declared in this case that the territory of Satara

had lapsed, on the death of the Raja, by failure of heirs, to

the Power which deposed, and it was annexed, accordingly, to

the British dominions. Under kindred circumstances the Native

States of Sambalpur, on the south-western frontier of Lower

Bengal, and Jhansi, a fragment of the Maratha dominions in

Northern India, were absorbed. "The same principle of lapse on

failure of heirs was applied by Lord Dalhousie to several

other dependent States. Jaitpur in Bundelkhand, Baghat a petty

hill Chiefdom of 36 square miles in the Punjab, Udaipur on the

Western frontier of Lower Bengal, and Budawal in Khandesh,

passed under direct British rule from this cause. The fort and

military fief of Tanjore were annexed after Lord Dalhousie's

departure from India, but practically on the grounds set forth

by his government. … By far the largest accession of

territory made during Lord Dalhousie's rule, to the British

dominions on the failure of heirs, was the great central tract

of India known as Nagpur. This Maratha principality as now

constituted into the Central Provinces, and after various

rectifications of frontier, has an area of 113,279 square

miles, with a population of 12,000,000 souls. The territories

annexed by Lord Dalhousie in 1854 make nearly four-fifths of

the present Central Provinces. … It is difficult to find any

ground for the charge which Mr. Kaye brought in 1865 against

Lord Dalhousie, for 'harshness' towards the man afterwards

known as the infamous Nana Sahib [see below: A. D. 1857

(MAY-AUGUST)]. As this charge, however, is still occasionally

repeated, and as it has even been suggested that Lord

Dalhousie was to some extent responsible for the Mutiny of

1857, in consequence of his action towards Nana Sahib in 1851,

I must briefly state the facts. In 1818, the Peshwa of the

Marathas, completely beaten in the field, threw himself on the

generosity of the British. Sir John Malcolm, then the

Governor-General's Agent in the Deccan, assured him of his

protection, and engaged that he should receive an allowance of

£80,000 a year for his support. … There could not be the

slightest pretension that it was ever anything more than a

personal annuity; and from first to last all mention of heirs

is carefully excluded. The records show that the ex-Peshwa,

Baji Rao, was well aware of this. Baji Rao lived until 1851,

leaving to his adopted son, Nana Sahib, an immense fortune

admitted to amount to £280,000, and believed by the Government

of the North-western Provinces to greatly exceed that sum. The

Government of India at once acknowledged the adopted son's

title to this splendid heritage, and out of its own

beneficence added to it the Jaghir, or grant of land, on which

his father had resided in the North-western Provinces. But the

pension, paid out of the tax-payers' pockets, lapsed upon the

death of the annuitant."

_Sir W. W. Hunter,

The Marquess of Dalhousie,

chapters 6-7._

_Duke of Argyll,

India under Dalhousie and Canning._

INDIA: A. D. 1849-1893.

The life in exile of Dhuleep Singh, heir to the Sikh throne.

"Few careers have ever been more instructive to those who can

see than that of the Maharajah Dhuleep Singh, who died in

Paris on Sunday [October 22, 1893] of apoplexy. He finished

life a despised exile, but no man of modern days ever had such

chances, or had seen them snatched, partly by fate, partly by

fault, so completely from his lips. But for an accident, if

there is such a thing as accident, he would have been the

Hindoo Emperor of India.

{1739}

His father, Runjeet Singh, that strange combination of Louis

XI. and Charles the Bold, had formed and knew how to control

an army which would have struck down all the native powers of

India much more easily than did any of the Tartar conquerors.

Without its master at its head, that army defeated the

British, and but for a magnificent bribe paid to its General

(vide Cunningham's 'History of the Sikhs') would have driven

the English from India, and placed the child, Dhuleep Singh,

upon the throne of the Peninsula, to be supported there by

Sikh and Rajpoot, Mahratta, and Beharee. Apart from the

English, there was nothing to resist them; and they were

guided by a woman, the Ranee Chunda Kour; who of all modern

women was most like Mary of Scots as her enemies have painted

her, and of whom, after her fall, Lord Dalhousie said that her

capture would be worth the sacrifice of a brigade. How Dhuleep

Singh would have reigned had Runjeet Singh's destiny completed

itself is another matter—probably like a Hindoo Humayoon—for

even if not the son of Runjeet Singh, who, be it remembered,

acknowledged him, he inherited ability from his mother; he was

a bold man, and he was, as his career showed, capable of wild

and daring adventure. He fell, however, from his throne under

the shock of the second Sikh War, and began a new and, to all

appearance, most promising career. Lord Dalhousie had a pity

for the boy, and the English Court—we never quite understood

why—an unusually kindly feeling. A fortune of £40,000 a year

was settled on him, he was sent to England, and he was granted

rank hardly less than that of a Prince of the Blood. He turned

Christian—apparently from conviction, though subsequent

events throw doubt on that—a tutor, who was quite competent,

devoted himself to his education, and from the time he became

of age he was regarded as in all respects a great English

noble. He knew, too, how to sustain that character,—made no

social blunders, became a great sportsman, and succeeded in

maintaining for years the sustained stateliness of life which

in England is held to confer social dignity. Confidence was

first shaken by his marriage, which, though it did not turn

out unsuccessfully, and though the lady was in after-life

greatly liked and respected, was a whim, his bride being a

half Coptic, half English girl whom he saw in an Egyptian

school-room, and who, by all English as well as Indian ideas

of rank, was an unfitting bride. Then he began over-spending,

without the slightest necessity, for his great income was

unburdened by a vast estate; and at last reduced his finances

to such a condition that the India Office, which had made him

advance after advance, closed its treasury and left him, as he

thought, face to face with ruin. Then the fierce Asiatic blood

in him came out. He declared himself wronged, perhaps believed

himself oppressed, dropped the whole varnish of civilisation

from him, and resolved to make an effort for the vengeance

over which he had probably brooded for years. He publicly

repudiated Christianity, and went through a ceremony intended

to readmit him within the pale of the Sikh variety of the

Hindoo faith. Whether it did readmit him, greater doctors than

we must decide. That an ordinary Hindoo who has eaten beef

cannot be readmitted to his own caste, even if the eating is

involuntary, is certain, as witness the tradition of the

Tagore family; but the rights of the Royal are, even in

Hindooism, extraordinarily wide, and we fancy that, had

Dhuleep Singh succeeded in his enterprise, Sikh doctors of

theology would have declared his re-admission legal. He did

not, however, succeed. He set out for the Punjab intending, it

can hardly be doubted, if the Sikhs acknowledged him, to make

a stroke for the throne, if not of India, at least of Runjeet

Singh; but he was arrested at Aden, and after months of fierce

dispute, let go, on condition that he should not return to

India. He sought protection in Russia, which he did not

obtain, and at last gave up the struggle, made his peace with

the India Office, took his pension again, and lived, chiefly

in Paris, the life of a disappointed but wealthy idler. There

was some spirit in his adventure, though it was unwisely

carried out. The English generally thought it a bit of

foolhardiness, or a dodge to extract a loan from the India

Office; but those who were responsible held a different

opinion, and would have gone nearly any length to prevent his

reaching the Punjab. They were probably wise. The heir of

Runjeet might have been ridiculed by the Sikhs as a Christian,

but he might also have been accepted as a reconverted man; and

one successful skirmish in a district might have called to

arms all the 'children of the sugar and the sword,' and set

all India on fire. The Sikhs are our very good friends, and

stood by us against any revival of the Empire of Delhi, their

sworn hereditary foe; but they have not forgotten Runjeet

Singh, and a chance of the Empire for themselves might have

turned many of their heads."

_The Spectator,

October 28, 1893._

INDIA: A. D. 1852.

The second Burmese War.

Annexation of Pegu.

"While Lord Dalhousie was laying out the Punjab like a Scotch

estate, on the most approved principles of planting,

road-making, culture, and general management, the chance of

another conquest at the opposite extremity of his vice-kingdom

summoned him to Calcutta. The master of a trading barque from

Chittagong, who was charged unjustly with cruelty to a pilot,

had been fined £100 by the authorities of Rangoon, and the

captain of a brig had in like manner been amerced for alleged

ill-treatment of his crew. To support a claim for restitution,

two English ships of war had been sent to the mouth of the

Irrawadi. … Misunderstandings arose on some inexplicable

point of etiquette;" the British commodore seized a royal

yacht which lay in the river; the angry Burmese opened fire on

his ships from their forts; and, "with an unprecedented

economy of time and trouble in the discovery or making of

plausible pretexts, a second war with Burmah was thus begun. A

long catalogue of affronts, wrongs, and injuries, now for the

first time poured in. … The subjects of the 'Golden Foot'

… must make an official apology for their misbehaviour, pay

ten lacs compensation, and receive a permanent Resident at

Rangoon. If these demands were not met within five weeks,

further reparation would be exacted otherwise, and as there

was no fear that they would, preparations were made for an

expedition. … The Governor-General threw himself with

enthusiasm into an undertaking which promised him another

chance of gratifying, as his biographer says, his 'passion for

imperial symmetry.'

