The brilliant success of the Mysore war reflected the highest credit on Lord Cornwallis, but the permanent renown of his administration rests upon his revenue and judicial institutions, which form one of the most important epochs in the history of British India.
The resources of government in India had been derived from time immemorial, almost exclusively from the land, a certain proportion of the produce of which was considered the inalienable right of the sovereign. The settlement of the land revenue was, therefore, a question of the greatest magnitude, and embraced, not only the financial strength of the state, but the prosperity of its subjects. Two centuries before the period of which we treat, Toder Mull, the great financier of Akbar, had made a settlement of the lower provinces, directly with the cultivators, after an accurate survey and valuation of the lands. To collect the rents from the ryots, and transmit them of the treasury, agents were
placed in various revenue circles, and remunerated for their labour by a percentage on the collections. The office of collector speedily became hereditary, from the constant tendency of every office in India to become so, and, also from the obvious convenience of continuing the agency in the family which was in possession of the local records, and acquainted with the position of the ryots, and the nature of the lands. The collector thus became responsible for the government rent, and was entrusted with all the powers necessary for realising it. He was permitted to entertain a military force, which it was his constant aim to augment, to increase his own consequence. His functions were gradually enlarged, and came eventually to embrace the control of the police and the adjudication of rights. The collector was thus transformed into a zemindar, and assumed the title and dignity of raja, and became, in effect, the master of the district.
The English government had from the first treated the zemindars as simple collectors, and ousted them without hesitation when others offered more for the lands than they were prepared to pay. But this uncertainty of tenure, and this repeated change of agency was found to be equally detrimental to the improvement of the lands, the welfare of the ryots, and the interests of the state. Under such a system there could be no application of capital to the operations of agriculture; the estates became deteriorated, while the remissions which Government was obliged to make from time to time, overbalanced any profits arising from competition. The Court of Directors complained that the revenue was steadily diminishing, and that the country itself was becoming impoverished and exhausted. Lord Cornwallis, soon after his arrival, declared that agriculture and internal, commerce were in a state of rapid decay, that no class of society appeared to be flourishing, except the money-lenders, and that both cultivators and landlords were sinking into poverty and wretchedness. The
evils under which the people groaned, he affirmed to be enormous.
The Court of Directors felt the necessity of adopting some bold and decisive measure to arrest the progress of ruin, and, under this impression, framed their memorable letter of the 12th of April, 1786, which became the basis of the important revenue settlement, begun and completed by Lord Cornwallis. They condemned the employment of farmers of the revenue and temporary renters, who had no interest in the land, and defrauded the state, while they oppressed the ryots. They directed that the engagements should be made with the old zemindars, not, however, as a matter of right, but of fiscal policy. On the presumption, moreover, that sufficient information must have been acquired regarding the estates, they desired that the settlement should be made for a period of ten years, and eventually declared permanent, if it appeared to be satisfactory. But Lord Cornwallis found that the Court had been essentially mistaken in this conclusion. Twenty years had been employed in efforts to procure information regarding the land, and five schemes had been devised for the purpose, but the Government was still as ignorant as ever on the subject. The Collectors had no knowledge of the value of the lands, of the nature of tenures, or of the rights of landlord and tenant. They had no intercourse with the people, and were ignorant of their language. They saw only through the eyes of their omlas, or native officers, whose sole object was to mystify them, in order the more effectually to plunder the country. Lord Cornwallis, therefore, suspended the execution of the orders of the Court, and circulated interrogatories with the view of obtaining the necessary information, and, in the mean time, made the settlements annual.
The proprietary right in the land had been considered, from time immemorial, to be vested in the sovereign; and although Mr. Francis and some others had thought fit to adopt a different opinion, the great
majority of the public servants adhered to the ancient doctrine. But, after the investigations were completed, the Government, acting upon a generous and enlightened policy, determined to confer on the zemindars the unexpected boon of a permanent interest in the soil. Before this concession, the zemindars, from the highest to the lowest, had been mere tenants at will, liable at any time to be deprived by the state landlord of the estates they occupied. But the regulations of 1793, in which the new fiscal policy was embodied, converted the soil into a property, and bestowed it upon them. A large and opulent class of landholders was thus created, in the hope that they would seek the welfare of the ryot, stimulate cultivation, and augment the general wealth of the country. It was found, however, to be much more easy to determine the relation between the government and the landlord, than between the landlord and his tenant. The rights of the cultivators were more ancient and absolute than those of the zemindar; but the zemindar had always practised every species of oppression on them, extorting every cowrie which could be squeezed from them by violence, and leaving them little beyond a rag and a hovel. Mr. Shore, who superintended the settlement, maintained that some interference on the part of government was indispensably necessary to effect an adjustment of the demands of the zemindar on the ryot. Lord Cornwallis affirmed that whoever cultivated the land, the zemindar could receive no more than the established rate, which in most cases was equal to what the cultivator could pay.
