In that condition of affairs the flame of war was kindled between the British and the French in Europe in 1745. Dupleix was at that time governor of Pondicherry and Clive was a young writer at Madras. A British fleet firstFrench and British wars.appeared on the Coromandel coast, but Dupleix by a judicious present induced the nawab of Arcot to interpose and prevent hostilities. In 1746 a French squadron arrived, under the command of La Bourdonnais. Madras surrendered almost without a blow, and the only settlement left to the British was Fort St David, a few miles south of Pondicherry, where Clive and a few other fugitives sought shelter. The nawab, faithful to his policy of impartiality, marched with 10,000 men to drive the French out of Madras, but he was signally defeated by a French force of only four hundred men and two guns. In 1748 a British fleet arrived under Admiral Boscawen and attempted the siege of Pondicherry, while a land force co-operated under Major Stringer Lawrence, whose name afterwards became associated with that of Clive. The French successfully repulsed all attacks, and at last peace was restored, by the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, which gave back Madras to the British (1748).
The first war with the French was merely an incident in the greater contest in Europe. The second war had its origin in Indian politics, while England and France were at peace. The easy success of the French arms hadClive.inspired Dupleix with the ambition of founding a French empire in India, under the shadow of the existing Mahommedan powers. Disputed successions at Hyderabad and at Arcot supplied his opportunity. On both thrones he placed nominees of his own, and for a short time posed as the supreme arbiter of the entire south. In boldness of conception, and in knowledge of Oriental diplomacy, Dupleix has had probably no rival. But he was no soldier, and he was destined in that sphere to encounter the “heaven-born genius” of Clive. For the British of Madras, under the instinct of self-preservation, were compelled to maintain the cause of another candidate to the throne of Arcot in opposition to the nominee of Dupleix. This candidate was Mahommed Ali, afterwards known in history as Wala-jah. The war that then ensued between the French and British, each with their native allies, has been exhaustively described in the pages of Orme. The one incident that stands out conspicuously is the capture and subsequent defence of Arcot by Clive in 1751. This heroic feat, even more than the battle of Plassey, established the reputation of the British for valour throughout India. Shortly afterwards Clive returned to England in ill-health, but the war continued fitfully for many years. On the whole, British Influence predominated in the Carnatic, and their candidate, Mahommed Ali, maintained his position at Arcot. But the French were no less supreme in the Deccan, whence they were able to take possession of the coast tract called “the Northern Circars.” The final struggle was postponed until 1760, when Colonel (afterwards Sir Eyre) Coote won the decisive victory of Wandiwash over the French general Lally, and proceeded to invest Pondicherry, which was starved into capitulation in January 1761. A few months later the hill-fortress of Gingee (Chenji) also surrendered. In the words of Orme, “That day terminated the long hostilities between the two rival European powers in Coromandel, and left not a single ensign of the French nation avowed by the authority of its Government in any part of India.”
Meanwhile the interest of history shifts with Clive to Bengal.
At the time of Aurangzeb’s death in 1707 the nawab or governor of Bengal was Murshid Kuli Khan, known also as Jafar Khan. By birth a Brahman, and brought up as a slave in Persia, he united the administrativeBlack Hole of Calcutta.ability of a Hindu to the fanaticism of a renegade. Hitherto the capital of Bengal had been at Dacca on the eastern frontier of the empire, whence the piratical attacks of the Portuguese and of the Arakanese or Mughs could be most easily checked. Murshid Kuli Khan transferred his residence to Murshidabad, in the neighbourhood of Cossimbazar, the river port of all the Ganges trade. The British, the French and the Dutch had each factories at Cossimbazar, as well as at Dacca, Patna and Malda. But Calcutta was the headquarters of the British, Chandernagore of the French, and Chinsura of the Dutch, all three towns being situated close to each other in the lower reaches of the Hugli, where the river is navigable for large ships. Murshid Kuli Khan ruled over Bengal prosperously for twenty-one years, and left his power to a son-in-law and a grandson. The hereditary succession was broken in 1740 by Ali Vardi Khan, who was the last of the great nawabs of Bengal. In his days the Mahratta horsemen began to ravage the country, and the British at Calcutta obtained permission to erect an earth-work, which is known to the present day as the Mahratta ditch. Ali Vardi Khan died in 1756, and was succeeded by his grandson, Suraj-ud-Dowlah, a youth of only nineteen years, whose ungovernable temper led to a rupturewith the British within two months after his accession. In pursuit of one of his own family who had escaped from his vengeance, he marched upon Calcutta with a large army. Many of the British fled down the river in their ships. The remainder surrendered after a feeble resistance, and were thrown as prisoners into the “black hole” or military jail of Fort William, a room 18 ft. by 14 ft. 10 in. in size, with only two small windows barred with iron. It was the month of June, in which the tropical heat of Calcutta is most oppressive. When the door of the prison was opened in the morning, only twenty-three persons out of one hundred and forty-six were found alive.
The news of this disaster fortunately found Clive returned to Madras, where also was a squadron of king’s ships under Admiral Watson. Clive and Watson promptly sailed to the mouth of the Ganges with all the troops thatBattle of Plassey.could be got together. Calcutta was recovered with little fighting, and the nawab consented to a peace which restored to the company all their privileges, and gave them compensation for their losses of property. It is possible that matters might have ended here if a fresh cause of hostilities had not suddenly arisen. War had just been declared between the British and French in Europe, and Clive, following the traditions of his early warfare in the Carnatic, attacked and captured Chandernagore. Suraj-ud-Dowlah, exasperated by this breach of neutrality within his own dominions, took the side of the French. But Clive, again acting upon the policy he had learned from Dupleix, had provided himself with a rival candidate to the throne. Undaunted, he marched out to the battlefield of Plassey (Palasi), at the head of about 900 Europeans and 2000 sepoys, with 8 pieces of artillery. The Mahommedan army is said to have consisted of 35,000 foot, 15,000 horse and 50 pieces of cannon. But there was a traitor in the Mahommedan camp in the person of Mir Jafar, who had married a sister of the late nawab, Ali Vardi Khan. The battle was short but decisive. After a few rounds of artillery fire, Suraj-ud-Dowlah fled, and the road to Murshidabad was left open.
The battle of Plassey was fought on the 23rd of June 1757, an anniversary afterwards remembered when the mutiny was at its height in 1857. History has agreed to adopt this date as the beginning of the British empire in the East; but the immediate results of the victory were comparatively small, and several more hard-won fights were fought before even the Bengalis would admit the superiority of the British arms. For the moment, however, all opposition was at an end. Clive, again following in the steps of Dupleix, placed his nominee, Mir Jafar, upon themasnadat Murshidabad, being careful to obtain a patent of investiture from the Mogul court. Enormous sums were exacted from Mir Jafar as the price of his elevation. The company claimed 10,000,000 rupees as compensation for losses; for the British, the Armenian and the Indian inhabitants of Calcutta there were demanded the sums of 5,000,000, 2,000,000 and 1,000,000 rupees; for the squadron 2,500,000 rupees, and an equal sum for the army. The members of the council received the following amounts: Mr Drake, the governor, and Colonel Clive 280,000 rupees each; and Mr Becher, Mr Watts and Major Kilpatrick 240,000 rupees each. The whole amounted to £2,340,000. The British, deluded by their avarice, still cherished extravagant ideas of Indian wealth; nor would they listen to the unwelcome truth. But it was found that there were no funds in the treasury to satisfy their inordinate demands, and they were obliged to be contented with one-half the stipulated sums, which, after many difficulties, were paid in specie and in jewels, with the exception of 584,905 rupees. The shares of the council were, however, paid in full. At the same time the nawab made a grant to the company of thezamindarirights over an extensive tract of country round Calcutta, now known as the district of the Twenty-four Parganas. The area of this tract was about 882 sq. m., and it paid a revenue or quit rent of about £23,000. The gross rental at first payable to the company was £53,000, but within a period of ten years it had risen to £146,000. Originally the company possessed only thezamindarirights,i.e.revenue jurisdiction. The superior lordship, or right to receive the quit rent, remained with the nawab; but in 1759 this also was parted with by the nawab in favour of Clive, who thus became the landlord of his own masters, the company. At that time also Clive was enrolled among the nobility of the Mogul empire, with the rank of commander of 6000 foot and 5000 horse. Clive’sjagir, as it was called, subsequently became a matter of inquiry in England, and on his death it passed to the company, thus merging thezamindariin the proprietary rights.