{1740}

He resolved 'to take in kingdoms wherever they made a gap in

the red line running round his dominions or broke its internal

continuity.' There was a gap in the ring-fence between Arracan

and Moulmein, which Pegu would fill. The logical inference was

clear, the duty of appropriation obvious. Let us have Pegu.

Ten millions of silver happening just then to lie in the

coffers of Fort William, how could they be better invested

than in a jungle on the sea coast, inhabited by quadrupeds and

bipeds after their various kinds, alike unworthy of being

consulted as to their future destiny? … In April, Martaban

and Rangoon were taken with trifling loss. Operations being

suspended during the rainy season, the city of Prome was not

attacked till October, and after a few hours' struggle it

fell, with the loss of a single sepoy on the side of the

victors. There was in fact no serious danger to encounter,

save from the climate; but that unfailing ally fought with

terrible effect upon the side of Ava. … On the 20th

December, 1852, a proclamation was issued, which, after

reciting undisguisedly the ineffably inadequate pretext for

the war, informed the inhabitants that the Governor in Council

had resolved that the maritime province of Pegu should

henceforth form a portion of the British territories in the

East, and warning the King of Ava, 'should he fail to renew

his former relations of friendship with the British

Government, and seek to dispute its quiet possession of the

province, the Governor-General would again put forth the power

he held, which would lead to the total subversion of the

Burman State, and to the ruin and exile of the King and his

race.' But no depth of humiliation could bring the Sovereign

or his Ministers to acknowledge the hopelessness of defeat or

the permanency of dismemberment. … Twenty years have passed,

and no treaty recognising the alienation of Pegu has yet [in

1872] been signed."

_W. M. Torrens,

Empire in Asia: How we came by it,

chapter 24._

ALSO IN:

_E. Arnold,

The Marquis of Dalhousie's Administration of British India,

chapters 15-16 (volume 2)._

INDIA: A. D. 1856.

The annexation of Oudh.

See OUDH.

INDIA: A. D. 1857.

Causes of the Sepoy Mutiny.

"The various motives assigned for the Mutiny appear inadequate

to the European mind. The truth seems to be that Native

opinion throughout India was in a ferment, predisposing men to

believe the wildest stories, and to rush into action in a

paroxysm of terror. Panic acts on an Oriental population like

drink upon a European mob. The annexation policy of Lord

Dalhousie, although dictated by the most enlightened

considerations, was distasteful to the Native mind. The spread

of education, the appearance at the same moment of the

steam-engine and the telegraph wire, seemed to reveal a deep

plan for substituting an English for an Indian civilisation.

The Bengal sepoys especially thought that they could see

further than the rest of their countrymen. Most of them were

Hindus of high caste; many of them were recruited from Oudh.

They regarded our reforms on Western lines as attacks on their

own nationality, and they knew at first hand what annexation

meant. They believed it was by their prowess that the Punjab

had been conquered, and that all India was held. The numerous

dethroned princes, or their heirs and widows, were the first

to learn and to take advantage of this spirit of disaffection

and panic. They had heard of the Crimean war, and were told

that Russia was the perpetual enemy of England. Our munificent

pensions had supplied the funds with which they could buy the

aid of skilful intriguers. They had much to gain, and little

to lose, by a revolution. In this critical state of affairs,

of which the Government had no official knowledge, a rumour

ran through the cantonments that the cartridges of the Bengal

army had been greased with the fat of pigs,—animals unclean

alike to Hindu and Muhammadan. No assurances could quiet the

minds of the sepoys. Fires occurred nightly in the Native

lines; officers were insulted by their men; confidence was

gone, and only the form of discipline remained. In addition,

the outbreak of the storm found the Native regiments denuded

of many of their best officers. The administration of the

great empire to which Dalhousie put the corner-stone, required

a larger staff than the civil service could supply. The

practice of selecting able military men for civil posts, which

had long existed, received a sudden and vast development.

Oudh, the Punjab, the Central Provinces, British Burma, were

administered to a large extent by picked officers from the

Company's regiments. Good and skilful commanders remained; but

the Native army had nevertheless been drained of many of its

brightest intellects and firmest wills at the very crisis of

its fate."

_W. W. Hunter,

Brief History of the Indian People,

chapter 15._

"The annexation of Oudh had nothing to do with the Mutiny in

the first place, though that measure certainly did add to the

number of our enemies after the Mutiny commenced. The old

government of Oudh was extremely obnoxious to the mass of our

native soldiers of the regular army, who came from Oudh and

the adjacent province of Behar, and with whom the Mutiny

originated. These men were the sons and kinsmen of the Hindu

yeomen of the country, all of whom benefited more or less by

annexation; while Oudh was ruled by a Muhammadan family which

had never identified itself with the people, and whose

government was extremely oppressive to all classes except its

immediate creatures and followers. But when the introduction

of the greased cartridges had excited the Native Army to

revolt, when the mutineers saw nothing before them short of

escape on the one hand or destruction on the other, they, and

all who sympathised with them, were driven to the most

desperate measures. All who could be influenced by love or

fear rallied round them. All who had little or nothing to lose

joined their ranks. All that dangerous class of religious

fanatics and devotees who abound in India, all the political

intriguers, who in peaceful times can do no mischief, swelled

the numbers of the enemy, and gave spirit and direction to

their measures. India is full of races of men, who, from time

immemorial, have lived by service or by plunder, and who are

ready to join in any disturbance which may promise them

employment. Oudh was full of disbanded soldiers who had not

had time to settle down. Our gaols furnished thousands of

desperate men let loose on society. The cry throughout the

country, as cantonment after cantonment became the scene of

triumphant mutiny was, 'The English rule is at an end. Let us

plunder and enjoy ourselves.' The industrious classes

throughout India were on our side, but for a long time feared

to act.

{1741}

On the one side they saw the few English in the country shot

down or flying for their lives, or at the best standing on the

defensive, sorely pressed; on the other side they saw summary

punishment, in the shape of the plunder and destruction of

their houses, dealt out to those who aided us. But when we

evinced signs of vigour, when we began to assume the offensive

and vindicate our authority, many of these people came forward

and identified themselves with our cause."

_Lord Lawrence,

Speech at Glasgow, 1860 (quoted by Sir O. T. Burne,

in "Clyde and Strathnairn," chapter 1)._

ALSO IN:

_J. W. Kaye,

History of the Sepoy War in India,

book 2 (volume 1)._

_G. B. Malleson,

The Indian Mutiny of 1857,

chapters 1-5._

INDIA: A. D. 1857 (May).

The outbreak at Meerut.

Seizure of Delhi by the Mutineers.

Massacre of Europeans.

Explosion of the magazine.

"The station of Meerut, some 40 miles north-east of Delhi, was

one of the very few in India where adequate means existed for

quelling an outbreak of native troops. There was a regiment of

English Dragoons, a battalion of the 60th Rifles, and a strong

force of Horse and Foot Artillery, far more than sufficient to

deal with the three native regiments who were also quartered

in the cantonment. The court-martial on … eighty-five men of

the 3rd N. C., who had refused to take their cartridges, had

by this time completed its inquiry. The men were sentenced to

long terms of imprisonment. The sentence was carried out with

impressive solemnity. On a morning [May 9] presently to become

historical—the heavens sombre with rolling clouds—the

brigade assembled to hear their comrades' doom—to see them

stripped of their uniform and secured with felons' manacles.

The scene produced intense emotion. Resistance was impossible.