The difficulty was compromised rather than adjusted by declaring that the zemindar should not be at liberty to enhance the rents of the “independent talookdars” and two other classes of renters who paid the fixed sums due to the state through him, simply for the convenience of government. The zemindar was also restricted from enhancing the rent of the class of tenants called khoodkast, who cultivated the lands of the village in which they resided, except when their rents were
below the current rates, or when their tenures had been improperly obtained. The remaining lands of the estate he was at liberty to let in any manner and at any rate he pleased. For the protection of the resident cultivators it was enacted that the zemindar should keep a register of their tenures, and grant them pottahs, or leases, specifying the rent they were to pay, and that for any infringement of these rules the ryot was to seek a remedy in an action against him in the civil courts. But the registers were not kept, and pottahs were rarely given; and, as to the remedy, a poor man has little chance against his wealthy oppressor in courts where the native officers are universally venal, and their influence is paramount. By the unremitted contrivances of the zemindar, and changes of residence on the part of the ryot – which extinguished all his rights – the class of resident cultivators has been gradually diminished; and the ryots have been placed at the mercy of the zemindar. The absence of any clear and defined rules for the protection of the cultivator in his ancient right not to pay more than a limited and moderate rent, and to be kept in possession of his fields as long as he did so, is an unquestionable blot on a system which in other respects was highly beneficial.
After the settlement had been completed, the great and all important question came on whether it should be decennial or permanent. Mr. Shore, the highest authority in all revenue questions in India at the time, strenuously opposed every proposal to make it irrevocable. He argued that government did not yet possess sufficient knowledge of the capabilities of the land, and of the collections, to make an equitable distribution of the assessment. But Lord Cornwallis replied, with great force, that if we had not acquired this knowledge after twenty years of research, and after the collectors had been employed especially for three years in seeking for it, we could never expect to obtain it, and the settlement must be indefinitely postponed. He considered that the boon which it was proposed to confer
on the zemindars would give them an irresistible inducement to promote cultivation, and to render their ryots comfortable. Mr. Shore, with a more correct appreciation of the character of the zemindars, affirmed that they had never been alive to their true interests; that they were utterly ignorant of the rudiments of agricultural science; that the whole zemindary system was a mere conflict of extortion on their part and resistance on the part of the ryot, the zemindar exacting whatever he had any chance of wringing from him, and the ryot refusing every cowrie he could withhold; and he argued that the zemindar would not assume new principles of action because his tenure was made permanent. But Lord Cornwallis was resolute in his opinion that a fixed and unalterable assessment was the only panacea for the evils which afflicted the country, and he strongly urged it upon Mr. Dundas. Some of the leading members of the Court of Directors, partly influenced by the weighty opinion of Mr. Shore, and partly by their own convictions, adopted a contrary opinion; but, as a body, they could not be persuaded to give their attention to the measure. Mr. Dundas resolved, therefore, that it should originate with the Board of Control. Mr. Pitt, who had for many years studied every Indian question with great assiduity, shut himself up with Mr. Dundas at his country seat at Wimbledon, determined to master the subject in all its bearings and results. Mr. Charles Grant, who had passed many years of his life in India, and combined the largest experience with the most enlightened views – though he had not been considered worthy a place among the Directors – was invited to assist Mr. Pitt and Mr. Dundas in these deliberations, and he gave his suffrage for the perpetuity of the settlement. Mr. Pitt at length declared his conviction of the wisdom of this measure, and a despatch was accordingly drawn up by Mr. Dundas and sent to the Court of Directors. The subject was too large for their consideration in general, and the few who understood it, finding that the Ministers of the Crown bad made up their minds on the point,
thought it best to acquiesce, and the dispatch was sent out to India.
