Chapter IV: Fourth Period: Rise to Asiatic Power (2)

Mr. Thomason, who was Lieutenant-Governor of the North-West Provinces from 1843 to 1853, was the first Bengal administrator who constructed macadamised roads. His object was to connect the large cities under his jurisdiction, but the work once begun soon advanced apace. A trunk road was commenced between Calcutta and Delhi, and in 1850 mail carts ran for the first time between the two capitals of Northern India. The annexation of the Punjab gave a further impetus to road-making, and Calcutta and Delhi were soon brought into communication with Lahore and Peshawar.

[Sidenote: Proposed railways.]

Meanwhile railways had created a furor. Promoters in the British Isles were anxious to construct railways in India at the expense of the East India Company, but the idea did not recommend itself to the men who had the largest experience of India. There was a natural reluctance to accept schemes by which speculators might profit at the Company's expense, whilst the gain to the people of India would be doubtful. It was currently believed, by men who had spent the best part of their lives in the country, that Hindus would never travel by railway; that they would trudge on foot, and carry their families and goods in carts and cars, as they had done in the days of Porus and Megasthenes.

[Sidenote: Lord Dalhousie, a new type of Indian statesman.]

§11. Lord Dalhousie was the type of British administrators of the modern school. He had served two years' apprenticeship in Great Britain as President of the Board of Trade under Sir Robert Peel, and he was especially familiar with the construction of British roads and railways. In India he opened the great trunk road from Calcutta to Delhi, and post carriages, known as "dak gharies," soon superseded the old river "budgerows." Other metalled roads were begun in Madras and Bombay. Still one thing was wanting. Calcutta was united to all the great capitals of Northern India--Allahabad, Agra, and Delhi--but Bombay and Madras were as far off as ever from both Northern India and each other.

[Sidenote: Trunk railway lines.]

Railways would remedy the evil, and Lord Dalhousie was bent on introducing them. He planned a trunk system which in the present day unites the three Presidencies, and connects them with the north-west frontier. He induced railway companies to undertake the construction, by giving a government guarantee of five per cent. interest per annum on the outlay; and before he left India three experimental lines were already in progress, namely, one from Calcutta, a second from Bombay, and a third from Madras. Such was the origin of the three great railways of India, namely, the "East Indian," which runs through Northern India; the "Great Indian Peninsula," which runs through the Deccan; and the "Madras railway," which runs through Southern India.

[Sidenote: Telegraph system, 1853-55.]

Between 1853 and 1855 the telegraph system was constructed, which electrified Europeans and awakened the Asiatics from the torpor of ages. Madras and Bombay could talk with all the great cities of Northern India, and Rangoon was placed in telegraphic communication with Lahore and Peshawar. Unfortunately there was only one line of wires from Allahabad to Delhi, and when the wires were cut by the sepoy mutineers of 1857, communication was cut off. This incident, however, belongs to the _régime_ of Lord Dalhousie's successor.

[Sidenote: Ganges canal, 1854.]

In 1854 the Ganges canal, the greatest work of irrigation ever accomplished, was completed by Sir Proby Cautley and opened by Lord Dalhousie. The British nation has never realised this grand undertaking of the old East India Company. It receives the water on the lower slope of the Himalayas, and runs along the Doab, or high lands between the Jumna and Ganges, throwing out distributaries at intervals. About eighty miles to the south-east of Delhi it separates into two branches, one flowing into the Ganges at Cawnpore, and the other flowing into the Jumna near Etawah. The whole length of the canal and branches for navigation is 614 miles; the length of the distributaries for irrigation is 3,111 miles.

[Sidenote: Annexation policy.]

§12. Lord Dalhousie was so convinced of the superiority of British administration, that he considered every opportunity should be taken for bringing the territories of feudatory princes under British rule. Hitherto it had been the policy of the East India Company to perpetuate the dynasties of its feudatories. If a feudatory prince was without a son, he was advised by the British Resident to adopt one. But Hindu princes shrink from the idea of adopting a son. It is often as difficult to persuade a Raja to adopt as it used to be to persuade Englishmen to make wills. He puts it off with some vague intention of marrying another wife, which he is permitted to do under Hindu law when the first wife is barren. Accordingly Hindu princes often die without leaving any son whatever, real or adopted. Under such circumstances the widow was permitted to adopt a boy, and the East India Company permitted this boy to succeed to the principality.