In 1758 Clive was appointed by the court of directors to be governor of all the company’s settlements in Bengal. From two quarters troubles threatened, which perhaps Clive alone was capable of overcoming. On the west the shahzada or imperial prince, known afterwards as the emperor Shah Alam, with a mixed army of Afghans and Mahrattas, and supported by the nawab wazir of Oudh, was advancing his own claims to the province of Bengal. In the south the influence of the French under Lally and Bussy was overshadowing the British at Madras. But the name of Clive exercised a decisive effect in both directions. Mir Jafar was anxious to buy off the shahzada, who had already invested Patna. But Clive in person marched to the rescue, with an army of only 450 Europeans and 2500 sepoys, and the Mogul army dispersed without striking a blow. In the same year Clive despatched a force southwards under Colonel Forde, which captured Masulipatam from the French, and permanently established British influence throughout the Northern Circars, and at the court of Hyderabad. He next attacked the Dutch, the sole European nation that might yet be a formidable rival to the English. He defeated them by both land and water; and from that time their settlement at Chinsura existed only on sufferance.
From 1760 to 1765, while Clive was at home, the history of the British in Bengal contains little that is creditable. Clive had left behind him no system of government, but merely the tradition that unlimited sums of moneyMassacre of Patna.might be extracted from the natives by the mere terror of the British name. In 1761 it was found expedient and profitable to dethrone Mir Jafar, the nawab of Murshidabad, and substitute his son-in-law, Mir Kasim, in his place. On that occasion, besides private donations, the British received a grant of the three districts of Burdwan, Midnapur and Chittagong, estimated to yield a net revenue of half a million sterling. But Mir Kasim proved to possess a will of his own, and to cherish dreams of independence. He retired from Murshidabad to Monghyr, a strong position on the Ganges, which commanded the only means of communication with Upper India. There he proceeded to organize an army, drilled and equipped after European models, and to carry on intrigues with the nawab wazir of Oudh. The company’s servants claimed the privilege of carrying on private trade throughout Bengal, free from inland dues and all other imposts. The assertion of this claim caused frequent affrays between the customs’ officers of the nawab and those traders who, whether falsely or not, represented that they were acting on behalf of the servants of the company. The nawab alleged that his civil authority was everywhere being set at nought. The majority of the council at Calcutta would not listen to his statements. The governor, Mr Vansittart, and Warren Hastings, then a junior member of council, attempted to effect some compromise. But the controversy had become too hot. The nawab’s officers fired upon a British boat, and forthwith all Bengal was in a blaze. A force of 2000 sepoys was cut to pieces at Patna, and about 200 Englishmen in various parts of the province fell into the hands of the Mahommedans, and were subsequently massacred. But as soon as regular warfare commenced Mir Kasim met with no more successes. His trained regiments were defeated in two pitched battles by Major Adams, at Gheria and at Udha-nala, and he himself took refuge with the nawab wazir of Oudh, who refused to deliver him up. This led to a prolongation of the war. Shah Alam, who had now succeeded his father as emperor, and Shuja-ud-Daula, the nawab wazir of Oudh, united their forces, and threatened Patna, which the British had recovered. A moreformidable danger appeared in the British camp, in the form of the first sepoy mutiny. This was quelled by Major (afterwards Sir Hector) Munro, who ordered twenty-four of the ringleaders to be blown from guns, an old Mogul punishment. In 1764 Major Munro won the decisive battle of Buxar, which laid Oudh at the feet of the conquerors, and brought the Mogul emperor as a suppliant to the British camp.
Meanwhile the council at Calcutta had twice found the opportunity they desired of selling the government of Bengal to a new nawab. But in 1765 Clive (now Baron Clive of Plassey, in the peerage of Ireland) arrived at Calcutta,Clive’s reforms.as governor of Bengal for the second time, to settle the entire system of relations with the native powers. Two objects stand out conspicuously in his policy. First, he sought to acquire the substance, though not the name, of territorial power, by using the authority of the Mogul emperor for so much as he wished, and for no more; and, secondly, he desired to purify the company’s service by prohibiting illicit gains, and at the same time guaranteeing a reasonable remuneration from honest sources. In neither respect were the details of his plans carried out by his successors. But the beginning of the British administration of India dates from this second governorship of Clive, just as the origin of the British empire in India dates from his victory at Plassey. Clive’s first step was to hurry up from Calcutta to Allahabad, and there settle in person the fate of half northern India. Oudh was given back to the nawab wazir, on condition of his paying half a million sterling towards the expenses of the war. The provinces of Allahabad and Kora, forming the lower part of the Doab, were handed over to Shah Alam himself, who in his turn granted to the company thediwanior financial administration of Bengal, Behar and Orissa, together with the Northern Circars. A puppet nawab was still maintained at Murshidabad, who received an annual allowance of about half a million sterling; and half that amount was paid to the emperor as tribute from Bengal. Thus was constituted the dual system of government, by which the British received all the revenues and undertook to maintain an army for the defence of the frontier, while the criminal jurisdiction vested in the nawab. In Indian phraseology, the company wasdiwanand the nawab wasnazim. As a matter of general administration, the actual collection of the revenues still remained for some years in the hands of native officials. In attempting to reorganize and purify the company’s service, Clive undertook a task yet more difficult than to partition the valley of the Ganges. The officers, civil and military alike, were all tainted with the common corruption. Their legal salaries were absolutely insignificant, but they had been permitted to augment them ten and a hundredfold by means of private trade and gifts from the native powers. Despite the united resistance of the civil servants, and an actual mutiny of two hundred military officers, Clive carried through his reforms. Both private trade and the receipt of presents were absolutely prohibited for the future, while a substantial increase of pay was provided out of the monopoly of salt.
Lord Clive quitted India for the third and last time in 1767. Between that date and the arrival of Warren Hastings in 1772 nothing of importance occurred in Bengal beyond the terrible famine of 1770, which is officially reportedWarren Hastings.to have swept away one-third of the inhabitants. The dual system of government, however, established by Clive, had proved a failure. Warren Hastings, a tried servant of the company, distinguished alike for intelligence, for probity and for knowledge of oriental manners, was nominated governor by the court of directors, with express instructions to carry out a predetermined series of reforms. In their own words, the court had resolved to “stand forth as diwan, and to take upon themselves, by the agency of their own servants, the entire care and administration of the revenues.” In the execution of this plan, Hastings removed the exchequer from Murshidabad to Calcutta, and for the first time appointed European officers, under the now familiar title of collectors, to superintend the revenue collections and preside in the civil courts. The urgency of foreign affairs, and subsequently internal strife at the council table, hindered Hastings from developing farther the system of civil administration, a task finally accomplished by Lord Cornwallis.
Though Hastings always prided himself specially upon that reform, as well as upon the improvements he introduced into the collection of the revenues from salt and opium, his name will be remembered in history for the boldnessFirst Governor-General.and success of his foreign policy. From 1772 to 1774 he was governor of Bengal; from 1774 to 1785 he was the first titular governor-general of India, presiding over a council nominated, like himself, not by the company, but by an act of parliament, known as the Regulating Act. In his domestic policy he was greatly hampered by the opposition of Sir Philip Francis; but, so far as regards external relations with Oudh, with the Mahrattas, and with Hyder Ali, he was generally able to compel assent to his own measures. His treatment of Oudh may here be passed over as not being material to the general history of India, while the personal aspects of his rule are discussed in a separate article (seeHastings, Warren). To explain his Mahratta policy, it will be necessary to give a short retrospective sketch of the history of that people.