The permanent settlement of Bengal and Behar was promulgated in Calcutta on the 22nd of March, 1793. It was the broadest and most important administrative act which the British government had adopted since its establishment in India. At a period when the revenue derived from the land formed the bone and muscle of the public resources, and while one-third of the country was a jungle, the assessment was fixed for ever. No margin was allowed for the inevitable increase of expenditure in the defence of the country, and in the development of civilised institutions; and there was moreover the unquestionable conviction that where the rent happened to be excessive, it must be reduced; where it was inadequate, it could not be increased. With the experience of seventy years before us, we are enabled to discover many defects and inequalities in the settlement, and it would be a miracle if this were not the case; but we must not forget the impending ruin of the country which it was intended to avert. It was a bold, brave, and wise measure. Under the genial influence of this territorial charter, which for the first time created indefeasible rights and interests in the soil, population has increased, cultivation has been extended, and a gradual improvement has become visible in the habits and comfort of the people; and the revenue of the provinces of Bengal and Behar have increased to fourteen crores of rupees a-year, of which only four crores are derived from the lands. Before dismissing the subject it may be worthy of remark, that with all his benevolent and generous sympathies for the natives, Lord Cornwallis was not able to advance beyond the traditional creed of England, that all her colonial and foreign possessions were to be administered primarily and emphatically for her benefit. No effort was to be spared to secure the protection, the improvement, and the happiness of the people; but it was with an eye exclusively to the credit and the interests of the governing power. He closes his great minute
on the permanent settlement with this characteristic remark: “The real value of Bengal and Behar to Britain depends on the continuance of its ability to furnish a large annual investment to Europe, to assist in providing an investment for China, and to supply the pressing wants of the other presidencies.”
The administration of Lord Cornwallis was also rendered memorable by the great changes introduced into the judicial institutions of the Presidency. The collector of the revenue had hitherto acted also as judge and magistrate. Lord Cornwallis separated the financial from the judicial functions, and confined the collector to his fiscal duties, placing him under a Board of Revenue at the Presidency. A civil court was established in each district and in the principal cities, with a judge, a register to determine cases of inferior value, and one or more covenanted assistants. Every person in the country was placed under the jurisdiction of these courts, with the exception of British subjects, who were, by Act of Parliament, amenable to the Supreme Court. To receive appeals from the zillah and city courts, four Courts of Appeal were constituted at Calcutta, Dacca, Moorshedabad, and Patna, and from their decisions an appeal lay to the Sudder Court at the Presidency, nominally composed of the Governor-General and the members of Council. All fees of every description were abolished, and the expenses of a suit restricted to the remuneration of pleaders and the expense of witnesses.
For the administration of criminal law, it was ordained that the judges of the four Courts of Appeal should proceed on circuit, from zillah to zillah, within their respective circles, and hold jail deliveries twice in the year. The Mohamedan law, divested of some of its most revolting precepts, was the criminal code of the courts, and the Mohamedan law officer, on the completion of the trial at which he had been present, was required to declare the sentence prescribed by that code, which was carried into execution
if the judge concurred in it, and if he did not it was referred to the Sudder Court, which was also constituted a Court of Appeal in criminal cases. The zillah judges were likewise invested with the powers of a magistrate, and authorized to pass and execute sentences in trivial offences, and, in other cases, to apprehend the delinquent and commit him for trial before the judges of circuit. Each zillah was divided into districts of about twenty miles square, to each of which an officer called a daroga was appointed, with authority to arrest offenders on a written charge, and when the offence was bailable, to take security for appearance before the magistrate. Of all the provisions of the new system this proved to be the most baneful. The daroga, who was often fifty miles from the seat of control, enjoyed almost unlimited power of extortion, and became the scourge of the country.
For more than ten years, the clear and simple rules for the administration of justice, drawn up by Sir Elijah Impey, in 1781, had been the guide of the Courts. Lord Cornwallis considered it important that his new institutions should have all the certainty of fixed rules. “It was essential,” he said, “to the future prosperity of the British in Bengal that all regulations affecting the rights, persons, and property of their subjects, should be formed into a code, and printed, with translations, in the country languages.” Mr. George Barlow, a civil servant of mark at the time, and subsequently Governor-General, ad interim, and Governor of Madras, had the chief hand in manipulating the code of 1793, more especially in the police and judicial department. He was ignorant of the principles or practice of law, except as he might have picked up some notion of them in the country courts. He expanded the ordinances of Sir Elijah into an elaborate volume of regulations, altering the original rules, without improving them. This code, however -valuable as a monument of British benevolence, was altogether unsuited to a people who had been accustomed to have justice distributed by simple and rational enquiry. The
course of procedure was loaded with formalities, and the multiplication of puzzling and pedantic rules only served to bewilder the mind, and to defeat the object in view. There was, in fact, too much law for there to be much justice. Every suit became a game of chess, and afforded the amplest scope for oriental ingenuity and chicanery. “Justice was thus made sour” by delay, and equity was smothered by legal processes. To add to the impediments thrown in the course of justice, it was administered in a language equally foreign to the judge and the suitors.