[Sidenote: Question of adoption.]

Adoption, however, is purely a religious ceremonial. It is the outcome of the religious belief of the Hindus that when a man dies his soul goes to a sort of purgatory until his sins are washed away; and that during this interval it is the duty of a son, real or adopted, to offer cakes and water to refresh the soul in question. The East India Company accepted the adoption as giving a claim to the principality, because it settled the succession when a natural heir was wanting. Lord Dalhousie decided that the adoption gave no claim to the principality, but only to the personal property of the deceased feudatory, because he was anxious to bring the territory under British administration.

[Sidenote: Satara and Nagpore.]

The Court of Directors refused to accept the views of Lord Dalhousie in the case of "protected allies," such as Sindia, Holkar, and the princes of Rajputana. But they accepted his views as regards "dependent principalities," such as Satara and Nagpore, which had been created, or artificially resuscitated, by the Marquis of Hastings, and in which the Hindu rulers had turned out very badly. Accordingly, Nagpore and Satara became British territory, and were brought under British administration.

[Sidenote: Jhansi in Bundelkund.]

A chiefship in Bundelkund, known as Jhansi, was also annexed to the British empire. The chiefs and princes of Bundelkund were situated far away to the south of the river Jumna. They were cut off by hills and jungles from the civilising influences of British rule, and retained much of the lawlessness and anarchy of the eighteenth century. The chief of Jhansi died without leaving any heir, real or adopted. The widow was allowed to adopt a son for the offering of cakes and water, but not allowed to adopt a successor to the principality, and the territory accordingly lapsed to the British government, and was brought under British administration. The widow was very angry. She had expected to rule Jhansi as queen regent; but a Hindu lady brought up in the seclusion of a zenana cannot always be trusted with the irresponsible powers of a despot. She yielded to her fate, but it will be seen hereafter that she bottled up her wrath and waited for revenge.

[Sidenote: Obsolete controversy.]

Since Lord Dalhousie's time the controversy as regards adoption has become obsolete. The right of adopting a son, who should not only offer cakes and water to the soul of the deceased, but succeed him in the government of the principality, has been distinctly recognised by the British government. Meanwhile the aspect of the question has entirely changed. In the days of Lord Dalhousie few, if any, of the Indian feudatories of the British government showed any signs of progress. In the present day the heirs to principalities are taught in schools and colleges, and are learning something of India and the great world around them by the help of railways and telegraphs. It is therefore to be hoped that a day may yet dawn when British systems of administration may be worked in every feudatory state in India by trained Asiatic officials.

[Sidenote: Exceptional annexation of Oudh.]

Last of all, Lord Dalhousie annexed the Mohammedan kingdom of Oudh to the British empire. This was an exceptional measure, having nothing whatever to do with the Hindu usage of adoption. The Nawab of Oudh had assumed the title of "king," but had degenerated under British protection into an Oriental ruler of the worst possible type. His kingdom was parcelled out amongst a landed aristocracy, known as talukdars, who were half landlords and half revenue collectors, like the zemindars of Bengal. Every talukdar of position had a fortress of his own, with a garrison and guns. He collected rents from the ryots, but paid little or no revenue to the king's officers, unless compelled by force of arms. The king lived secluded in his palaces at Lucknow, surrounded by greedy and corrupt officials, immersed in Oriental pleasures, ignorant of what was going on outside his capital, yet maintaining a rabble army, which was either in mutiny for want of pay, or plundering the villages for bare necessaries. A British Resident was appointed to Lucknow, but he could only interfere by way of advice, remonstrance, or warning. A British force was stationed in Oudh, under the direction of the Resident, but only for the maintenance of the public peace, and not for interference in the administration. Deposition of the king would have done no manner of good, for there was not a prince of the family capable of governing the country in his room. It was thus impossible to maintain the dynasty without sacrificing the interests of ten millions of population whom the British government was bound to protect. At last, in 1856, the territory of Oudh was annexed to the British empire, and brought under British administration.

[Sidenote: India Bill of 1853; new Civil Service.]

§13. In 1853 the last charter of the East India Company, which had been granted in 1833 for a term of twenty years, was brought to a close. Parliament refused to renew the charter, but declined as yet to abolish the Company, and meanwhile carried out some constitutional changes. It placed the Indian civil service on a national basis, by abolishing the system of nomination by the Court of Directors, and introducing the system of competitive examinations, which was eventually thrown open to all British subjects--Asiatic as well as European.