There were entreaties, tears, imprecations, as the prisoners

were marched away to jail. Discipline had been vindicated by a

terrible example. The next day was Sunday. In the evening, as

the European Riflemen were gathering for Church, a sudden

movement took place in the native quarters. The Cavalry dashed

off to the jail to rescue their imprisoned companions. The two

Infantry regiments, after a moment's wavering, threw in their

lot with the mutineers. Then ensued a scene such as,

unhappily, became too familiar in Upper India within the next

few weeks. Officers were shot, houses fired, Europeans—men,

women, and children, wherever found, were put to the sword. A

crowd of miscreants from the jail, suddenly set free, made a

long night of pillage. Meanwhile, paralysed by the sudden

catastrophe, the English General of the Division and the

Brigadier of the Station forbore to act, refused to let their

subordinates act, and the Sepoys who had fled, a disorganised

mob, in different directions, soon found themselves gathering

on the march for Delhi. In the early morning at Delhi, where

courts and offices had already begun the day's work, a line of

horsemen were descried galloping on the Meerut road. They

found their way into the city, into the presence of the King;

cut down the European officials, and, as they were gradually

reinforced by the arrival of fresh companions, commenced a

general massacre of the Christian population. A brave

telegraph clerk, as the mutineers burst in upon him, had just

time to flash the dreadful tidings to Lahore. Before evening,

the native regiments fired upon their officers and joined the

mutineers. After weary hours of hope for the help from Meerut

which never came, the British officers in command were

compelled to recognise that the only chance of safety lay in

flight. Ere the day closed, every European who had risen that

morning in Delhi, was dead, or awaiting death, or wandering

about the country in the desperate endeavor to reach a place

of safety. A day dark with disaster was, however, illumined by

the first of those heroic acts which will make the siege of

Delhi immortal. The insurgents had their first taste of the

quality of the race whose ascendancy they had elected to

assail. Lieutenant Willoughby, the officer in charge of the

Magazine, and eight gallant companions, resolved, early in the

day, that, if they could not defend their invaluable supply of

ammunition, they would destroy it, though its destruction

would almost certainly involve their own. For hours they

defended their stronghold against an overpowering crowd of

assailants. The train was laid: the sergeant who was to fire

it stood ready: Willoughby took a last look out upon the

Meerut road: the assailants were swarming on the walls. The

word was spoken: a vast column of flame and smoke shot upward.

Two thousand of the assailants were blown into the air [and

five of the defenders perished, while Willoughby and three of

his companions escaped]. The thunder of that explosion

announced to the mutineers that one great object in the

seizure of Delhi had escaped their grasp."

_H. S. Cunningham,

Earl Canning,

chapter 5._

ALSO IN:

_J. W. Kaye,

History of the Sepoy War in India,

book 4, chapters 1-3 (volume 2)._

INDIA: A. D. 1857 (May-August).

The situation at Delhi.

Siege of the English at Cawnpur.

Their surrender and massacre.

The siege of Lucknow.

"A few days of inactivity allowed the flame to blaze up beyond

possibility of immediate extinction. The unchallenged

occupation of the Mughal capital by rebel sepoys and badmashes

was followed by risings and massacres in almost every station

within range of the example; and from Firozpur, Bareilly,

Moradabad, Shahjahanpur, Cawnpur, and numerous other places

came harrowing tales of massacre, suffering, and heroism. When

this terrible news reached army head-quarters, it was received

with a perhaps natural incredulity. Nevertheless, a force was

hastily assembled at Ambala; and with the troops thus

mobilised, General Anson, then Commander-in-Chief, made

preparations to march against the renowned city of the Mughal.

The little force had hardly started, however, when its leader

died of cholera (May 27th). It was not until the 1st of June

that General Barnard, who had succeeded temporarily to the

chief command, advanced in earnest against the now jubilant

rebels. Meanwhile, a small body of troops under Brigadier

Archdale Wilson marched out from Meerut, after a disastrous

delay; and the combined force, amounting to about 3,000

Europeans and one battalion of Gurkhas, fought its way onwards

till it reached the outskirts of the city on the 8th of June,

1857. We may now refer to the three great points,—Delhi,

Cawnpur, and Lucknow, round which the Mutiny was, so to speak,

centred during the earlier period of the revolt; namely, from

May, 1857, till the arrival in India of Sir Colin Campbell in

August of that year.

{1742}

The modern city of Delhi was founded by the Emperor Jahangir

in 1631. Situated on the right bank of a branch of the Jumna

river it was, as it still is, surrounded by a high wall some

seven miles in extent, strengthened by bastions and by a

capacious dry ditch. The British force held the elevated

ground known as the Ridge, which extends two miles along the

northern and western faces of the city—a position taken up

some centuries before by Timur Shah and his Tartar hordes when

advancing to attack old Delhi. At intervals along the Ridge

stood the Flagstaff Tower, the Observatory, a large mansion

called Hindu Rao's house, and other defensible buildings. The

space between the city and the Ridge was thickly planted, for

the most part with trees and shrubs; in the midst of which

might be seen numerous mosques and large houses, and the ruins

of older buildings. It soon became evident that the position

held by the British force on the Ridge was a false one; and

the question arose whether the city might not be taken by a

coup de main, seeing that it was impossible either to invest

it or to attempt a regular siege with any chance of success. A

plan of assault, to be carried out on the 12th of June, was

drawn up by a young Engineer officer and sanctioned. Had this

assault been delivered the city would in all likelihood have

been taken and held. … But owing to a series of accidents,

the plan fell through—a miscarriage the more to be regretted

because the early recapture of the city would in all human

probability have put a stop to further outbreaks. As matters

stood, however, the gallant little force before Delhi could

barely hold its own. It was an army of observation perpetually

harassed by an active enemy. As time went on, therefore, the

question of raising the siege in favour of a movement towards

Agra was more than once seriously discussed, but was

fortunately abandoned. On July 5th, 1857, General Barnard

died, worn out with fatigue and anxiety. He was succeeded in

command by General Archdale Wilson, an officer who, possessing

no special force of character, did little more than secure the

safe defence of the position until the arrival of Brigadier

Nicholson from the Punjab, August 14th, 1857, with a moveable

column of 2,500 men, Europeans and Sikhs. And here we may

leave Delhi, for the moment, deferring till later any further

details of the siege. The city of Cawnpur, situated on the

south bank of the river Ganges, 42 miles south-west of Lucknow

and 270 miles from Delhi, lies about a mile from the river in

a large sandy plain. On the strip of land between the river

and the town, a space broken by ravines, stretched the Civil

Station and cantonments. A more difficult position to hold in

an extremity cannot well be conceived, occupied as it was by

four disaffected Sepoy regiments with but sixty European

artillerymen to overawe them. There was, moreover, an

incompetent commander. Realising after the disasters at Meerut

and Delhi that his native garrison was not to be trusted, Sir

Hugh Wheeler threw up a make-shift entrenchment close to the

Sepoy lines. Commanded on all sides, it was totally unfitted

to stand a siege. But a worse mistake was to follow. Alarmed

as time went on at his growing difficulties, Sir Hugh Wheeler

at length asked the notorious Nana Sahib [see above: A. D.

1848-1856], who lived a few miles off at Bithur, to assist him

with troops to guard the Treasury. For some months previously

this archtraitor's emissaries had been spreading discontent

throughout India, but he himself had taken care to remain on

good terms with his European neighbours. He now saw his

opportunity. Cawnpur, delivered into his hands by the

misplaced confidence of its defenders, was virtually in his

keeping. Of European succour there was no immediate hope. The

place was doomed. The crash came three days before General

Barnard's force reached Delhi. With the exception of a few

devoted natives who remained faithful to their salt, the whole

Sepoy force on the 5th of June rose in revolt, opened the

doors of the jail, robbed the treasury, and made themselves

masters of the magazine. The Nana cast aside all further

pretence of friendship and, joined by the mutinous troops,

laid siege to the entrenchment already mentioned, which with

culpable military ignorance had been thrown up in one of the

worst positions that could have been chosen. The besieging

army numbered some 3,000 men. The besieged could only muster

about 400 English soldiers, more than 70 of which number were

invalids. For twenty-one days the little garrison suffered

untold horrors from starvation, heat, and the onslaughts of

the rebels; until the General in command listened to overtures

for surrender, and the garrison marched out on the 27th of

June, to the number of about 450 souls, provided with a

promise of safeguard from the Nana, who would allow them, as

they thought, to embark in country boats for Allahabad. Tantia

Topi, who afterwards became notorious in Central India,

superintended the embarkation. No sooner, however, were the

Europeans placed in the boats, in apparent safety, than a

battery of guns concealed on the river banks opened fire,

while at the same time a deadly fusillade of musketry was

poured on the luckless refugees. The Nana at length ordered

the massacre to cease. He celebrated what he called his

glorious victory by proclaiming himself Peshwa or Maratha

Sovereign, and by rewarding his troops for their 'splendid

achievements,' while the wretched survivors of his treachery,

numbering about 5 men and 206 women and children, were taken

back to Cawnpur and confined in a small building for further

vengeance and insult. On the 15th of July came the last act of

this tragedy. The Nana, having suffered a crushing defeat at

the hands of Brigadier Havelock's force within a day's march

of Cawnpur, as will presently be recorded, put the whole of

his prisoners to death. The men were brought out and killed in

his presence, while the women and children were hacked to

pieces by Muhammadan butchers and others in their prison.

