Page 441

Appendix – Proceedings of Sir Thomas Rumbold, Governor of Madras, 1778–1780

Since this volume was sent to press, the author has been favoured with a large and valuable collection of papers, compiled from original correspondence, and from printed records long since forgotten, relative to the administration of Sir Thomas Rumbold, at Madras, and intended to relieve his memory from the obloquy which has rested on it for nearly half a century. A careful perusal of this compilation forces the conclusion that the charges brought against him by Colonel Wilks and Mr. Mill were based on erroneous information, and partial investigation. The statements regarding his proceedings, which are now received as historical facts, and the authenticity of which the author of this volume never suspected, are not, as it would appear, to be relied on, and this chapter of Indian history requires to be written afresh. The interests of historical truth demand this candid admission, and render it necessary to place before the reader the clear explanations which these documents afford, of various points on which his conduct has been impeached.

The large sums remitted to England by Sir Thomas Rumbold, soon after his arrival at Madras, have been considered a decisive proof of the corrupt character of his proceedings. But these papers explain that he was for twelve years a civilian on the Bengal establishment, and chief of the factory of Patna, and moreover, engaged, like all the civilians of the time, in mercantile transactions; that the remittances consisted of the property he had left in Bengal in the public securities, as proved by the clearest evidence, and which, combined with his salary as Governor, fully accounted for the fortune he had accumulated, of which he was obliged on his return to deliver a schedule on oath, under the penalty of the confiscation of his entire property, if he erred to the extent of £500.

The Court of Directors had directed five of the members of Council at Madras to proceed to the northern sircars, to complete a settlement with the zemindars, and Sir Thomas Rumbold has been censured for cancelling the commission, and directing the zemindars to repair to Madras, where they were required to transact business with him alone. But it is now shown that for this procedure he submitted

Page 442

his reasons to the Court of Directors, the chief of which was that these landholders were endeavouring to baffle the Commissioners, and that the Court declared themselves perfectly satisfied with the course he had adopted. When the matter came under Parliamentary investigation, it was attested by four witnesses that at the Madras Presidency transactions of this nature had always been conducted by the President himself, and subsequently communicated to the Board.

Regarding the bribe of a lac of rupees to his secretary, Mr. Redhead, by Seetaram raj, it is shown that Mr. Redhead never enjoyed the confidence of Sir Thomas, and was dismissed within a few months of his arrival at Madras, and died soon after. A paper was discovered among his effects, which purported to be a translation from the original, in the Gentoo language, containing a promise on the part of Seetaram raj to pay him a lac of rupees on the performance of certain services. It was not attested by Seetaram, or by Mr. Redhead. His executors, however, sued the native for the amount in the Mayor’s Court, and obtained a decree, which was reversed on appeal by the President in Council. An attempt was made to implicate Sir Thomas in the odium of this transaction, but the counsel for the bill found that it could not be sustained, and abandoned the charge.

It is stated in the histories of India, that when Sir Thomas summoned the zemindars of the northern sircars to Madras, Viziram raj, the zemindar of Vizagapatam, declined to obey the injunction, pleading the injury which his estates would suffer from his absence, but that his brother Seetaram raj hastened thither, and succeeded in obtaining from Sir Thomas Rumbold the entire command of the zemindary, in spite of his brother’s remonstrances. The version of this affair given in these papers, and substantiated by documentary evidence, presents it in a totally different aspect. Seetaram was the eldest son, and the lawful heir of the principality, but, under the pressure of palace intrigues, was induced to relinquish his right to his brother, and to consent to act as his dewan, or steward, in which capacity he managed the estates with such fidelity and benefit as in a few years to double the rent-roll. A competitor at length succeeded in poisoning the mind of Viziram raj against his brother, and supplanted him in his office. Seetaram was at Madras, seeking the intervention of the public authorities before the arrival of Sir Thomas, who determined, if possible, to reconcile the brothers. The new dewan, who was a defaulter to the extent of £90,000, was directed to proceed to the zemindary, and bring up his accounts. Sir Thomas embraced the opportunity of his absence, which relieved Viziram from the spell of his influence, to make up the family quarrel. Seetaram was re appointed dewan, and continued to live in harmony with his brother, and secured the punctual payment of the public revenue, and promoted the improvement of the family property.