[Sidenote: New Legislative Council.]

In like manner Parliament broadened the supreme government of India by creating a new legislative council. The Governor-General in Council continued to exercise supreme control over the executive. At the same time this executive council was formed into a legislative council by the addition of representative members; namely, the chief justice and one puisne judge of the Supreme Court at Calcutta, and one representative member from each of the four presidencies, namely, Madras, Bombay, Bengal, and the North-West Provinces.

[Sidenote: Constitutional germ.]

§14. The legislative council was opened in 1854. It was the first germ of representative government in India. Lord Dalhousie introduced parliamentary forms, and the debates were conducted with a spirit which recommended them to the attention of the Indian public, official and non-official, Asiatic and European. The Governor-General and executive council exercised a veto on the introduction of bills. But four Indian civilians represented the governments of four presidencies, and the judges of the Supreme Court represented, more or less, the interests of the public outside official circles. Moreover, although the Asiatic populations had no voice in the debates, they were enabled to express their objections in the form of petitions, which were duly considered by the committees of the council on the several bills. In a word, the legislative council of India, imperfect as it may have been, was an advance in the development of constitutional government of India, and will accordingly be brought under review in the concluding chapter.

[Sidenote: Macaulay and the Penal Code.]

The new legislative council brought to light Lord Macaulay's draft of a Penal Code, which had been shelved for nearly twenty years. The delay, however, had not been without its advantages. Mr. (now Sir Barnes) Peacock, took charge of the bill under which the Code became law, and subjected its clauses to a careful revision. Moreover, the representative civilians from the four presidencies, and two judges of the Supreme Court at Calcutta, had opportunities for discussing any or every clause from local and imperial points of view, which could scarcely fail to adapt the Penal Code to all parts of British India.

[Sidenote: Characteristics of the Code.]

The Penal Code had evidently been drafted in Lord Macaulay's best style. It was eminently clear and concise, free from redundancies and repetitions, and singularly happy in the definitions of offences and law terms. It embodies illustrations, as well as explanations, of every conceivable offence known to criminal law. Consequently, no educated individual, Asiatic or European, who refers to the Penal Code, can possibly make any mistake as regards the criminal law in British India. It did not, however, take effect until 1860. Meanwhile events transpired which opened up an entirely new era in the progress of Great Britain as an Asiatic power.

[Sidenote: Lord Dalhousie leaves India, 1856.]

§15. In 1856 Lord Dalhousie left India for ever. He had alarmed Anglo-Indians of the old school by his energetic promotion of moral and material progress without regard to the ignorance or prejudices of the Asiatic populations; but besides his grander measures, he carried out a thousand and one smaller reforms which to this day are felt and appreciated by Asiatics as well as by Europeans. It was Lord Dalhousie who introduced cheap postage; who caused Calcutta to be lit with gas; who purified the south-west breezes of fever and malaria by clearing the jungles of the Sunderbunds; who sat by the cradle of the new legislative council of 1854, and thus nourished the earliest germ of representative government which British rule had planted in India. In a word, Lord Dalhousie prepared the way for that great measure which will be told in a future chapter, namely, the transfer of the government of India from the East India Company to the British Crown.

[Sidenote: Lord Canning 1856-62. War with Persia, 1856-7.]

§16. Lord Canning succeeded Lord Dalhousie in 1856. To all outward appearance there was no cause for alarm in any part of India. Persia had again laid siege to Herat, as she had done in 1837; but the British government had come to an understanding with old Dost Mohammed of Cabul, and had given him money and arms. A mission was sent to Candahar under Major (now Sir Peter) Lumsden. A British expedition was sent to the Persian Gulf under Sir James Outram, and captured Bushire. Eventually Persia withdrew her pretensions as regards Herat, and peace was concluded in March, 1857.

[Sidenote: Status of the "king" at Delhi.]

[Sidenote: Proposed removal from Delhi.]

Meanwhile the status of the so-called king of Delhi, the relic of the Great Mogul, was under consideration. For more than half a century the family had lived in a palace at Delhi on a yearly pension from the British government. There was much marrying and giving in marriage, and the palace was a hive of princes and princesses without any apparent occupation save that of petitioning for increased pensions. Lord Ellenborough contemplated removing the family from Delhi, but the measure was postponed. At last Lord Dalhousie took action. The so-called king was very old, and could not live many years. Lord Dalhousie recognised a grandson as successor to the pageant throne, on the condition that when the old king died, the whole family should clear out of Delhi and take up their abode in a royal residence some miles off, known as the Kutub.