Sivaji the Great, as already mentioned, died in 1680, while Aurangzeb was still on the throne. The family of Sivaji produced no great names, either among those who continued to be the nominal chiefs of the MahrattaRise of the Mahrattas.confederacy, with their capital at Satara, or among the rajas of Kolhapur and Tanjore. All real power passed into the hands of the peshwa, or Brahman minister, who founded in his turn an hereditary dynasty at Poona, dating from the beginning of the 18th century. Next rose several Mahratta generals, who, though recognizing the suzerainty of the peshwa, carved out for themselves independent kingdoms in different parts of India, sometimes far from the original home of the Mahratta race. Chief among these generals were the gaikwar in Gujarat, Sindhia and Holkar in Malwa, and the Bhonsla raja of Berar and Nagpur. At one time it seemed probable that the Mahratta confederacy would expel the Mahommedans even from northern India; but the decisive battle of Panipat, won by the Afghans in 1761, gave a respite to the Delhi empire. The Mahratta chiefs never again united heartily for a common purpose, though they still continued to be the most formidable military power in India. In especial, they dominated over the British settlement of Bombay on the western coast, which was the last of the three presidencies to feel the lust of territorial ambition. For more than a hundred years, from its acquisition in 1661 to the outbreak of the first Mahratta war in 1775, the British on the west coast possessed no territory outside the island of Bombay and their fortified factory at Surat.
The Bombay government was naturally emulous to follow the example of Madras and Bengal, and to establish its influence at the court of Poona by placing its own nominee upon the throne. The attempt took form in 1775 in theFirst Mahratta War.treaty of Surat, by which Raghunath Rao, one of the claimants to the throne of the peshwa, agreed to cede Salsette and Bassein to the British, in consideration of being himself restored to Poona. The military operations that followed are known as the first Mahratta War. Warren Hastings, who in his capacity of governor-general claimed a right of control over the decisions of the Bombay government, strongly disapproved of the treaty of Surat, but, when war once broke out, he threw the whole force of the Bengal army into the scale. One of his favourite officers, General Goddard, marched across the peninsula, and conquered the rich province of Gujarat almost without a blow. Another, Captain Popham, stormed the rock-fortress of Gwalior, which was regarded as the key of Hindustan. These brilliant successes atoned for the disgrace of the convention of Wargaon in 1779, when the Mahrattas dictated terms to a Bombay force, but the war was protracted until 1782. It was then closed by the treaty of Salbai, which practically restored thestatus quo. Raghunath Rao, the English claimant, was set aside; Gujarat was restored, and only Salsette and some other small islands were retained by the English.
Meanwhile Warren Hastings had to deal with a more formidable enemy than the Mahratta confederacy. The reckless conduct of the Madras government had roused the hostility both of Hyder Ali of Mysore and of the nizam of theFirst Mysore War.Deccan, the two strongest Mussulman powers in India, who attempted to draw the Mahrattas into an alliance against the British. The diplomacy of Hastings won over the nizam and the Mahratta raja of Nagpur, but the army of Hyder Ali fell like a thunderbolt upon the British possessions in the Carnatic. A strong detachment under Colonel Baillie was cut to pieces at Perambakam, and the Mysore cavalry ravaged the country unchecked up to the walls of Madras. For the second time the Bengal army, stimulated by the energy of Hastings, saved the honour of the British name. Sir Eyre Coote, the victor of Wandiwash, was sent by sea to relieve Madras with all the men and money available, while Colonel Pearse marched south overland to overawe the raja of Berar and the nizam. The war was hotly contested, for Sir Eyre Coote was now an old man, and the Mysore army was well-disciplined and equipped, and also skilfully handled by Hyder and his son Tippoo. Hyder died in 1782, and peace was finally concluded with Tippoo in 1784, on the basis of a mutual restitution of all conquests.
It was Warren Hastings’s merit to organize the empire which Clive founded. He was governor or governor-general for thirteen years, a longer period than any of his successors. During that time the British lost the American colonies,Permanent settlement of Bengal.but in India their reputation steadily rose to its highest pitch. Within a year Hastings was succeeded by Lord Cornwallis, the first English nobleman of rank who undertook the office of governor-general. His rule lasted from 1786 to 1793, and is celebrated for two events—the introduction of the permanent settlement into Bengal and the second Mysore war. If the foundations of the system of civil administration were laid by Hastings, the superstructure was erected by Cornwallis. It was he who first entrusted criminal jurisdiction to Europeans, and established the Nizamat Sadr Adalat, or appellate court of criminal judicature, at Calcutta; and it was he who separated the functions of collector and judge. The system thus organized in Bengal was afterwards extended to Madras and Bombay, when those presidencies also acquired territorial sovereignty. But the achievement most familiarly associated with the name of Cornwallis is the permanent settlement of the land revenue of Bengal. Up to this time the revenue had been collected pretty much according to the old Mogul system.Zamindars, or government farmers, whose office always tended to become hereditary, were recognized as having a right of some sort to collect the revenue from the actual cultivators. But no principle of assessment existed, and the amount actually realized varied greatly from year to year. Hastings had the reputation of bearing hard upon thezamindars, and was absorbed in other critical affairs of state or of war. On the whole he seems to have looked to experience, as acquired from a succession of quinquennial settlements, to furnish the standard rate of the future. Francis, on the other hand, Hastings’s great rival, deserves the credit of being among the first to advocate a limitation of the state demand in perpetuity. The same view recommended itself to the authorities at home, partly because it would place their finances on a more stable basis, partly because it seemed to identify thezamindarwith the more familiar landlord. Accordingly, Cornwallis took out with him in 1787 instructions to introduce a permanent settlement. The process of assessment began in 1789 and terminated in 1791. No attempt was made to measure the fields or calculate the out-turn, as had been done by Akbar, and is now done when occasion requires in the British provinces; but the amount payable was fixed by reference to what had been paid in the past. At first the settlement was called decennial, but in 1793 it was declared permanent for ever. The total assessment amounted tosikkaRs.26,800,989, or about 2¾ millions sterling. Though Lord Cornwallis carried the scheme into execution, all praise or blame, so far as details are concerned, must belong to Sir John Shore, afterwards Lord Teignmouth, whose knowledge of the country was unsurpassed by that of any civilian of his time. Shore would have proceeded more cautiously than Cornwallis’s preconceived idea of a proprietary body and the court of directors’ haste after fixity permitted.
The second Mysore War of 1790-92 is noteworthy on two accounts: Lord Cornwallis, the governor-general, led the British army in person, with a pomp and lavishness of supplies that recalled the campaigns of Aurangzeb;Second Mysore War.and the two great native powers, the nizam of the Deccan and the Mahratta confederacy, co-operated as allies of the British. In the result, Tippoo Sultan submitted when Lord Cornwallis had commenced to beleaguer his capital. He agreed to yield one-half of his dominions to be divided among the allies, and to pay three millions sterling towards the cost of the war. Those conditions he fulfilled, but ever afterwards he burned to be revenged upon his conquerors.
The period of Sir John Shore’s rule as governor-general, from 1793 to 1798, was uneventful. In 1798 Lord Mornington, better known as the marquis Wellesley, arrived in India, already inspired with imperial projects that wereWellesley.destined to change the map of the country. Mornington was the friend and favourite of Pitt, from whom he is thought to have derived the comprehensiveness of his political vision and his antipathy to the French name. From the first he laid down as his guiding principle that the British must be the one paramount power in the peninsula, and that the native princes could only retain the insignia of sovereignty by surrendering the substance of independence. The subsequent political history of India has been but the gradual development of this policy, which received its finishing touch when Queen Victoria was proclaimed empress of India in 1877.