The most important series of events elucidated by these documents is that which refers to the transfer of the Guntoor sircar, which has been assumed, without question, as the cause of the confederacy formed to

Page 443

exterminate the Company, and of the war with Hyder Ali, which spread desolation through the Carnatic. The statement, which has hitherto been deemed authentic, runs thus: – By the treaty made with the Nizam in 1768, a tribute of seven lacs of rupees a-year was to be paid to him for the four sircars, and he was bound to consider the enemies of the Company his enemies. The Guntoor sircar, however, was to remain in the possession of his brother, Basalut Jung, during his life, and then to revert to the Company; but if he gave protection or assistance to their enemies they were at liberty to take possession of the province and retain it. Basalut Jung employed Monsieur Lally to organize an army, commanded by French officers, which was gradually increased to 500 Europeans and 3,000 sepoys, and was constantly supplied with recruits and stores through the port of Motapilly. In 1779, Basalut Jung, alarmed by the encroachment of Hyder, voluntarily proposed to Sir Thomas Rumbold to lease his territory for its full value to the Company, to dismiss the French force, and to receive a British contingent in its stead. A British force was accordingly sent to take possession of the province, and Mr. Holland was deputed to Hyderabad to explain this transaction to the Nizam, and to demand the remission of the tribute, which had been withheld for some time. The Nizam was exasperated at a proceeding which he considered a breach of the treaty, and immediately formed a confederacy with the Mahrattas and Hyder for the extermination of English power in the Deccan. These measures were concealed from Mr. Hastings, who, on becoming cognizant of them, superseded the authority of the Madras Government at the court of the Nizam, ordered the province to be restored, and engaged to make good the tribute; and by this prompt and conciliatory procedure detached him from the great confederacy.

The documents now collected give a totally different aspect to these transactions. The collection of a French force in Guntoor had been an object of alarm equally at Calcutta and at Madras for years before the confederacy was formed. In July, 1775, the Governor-General stated that no time should be lost in removing it, and authorized the Government of Madras to march a body of troops to - the frontier, to demand the immediate dismissal of the French force, and, if it was not complied with, to take possession of the country and retain it. The Government of Madras, instead of adopting this extreme measure, sent a remonstrance to the Nizam as Soobadar of the Deccan, and urged the removal of the French corps. He promised to respect the treaty “to a hair’s breadth,” but constantly evaded compliance with the demand, which was often repeated. The capture of Pondicherry, in 1778, gave a new turn to affairs in the Deccan. and, combined with the recent encroachments of Hyder, who threatened to absorb the Guntoor sircar likewise, induced Basalut Jung to send a vakeel to Madras and offer to make over the province to the Company on the payment of the same sum which he had hitherto derived from it, to dismiss the French, and receive an English force. A treaty, embodying these arrangements, was accordingly drawn up by Sir Thomas Rumbold, with the full concurrence of Sir Eyre Coote, then a member

Page 444

of the Madras Council, and submitted to Mr. Hastings, who made divers alterations, and then returned it to be carried into effect, with his full concurrence. A detachment of British troops was then sent to occupy the province, who were obliged to cross a corner of a district which Hyder had recently added to his dominions. The Court of Directors likewise commended the meritorious conduct of Sir Thomas in concluding the treaty.

The Nizam and Hyder resented this proceeding, but their indignation only served to demonstrate the wisdom and policy of it. The Nizam reproached his brother for having rented the sircar to the English, when he should have made it over to Hyder Ali. Hyder had resolved to oust Basalut Jung and take possession of the province, which would give him a position on the flank of the Carnatic, and a port on the Coromandel coast. He was irritated by the promptness with which this design was frustrated, and vowed that he would not allow the sircar to pass into the hands of “his old and bitter enemies.” By a singular error, accidental or otherwise, the word “enemy” was substituted for “enemies,” and the declaration was thus made to apply to Mahomed Ali, the nabob of the Carnatic, and not to the company whom Hyder always regarded with a feeling of rancorous hatred.