[Sidenote: Palace intrigues.]

This design was frustrated. The old king had married a young wife, and she had a son, and she determined that her son should be king. The grandson, who had been recognised by Lord Dalhousie, died suddenly; it was said that she had poisoned him. Lord Canning ignored her son, and recognised a brother of the dead prince as heir to the title, on the same conditions. Henceforth the queen, like the princess of Jhansi, bottled up her wrath and waited for revenge.

[Sidenote: Land settlement in Oudh.]

Lord Canning, however, was somewhat uneasy about Oudh. A British administration had been introduced under a chief commissioner, with commissioners of divisions and deputy commissioners of districts, but nothing was done to reconcile the talukdars in the provinces to the change of rule. On the contrary, a land settlement was introduced corresponding to that which had been effected in the North-West Provinces. But half a century had elapsed since the acquisition of the North-West Provinces. Meanwhile the talukdars of Oudh had ceased to be mere middle men, and had grown into landed proprietors; whilst the rights of village proprietors, individual or joint, had been ignored or stamped out by the new landlords.

[Sidenote: Disaffection of talukdars.]

The early British administrators settled the revenue direct with the villagers, and told the talukdars that their claims to proprietorship, if they had any, would be considered hereafter, or might be settled in the law courts. Under such cool treatment the talukdars of Oudh might well be disaffected towards their new British rulers. Rightly or wrongly, by long possession, or by recent usurpation, they had become _de facto_ landlords, and under the new system they saw their estates transferred to their tenants. Early in 1857, however, Sir Henry Lawrence was appointed chief commissioner of Oudh, and he was expected to reconcile all parties.

[Sidenote: Imagined wrongs of Oudh villagers.]

Strange to say, the villagers of Oudh, who had profited so much by the new land settlement, had a secret grievance of their own which no one seems to have suspected. They held their lands on better terms than their fathers or grandfathers, but many families had lost position in the eyes of their neighbours. For generations Oudh had been the chief recruiting ground for the Asiatic soldiery of the Bengal army; and under Mohammedan rule every sepoy was the great man of his family, and indeed the patron of his native village. If any villager had a grievance, he applied to the sepoy, and the sepoy applied to his British officer, and his petition was forwarded to the British Resident at Lucknow; and the Mohammedan court was too anxious to please the Resident to make any difficulty about redressing wrongs so strongly supported, whatever might have been the abstract merits of the case. When, however, the king was replaced by a chief commissioner, the sepoy was referred to a British court for justice, and was no better off than his neighbours. This loss of privilege and prestige rankled in the heart of sepoys from Oudh, and they began to look upon annexation as a wrong done to themselves, although they had not, and could not have, any sympathies for the deposed king.

[Sidenote: Coming catastrophe.]

Such was the state of affairs in India when the storm of 1857 was about to burst upon Hindustan, which was to shake British power in Northern India to its very foundations, and sweep away the East India Company for ever. The outbreak was hardly felt in the older presidencies of Bengal, Madras, or Bombay, nor in the Punjab or Pegu, nor in Nagpore or Satara, the provinces recently annexed without conquest, nor, with few exceptions, in the feudatory states under British suzerainty. The main fury of the storm was spent on Oudh and the North-West Provinces; and the significance of this localisation will appear in the after history.

FOOTNOTES:

[25] The capture of Ghazni was mainly due to the cool intrepidity of the late Sir Henry Durand, then a lieutenant in the Bengal Engineers.

[26] As these pages are passing through the press Upper Burma has been annexed to the British empire. In 1870 the author was sent by the British government on a semi-political mission to Mandalay and Bhamo. In those days the reigning king respected British supremacy, and British representatives were maintained at the capital and the frontier. These political ties were subsequently loosened, and annexation became a state necessity. Like most of the Buddhist kings of Burma, Theebaw was a professed water drinker, but much given to strong liquors, in which state he committed the most revolting cruelties. Similar horrors are related of the old kings of Burma in the author's _Short History of India, Afghanistan, Nepal, and Burma_, chap. xv.