Their bodies were thrown into what is now known as the

Cawnpur Well.' Lucknow, at the time of the Mutiny, was in

population, in extent, and in the number and importance of its

principal buildings, one of the foremost cities of India. …

The Residency stood on a hill gently sloping towards the

river, and was an imposing edifice of three stories. Near it

were the iron and stone bridges over the river. … At the

outbreak of the Mutiny the Sepoy regiments were stationed in

various localities within the city; while the 32nd Foot, the

only European regiment on the spot, was quartered in a barrack

about a mile or so from the Residency.

{1743}

As was the case elsewhere, so it happened at Lucknow. While

the population and native garrison were seething with

sedition, the British authorities were hampered by ignorance

of popular feeling, by the want of European troops, and by

divided counsels. So, by the end of May, 1857, the rebellion

in Oudh became an accomplished fact, although matters went on

with comparative smoothness in Lucknow itself. At length,

after a serious disaster at Chinhat, the British garrison was

forced to withdraw to the Residency and its adjacent

buildings; and on the 1st of July commenced the famous

investment of this position by the rebel forces. The position

was ill adapted for defence; for the lofty windows of the

Residency itself not only allowed free access to the enemy's

missiles, but its roof was wholly exposed. On the opposite

side of the street, leading from the Bailey Guard Gate, was

the house of the Residency Surgeon, Dr. (now Sir Joseph)

Fayrer. It was a large but not lofty building with a flat roof

which, protected by sand bags, afforded a good cover for our

riflemen, and with a tyekhana, or underground story, that

afforded good shelter for the women and children. But as a

whole, the defences of the Residency were more formidable in

name than in reality, and were greatly weakened by the

proximity of high buildings from which the rebels without

danger to themselves poured an unceasing fire. The siege had

an ominous commencement. On July 4th the much-beloved Sir

Henry Lawrence, the Resident, died of a wound received two

days before from an enemy's shell that had fallen into his

room. Brigadier Inglis succeeded him in command; and for three

months the heroic garrison of about 1,700 souls held their

weak position, amid inconceivable hardships and dangers,

against thousands of the rebels who were constantly reinforced

by fresh levies. It was well said in a general order by Lord

Canning that there could not be found in the annals of war an

achievement more heroic than this defence."

_General Sir O. T. Burne,

Clyde and Strathnairn,

chapter 2._

ALSO IN:

_J. W. Kaye,

History of the Sepoy War,

book 9, chapters 1-3 (volume 3)._

_G. O. Trevelyan,

Cawnpore._

_T. R. E. Holmes,

History of the Indian Mutiny,

chapters 8-10._

_Lady Inglis,

The Siege of Lucknow._

INDIA: A. D. 1857 (June-September).

The siege, the storming and the capture of Delhi.

Murder of the Moghul princes.

"During the four months that followed the revolt at Delhi on

the 11th of May, all political interest was centred at the

ancient capital of the sovereigns of Hindustan. The public

mind was occasionally distracted by the current of events at

Cawnpore and Lukhnow, as well as at other stations which need

not be particularised; but so long as Delhi remained in the

hands of the rebels, the native princes were bewildered and

alarmed; and its prompt recapture was deemed of vital

importance to the prestige of the British government, and the

re-establishment of British sovereignty in Hindustan. The

Great Moghul had been little better than a mummy for more than

half a century, and Bahadur Shah was a mere tool and puppet in

the hands of rebel sepoys; but nevertheless the British

government had to deal with the astounding fact that the

rebels were fighting under his name and standard, just as

Afghans and Mahrattas had done in the days of Ahmad Shah

Durani and Mahadaji Sindia. To make matters worse, the roads

to Delhi were open from the south and east; and nearly every

outbreak in Hindustan was followed by a stampede of mutineers

to the old capital of the Moghuls. Meanwhile, in the absence

of railways, there were unfortunate delays in bringing up

troops and guns to stamp out the fires of rebellion at the

head centre. The highway from Calcutta to Delhi was blocked up

by mutiny and insurrection; and every European soldier sent up

from Calcutta was stopped for the relief of Benares,

Allahabad, Cawnpore, or Lukhnow. But the possession of the

Punjab at this crisis proved to be the salvation of the

empire. Sir John Lawrence, the Chief Commissioner, was called

upon to perform almost superhuman work:—to maintain order in

a newly conquered province; to suppress mutiny and

disaffection amongst the very sepoy regiments from Bengal who

were supposed to garrison the country; and to send

reinforcements of troops and guns, and supplies of all

descriptions, to the siege of Delhi. Fortunately the Sikhs had

been only a few short years under British administration; they

had not forgotten the miseries that prevailed under the native

government, and could appreciate the many blessings they

enjoyed under British rule. They were staunch to the British

government, and eager to be led against the rebels. In some

cases terrible punishment was meted out to mutinous Bengal

sepoys within the Punjab; but the imperial interests at stake

were sufficient to justify every severity, although all must

regret the painful necessity that called for such extreme

measures. … The defences of Delhi covered an area of three

square miles. The walls consisted of a series of bastions,

about sixteen feet high, connected by long curtains, with

occasional martello towers to aid the flanking fire. … There

were seven gates to the city, namely, Lahore gate, Ajmir gate,

Turkoman gate, Delhi gate, Mori gate, Kabul gate, and Kashmir

gate. The principal street was the Chandni Chouk, which ran in

a direct line from the Delhi gate to the palace of the

Moghuls. … For many weeks the British army on the Ridge was

unable to attempt siege operations. It was, in fact, the

besieged, rather than the besiegers; for, although the bridges

in the rear were blown up, the camp was exposed to continual

assaults from all the other sides. On the 23rd of June, the

hundredth anniversary of the battle of Plassy, the enemy made

a greater effort than ever to carry the British position. The

attack began on the right from the Subzi Mundi, its object

being to capture the Mound battery. Finding it impossible to

carry the battery, the rebels confined themselves to a hand to

hand conflict in the Subzi Mundi. The deadly struggle

continued for many hours; and as the rebels came up in

overwhelming numbers, it was fortunate that the two bridges in

the rear had been blown up the night before, or the assault

might have had a different termination. It was not until after

sunset that the enemy was compelled to retire with the loss of

a thousand men. Similar actions were frequent during the month

of August; but meanwhile reinforcements were coming up, and

the end was drawing nigh. In the middle of August, Brigadier

John Nicholson, one of the most distinguished officers of the

time, came up from the Punjab with a brigade and siege train.

On the 4th of September a heavy train of artillery was brought

in from Ferozepore.

{1744}

The British force on the Ridge now exceeded 8,000 men.

Hitherto the artillery had been too weak to attempt to breach

the City walls; but now fifty-four heavy guns were brought

into position and the siege began in earnest. From the 8th to

the 12th of September four batteries poured in a constant

storm of shot and shell; number one was directed against the

Kashmir bastion, number two against the right flank of the

Kashmir bastion, number three against the Water bastion, and

number four against the Kashmir and Water gates and bastions.

On the 13th of September the breaches were declared to be

practicable, and the following morning was fixed for the final

assault upon the doomed city. At three o'clock in the morning

of the 14th September, three assaulting columns were formed in

the trenches, whilst a fourth was kept in reserve. The first

column was led by Brigadier Nicholson; the second by Brigadier

Jones; the third by Colonel Campbell; and the fourth, or

reserve, by Brigadier Longfield. The powder bags were laid at

the Kashmir gate by Lieutenants Home and Salkeld. The

explosion followed, and the third column rushed in, and pushed

towards the Juma Musjid. Meanwhile the first column under

Nicholson escaladed the breaches near the Kashmir gate, and

pushed along the ramparts towards the Kabul gate, carrying the

several bastions in the way. Here it was met by the second

column under Brigadier Jones, who had escaladed the breach at

the Water bastion. The advancing columns were met by a

ceaseless fire from terraced houses, mosques, and other

buildings; and John Nicholson, the hero of the day, whilst

attempting to storm a narrow street near the Kabul gate, was

struck down by a shot and mortally wounded."