To frustrate the possibility of a French invasion of India, led by Napoleon in person, was the governing idea of Wellesley’s foreign policy; for France at this time, and for many years later, filled the place afterwards occupied byThe French Menace.Russia in the imagination of British statesmen. Nor was the possibility so remote as might now be thought. French regiments guarded and overawed the nizam of Hyderabad. The soldiers of Sindhia, the military head of the Mahratta confederacy, were disciplined and led by French adventurers. Tippoo Sultan carried on a secret correspondence with the French directorate, and allowed a tree of liberty to be planted in his dominions. The islands of Mauritius and Bourbon afforded a convenient half-way house both for French intrigue and for the assembling of a hostile expedition. Above all, Napoleon Buonaparte was then in Egypt, dreaming of the conquests of Alexander; and no man knew in what direction he might turn his hitherto unconquered legions. Wellesley first addressed himself to the nizam, where his policy prevailed without serious opposition. The French battalions at Hyderabad were disbanded and the nizam bound himself by treaty not to take any European into his service without the consent of the British government—a clause since inserted in every engagement entered into with native powers. Next, the whole weight of Wellesley’s resources was turned against Tippoo, whom Cornwallis had defeated but not subdued. His intrigues with the French were laid bare, and he was given an opportunity of adhering to the new subsidiary system. On his refusal war was declared, and Wellesley came down in state to Madras to organize the expedition in person and watch over the course of events. One British army marched into Mysore from Madras, accompanied by a contingent from the nizam. Another advanced from the western coast. Tippoo, after offering but a feeble resistance in the field, retired into Seringapatam, and, when his capital was stormed, died fighting bravely in the breach (1799). Since the battle of Plassey no event so greatly impressed the native imagination as the capture of Seringapatam, which won for General Harris a peerage and for Wellesley an Irish marquisate. In dealing with the territories of Tippoo, Wellesley acted with moderation. The central portion, forming the old state of Mysore, was restored to an infant representative of the Hindu rajas, whom Hyder Alihad dethroned, while the rest was partitioned between the nizam and the British. At about the same time the province of the Carnatic, or all that large portion of southern India ruled by the nawab of Arcot, and also the principality of Tanjore, were placed under direct British administration, thus constituting the Madras presidency almost as it has existed to the present day.
The Mahrattas had been the nominal allies of the British in both their wars with Tippoo, but they had never given active assistance, nor were they secured to the British side as the nizam now was. The Mahratta powers at thisWars with Sindhia and Holkar.time were five in number. The recognized head of the confederacy was the peshwa of Poona, who ruled the hill country of the Western Ghats, the cradle of the Mahratta race. The fertile province of Gujarat was annually harried by the horsemen of the gaekwar of Baroda. In central India two military leaders, Sindhia of Gwalior and Holkar of Indore, alternately held the pre-eminency. Towards the east the Bhonsla raja of Nagpur reigned from Berar to the coast of Orissa. Wellesley tried assiduously to bring these several Mahratta powers within the net of his subsidiary system. At last, in 1802, the necessities of the peshwa, who had been defeated by Holkar, and driven as a fugitive into British territory, induced him to sign the treaty of Bassein, by which he pledged himself to hold communications with no other power, European or native, and ceded territory for the maintenance of a subsidiary force. This greatly extended the British territorial influence in western India, but led directly to the second Mahratta war, for neither Sindhia nor the raja of Nagpur would tolerate this abandonment of Mahratta independence. The campaigns that followed are perhaps the most glorious in the history of the British arms in India. The general plan and the adequate provision of resources were due to the marquis Wellesley, as also the indomitable spirit that could not anticipate defeat. The armies were led by General Arthur Wellesley (afterwards duke of Wellington) and General (afterwards Lord) Lake. Wellesley operated in the Deccan, where, in a few short months, he won the decisive victories of Assaye and Argaum. Lake’s campaign in Hindustan was no less brilliant, though it has received less notice from historians. He won pitched battles at Aligarh and Laswari, and captured the cities of Delhi and Agra, thus scattering the French troops of Sindhia, and at the same time coming forward as the champion of the Mogul emperor in his hereditary capital. Before the year 1803 was out, both Sindhia and the Bhonsla raja were glad to sue for peace. Sindhia ceded all claims to the territory north of the Jumna, and left the blind old emperor Shah Alam once more under British protection. The Bhonsla raja forfeited Orissa to the English, who had already occupied it with a flying column, and Berar to the nizam, who gained a fresh addition by every act of complaisance to the British government. The freebooter, Jaswant Rao Holkar, alone remained in the field, supporting his troops by ravages through Malwa and Rajputana. The concluding years of Wellesley’s rule were occupied with a series of operations against Holkar, which brought no credit to the British name. The disastrous retreat of Colonel Monson through Central India (1804) recalled memories of the convention of Wargaum, and of the destruction of Colonel Baillie’s force by Hyder Ali. The repulse of Lake in person at the siege of Bharatpur (Bhurtpore) (1805) is memorable as an instance of a British army in India having to turn back with its object unaccomplished.
The ambitious policy and the continuous wars of Lord Wellesley exhausted the patience of the court of directors at home. In 1804 Lord Cornwallis was sent out as governor-general a second time, with instructions to bring about peaceBarlow.at any price, while Holkar was still unsubdued, and Sindhia was threatening a fresh war. But Cornwallis was now an old man and broken down in health. Travelling up to the north-west during the rainy season, he sank and died at Ghazipur, before he had been ten weeks in the country. His immediate successor was Sir George Barlow, a civil servant of the company, who, as alocum tenens, had no alternative but to carry out faithfully the orders of his employers. He is charged with being, under these orders, the only governor-general who diminished the area of British territory, and with violating engagements by abandoning the Rajput chiefs to the tender mercies of Holkar and Sindhia. During his administration also occurred the mutiny of the Madras sepoys at Vellore, which, though promptly suppressed, sent a shock of insecurity through the empire.
Lord Minto, governor-general from 1807 to 1813, consolidated the conquests which Wellesley had acquired. His only military exploits were the occupation of the island of Mauritius, and the conquest of Java by an expedition which he accompanied in person. The condition of central India continued to be disturbed, but Lord Minto succeeded in preventing any violent outbreaks without himself having recourse to the sword. The company had ordered him to follow a policy of non-intervention, and he managed to obey his orders without injuring the prestige of the British name. In his time the Indian government first opened relations with a new set of foreign powers by sending embassies to the Punjab, to Afghanistan and to Persia. The ambassadors were all trained in the school of Wellesley, and formed perhaps the most illustrious trio of “politicals” that the Indian service has produced. Sir Charles Metcalfe was the envoy to the court of Ranjit Singh at Lahore; Mountstuart Elphinstone met the shah of Afghanistan at Peshawar; and Sir John Malcolm was despatched to Persia. If it cannot be said that any of these missions were fruitful in permanent results, at least they introduced the English to a new set of diplomatic relations, and widened the sphere of their influence.
The successor of Lord Minto was Lord Moira, better known as the marquis of Hastings, who governed India for the long period of nine years, from 1814 to 1823. This period was marked by two wars of the first magnitude, theGurkha War.campaigns against the Gurkhas of Nepal, and the third and last Mahratta War. The Gurkhas, the present ruling race in Nepal, are Hindu immigrants who claim a Rajput origin. Their sovereignty dates only from 1767, in which year they overran the valley of Katmandu, and gradually extended their power over all the hills and valleys of Nepal. Organized upon a sort of military and feudal basis, they soon became a terror to all their neighbours, marching east into Sikkim, west into Kumaon, and south into the Gangetic plains. In the last quarter their victims were British subjects, and at last it became imperatively necessary to check their advance. Sir George Barlow and Lord Minto had remonstrated in vain, and nothing was left to Lord Moira but to take up arms. The campaign of 1814 was little short of disastrous. After overcoming the natural difficulties of a malarious climate and precipitous hills, the sepoys were on several occasions fairly worsted by the unexpected bravery of the little Gurkhas, whose heavy knives or kukris dealt terrible execution. But in 1815 General Ochterlony, who commanded the army operating by way of the Sutlej, stormed one by one the hill forts which still stud the Himalayan states now under the Punjab government, and compelled the Nepal darbar to sue for peace. In the following year the same general advanced from Patna into the valley of Katmandu, and finally dictated the terms which had before been rejected, within a few miles of the capital. By the treaty of Segauli, which defines the English relations with Nepal to the present day, the Gurkhas withdrew on the one hand from Sikkim, and on the other from those lower ranges of the western Himalayas which have supplied the health-giving stations of Naini Tal, Mussoorie and Simla.