Notwithstanding the wisdom exhibited in Lord Cornwallis’s institutions, they were deformed by one great and radical error. He considered it necessary that the whole administration of the country should be placed exclusively in the hands of covenanted servants of the Company, to the entire exclusion of all native agency. In the criminal department, the only native officer entrusted with any power was the Daroga, upon an allowance of twenty-five rupees a month. In the administration of civil justice, cases of only the most trivial amount were made over to a native judge, under the title of Moonsiff; but while the salary of the European judge was raised to 2,500 rupees a month, the Moonsiff was deprived of all pay, and left to find a subsistence by a small commission on the value of suits; in other words, by the encouragement of litigation. Under all former conquerors, civil and military offices, with few exceptions, were open to the natives of the country, who might aspire, with confidence, to the post of minister, and to the command of armies. But under the impolitic system established in 1793, the prospects of legitimate and honourable ambition were altogether closed against the natives of the country. If the peculiar nature of British rule rendered it necessary to retain all political and military power in the hands of Europeans, this was no reason for denying the natives every opportunity of rising to distinction in the judicial departments, for which they were eminently qualified by
their industrious habits, and their natural sagacity, not less than by the knowledge they possessed of the language and character of their fellow-countrymen. The fatal effects of this exclusion were speedily visible in the disrepute and inefficiency of the whole administration. With only three or four European functionaries in a district, which often contained a million of inhabitants, the machine of government must have stood still without the services of natives. But this power and influence from which it was impossible to exclude them, being exercised without responsibility, was used for the purposes of oppression, and the courts of every description became the hot-bed of corruption and venality.
The remaining events of 1793 are few and unimportant. Information having been received that France had declared war against England, Lord Cornwallis issued orders for the assemblage of a large force at Madras, intending to take the command of it in person, and march against Pondicherry. He embarked at Calcutta on the 25th of August, but was twenty-five days in reaching Madras. On his arrival there, he found that Colonel Brathwaite had proceeded to invest Pondicherry, and that, in consequence of the insubordination of the French troops, the governor had been obliged to capitulate a few days before. Lord Cornwallis embarked for England in October, after a memorable reign of seven years, during which period he had given strength and stability to the power established by the daring of Clive, and consolidated by the genius of Hastings. The dignity and firmness which he exhibited in his intercourse with the princes of India conciliated and overawed them, while the supreme authority which he exercised over all the Presidencies, convinced them that a new element of vigour had been introduced into the British government in India, which rendered it more formidable than ever.
The treaty of Salbye, which Sindia had concluded with Hastings, on the part of the Mahratta powers in 1782, raised him to a commanding
position in the politics of India. He was no longer a mere feudatory of the Peshwa, but an independent chief, the ally of the British Government, who had honoured his capital with the presence of their representative. He determined to lose no time in improving these advantages, and of pushing his schemes of ambition in Hindostan. The state of affairs at Delhi was eminently favourable to these views. The imbecile emperor was a puppet in the hands of Afrasiab Khan, who invoked the aid of Sindia, in his master’s name, to demolish the power of his rival, Mohamed Beg. Sindia accepted the invitation with alacrity, and advanced with a large force to Agra, where he had a meeting with the emperor in October, 1784. Afrasiab was soon after assassinated, and the authority of the imperial court, and the influence connected with it, were at once transferred to Sindia. He refused the title of Ameer-ool-omrah, but accepted that of Vakeel-ool-mutluk, or Regent of the empire, for the Peshwa, and the post of deputy for himself, and was thus nominally invested with the executive authority of the Mogul throne. The emperor likewise conferred on him the command of the imperial forces, and assigned to him the provinces of Agra and Delhi, out of which he agreed to pay 65,000 rupees monthly, for the expenditure of the emperor’s household. His ambitious views were thus gratified sooner than he had expected, and in the elation of success, and encouraged likewise by the departure of Hastings, he demanded the arrears of chout for Bengal and Behar, but Mr. Macpherson not only rejected the claim with indignation, but constrained him to offer a humble apology for having made it.