_J. T. Wheeler,

Short History of India,

part 3, chapter 25._

"The long autumn day was over, and we were in Delhi. But Delhi

was, by no means, ours. Sixty-six officers and 1,100 men—

nearly a third, that is, of the whole attacking force—had

fallen; while, as yet, not a sixth part of the town was in our

power. How many men, it might well be asked, would be left to

us by the time that we had conquered the remainder? We held

the line of ramparts which we had attacked and the portions of

the city immediately adjoining, but nothing more. The Lahore

Gate and the Magazine, the Jumma Musjid and the Palace, were

still untouched, and were keeping up a heavy fire on our

position. Worse than this, a large number of our troops had

fallen victims to the temptation which, more formidable than

themselves, our foes had left behind them, and were wallowing

in a state of bestial intoxication. The enemy, meanwhile, had

been able to maintain their position outside the town; and if

only, at this supreme hour, a heaven-sent General had appeared

amongst them, they might have attacked our camp, defended as

it was mainly by the sick, and the maimed, and the halt. …

Never, perhaps, in the history of the Mutiny were we in quite

so perilous a position as on the night which followed our

greatest military success. General Wilson, indeed, proposed,

as might have been expected from a man in his enfeebled

condition of mind and body, to withdraw the guns, to fall back

on the camp and wait for reinforcements there; a step which,

it is needless to point out, would have given us all the

deadly work to do over again, even if our force should prove

able to maintain itself on the Ridge till reinforcements came.

But the urgent remonstrances of Baird Smith and others, by

word of mouth; of Chamberlain, by letter; and, perhaps, also,

the echoes which may have reached him from the tempest-tossed

hero who lay chafing against his cruel destiny on his

death-bed, and exclaimed in a wild paroxysm of passion, when

he heard of the move which was in contemplation, 'Thank God, I

have strength enough left to shoot that man,' turned the

General once more from his purpose. On the following day, the

15th, vast quantities of the intoxicating drinks, which had

wrought such havoc amongst our men, were destroyed by General

Wilson's order, and the streets literally ran with rivers of

beer, and wine, and brandy. Meanwhile, the troops were

sleeping off their drunken debauch; and on the 16th active

operations were resumed. On that day the Magazine was taken,

and its vast stores of shot and shell, and of all the

'material' of war, fell once more into the hands of their

proper owners. By sapping gradually from house to house we

managed, for three days more, to avoid the street-fighting

which, once and again, has proved so demoralising to

Englishmen; and, slowly but surely, we pressed back the

defenders into that ever-narrowing part of the city of which,

fortunately for themselves, they still held the bolt-holes.

Many of them had already begun, like rats, to quit the sinking

vessel. And now the unarmed population of the city flocked in

one continuous stream out of the open gates, hoping to save

their lives, if nothing else, from our avenging swords. On the

19th, the palace of the Moguls, which had witnessed the last

expiring flicker of life in an effete dynasty, and the cruel

murder of English men, and women, and children, fell into our

hands; and by Sunday, the 20th, the whole of the city—in

large part already a city of the dead—was at our mercy. But

what of the King himself and the Princes of the royal house?

They had slunk off to the tomb of Humayoun, a huge building,

almost a city in itself, some miles from the modern Delhi, and

there, swayed this way and that, now by the bolder spirits of

his army who pressed him to put himself at their head and

fight it out to the death, as became the descendant of

Tamerlane and Baber, now by the entreaties of his young wife,

who was anxious chiefly for her own safety and that of her

son, the heir of the Moguls; and now, again, by the plausible

suggestions of a double-dyed traitor of his own house who was

in Hodson's pay, and who, approaching the head of his family

with a kiss of peace, was endeavoring to detain him where he

was till he could hand him over to his employer and receive

the price of blood, the poor old monarch dozed or fooled away

the few hours of his sovereignty which remained, the hours

which might still make or mar him, in paroxysms of imbecile

vacillation and despair. The traitor gained the day, and

Hodson, who could play the game of force as well as of fraud,

and was an equal adept at either, learning from his

craven-hearted tool that the King was prepared to surrender on

the promise of his life, went to Wilson and obtained leave, on

that condition, to bring him into Delhi. The errand, with such

a promise tacked on to it, was only half to Hodson's taste.

{1745}

'If I get into the Palace,' he had written in cool blood some

days before, 'the house of Timour will not be worth five

minutes' purchase, I ween.' … After two hours of bargaining

for his own life and that of his queen and favourite son, the

poor old Priam tottered forth and was taken back, in a

bullock-cart, a prisoner, to his own city and Palace, and was

there handed over to the civil authorities. But there were

other members of the royal family, as Hodson knew well from

his informants, also lurking in Humayoun's tomb. … With a

hundred of his famous horse Hodson started for Humayoun's

tomb, and, after three hours of negotiation, the three

princes, two of them the sons, the other the grandson of the

King, surrendered unconditionally into his hands. … Their

arms were taken from them, and, escorted by some of his

horsemen, they too were despatched in bullock-carts towards

Delhi. With the rest of his horse, Hodson stayed behind to

disarm the large and nerveless crowd, who, as sheep having no

shepherd, and unable, in their paralysed condition, to see

what the brute weight even of a flock of sheep might do by a

sudden rush, were overawed by his resolute bearing. This done,

he galloped after his prey and caught them up just before the

cavalcade reached the walls of Delhi. He ordered the princes

roughly to get out of the cart and strip,—for, even in his

thirst for their blood, he had, as it would seem, an eye to

the value of their outer clothes,—he ordered them into the

cart again, he seized a carbine from one of his troopers, and

then and there, with his own hand, shot them down deliberately

one after the other. It was a stupid, cold-blooded, three-fold

murder. … Had they been put upon their trial, disclosures of

great importance as to the origin of the Mutiny could hardly

fail to have been elicited. Their punishment would have been

proportioned to their offence, and would have been meted out

to them with all the patient majesty of offended law."

_R. B. Smith,

Life of Lord Lawrence,

volume 2, chapter 5._

ALSO IN:

_Sir R. Temple,

Lord Lawrence,

chapter 7._

_Sir R. Temple,

Men and Events of my Time in India,

chapter 7._

_J. Cave-Brown,

The Punjab and Delhi in 1857._

_G. B. Malleson,

History of the Indian Mutiny,

book 10, chapter 1 (volume 2)._

_Major Hodson,

Twelve Years of a Soldier's Life in India,

part 2: The Delhi Campaign._

INDIA: A. D. 1857-1858 (July-June).

General Havelock's campaign.

Sir Colin Campbell's.

The Relief of Lucknow.

Substantial suppression of the Mutiny.

"Meanwhile the greatest anxiety prevailed with regard to our

countrymen and countrywomen at Lucknow and Cawnpore. The

Indian government made every effort to relieve them; but the

reinforcements which had been despatched from England and

China came in slowly, and the demands made for assistance far

exceeded the means at the disposal of the government. … The

task of relieving the city was entrusted to the heroic General

Havelock, who marched out with a mere handful of men, of whom

only 1,400 were British soldiers, to encounter a large army

and a whole country in rebellion. At Futtehpore, on the 12th

of July, he defeated a vastly superior force, posted in a very

strong position. After giving his men a day's rest, he

advanced again on the 14th, and routed the enemy in two

pitched battles. Next morning he renewed his advance, and with

a force of less than 900 men attacked 5,000 strongly

entrenched, and commanded by Nana Sahib. They were

outmanœuvred, out-flanked, beaten and dispersed. But for this

signal defeat they wreaked their vengeance on the unfortunate

women and children who still remained at Cawnpore. On the very

day on which the battle occurred, they were massacred under

circumstances of cruelty over which we must throw a veil. The

well of Cawnpore, in which their hacked and mutilated bodies

were flung, presented a spectacle from which soldiers who had

regarded unmoved the carnage of numerous battle-fields shrank

with horror. Of all the atrocities perpetrated during this

war, so fruitful in horrors, this was the most awful; and it

was followed by a terrible retribution. It steeled the hearts,

and lent a furious and fearless energy to the arms, of the

British soldiery. Wherever they came, they gave no quarter to

the mutineers; a few men often frantically attacked hundreds,

frantically but vainly defending themselves; and never ceased

till all had been bayoneted, or shot, or hewn in pieces. All

those who could be shown to have been accomplices in the

perpetration of the murders that had been committed were hung,

or blown from the cannon's mouth. Though the intrepid Havelock

was unable to save the women and children who had been

imprisoned in Cawnpore, he pressed forward to Lucknow. But the

force under his command was too small to enable him to drive

off the enemy. Meanwhile Sir J. Outram, who was now returning

from the Persian war, which had been brought to a successful

conclusion, was sent to Oude as chief commissioner, with full

civil and military power. This appointment was fully deserved;

but it had the effect, probably not thought of by those who

made it, of superseding Havelock just as he was about to

achieve the crowning success of his rapid and glorious career.

