Page vii

Preface to the Fourth Volume

The present volume narrates the story of the storming of Dehli, the subsequent clearing of the country in the vicinity of that city, and the march to Agra and Kanhpur. It proceeds then to deal with Sir Colin Campbell’s journey from Calcutta to Kanhpur; his relief of the garrison of Lakhnao; and his safe escort of the women and children of that garrison to Kanhpur. It devotes then a chapter to the attack of the Gwaliar contingent on that central point, and to Windham’s consequent action; another, to Colin Campbell’s reply to their daring aggression. Narrating, then, the movements of the several columns of Walpole and Seaton, and of the main body under Sir Colin, in the North-West; the action of the Nipal troops under Jang Bahadur; and of the columns under Rowcroft and Franks in the Azamgarh district and in eastern Oudh; it proceeds to describe the four months’ defence of the Alambagh by the illustrious Outram; then, the last movements which preceded Sir Colin’s attack on Lakhnao; then, the storming of that city. From this point the narrative returns to the Bengal Presidency proper, and describes the outbreaks in eastern Bengal, in eastern Bihar, in Chutia Nagpur, and their repression; deals then with the difficulties caused mainly by the suicidal action of the Government in western Bihar; gives in full detail the splendid action of Lord Mark Kerr in the relief of Azamgarh, one of the two instances1 on record in which a surprised army defeated the surprisers; proceeds then to the campaign of Lugard, Douglas, and their lieutenants, against Kunwar Singh and his brother Amar Singh, in western Bihar; describes the gallantry of Middleton, and the fertility of resource of, and striking success achieved by, Sir Henry Havelock.

Page viii

Returning to the North-West, it describes the campaigns in Rohilkhand and north-western Oudh, detailing the skilful movements of Hope Grant, of John Coke, and of Jones; the fatal incapacity of Walpole; the useless sacrifice of life before Ruiya, culminating in the death of Adrian Hope; the gallantry of Ross-Graves, of Cafe, of Willoughby, of Cureton, of Sam Browne, of Hanna, and of many others; the all but successful daring and the death of the famous Maulavi; and the untimely end of Venables and of the great William Peel. The last chapter deals with the manner in which George St. Patrick Lawrence, one of four noble brothers, succeeded, amid great difficulties, in retaining British hold upon Rajputana.

In the preface to the first edition to this volume, published nearly ten years ago (August 1879), I acknowledged the generous reception which its immediate predecessor had met with both in this country, in the Colonies, and in America. “It was not possible,” I added, “writing of events, many actors in which survive, and to some of whom a record of their performances cannot be palatable, that I should absolutely escape hostile criticism.” But the reception accorded to that volume did not surpass the welcome which the same generous public gave to that of which the present volume is something more than a reprint. Large as was the edition printed, within three weeks I was called upon to prepare a second, and I am informed that the demand for it has continued to the present day.

This new edition has been thoroughly revised. I have not Ally gone through it step by step with the original authorities, but I have compared the text with the information I have received since its first publication from several actors in the drama. In this way I have acquired additional information of a valuable character. The whole of this has been carefully utilised. I have, in consequence, not only made additions to the original text, but have re-written several portions of it. The result of the fresh information I have received has been, in almost every instance, to confirm the opinions regarding individuals recorded in the original edition. With respect to Hodson of Hodson’s Horse, whilst I still hold to the views previously expressed, I have thought it only fair to the memory of that great soldier to present the other side of the shield. A distinguished officer who served throughout the siege of Dehli, to whom I communicated my intention in this respect, thus wrote in reply:

“I am glad to read what you tell me about Hodson’s case. I

Page ix

can never understand why the other side should always make him out such a bloodthirsty character. We may have heard other things against his character; but I don’t remember that at the time he was looked upon by us as more bloodthirsty than any one else. It should be remembered that it was a fight without quarter; there was no love lost on one side or the other. His shooting of the princes (who, if brought in alive at the time, were as safe to have been hung or shot as when I saw their dead bodies lying in front of the Kotwali), must, to say the least of it, have removed, very considerably, any chance of rising among thousands of discontented ruffians then around us.”

I have dealt with this last argument in the text. It is unnecessary, therefore, to repeat it here. It would seem that, whilst the general consensus of opinion outside the camp of the force which assailed Dehli was, and is, against Hodson in the matter of the slaughter of the princes, his comrades on the spot saw in the deed only an additional security for a small body of men occupying but half of the city, the defences of which had been stormed with great loss of life.

I wish to say, before I conclude, that no one is so thoroughly aware as I am of the many imperfections and shortcomings of this volume. Distant myself from the scene of action, for I was at Calcutta attached to the Audit department of the Government of India throughout the period of the Mutiny, I have had but one desire, and that has been, to tell the truth, the whole truth, without respect of persons. I believe I have succeeded in unearthing some gallant deeds which no previous writer had recorded; which had not even found their way into the despatches; and, by dint of earnest and patient inquiry, accompanied by much sifting of evidence, I have also been able, in some instances, to transfer the credit for a gallant achievement from the wrong to the right man. How difficult this is, no one can know who has not attempted the task. I recollect well, that just before the first edition of this volume . appeared, whilst, in fact, I was engaged in examining the last proofs in galleys, I met in the street a distinguished actor in the scenes I had attempted to describe. He asked me when the volume would appear. I replied that it was on the eve of publication, and I should be greatly pleased if he would come to my rooms and read the chapter in which his own gallant achievements were specially recorded. He acceded at once to