Meanwhile the condition of central India was every year becoming more unsatisfactory. Though the great Mahratta chiefs were learning to live rather as peaceful princes than as leaders of predatory bands, the example ofPindaris.lawlessness they had set was being followed, and bettered in the following, by a new set of freebooters, known as the Pindaris. As opposed to the Mahrattas, who were at least a nationality bound by some traditions of a united government, the Pindaris were merely irregular soldiers, corresponding most nearly to the free companies of medieval Europe. Of no common race andof no common religion, they welcomed to their ranks the outlaws and broken tribes of all India—Afghans, Mahrattas or Jats. Their headquarters were in Malwa, but their depredations were not confined to central India. In bands, sometimes numbering a few hundreds, sometimes many thousands, they rode out on their forays as far as the Coromandel coast. The most powerful of the Pindari captains, Amir Khan, had an organized army of many regiments, and several batteries of cannon. Two other leaders, known as Chitu and Karim, at one time paid a ransom to Sindhia of £100,000. To suppress the Pindari hordes, who were supported by the sympathy, more or less open, of all the Mahratta chiefs, Lord Hastings (1817) collected the strongest British army that had been seen in India, numbering nearly 120,000 men, half to operate from the north, half from the south. Sindhia was overawed, and remained quiet. Amir Khan consented to disband his army, on condition of being guaranteed the possession of what is now the principality of Tonk. The remaining bodies of Pindaris were attacked in their homes, surrounded, and cut to pieces. Karim threw himself upon the mercy of the conquerors. Chitu fled to the jungles, and was killed by a tiger.
In the same year (1817) as that in which the Pindaris were crushed, and almost in the same month (November), the three great Mahratta powers at Poona, Nagpur and Indore rose against the English. The peshwa, Baji Rao,Third Mahratta War.had long been chafing under the terms imposed by the treaty of Bassein (1802), and the subsequent treaty of Poona (1817), which riveted yet closer the chains of dependence upon the paramount power. Elphinstone, then resident at his court, foresaw what was coming and ordered up a European regiment from Bombay. The next day the residency was burned down, and Kirkee was attacked by the whole army of the peshwa. The attack was bravely repulsed, and the peshwa immediately fled from his capital. Almost the same plot was enacted at Nagpur, where the honour of the British name was saved by the sepoys who defended the hill of Sitabaldi against enormous odds. The army of Holkar was defeated in the following month at the pitched battle of Mehidpur. All open resistance was now at an end. Nothing remained but to follow up the fugitives, and determine the conditions of the general pacification. In both these duties Sir John Malcolm played a prominent part. The peshwa himself surrendered, and was permitted to reside at Bithur, near Cawnpore, on a pension of £80,000 a year. His adopted son was the infamous Nana Sahib. To fill the peshwa’s place to some extent at the head of the Mahratta confederacy, the lineal descendant of Sivaji was brought forth from obscurity, and placed upon the throne of Satara. The greater part of the peshwa’s dominions was ultimately incorporated in the Bombay presidency, while the nucleus of the Central Provinces was formed out of territory taken from the peshwa and the raja of Nagpur. An infant was recognized as the heir of Holkar, and a second infant was proclaimed raja of Nagpur under British guardianship. At the same time the several states of Rajputana accepted the position of feudatories of the paramount power. The map of India, as thus drawn by Lord Hastings, remained substantially unchanged until the time of Lord Dalhousie. But the proudest boast of Lord Hastings and Sir John Malcolm was, not that they had advanced thepomoerium, but that they had conferred the blessings of peace and good government upon millions who had suffered unutterable things from Mahratta and Pindari tyranny.
The marquis of Hastings was succeeded by Lord Amherst, after the interval of a few months, during which Mr Adam, a civil servant, acted as governor-general. Lord Amherst’s administration lasted for five years, fromFirst Burmese War.1823 to 1828. It is known in history by two prominent events, the first Burmese War and the capture of Bharatpur. For some years past the north-east frontier had been disturbed by the restlessness of the Burmese. The successors of Alompra, after having subjugated all Burma, and overrun Assam, which was then an independent kingdom, began a series of encroachments upon British territory in Bengal. As all peaceful proposals were scornfully rejected, Lord Amherst was compelled to declare war in 1824. Little military glory could be gained by beating the Burmese, who were formidable only from the pestilential character of their country. One expedition with gunboats proceeded up the Brahmaputra into Assam; another marched by land through Chittagong into Arakan, for the Bengal sepoys refused to go by sea; a third, and the strongest, sailed from Madras direct to the mouth of the Irrawaddy. The war was protracted over two years. At last, after the loss of about 20,000 lives and an expenditure of £14,000,000, the king of Ava consented to sign the treaty of Yandabu, by which he abandoned all claim to Assam, and ceded the provinces of Arakan and Tenasserim, which were already in the military occupation of the British. He retained all the valley of the Irrawaddy, down to the sea at Rangoon. The capture of Bharatpur in central India by Lord Combermere in 1826 wiped out the repulse which Lord Lake had received before that city in January 1805. A disputed succession necessitated British intervention. Artillery could make little impression upon the massive walls of mud, but at last a breach was effected by mining, and the city was taken by storm, thus losing its general reputation throughout India for impregnability, which had threatened to become a political danger.
The next governor-general was Lord William Bentinck, who had been governor of Madras twenty years earlier at the time of the mutiny of Vellore. His seven years’ rule (from 1828 to 1835) is not signalized by any of thoseBentinck.victories or extensions of territory by which chroniclers delight to measure the growth of empire. But it forms an epoch in administrative reform, and in the benign process by which the hearts of a subject population are won over to venerate as well as obey their alien rulers. The modern history of the British in India, as benevolent administrators ruling the country with an eye to the good of the natives, may be said to begin with Lord William Bentinck. According to the inscription upon his statue at Calcutta, from the pen of Macaulay: “He abolished cruel rites; he effaced humiliating distinctions; he gave liberty to the expression of public opinion; his constant study it was to elevate the intellectual and moral character of the nations committed to his charge.” His first care on arrival in India was to restore equilibrium to the finances, which were tottering under the burden imposed upon them by the Burmese War. This he effected by reductions in permanent expenditure, amounting in the aggregate to 1½ millions sterling, as well as by augmenting the revenue from land that had escaped assessment, and from the opium of Malwa. He also widened the gates by which educated natives could enter the service of the company. Some of these reforms were distasteful to the covenanted service and to the officers of the army, but Lord William was always staunchly supported by the court of directors and by the Whig ministry at home.
His two most memorable acts are the abolition of suttee and the suppression of the Thugs. At this distance of time it is difficult to realize the degree to which these two barbarous practices had corrupted the socialSuttee.system of the Hindus. European research has clearly proved that the text in theVedasadduced to authorize the immolation of widows was a wilful mistranslation. But the practice had been engrained in Hindu opinion by the authority of centuries, and had acquired the sanctity of a religious rite. The emperor Akbar is said to have prohibited it by law, but the early British rulers did not dare so far to violate the religious customs of the people. In the year 1817 no fewer than seven hundred widows are said to have been burned alive in the Bengal presidency alone. To this day the most holy spots of Hindu pilgrimage are thickly dotted with little white pillars, each commemorating a suttee. In the teeth of strenuous opposition, from both Europeans and natives, Lord William carried the regulation in council on the 4th of December 1829, by which all who abetted suttee were declared guilty of “culpable homicide.” The honour of suppressing Thuggism must be shared between Lord William and Captain Sleeman. Thuggism was an abnormalexcrescence upon Hinduism, in so far as the bands of secret assassins were sworn together by an oath based on the rites of the bloody goddess Kali. Between 1826 and 1835 as many as 1562 Thugs were apprehended in different parts of British India, and by the evidence of approvers the moral plague spot was gradually stamped out.