Outram, however, with a generosity which did him more real

honour than a thousand victories would have conferred, wrote

to Havelock to inform him that he intended to join him with

adequate reinforcements; adding: 'To you shall be left the

glory of relieving Lucknow, for which you have already

struggled so much. I shall accompany you only in my civil

capacity as commissioner, placing my military service at your

disposal, should you please, and serving under you as a

volunteer.' Thus Havelock, after gaining no fewer than twelve

battles against forces far superior in numbers to the little

band he originally led, was enabled at length, on the 25th of

August, to preserve the civilians, the women, and children of

Lucknow from the impending horrors of another massacre, which

would no doubt have been as fearful as that of Cawnpore. The

Highlanders were the first to enter, and were welcomed with

grateful enthusiasm by those whom they had saved from a fate

worse than death. However, the enemy, recovering from the

panic which the arrival of Havelock and his troops had caused,

renewed the siege. Sir Colin Campbell, who had assumed the

command of the Indian army, had determined to march to the

relief of Lucknow. He set out from Cawnpore on the 9th of

November, but was obliged to wait till the 14th for

reinforcements, which were on the way to join him, and which

raised the force under his command to 5,000—a force

numerically far inferior to that which it was to attack.

{1746}

On the 17th of November the relief of Lucknow was effected.

The music of the Highland regiments, playing 'The Campbells

are coming,' announced to their delighted countrymen inside

the city that the commander-in-chief himself was with the

relieving force. Little time, however, was allowed for

congratulations and rejoicings. The ladies, the civilians, and

the garrison were quietly withdrawn; the guns, which it was

thought not desirable to remove, were burst; and a retreat

effected, without affording the enemy the slightest suspicion

of what was going on until some hours after the town had been

evacuated by its defenders. The retreating force reached

Dilhasha on the 24th, without having sustained any serious

molestation. There the gallant Havelock sank under the trials

and hardships to which he had been exposed, and yielded up the

life which was instrumental in preserving so many others from

the most terrible of deaths. While Sir Colin Campbell was

engaged in effecting the relief of Lucknow, intelligence

reached Cawnpore that a large hostile army was making towards

it. General Windham, who commanded there, unacquainted with

the number or the position of the approaching force, marched

forth to meet it, in the hope that he should be able to rout

and cut up the advanced guard before the main body of the

enemy could come to its assistance. But in this expectation he

was disappointed. Instead of having to deal with the van, he

engaged with the whole rebel army, and his little force,

assailed on all sides, was obliged to retire. He at once

despatched a letter to the commander-in-chief, requesting him

to hasten to his assistance; but it was intercepted by the

enemy. Fortunately Sir Colin Campbell, though ignorant of the

critical position of his subordinate, came up just at the

moment when the danger was at its height. This was on the 28th

of November. He was, however, in no haste to attack the foe,

and was content for the present merely to hold them in check.

His first care was for the safety of the civilians, the women,

and the children, which was not secured till the 30th; and he

continued to protect them till the 5th of December, when they

were all safely lodged at Allahabad. The enemy, unaware of the

motive of his seeming inaction, imputed it to fear, and became

every day more confident and audacious. On the 6th he at

length turned fiercely on them, completely defeated them, and

seized their baggage; he then dispersed and drove away another

large force, under the command of Nana Sahib, which was

watching the engagement at a little distance. The army entered

the residence of Nana Sahib at Bithoor, and took possession of

much treasure, which had been concealed in a well. Nearly the

whole of the enemy's artillery was captured; and the army,

being overtaken as they were in the act of crossing into Oude,

great numbers of them were destroyed. Of course, for the

moment Lucknow, being no longer garrisoned, had fallen into

the hands of the insurgents; but they were not long permitted

to retain it. Strong reinforcements arrived, and the Indian

government was enabled to send a force against Lucknow

sufficient to overwhelm all resistance; and on the 15th of

December this important city was in the undisputed possession

of the British troops. This final recovery of the capital of

Oude decided the reconquest of that country. A struggle was,

indeed, maintained for some time longer; innumerable battles

were fought; and the final subjugation of the country was

effected in the month of June, 1858."

_W. N. Molesworth,

History of England, 1830-1874,

volume 3, chapter 2._

ALSO IN:

_A. Forbes,

Havelock,

chapters 5-7._

_General Sir O. T. Burne,

Clyde and Strathnairn._

_General Shadwell,

Life of Colin Campbell, Lord Clyde,

volume 1, chapter 11,

and volume 2, chapters 1-18._

_T. Lowe,

Central India during 1857-8._

INDIA: A. D. 1858.

The Governor-General's Proclamation,

Termination of the rule of the East India Company.

The government transferred to the Crown.

"By a singular circumstance, when the mutiny was suppressed in

1858, the Governor-General, who in the previous year had been

condemned for leniency which was thought ill-timed, was

destined to receive censure for harshness which was declared

unnecessary. On the eve of the fall of Lucknow, he drew up a

proclamation confiscating the lands of all the great

landowners in Oudh. Exceptions were, indeed, made to this

sweeping decree. Landowners who could prove their loyalty were

promised exemption from it, just as rebels who unconditionally

surrendered, and whose hands were not stained with British

blood, were offered pardon. There is no doubt that Canning, in

drawing up this proclamation, relied on the exceptions which

it contained, while there is equally no doubt that the critics

who objected to it overlooked its parentheses. But its issue

was made the basis of an attack which well-nigh proved fatal

to the Governor-General's administration. The chances of party

warfare had replaced Palmerston with Derby; and the

Conservative minister had entrusted the Board of Control to

the brilliant but erratic statesman who, fifteen years before,

had astonished India with pageant and proclamation. …

Ellenborough thought proper to condemn Canning's proclamation

in a severe despatch, and to allow his censure to be made

public. For a short time it seemed impossible that the

Governor-General who had received such a despatch could

continue his government. But the lapse of a few days showed

that the minister who had framed the despatch, and not the

Viceroy who had received it, was to suffer from the

transaction. The public, recollecting the justice of Canning's

rule, the mercy of his administration, almost unanimously

considered that he should not have been hastily condemned for

a document which, it was gradually evident, had only been

imperfectly understood; and Ellenborough, to save his

colleagues, volunteered to play the part of Jonah, and retired

from the ministry. His retirement closes, in one sense, the

history of the Indian Mutiny. But the transactions of the

Mutiny had, almost for the first time, taught the public to

consider the anomalies of Indian government. In the course of

a hundred years a Company had been suffered to acquire an

empire nearly ten times as large and as populous as Great

Britain. It was true that the rule of the Company was in many

respects nominal. The President of the Board of Control was

the true head of the Indian Government, and spoke and acted

through the Secret Committee of the Court of Directors. But

this very circumstance only accentuated the anomaly. If the

President of the Board of Control was in fact Indian minister,

it was far simpler to make him Indian minister by name, and to

do away with the clumsy expedient which alone enabled him to

exercise his authority.

{1747}

Hence it was generally decided that the rule of the Company

should cease, and that India should thenceforward become one

of the possessions of the crown. … A great danger thus led

to the removal of a great anomaly, and the vast Indian empire

which Englishmen had won was thenceforward taken into a

nation's keeping."

_S. Walpole,

History of England from 1815,

chapter 27 (volume 5)._

The act "for the better government of India," which was passed

in the autumn of 1858, "provided that all the territories

previously under the government of the East India Company were

to be vested in her Majesty, and all the Company's powers to

be exercised in her name. One of her Majesty's principal

Secretaries of State was to have all the power previously

exercised by the Company, or by the Board of Control. The

Secretary was to be assisted by a Council of India, to consist

of fifteen members, of whom seven were to be elected by the

Court of Directors from their own body, and eight nominated by

the Crown. The vacancies among the nominated were to be filled

up by the Crown; those among the elected by the remaining

members of the Council for a certain time, but afterward by

the Secretary of State for India. The competitive principle

for the Civil Service was extended in its application, and

made thoroughly practical. The military and naval forces of

the Company were to be deemed the forces of her Majesty. A

clause was introduced declaring that, except for the purpose

of preventing or repelling actual invasion of India, the

Indian revenues should not, without the consent of both Houses

of Parliament, be applicable to defray the expenses of any

military operation carried on beyond the external frontiers of

her Majesty's Indian possessions. Another clause enacted that

whenever an order was sent to India directing the commencement

of hostilities by her Majesty's forces there, the fact should

be communicated to Parliament within three months, if

Parliament were then sitting, or, if not, within one month

after its next meeting. These clauses were heard of more than

once in later days. The Viceroy and Governor-General was to be

supreme in India, but was to be assisted by a Council. India

now has nine provinces, each under its own civil government,

and independent of the others, but all subordinate to the

authority of the Viceroy. In accordance with this Act the

government of the Company, the famed 'John Company,' formally

ceased on September 1st, 1858; and the Queen was proclaimed

throughout India in the following November, with Lord Canning

for her first Viceroy."