The resources of the provinces of Agra and Delhi, which had been exhausted by constant hostilities, were found inadequate to the maintenance of the large force which Sindia entertained, and he sequestered the jageers of the Mohamedan nobles of the court. A powerful party was thus raised against him, which received secret encouragement from the emperor himself. Sindia then proceeded
to despoil the Rajpoots, and at the gates of Jeypore made a demand of sixty lacs of rupees, as tribute due to the imperial treasury. The greater portion of this sum was paid, but when his general appeared to claim the remainder, the Rajpoot tribes made common cause, and attacked and routed him. Sindia advanced with all his troops to encounter them, but Mohamed Beg, who joined his standard after the murder of Afrasiab, fearing that the confiscation of his estates would not be long delayed, if Sindia were victorious, chose the eve of the battle for going over to the Rajpoots. He was killed in the engagement which followed, but his gallant nephew, Ismael Beg, one of the best native soldiers of the age, rallied the troops, and Sindia was obliged to retire. He was preparing to renew the conflict, on the third day, when the whole of the emperor’s troops went over in a body to Ismael Beg, with eighty pieces of cannon. Sindia had not been reduced to such straits since he fled from the field of Paniput, but in no emergency did he evince greater fortitude and conduct. Fortunately for him, the Rajpoots, satisfied with their success, retired to their respective homes, instead of following up the victory. They left Ismael Beg to conduct the war alone, and he laid siege to Agra, the fortifications of which had been greatly strengthened by Sindia. In this extremity, he addressed Nana Furnuvese, and importuned him to aid him in maintaining the Mahratta ascendancy in Hindostan. But Nana was jealous of the growing power of Sindia, who he knew was aiming at the supreme control of the Mahratta commonwealth, and although he did not fail to send forward troops under Holkar and Ali Bahadoor, they were intended rather to watch and check his movements than to assist them.
In this position of affairs, the infamous Gholam Kadir, a turbulent soldier of fortune, the son of the Rohilla chief, Zabita Khan, who had died in June, 1785, appeared on the scene. Ismael Beg was still engaged in the siege of Agra: Gholam Kadir, with his body of free
lances joined him there, and Sindia advanced to attack them both. On the 24th of April, they raised the siege and advanced sixteen miles to meet him; Sindia was completely overpowered, and obliged to retreat to Bhurtpore, the capital of the friendly Jauts. Gholam Kadir was soon after called off to defend his own jageer from the encroachments of the Sikhs, by whom it was invaded at the instigation of Sindia, who took advantage of the circumstance to attack Ismael Beg, under the walls of Agra. The battle was fought on the 18th day of June, 1788, and terminated in the complete dispersion of Ismael’s troops. He immediately joined the camp of Gholam Kadir, and they advanced together towards Delhi, but the emperor refused to admit either of them into it. Gholam Kadir, however, succeeded in corrupting one of the emperor’s confidential officers, seized the gates of the city, and occupied the palace and the citadel. He then let loose his licentious soldiers on the city, which was for two months subjected to a degree of violence, rapine and barbarity, unexampled even in the gloomy annals of that imperial metropolis, which had been so repeatedly devoted to spoliation. The wives and daughters, and female relatives of the emperor were exposed and dishonoured, while some were, more mercifully, put to death.
To crown his infamy, the ruffian put out the eyes of the wretched monarch, in their sockets with his dagger. Ismael Beg turned with horror from the sight of these atrocities, and on receiving the promise of a jageer, entered the service of Sindia, who advanced to Delhi, reseated the emperor on the throne, and did everything that humanity could suggest, to alleviate the sorrows of the old man, then in his sixty-fifth year. A force was sent after Gholam Kadir who took shelter in Meerut, where he defended himself with vigour, but seeing his case desperate, mounted a swift horse and fled across the country, but was captured and brought into the presence of Sindia, who subjected him to the most barbarous mutilations, under which he expired.