Two other historical events are connected with the administration of Lord William Bentinck. In 1833 the charter of the East India Company was renewed for twenty years, but only upon the terms that it should abandon its trade and permit Europeans to settle freely in the country. At the same time a legal or fourth member was added to the governor-general’s council, who might not be a servant of the company, and a commission was appointed to revise and codify the law. Macaulay was the first legal member of council, and the first president of the law commission. In 1830 it was found necessary to take the state of Mysore under British administration, where it continued until 1881, when it was restored to native rule; and in 1834 the frantic misrule of the raja of Coorg brought on a short and sharp war. The raja was permitted to retire to Benares, and the brave and proud inhabitants of that mountainous little territory decided to place themselves under the rule of the company; so that the only annexation effected by Lord William Bentinck was “in consideration of the unanimous wish of the people.”
Sir Charles (afterwards Lord) Metcalfe succeeded Lord William as senior member of council. His short term of office is memorable for the measure which his predecessor had initiated, but which he willingly carried into execution, forAuckland.giving entire liberty to the press. Public opinion in India, as well as the express wish of the court of directors at home, pointed to Metcalfe as the most fit person to carry out the policy of Bentinck, not provisionally, but as governor-general for a full term. Party exigencies, however, led to the appointment of Lord Auckland. From that date commences a new era of war and conquest, which may be said to have lasted for twenty years. All looked peaceful until Lord Auckland, prompted by his evil genius, attempted by force to place Shah Shuja upon the throne of Kabul, an attempt which ended in gross mismanagement and the annihilation of the British garrison in that city. The disaster in Afghanistan was quickly followed by the conquest of Sind, the two wars in the Punjab, the second Burmese War, and last of all the Mutiny.
The attention of the British government had been directed to Afghan affairs ever since the time of Sir John Shore, who feared that Zaman Shah, then holding his court at Lahore, might follow in the path of Ahmed Shah,First Afghan War.and overrun Hindustan. The growth of the powerful Sikh kingdom of Ranjit Singh effectually dispelled any such alarms for the future. Subsequently, in 1809, while a French invasion of India was still a possibility to be guarded against, Mountstuart Elphinstone was sent by Lord Minto on a mission to Shah Shuja to form a defensive alliance. Before the year was out Shah Shuja had been driven into exile, and a third brother, Mahmud Shah, was on the throne. In 1837, when the curtain rises upon the drama of British interference in Afghanistan, the usurper, Dost Mahommed Barakzai, was firmly established at Kabul. His great ambition was to recover Peshawar from the Sikhs; and when Captain Alexander Burnes arrived on a mission from Lord Auckland, with the ostensible object of opening trade, the Dost was willing to promise everything, if only he could get Peshawar. But Lord Auckland had another and more important object in view. At this time the Russians were advancing rapidly in Central Asia, and a Persian army, not without Russian support, was besieging Herat, the traditional bulwark of Afghanistan on the east. A Russian envoy was at Kabul at the same time as Burnes. The latter was unable to satisfy the demands of Dost Mahommed in the matter of Peshawar, and returned to India unsuccessful. Lord Auckland forthwith resolved upon the hazardous plan of placing a more subservient ruler upon the throne of Kabul. Shah Shuja, now in exile at Ludhiana, was selected for the purpose. At this time both the Punjab and Sind were independent kingdoms. Sind was the less powerful of the two, and, therefore, a British army escorting Shah Shuja made its way by that route to enter Afghanistan through the Bolan Pass. Kandahar surrendered, Ghazni was taken by storm, Dost Mahommed fled across the Hindu Kush, and Shah Shuja was triumphantly led into the Bala Hissar at Kabul in August 1839. During the two years that followed Afghanistan remained in the military occupation of the British. The catastrophe occurred in November 1841, when Sir Alexander Burnes was assassinated in the city of Kabul. The troops in the cantonments were then under the command of General Elphinstone (not to be confounded with the civilian Mountstuart Elphinstone), with Sir William Macnaghten as chief political adviser. Elphinstone was an old man, unequal to the responsibilities of the position. Macnaghten was treacherously murdered at an interview with the Afghan chief, Akbar Khan, eldest son of Dost Mahommed. After lingering in their cantonments for two months, the British army set off in the depth of winter to find its way back to India through the passes. When they started they numbered 4000 fighting men, with 12,000 camp followers. A single survivor, Dr Brydon, reached the friendly walls of Jalalabad, where General Sale was gallantly holding out. The rest perished in the defiles of Khurd Kabul and Jagdalak, either from the knives and matchlocks of the Afghans or from the effects of cold. A few prisoners, mostly women, children and officers, were considerately treated by the orders of Akbar Khan. (SeeAfghanistan.)
Within a month after the news reached Calcutta, Lord Auckland had been superseded by Lord Ellenborough, whose first impulse was to be satisfied with drawing off in safety the garrisons from Kandahar and Jalalabad. But bolder counsels prevailed. General Pollock, who was marching straight through the Punjab to relieve General Sale, was ordered to penetrate to Kabul, while General Nott was only too glad not to be forbidden to retire from Kandahar through Kabul. After a good deal of fighting, the two British forces met at their common destination in September 1842. The greatbazarat Kabul was blown up with gunpowder to fix a stigma upon the city; the prisoners were recovered; and all marched back to India, leaving Dost Mahommed to take undisputed possession of his throne. The drama closed with a bombastic proclamation from Lord Ellenborough, who had caused the gates from the tomb of Mahmud of Ghazni to be carried back as a memorial of “Somnath revenged.”
Lord Ellenborough, who loved military display, had his tastes gratified by two more wars. In 1843 the Mahommedan rulers of Sind, known as the “meers” or amirs, whose only fault was that they would not surrender theirAnnexation of Sind.independence, were crushed by Sir Charles Napier. The victory of Meeanee, in which 3000 British troops defeated 20,000 Baluchis, is perhaps the most brilliant feat of arms in Indian history; but an honest excuse can scarcely be found for the annexation of the country. In the same year a disputed succession at Gwalior, fomented by femimine intrigue, resulted in an outbreak of the overgrown army which the Sindhia family had been allowed to maintain. Peace was restored by the battles of Maharajpur and Punniar, at the former of which Lord Ellenborough was present in person.
In 1844 Lord Ellenborough was recalled by the court of directors, who differed from him on many points of administration, and distrusted his erratic genius. He wasFirst Sikh War.succeeded by Sir Henry (afterwards Lord) Hardinge, who had served through the Peninsular War and had lost a hand at Ligny. It was felt on all sides that a trial of strength between the British and the Sikhs was at hand. (For the origin of the Sikh power seePunjab.)
Ranjit Singh, the founder of the Sikh kingdom in the Punjab, had faithfully fulfilled all his obligations towards the British. But on his death in 1839 no successor was left to curb the ambition of the Sikh nationality.
In 1845 thekhalsa, or Sikh army, numbering 60,000 men with150 guns, crossed the Sutlej and invaded British territory. Sir Hugh Gough, the commander-in-chief, together with the governor-general, hurried up to the frontier. Within three weeks four pitched battles were fought, at Mudki, Ferozeshah, Aliwal and Sobraon. The British loss on each occasion was heavy; but by the last victory the Sikhs were fairly driven into and across the Sutlej, and Lahore surrendered to the British. By the terms of peace then dictated the infant son of Ranjit, Dhuleep Singh, was recognized as raja; the Jullundur Doab, or tract between the Sutlej and the Ravi, was annexed; the Sikh army was limited to a specified number; Major Henry Lawrence was appointed to be resident at Lahore; and a British force was detailed to garrison the Punjab for a period of eight years.