With regard to the tribute of seven lacs of rupees a-year, the papers state that it had fallen into arrears before the arrival of Sir Thomas Rumbold. The Nizam was pressing for payment, and the Madras Government had earnestly entreated the Governor-General to assist them with funds to discharge it. The Madras Presidency was reduced to such a state of poverty, that when the troops had been paid for one month they knew not where to look for the next supply. Mr. Holland was sent to Hyderabad, not to make a positive demand of remission, to be eventually supported by violence, but to solicit a reduction of the sum, on the plea of poverty, and if the Nizam appeared to be propitious, to propose the entire relinquishment of it, coupled with certain propositions which it was thought would appear an equivalent for the sacrifice. If they were rejected, he was instructed to assure the Nizam that the current tribute, as well as the arrears, would be paid “as soon as they were in cash.” Mr. Holland found, on his arrival, that the Nizam had taken the French force dismissed by Basalut Jung into his own service, which, considering that the English were then at war with the French, was a gross breach of the treaty, and the Governor of Madras strenuously remonstrated with the Nizam for openly protecting and encouraging the enemies of the Company. Mr. Holland therefore informed him that the payment of the tribute would be made on his giving full satisfaction regarding the French troops.

The hostile confederacy formed by the Nizam is attributed, by the historians, to the irritation produced in the mind of the Nizam by the Guntoor transactions and the tribute negotiations. But the documents show that it was formed before they had occurred, and that this fact was admitted by the Governor-General himself. The

Page 445

animosity of the Nizam, which led to the confederacy, was created by the support given by the British Government to Raghoba, whom he considered his most inveterate enemy. He had earnestly remonstrated with the Bengal Government on this subject, and announced his determination to attack the Company’s dominions if the alliance was not relinquished. Another cause of annoyance was the interception of a letter addressed by the Governor-General to Mr. Elliott, the envoy sent to Nagpore, authorizing him to conclude an alliance with the raja, and to assist him in recovering certain territories from the Nizam. It is shown in the papers that it was these two transactions alone which induced the Nizam to form a combination against the Company. It has likewise been believed that the Nizam was detached from the confederacy by the assurance of the Bengal Government that the tribute should be paid, and the Guntoor sircar restored; but a far more probable cause of this change of policy is to be found, so the papers say, in the fact that while the Nizam was inciting Hyder to attack the English, he discovered that Hyder had sent a vakeel to Delhi to obtain from the puppet of an Emperor an imperial grant of the whole of the Nizam’s dominions!

These documents deal also with the assertion that the Madras Government, after having given every provocation to Hyder, were taken by surprise when he burst on the Carnatic. But it is stated that every effort was made to conciliate him. The expedition to Mahé was undertaken by orders from home, but when it was found to be obnoxious to Hyder, Sir Thomas proposed that it should be suspended, but was overruled by Sir Eyre Coote. Hyder declared that he would be revenged for Mahé in the Carnatic. The Madras Council were fully aware of his hostility, and repeatedly pointed out the danger to which the Carnatic would be exposed from his assaults, and their inability to defend it. They recommended a union of all the Presidencies to reduce his power. In announcing Hyder’s preparations to Calcutta in November, 1779, Sir Thomas Rumbold stated that if he should enter the Carnatic it was beyond their power to prevent the ravages of his horse; but so late as January, 1780, Mr. Hastings wrote: “I am convinced from Hyder’s conduct and disposition that he will never molest us while we preserve a good understanding with him.”

In reference to the desertion of his post on the eve of the war, and the resentment of the Court of Directors, the papers show that the measures of Sir Thomas Rumbold had been uniformly commended by them, and that the first censure of his conduct, which was also accompanied by a sentence of deposition, was written three months after they had received his resignation and appointed his successor, and that his retirement from India was rendered imperative by the advice of the first physicians in Madras. After his return, Mr. Dundas introduced a bill of pains and penalties charging him with high crimes and misdemeanours, and more particularly stigmatising the transaction regarding the Guntoor sircar as having been done in a clandestine, treacherous, irregular, and

Page 446

unjustifiable manner. The law officers of the Crown condemned these proceedings as unjust. Some of the more important allegations in the bill were abandoned, and others broke down when brought to the test of evidence, and the bill itself was withdrawn twenty months after it had been presented, by a motion that it be read that day six months.

It is to be hoped that this valuable collection of documents will at no distant period be given to the public, for the information of those who take an interest in the history of British India, and the guidance of those who may hereafter treat of this subject.

This collection transcribed by Chris Gage
hosted by ibiblio Support Wikipedia