_J. McCarthy,

History of Our Own Times,

chapter 36 (volume 3)._

ALSO IN:

_Sir H. S. Cunningham,

Earl Canning,

chapters 7-9._

_Duke of Argyll,

India Under Dalhousie and Canning._

INDIA: A. D. 1861.

Institution of the Order of the Star of India.

See STAR OF INDIA.

INDIA: A. D. 1862-1876.

Vice-regal administrations of

Lords Lawrence, Mayo and Northbrook.

Lord Canning was succeeded as Viceroy by Lord Elgin, in 1862;

but Elgin only lived until November, 1863, and his successor

was Sir John Lawrence, the savior of the Punjab. "Sir John

Lawrence's Viceroyalty was an uneventful time. Great natural

calamities by famine and cyclone fell upon the country, which

called forth the philanthropic energies of Government and

people. Commerce passed through an unexampled crisis, taxing

skill and foresight. But the political atmosphere was calm.

With the exception of little frontier wars, wasteful of

resources that were sorely needed, there was nothing to divert

the Government from the prosecution of schemes for the

improvement of the physical and moral condition of the

people." Sir John Lawrence held the Viceroyalty until January,

1869, when he was succeeded by Lord Mayo and returned to

England. He was raised, in that year, to the peerage, under

the title of Baron Lawrence of Punjab and Grateley. He died

ten years later.

_Sir C. Aitchison,

Lord Lawrence,

chapters 7-12._

Lord Lawrence's immediate successor, Lord Mayo, was

assassinated, while Viceroy, in 1872, by a convict—a

Highlander—at the convict settlement on the Andaman Islands,

for no reason of personal hatred, but only because he

represented the governing authority which had condemned the

man. Lord Mayo was succeeded by Lord Northbrook, who held the

office from 1872 to 1876.

_Sir W. W. Hunter,

The Earl of Mayo._

INDIA: A. D. 1876.

Lord Lytton, Viceroy.

The successor of Lord Northbrook in the Vice-regal

office was Lord Lytton, appointed in 1876.

INDIA: A. D. 1877.

The Native States and their quasi feudatory relation to the

British Crown.

Queen Victoria's assumption of the title of Empress of India.

"In some sense the Indians were accustomed to consider the

Company, as they now consider the Queen, to be the heir of the

Great Mughal, and therefore universal suzerain by right of

succession. But it is easy to exaggerate the force of this

claim, which is itself a mere restatement of the fact of

conquest. Politically, India is divided into two parts,

commonly known as British territory and the native states. The

first portion alone is ruled directly by English officials,

and its inhabitants alone are subjects of the Queen. The

native states are sometimes called feudatory—a convenient

term to express their vague relation to the British crown. To

define that relation precisely would be impossible. It has

arisen at different times and by different methods; it varies

from semi-independence to complete subjection. Some chiefs are

the representatives of those whom we found on our first

arrival in the country; others owe their existence to our

creation. Some are parties to treaties entered into as between

equal powers; others have consented to receive patents from

their suzerain recording their limited rights; with others,

again, there are no written engagements at all. Some have

fought with us and come out of the struggle without dishonour.

Some pay tribute; others pay none. Their extent and power vary

as greatly as their political status. The Nizam of Haidarabad

governs a kingdom of 80,000 square miles and 10,000,000

inhabitants. Some of the petty chieftains of Kathiawar

exercise authority over only a few acres. It is, however,

necessary to draw a line sharply circumscribing the native

states, as a class, from British territory. Every native chief

possesses a certain measure of local authority, which is not

derivative but inherent. English control, when and as

exercised, is not so much of an administrative as of a

diplomatic nature. In Anglo-Indian terminology this shade of

meaning is expressed by the word 'political.' … As a general

proposition, and excepting the quite insignificant states, it

may be stated that the government is carried on not only in

the name but also by the initiative of the native chief.

{1748}

At all the large capitals, and at certain centres round which

minor states are grouped, a British officer is stationed under

the style of Resident or Agent. Through him all diplomatic

affairs are conducted. He is at once an ambassador and a

controller. His duty is to represent the majesty of the

suzerain power, to keep a watchful eye upon abuses, and to

encourage reforms."

_J. S. Cotton,

Colonies and Dependencies,

part 1, chapter 3._

"The supremacy of the British Government over all the Native

States in India was declared in 1877, in a more emphatic form

than it had received before, by the assumption by the Queen of

the title of Kaisar-i-Hind, Empress of India. No such

gathering of chiefs and princes has taken place in historical

times as that seen at Delhi in January, 1877, when the rulers

of all the principal States of India formally acknowledged

their dependence on the British Crown. The political effect of

the assertion of the supremacy of the paramount power, thus

formally made for the first time in India, has been marked and

extremely important."

_Sir J. Strachey,

India,

lecture 11._

ALSO IN:

_G. B. Malleson,

Historical Sketch of the Native States of India._

INDIA: A. D. 1878-1881.

The second Afghan War.

See AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1869-1881.

INDIA: A. D. 1880-1893.

Recent Viceroys.

On the defeat of the Conservative Beaconsfield Ministry in

England, in 1880, Lord Lytton resigned the Viceroyalty and was

succeeded by the Marquis of Ripon, who gave place in turn to

the Marquis of Dufferin in 1884. In 1888, the Marquis of

Lansdowne succeeded Lord Dufferin, and was himself succeeded

in 1893 by Sir Henry Norman.

INDIA: A. D. 1893.

Suspension of the free coinage of silver.

In June, 1893, the Indian Government, with the approval of the

British Cabinet, stopped the free coinage of silver, with a

view to the introduction of a gold standard. The Government,

it was announced, while stopping the coinage of the declining

metal for private persons, would continue on its own account

to coin rupees in exchange for gold at a ratio then fixed at

sixteen pence sterling per rupee. "The closing of the mints of

British India to the coinage of silver coins of

full-debt-paying power is the most momentous event in the

monetary history of the present century. It is the final and

disastrous blow to the use of silver as a measure of value and

as money of full-debt-paying power, and the relegation of it

to the position of a subsidiary, or token metal. It is the

culmination of the evolution from a silver to a gold standard

which has been progressing with startling rapidity in recent

years. … The remarkable series of events which have

characterized, or made manifest, this evolution from a silver

to a gold standard are nearly all condensed in the brief

period of twenty years, and are probably without a parallel in

ancient or modern monetary history. … With the single

exception of England, all Europe forty years ago had the

silver standard, not only legally but actually—silver coins

constituting the great bulk of the money of actual

transactions. To-day, not a mint in Europe is open to the

coinage of full-debt-paying silver coins, and the gateways of

the Orient have been closed against it. Twenty years ago one

ounce of gold exchanged in the markets of the world for

fifteen and one-half ounces of silver; to-day, one ounce of

gold will buy nearly thirty ounces of silver. … There is a

general impression that silver has been the money of India

from remote generations. This is a fallacy. It has not been a

great many years since India adopted the silver standard. The

ancient money of the Hindoos was gold, which in 1818 was

supplemented by silver, but gold coins remained legal tender

until 1835, when silver was made the sole standard of value

and legal tender money in British India, and gold was

demonetized. … During the last fifty odd years, India has

absorbed vast quantities of silver."

_E. O. Leech,

The Doom of Silver

(The Forum, August, 1893)._

----------INDIA: End--------

INDIAN EMPIRE, The Order of the.

An Order instituted by Queen Victoria in 1878.

----------INDIAN TERRITORY: Start--------

INDIAN TERRITORY: 1803.

Embraced in the Louisiana Purchase.

See LOUISIANA: A. D. 1798-1803.

INDIAN TERRITORY: A. D. 1824.

Set off from Arkansas Territory.

See ARKANSAS: A. D. 1819-1836.

----------INDIAN TERRITORY: End--------

INDIANA.

The Aboriginal Inhabitants.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY,

ALLEGHANS, and DELAWARES.

INDIANA: A. D. 1700-1735.

Occupation by the French.

See CANADA: A. D. 1700-1735.

INDIANA: A. D. 1763.

Cession to Great Britain.

See SEVEN YEARS WAR: THE TREATIES.