Lord Dalhousie succeeded Lord Hardinge, and his eight years’ administration (from 1848 to 1856) was more pregnant of results than that of any governor-general since Wellesley. Though professedly a man of peace, he was compelledDalhousie.to fight two wars, in the Punjab and in Burma. These both ended in large acquisitions of territory, while Nagpur, Oudh and several minor states also came under British rule. But Dalhousie’s own special interest lay in the advancement of the moral and material condition of the country. The system of administration carried out in the conquered Punjab by the two Lawrences and their assistants is probably the most successful piece of difficult work ever accomplished by Englishmen. Lower Burma prospered under their rule scarcely less than the Punjab. In both cases Lord Dalhousie deserves a large share of the credit. No branch of the administration escaped his reforming hand. He founded the public works department, to pay special attention to roads and canals. He opened the Ganges canal, still the largest work of the kind in the country, and he turned the sod of the first Indian railway. He promoted steam communication with England via the Red Sea, and introduced cheap postage and the electric telegraph. It is Lord Dalhousie’s misfortune that these benefits are too often forgotten in the vivid recollections of the Mutiny, which avenged his policy of annexation.
Lord Dalhousie had not been six months in India before the second Sikh war broke out. Two British officers were treacherously assassinated at Multan. Unfortunately Henry Lawrence was at home on sick leave. The BritishSecond Sikh War.army was not ready to act in the hot season, and, despite the single-handed exertions of Lieutenant (afterwards Sir Herbert) Edwardes, this outbreak of fanaticism led to a general rising. Thekhalsaarmy again came together, and more than once fought on even terms with the British. On the fatal field of Chillianwalla, which patriotism prefers to call a drawn battle, the British lost 2400 officers and men, besides four guns and the colours of three regiments. Before reinforcements could come out from England, with Sir Charles Napier as commander-in-chief, Lord Gough had restored his own reputation by the crowning victory of Gujrat, which absolutely destroyed the Sikh army. Multan had previously fallen; and the Afghan horse under Dost Mahommed, who had forgotten their hereditary antipathy to the Sikhs in their greater hatred of the British name, were chased back with ignominy to their native hills. The Punjab henceforth became a British province, supplying a virgin field for the administrative talents of Dalhousie and the two Lawrences. Raja Dhuleep Singh received an allowance of £50,000 a year, on which he retired as a country gentleman to Norfolk in England. (SeePunjab.)
The second Burmese war of 1852 was caused by the ill-treatment of European merchants at Rangoon, and the insolenceSecond Burmese War.offered to the captain of a frigate who had been sent to remonstrate. The whole valley of the Irrawaddy, from Rangoon to Prome, was occupied in a few months, and, as the king of Ava refused to treat, it was annexed, under the name of Pegu, to the provinces of Arakan and Tenasserim, which had been acquired in 1826.
Lord Dalhousie’s dealings with the feudatory states of India, though actuated by the highest motives, seem now to have proceeded upon mistaken lines. His policy of annexing each native state on the death of its ruler without natural heirs producedThe doctrine of lapse.a general feeling of insecurity of tenure among the princes, and gave offence to the people of India. This policy was reversed when India was taken over by the crown after the Mutiny; and its reversal has led to the native princes being amongst the most loyal subjects of the British government. The first state to escheat to the British government was Satara, which had been reconstituted by Lord Hastings on the downfall of the peshwa Baji Rao in 1818. The last direct representative of Sivaji died without a male heir in 1848, and his deathbed adoption was set aside. In the same year the Rajput state of Karauli was saved by the interposition of the court of directors, who drew a fine distinction between a dependent principality and a protected ally. In 1853 Jhansi suffered the same fate as Satara. But the most conspicuous application of the doctrine of lapse was the case of Nagpur. The last of the Bhonslas, a dynasty older than the British government itself, died without a son, natural or adopted, in 1853. That year also saw British administration extended to the Berars, or the assigned districts which the nizam of Hyderabad was induced to cede as a territorial guarantee for the subsidies which he perpetually kept in arrear. Three more distinguished names likewise passed away in 1853, though without any attendant accretion to British territory. In the extreme south the titular nawab of the Carnatic and the titular raja of Tanjore both died without heirs. Their rank and their pensions died with them, though compassionate allowances were continued to their families. In the north of India, Baji Rao, the ex-peshwa who had been dethroned in 1818, lived on till 1853 in the enjoyment of his annual pension of £80,000. His adopted son, Nana Sahib, inherited his accumulated savings, but could obtain no further recognition.
The annexation of the province of Oudh was justifiable on the ground of morals, though not on that of policy. Ever since the nawab wazir, Shuja-ud-Dowlah, received back his forfeited territories from the hands of Lord Clive inAnnexation of Oudh.1765, the very existence of Oudh as an independent state had depended only upon the protection of British bayonets. Thus, preserved alike from foreign invasion and from domestic rebellion, the long line of subsequent nawabs had given way to that neglect of public affairs and those private vices which naturally flow from irresponsible power. Their only redeeming virtue was steady loyalty to the British government. Warning after warning had been given to the nawabs, who had assumed the title of king since 1819, to put their house in order; but every warning was neglected, and Lord Dalhousie at last carried into effect what both the previous governors-general had threatened. In 1856, the last year of his rule, he issued orders to General (afterwards Sir James) Outram, then resident at the court of Lucknow, to assume the direct administration of Oudh, on the ground that “the British government would be guilty in the sight of God and man, if it were any longer to aid in sustaining by its countenance an administration fraught with suffering to millions.” The king, Wajid Ali, bowed to irresistible force, though he ever refused to recognize the justice of his deposition. After a mission to England, by way of protest and appeal, he settled down in the pleasant suburb of Garden Reach near Calcutta, where he lived in the enjoyment of a pension of £120,000 a year. Oudh was thus annexed without a blow; but it may be doubted whether the one measure of Lord Dalhousie upon which he looked back himself with the clearest conscience was not the very one that most alarmed native public opinion.
Lord Dalhousie was succeeded by his friend, Lord Canning, who, at the farewell banquet in England given to him by the court of directors, uttered these prophetic words: “I wish for a peaceful term of office. But I cannotThe Mutiny.forget that in the sky of India, serene as it is, a small cloud may arise, no larger than a man’s hand, but which, growing larger and larger, may at last threaten to burst and overwhelm us with ruin.” In the following year the sepoys of the Bengalarmy mutinied, and all the valley of the Ganges from Patna to Delhi rose in open rebellion.
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 act precipitately upon their fears. The influence of panic in an Oriental population is greater than might be readily believed. In the first place, the policy of Lord Dalhousie, exactly in proportion as it had been dictated by the most honourable considerations, was utterly distasteful to the native mind. Repeated annexations, the spread of education, the appearance of the steam engine and the telegraph wire, all alike revealed a consistent determination to substitute an English for an Indian civilization. The Bengal sepoys, especially, thought that they could see into the future farther than the rest of their countrymen. Nearly all men of high caste, and many of them recruited from Oudh, they dreaded tendencies which they deemed to be denationalizing, and they knew at first hand what annexation meant. They believed it was by their prowess that the Punjab had been conquered, and all India was held quiet. The numerous dethroned princes, their heirs and their widows, were the first to take advantage of the spirit of disaffection that was abroad. They had heard of the Crimean War, and were told that Russia was the perpetual enemy of England. Owing to the silladar system, under which the native cavalry provided their own horses and accoutrements, many of the sowars were in debt, and were in favour of a change which would wipe out the existing régime and with it the money-lender.
But in addition to these general causes of unrest the condition of the native army had long given cause for uneasiness to acute observers. During the course of its history it had broken out into mutiny at recurrent intervals, the latest occasion being the winter of 1843-1844, when there were two separate mutinies in Sind and at Ferozepur. Moreover the spirit of the sepoys during the Sikh wars was unsatisfactory, and led to excessive casualties amongst the British officers and soldiers. Both General Jacob and Sir Charles Napier had prophesied that the Mutiny would take place. Sir Hugh Gough and other commanders-in-chief had petitioned for the removal of India’s chief arsenal from Delhi to Umballa; and Lord Dalhousie himself had protested against the reduction of the British element in the army. But all these warnings were disregarded with a blindness as great as was the incapacity that allowed the Mutiny to gather head unchecked after its first outbreak at Meerut. Moreover the outbreak was immediately provoked by an unparalleled instance of carelessness. It has recently been proved by Mr G. W. Forrest’s researches in the Government of India records that the sepoys’ belief that their cartridges were greased with the fat of cows and pigs had some foundation in fact. Such a gross violation of their caste prejudices would alone be sufficient to account for the outbreak that followed. (For the military incidents of the Mutiny seeIndian Mutiny.)