Page x

the request, came to my rooms, and sat down to read the sheets, having first asked my permission to make pencil notes in the margin. He sat reading six hours that day and two of the day following. He then handed back the sheets, expressing his general approval, but adding that I should find in the margin a few notes which might be useful. When he had left me I looked at the notes. The chapter was one in which I had taken all the pains in my power to unearth the deeds of brave men. The reader will imagine my surprise when, on looking at the notes written by my visitor in the margin, I saw attached to my description of every one of the gallant deeds enumerated, these words: “This is a mistake: I did this.” For the contention to have been true my visitor must have been ubiquitous, for some of the deeds occurred on different parts of the field, almost at the same moment. Yet my visitor was an officer of the highest character, a great stickler for truth, and who would not knowingly have deviated from the straight line for a moment. But his imagination had overpowered him The campaigns of 1857-8 had been the great event of his life. By degrees he had come to regard them as the only event. And, his mind constantly dwelling on the subject, he had come to regard himself as the only actor. This, I admit, is the worst case I met with; but I have had other experiences almost as curious.

Perhaps the reader will pardon me if I mention another fact personal to myself, which may perhaps serve to point a moral. Stationed as I have said, at Calcutta in 1857, I had viewed with the greatest indignation the tardy measures of repression adopted by the Government early in that year. I had but recently come down from Kanhpur, where, as officer in charge of the commissariat department, I had witnessed the dissatisfaction of the sipahis of the regiments there stationed, when, in the dead of night, Sir James Outram crossed the Ganges for the purpose of annexing Oudh. I stated, at the time, to the authorities all I had seen, and when the outbreak took place at Barhampur I did my best in my small way – for I was still only a subaltern – to convince them that the disaffection was general. But, apparently deaf to evidence, they pursued their own course, in the manner I have attempted to describe in the third volume. I kept my indignation within bounds until Lord Canning went down to the Legislative Council, and in two hours passed a Gagging Act for the press. Regarding

Page xi

this as a deliberate attempt to prevent the truth, hitherto well set forth by the Calcutta newspapers, from reaching England, I sat down to write a true record of the proceedings IzI and events. A portion of this record appeared in England in, I think, August of the same year, in the form of a pamphlet, entitled, “The Mutiny of the Bengal Army.” This pamphlet at once attracted attention; was quoted by the late Lord Derby in the House of Lords; and obtained, on that occasion, the name of the “Red Pamphlet,” by which it is still remembered. I completed it up to the fall of Dehli the same year, and the second part had a sale almost equal to the first. I could not carry it on further because I was wrecked off the coast of Ceylon in February 1858, and lost all the materials I had collected. It happened that, many years later, in 1871, I made the acquaintance of the late Sir John Kaye. We speedily became intimate, and we had many discussions over the events of 1857–8. One day he told me that when my “Red Pamphlet” had appeared he had regarded it with horror; and that one of the secret objects he had in his mind when he undertook to write the history of the Mutiny, was to prove that the “Red Pamphlet” was not to be trusted. “But,” he added, “having since gone over the same ground, I am bound to tell you, that, however I may still differ from some of your conclusions, I have found your facts accurate throughout, and I shall state the fact in my preface to my third volume.” I returned to India the following year, and I suppose Sir John forgot his intention, for in his third volume the promised testimony did not appear. I only mention it here to show how the truth of my narrative forced conviction even upon the mind of a man deeply prejudiced against my book the moment he himself had occasion to examine the sources whence its statements had been derived.

The sons of Great Britain have, during the building up of their vast and magnificent empire, accomplished wonders. But of all the marvels they have achieved there is not one that can compare with the re-conquest, with small means, of the great inheritance which had suddenly, as if by the wave of a magician’s wand, slipped from their grasp. They were called upon at a moment’s notice, without any previous warning, that is rather, without any symptom which their clouded vision would accept as a warning, to attempt, on the instant, a task which it had taken the valour of Clive, the sagacity of Warren

Page xii

Hastings, and the genius of Wellesley, half a century to accomplish. Not for a second did they flinch from the seemingly unequal struggle. They held out, they persevered, they pressed forward, they wore down their enemies, and they won. It was the greatest achievement the world has ever seen.

How did they do it? The one ambition of my life yet remaining to me is to answer that question; to tell who really were the men who thus conquered the impossible. I have spared no pains to relate the story clearly, truly, and without favour. Proud of being an Englishman, I desire to place on a record that shall he permanent the great deeds of my countrymen. Lord Beaconsfield never wrote more truly than when he said that everything depends on “race.” Other races have accomplished great things under exceptional circumstances. They have been aided by the genius of their leader, by the inferiority of their opponents, by a combination of events in their favour. But the race which inhabits these islands has known how to triumph, not only unaided, but when heavily handicapped by Fortune. It has triumphed, often despite the mediocrity of its leaders; despite enormous superiority of numbers against it; and when circumstances around seemed combined to overwhelm its representatives. As these have triumphed before, so will they triumph again. Their invincibility is due to the fact that, never knowing when they are beaten, they persevere long after the period when races, less persistent, would have abandoned the contest in sheer despair.

G. B. MALLESON.

27, West Cromwell Road.

May 1st, 1889.

Footnotes

1. The other was that of Clive at Kaveripak, February 23, 1752.

This collection transcribed by Chris Gage
hosted by ibiblio Support Wikipedia