INDIANA: A. D. 1763.

The King's proclamation excluding settlers.

See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1763.

INDIANA: A. D. 1765.

Possession taken by the English.

See ILLINOIS: A. D. 1765.

INDIANA: A. D. 1774.

Embraced in the Province of Quebec.

See CANADA: A. D. 1763-1774.

INDIANA: A. D. 1778-1779.

Conquest from the British by the Virginian General Clark, and

annexation to the Kentucky district of Virginia.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

A. D. 1778-1779, CLARK'S CONQUEST.

INDIANA: A. D. 1784.

Included in the proposed states of Assenisipia, Metropotamia,

Illinoia and Polypotamia.

See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1784.

INDIANA: A. D. 1786.

Partially covered by the western land claims of Connecticut,

ceded to the United States.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1781-1786.

INDIANA: A. D. 1787.

The Ordinance for the government of the Northwest Territory.

Perpetual exclusion of Slavery.

See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1787.

INDIANA: A. D. 1790-1795.

Indian War.

Disastrous expeditions of Harmar and St. Clair, and Wayne's

decisive victory.

See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1790-1795.

INDIANA: A. D. 1800.

The Territory of Indiana organized.

See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1788-1802.

{1749}

INDIANA: A. D. 1800-1818.

Successive partitions of the Territory.

Michigan and Illinois detached.

The remaining Indiana admitted as a State.

"Indiana Territory as originally organized [in 1800] …

included the county of Knox, upon the Wabash, from which has

sprung the State of Indiana; the county of St. Clair, on the

Upper Mississippi, or Illinois River, from which has sprung

the State of Illinois; and the county of Wayne, upon the

Detroit River, from which has sprung the State of Michigan.

… At this time, the inhabitants contained in all of them did

not amount to more than 5,640 souls, while the aggregate

number of the Indian tribes within the extreme limits of the

territory was more than 100,000. … By successive treaties,

the Indian title was extinguished gradually to all the country

lying upon the waters of the White River, and upon all the

lower tributaries of the Wabash, upon the Little Wabash, the

Kaskaskia, and east of the Mississippi, below the mouth of the

Illinois. Thus, before the close of the year 1805, nearly all

the southern half of the present State of Indiana, and one

third of the State of Illinois, was open to the advance of the

enterprising pioneer. … In 1807, the Federal government, in

like manner, purchased from the Indians extensive regions west

of Detroit River, and within the present State of Michigan,

far beyond the limits of the white settlements in that

quarter. Meantime, the settlements formerly comprised in Wayne

county, having increased in inhabitants and importance, had

been erected into a separate territorial government, known and

designated as the 'Territory of Michigan.' On the 1st of July,

1805, the territory entered upon the first grade of

territorial government, under the provisions of the ordinance

of 1787; and William Hull, formerly a lieutenant in the

Revolutionary army, was made the first governor. … Detroit

… was made the seat of the territorial government. … By

the close of the year 1808, the Indiana Territory east of the

Wabash had received such an increase in numbers that it was

desirable to assume the second grade of territorial

government. Having a population of 5,000 free white males,

Congress, with a view to a future state government, by an act

approved February 3d, 1809, restricted its limits, and

authorized a territorial Legislature. … The Indiana

Territory, from this time, was bounded on the west by a line

extending up the middle of the Wabash, from its mouth to

Vincennes, and thence by a meridian due north to the southern

extremity of Lake Michigan. On the north, it was bounded by

the southern line of the Michigan Territory. That portion west

of the Wabash was erected into a separate territorial

government of the first grade, known and designated as the

'Illinois Territory.' The inhabitants of the Indiana Territory

soon began to augment more rapidly. … In 1810 the people had

increased in numbers to 24,500, and in the newly-erected

Territory of Illinois there was an aggregate of 12,300

persons." In 1816 "it was ascertained that the Indiana

Territory possessed a population which entitled it to an

independent state government. Congress authorized the election

of a convention to form a state Constitution," and "the new

'State of Indiana' was formally admitted into the Union on the

19th of April, 1816." Two years later, on the 3d of December,

1818, the Territory of Illinois was similarly transformed and

became one of the states of the Union.

_J. W. Monette,

The Discovery and Settlement of the Mississippi Valley,

book 5, chapter 16 (volume 2)._

ALSO IN:

_J. B. Dillon,

History of Indiana,

chapters 31-47._

_A. Davidson and B. Stuvé,

History of Illinois,

chapters 20-26._

_T. M. Cooley,

Michigan,

chapter 8._

INDIANA: A. D. 1811.

General Harrison's campaign against Tecumseh and his League.

The Battle of Tippecanoe.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1811.

INDIANA: A. D. 1863.

John Morgan's Rebel Raid.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (JULY: KENTUCKY).

----------INDIANS: Start--------

INDIANS:

American: The Name.

"As Columbus supposed himself to have landed on an island at

the extremity of India, he called the natives by the general

appellation of Indians, which was universally adopted before

the true nature of his discovery was known, and has since been

extended to all the aboriginals of the New World."

_W. Irving,

Life and Voyages of Columbus,

book 4, chapter 1 (volume 1)._

"The Spanish writers from the outset, beginning with Columbus

in his letters, call the natives of America, Indians, and

their English translators do the same. So, too, Richard Eden,

the earliest English writer on American travel, applies the

name to the natives of Peru and Mexico. It is used in the same

way, both in translations and original accounts, during the

rest of the century, but it is always limited to those races

with whom the Spaniards were in contact. In its wider and

later application the word does not seem to have established

itself in English till the next century. The earliest instance

I can find, where it is applied to the natives of North

America generally in any original work, is by Hakluyt. In 1587

he translated Laudonnière's 'History of the French Colony in

Florida,' and dedicated his translation to Sir Walter Raleigh.

In this dedication he once uses the term Indian for the

natives of North America. Heriot and the other writers who

describe the various attempts at settlement in Virginia during

the sixteenth century, invariably call the natives 'savages.'

Perhaps the earliest instance where an English writer uses the

name Indian specially to describe the occupants of the land

afterwards colonized by the English is in the account of

Archer's voyage to Virginia in 1602. This account, written by

James Rosier, is published in Purchas (volume iv. b. viii.).

From that time onward the use of the term in the wider sense

becomes more common. We may reasonably infer that the use of

it was an indication of the growing knowledge of the fact that

the lands conquered by the Spaniards and those explored by the

English formed one continent."

_J. A. Doyle,

The English in America: Virginia, &c.,

appendix A._

INDIANS: The tribes and families.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES.

----------INDIANS: End--------

INDICTIONS, The.

The indiction "was a cycle of 15 years, used only by the

Romans, for appointing the times of certain public taxes; as

appears from the title in the Code, 'De tributo indicto.' It

was established by Constantine, A. D. 312, in the room of the

heathen Olympiads; and was used in the acts of the General

Councils, Emperors, and Popes."

_W. Hales,

New Analysis of Chronology,

volume 1, book 1._

"The indictions consisted of a revolution of 15 years, which

are separately reckoned as indiction 1, indiction 2, &c., up

to 15; when they recommence with indiction 1. … Doubt exists

as to the commencement of the indictions; some writers

assigning the first indiction to the year 312; the greater

number to the year 313; others to 314; whilst some place it

in the year 315.

{1750}

In 'L'Art de vérifier les Dates,' the year 313 is fixed upon

as that of the first indiction. There are four descriptions of

indictions. The first is that of Constantinople, which was

instituted by Constantine in A. D. 312, and began on the 1st

of September. The second, and more common in England and

France, was the Imperial or Cæsarean indiction, which began on

the 24th of September. The third kind of indiction is called

the Roman or Pontifical, from its being generally used in

papal bulls, at least from the ninth to the fourteenth

century; it commences on the 25th of December or 1st of

January, accordingly as either of these days was considered

the first of the year. The fourth kind of indiction, which is

to be found in the register of the parliaments of Paris, began

in the month of October. … After the 12th century, the

indiction was rarely mentioned in public instruments. … But

in France, in private charters, and in ecclesiastical

documents, the usage continued until the end of the 15th

century."

_Sir H. Nicolas,

Chronology of History,

pages 6-7._

_ALSO IN:

E. Gibbon,

Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,

chapter 17._

INDO-EUROPEAN.

INDO-GERMANIC.

See ARYAN.

INDULGENCE: Declarations of: by Charles II.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1672-1673.

INDULGENCE: By James II.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1687-1688.

INDULGENCES: The Doctrine.

Tetzel's sale.

Luther's attack.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1516-1517; and 1517.