The Mutiny sealed the fate of the East India company, after a life of more than two and a half centuries. The Act for the Better Government of India (1858), which finally transferred the entire administration from the companyTransfer to the Crown.to the crown, was not passed without an eloquent protest from the directors, nor without acrimonious party discussion in parliament. It enacts that India shall be governed by, and in the name of, the sovereign of England through a principal secretary of state, assisted by a council. The governor-general received the new title of viceroy. The European troops of the company, numbering about 24,000 officers and men, were amalgamated with the royal service, and the Indian navy was abolished. By the Indian Councils Act 1861 the governor-general’s council and also the councils at Madras and Bombay were augmented by the addition of non-official members, either natives or Europeans, for legislative purposes only; and by another act passed in the same year high courts of judicature were constituted out of the existing supreme courts and company’s courts at the presidency towns.
India under the Crown.
It fell to the lot of Lord Canning both to suppress the Mutiny and to introduce the peaceful revolution that followed. As regards his execution of the former part of his duties, it is sufficient to say that he preserved his equanimity undisturbed in the darkest hours of peril, and that the strict impartiality of his conduct incurred alternate praise and blame from the fanatics on either side. The epithet then scornfully applied to him of “Clemency” Canning is now remembered only to his honour. On November 1, 1858, at a grand durbar held at Allahabad the royal proclamation was published which announced that the queen had assumed the government of India. This document, which has been called the Magna Charta of the Indian people, went on to explain the policy of political justice and religious toleration which it was her royal pleasure to pursue, and granted an amnesty to all except those who had directly taken part in the murder of British subjects. Peace was proclaimed throughout India on the 8th of July 1859; and in the following cold season Lord Canning made a viceregal progress through the upper provinces, to receive the homage of loyal princes and chiefs, and to guarantee to them the right of adoption. The suppression of the Mutiny increased the debt of India by about 40 millions sterling, and the military changes that ensued augmented the annual expenditure by about 10 millions. To grapple with this deficit, James Wilson was sent out from the treasury as financial member of council. He reorganized the customs system, imposed an income tax and licence duty and created a state paper currency. The penal code, originally drawn up by Macaulay in 1837, passed into law in 1860, together with codes of civil and criminal procedure.
Lord Canning left India in March 1862, and died before he had been a month in England. His successor, Lord Elgin, only lived till November 1863, when he too fell a victim to the excessive work of the governor-generalship, dying at the Himalayan station of Dharmsala, where he lies buried. He was succeeded by Sir John Lawrence, the saviour of the Punjab. The chief incidents of his administration were the Bhutan war and the terrible Orissa famine of 1866. Lord Mayo, who succeeded him in 1869, carried on the permanent British policy of moral and material progress with a special degree of personal energy. The Umballa durbar, at which Shere Ali was recognized as amir of Afghanistan, though in one sense the completion of what Lord Lawrence had begun, owed much of its success to the personal influence of Lord Mayo himself. The same quality, combined with sympathy and firmness, stood him in good stead in all his dealings both with native chiefs and European officials. His example of hard work stimulated all to their best. While engaged in exploring with his own eyes the furthest corners of the empire, he fell by the hand of an assassin in the convict settlement of the Andaman islands in 1872. His successor was Lord Northbrook, whose ability showed itself chiefly in the department of finance. During the time of his administration a famine in Lower Bengal in 1874 was successfully obviated by government relief and public works, though at an enormous cost; the gaekwar of Baroda was dethroned in 1875 for misgovernment and disloyalty, while his dominions were continued to a nominated child of the family; and the prince of Wales (Edward VII.) visited the country in the cold season of 1875-1876. Lord Lytton followed Lord Northbrook in 1876. On the 1st of January 1877 Queen Victoria was proclaimed empress of India at a durbar of great magnificence, held on the historic “Ridge” overlooking the Mogul capital Delhi. But, while the princes and high officials of the country were flocking to this gorgeous scene, the shadow of famine was already darkening over the south of India. Both the monsoons of 1876 had failed to bring their due supply of rain, and the season of 1877 was little better. The consequences of this prolonged drought, which extended from Cape Comorin to the Deccan, and subsequently invaded northern India, were more disastrous than any similar calamityup to that time from the introduction of British rule. Despite unparalleled importations of grain by sea and rail, despite the most strenuous exertions of the government, which incurred a total expenditure on this account of 11 millions sterling, the loss of life from actual starvation and its attendant train of diseases was lamentable. In the autumn of 1878 the affairs of Afghanistan again forced themselves into notice. Shere Ali, the amir, who had been hospitably entertained by Lord Mayo, was found to be favouring Russian intrigues. A British envoy was refused admittance to the country, while a Russian mission was received with honour. This led to a declaration of war. British armies advanced by three routes—the Khyber, the Kurram and the Bolan—and without much opposition occupied the inner entrances of the passes. Shere Ali fled to Afghan Turkestan, and there died. A treaty was entered into with his son, Yakub Khan, at Gandamak, by which the British frontier was advanced to the crests or farther sides of the passes and a British officer was admitted to reside at Kabul. Within a few months the British resident, Sir Louis Cavagnari, was treacherously attacked and massacred, together with his escort, and a second war became necessary. Yakub Khan abdicated, and was deported to India, while Kabul was occupied in force.
At this crisis of affairs a general election in England resulted in a change of government. Lord Lytton resigned with the Conservative ministry, and the marquis of Ripon was nominated as his successor in 1880. Shortly afterwardsLord Ripon.a British brigade was defeated at Maiwand by the Herati army of Ayub Khan, a defeat promptly and completely retrieved by the brilliant march of General Sir Frederick Roberts from Kabul to Kandahar, and by the total rout of Ayub Khan’s army on the 1st of September 1880. Abdur Rahman Khan, the eldest male representative of the stock of Dost Mahommed, was then recognized as amir of Kabul. Lord Ripon was sent out to India by the Liberal ministry of 1880 for the purpose of reversing Lord Lytton’s policy in Afghanistan, and of introducing a more sympathetic system into the administration of India. The disaster at Maiwand, and the Russian advance east of the Caspian, prevented the proposed withdrawal from Quetta; but Kandahar was evacuated, Abdur Rahman was left in complete control of his country and was given an annual subsidy of twelve lakhs of rupees in 1883. In the second purpose of his administration Lord Ripon’s well-meant efforts only succeeded in setting Europeans and natives against each other. His term of office was chiefly notable for the agitation against the Ilbert Bill, which proposed to subject European offenders to trial by native magistrates. The measure aroused a storm of indignation amongst the European community which finally resulted in the bill being shorn of its most objectionable features. Lord Ripon’s good intentions and personal sympathy were recognized by the natives, and on leaving Bombay he received the greatest ovation ever accorded to an Indian viceroy.
After the arrival of Lord Dufferin as governor-general the incident known as the Panjdeh Scare brought Britain to the verge of war with Russia. During the preceding decades Russia had gradually advanced her powerThe Panjdeh scare.from the Caspian across the Turkoman steppes to the border of Afghanistan, and Russian intrigue was largely responsible for the second Afghan war. In February 1884 Russia annexed Merv. This action led to an arrangement in August of the same year for a joint Anglo-Russian commission to delimit the Afghan frontier. In March 1885, while the commission was at work, Lord Dufferin was entertaining the amir Abdur Rahman at a durbar at Rawalpindi. The durbar was interrupted by the news that a Russian general had attacked and routed the Afghan force holding the bridge across the river Kushk, and the incident might possibly have resulted in war between Britain and Russia but for the slight importance that Abdur Rahman attributed to what he termed a border scuffle.