The success which had attended the exertions of Sindia was owing, in a great measure, to the force which he had organised under European officers. He could not fail to perceive that the native Mahratta soldier, though admirably adapted for marauding expeditions, was ill suited for regular warfare, or for the maintenance of such a power as he was endeavouring to establish; and he resolved to create a Sepoy army on the model of the English battalions. The Count de Boigne, a native of Savoy, had come to India in quest of service, and circumstances brought him to the camp of Sindia, by whom he was immediately entertained. He was an officer of distinguished talents and great military experience, having served both in Europe and in India, and a large force was gradually formed under his direction, consisting chiefly of Rajpoots and Mohamedans, commanded and disciplined by European officers, many of whom were English adventurers. The force was eventually raised to 18,000 regular infantry, 6,000 irregular and 2,000 regular cavalry, and 600 Persian horse. With the aid of these regiments Sindia was enabled to fight pitched battles, and to capture towns and forts, as no Mahratta chief had ever done before. A foundry was likewise established, and 200 cannon cast. The equipment of this formidable force completely established Sindia’s authority in Hindostan, and made him the most powerful member of the Mahratta confederation.
The turbulent Ismael Beg did not long remain faithful to Sindia, and he was joined by the Rajpoot rajas of Jeypore and Joudhpore. Sindia attacked the allies at Patun, on the 20th of June, 1790. Ismael fought with his usual bravery, and thrice charged through Sindia’s regular infantry, cutting down the artillerymen at their guns. Holkar’s force stood aloof during the engagement, and the issue of the battle was for a time doubtful, but the personal gallantry of De Boigne and his European officers, and the firmness of his disciplined troops, secured the day to his
master, though not, as it was affirmed, without the loss of 11,000 men. Ismael Beg fled with a small retinue to Jeypore, all his guns were captured, and ten of his battalions grounded their arms and surrendered.
The Rajpoots, however, still continued to maintain the war, and in the succeeding year a second battle was fought, at Mairta, in which De Boigne achieved another victory. The Rajpoot tribes were now apparently at Sindia’s mercy, but the equivocal conduct of Holkar induced him to grant them peace on the payment of a moderate tribute. The raja of Joudhpore, however, who had assassinated Sindia’s brother, Jayapa, thirty-two years before, was now required to surrender Ajmere to atone for the deed.
Sindia had offered to join the alliance against Tippoo, in 1790, on the condition that two battalions of English troops should accompany him to Poona, that his own conquests in Hindostan should be guaranteed, and that he should be assisted to effect the complete subjugation of the Rajpoot states. Lord Cornwallis necessarily rejected these terms, upon which he entered into correspondence with Tippoo – all the while, however, professing the warmest attachment for the Company – and assumed a threatening attitude towards the Peshwa; and, if the arms of the allies had met with any serious reverse in the war with Tippoo, would doubtless have made common cause with that prince against them. That he might be in a position to take advantage of circumstances, and establish his authority at the Mahratta capital, he resolved to proceed thither, much against the wishes of Nana Furnuvese, who was justly apprehensive of his designs. After the battle of Patun, he had obtained from the emperor, for the third time, patents constituting the Peshwa Vakeel-ool-mootluk, or regent of the empire, and Sindia and his descendants, hereditary deputies. It may serve to give some idea of the prestige which still lingered about the Mogul throne, that, at a time when the emperor was dependant on Sindia for the daily expenses of his household,
such a sunnud as this was considered an important acquisition in the Deccan. As a pretext for appearing at Poona, he gave out that he was proceeding to invest the Peshwa with the robes of his new office. He arrived at the capital on the 11th of June, 1792, and in order to exhibit his influence over the imperial house, as well as to gratify the feelings of the Hindoos, he published an edict he had extorted from the emperor, forbidding the slaughter of bullocks and cows throughout the Mogul dominions. Nana Furnuvese used every effort to prevent the Peshwa’s accepting the title conferred on him, but Sindia had brought a large variety of rarities with him from Hindostan which delighted the fancy of the young prince, and, by making constant arrangements for his amusement, obtained a complete ascendancy over him. A day was accordingly fixed for the investiture.
Sindia spared no pains to render the ceremony. imposing. A grand suite of tents was pitched in the vicinity of the town, and the Peshwa proceeded to them with the greatest pomp. At the farthest end of the great tent of state a throne was erected to represent that of the Great Mogul, on which the imperial sunnud and the insignia were placed. The Peshwa approached it and placed on it the usual offering of a hundred and one gold mohurs, and took his seat on the right, when Sindia’s secretary read out the patent, as well as the edict abolishing the slaughter of trine. The Peshwa was then invested with the gorgeous robes and splendid jewels of the office, and returned to Poona amidst the acclamations of thousands, and salvos of artillery. The grandeur of the scene exceeded everything which had ever been seen in the Mahratta capital before. It was on this occasion that Sindia exhibited one of the most extraordinary specimens of mock humility recorded in Indian history. It must be borne in mind that three months before this time, Tippoo had been stripped of half his dominions, and that Sindia was now the most powerful native prince in India, and master of an army composed of sixteen battalions
of regular infantry, five hundred pieces of cannon, and a hundred thousand horse. But he dismounted from his elephant at the gates of Poona, and in the great hall of audience placed himself below all the hereditary nobles of the state. The Peshwa entered the room, and desired him to take his seat among the highest dignitaries, when he replied that he was unworthy of that honour, and untying a bundle which he carried under his arm, produced a pair of slippers, which he put before the Peshwa, saying, “This is my occupation; it was that of my father,” and it was with great apparent reluctance that he allowed himself to be conducted to the honourable seat prepared for him.
Sindia and Nana Furnuvese, after this transaction, maintained an outward appearance of respect and civility, though plotting each other’s destruction; but their respective forces in Hindostan could not be restrained from open hostility. They had been engaged together in levying tribute from the Rajpoots, and had captured two forts, but quarrelled about the division of the spoil. De Boigne, with 20,000 horse and 9,000 regular infantry, fell on Holkar’s army of 30,000 horse, and four battalions disciplined by Europeans. The conflict was desperate, and the four battalions were completely annihilated, only one European officer escaping the carnage. Holkar retreated with the wreck of his army, and on his route sacked and burnt Sindia’s capital, Oojein. This battle rendered Sindia absolute in Hindostan, and served to aggravate the intrigues at Poona, and to deepen the alarm of Nana Furnuvese.
But he was unexpectedly relieved from all anxiety by the death of Sindia, on the 12th of February, 1794. Had he lived a few months longer, a contest for the office of chief minister of the Peshwa, and the supreme command of the Mahratta power would have been inevitable. For thirty-five years he may be said to have passed his life in the camp, devoting himself to the improvement of his army, and the increase of his resources. His character has been aptly
summed up in a few words, by the great historian of the Mahrattas, “he was a man of great political sagacity, and considerable genius, of deep artifice, restless ambition and implacable revenge.” He received from his father a small principality; he bequeathed to his successor, a lad of thirteen, a kingdom comprising all the territory from the Sutlege to Allahabad, two-thirds of Malwa, and the fairest provinces in the Deccan, as well as the finest native army in India.
The proceedings in England in connection with the government of India, subsequent to Mr. Pitt’s Bill in 1784, will now claim attention. The Regulating Act of 1773, which created the office of Governor-General, made him responsible for the safety of India, but gave him only a single vote in Council, and rendered him liable, on every occasion, to be overruled by his colleagues. The distractions of Hastings’s administration are to be attributed, in a great measure, to this anomalous clause, which frequently brought the Government to a dead lock. Lord Cornwallis therefore refused to accept the office, subject to this encumbrance, and a Bill was introduced and passed in 1786 to enable the Governor-General and the Governors of the minor Presidencies to act in opposition to the opinion of the Council, when they deemed it necessary for the welfare of the country, the counsellors being at liberty to record the reasons of their dissent. Of the wisdom of this measure no better proof can be offered than the fact that it has worked beneficially fur nearly eighty years.
The gravest movement of this period, however, was the consummation of Mr. Pitt’s plan of transferring the powers of government from the Company to the Crown. In the year 1787, a conflict of parties arose in the republic of Holland; the French and the English Governments espoused opposite sides, and there was every prospect of a rupture between them. The interference of France in the politics of India, had been for half a century the great object of dread to the Court of Directors, and under the apprehension
that they might have again to encounter it, they now solicited the Ministry to augment the European force in India, and four regiments were immediately raised for their service. Happily, the peace with France was not interrupted, but, as soon as the storm had blown over, the Court of Directors, anxious to save the cost of the regiments, declared that they were no longer necessary. Lord Cornwallis had earnestly recommended the augmentation of the European force in India, to give greater security to our position, and the Board of Control therefore determined that the regiments should be sent out. The Court of Directors, however, refused to allow them to embark in their ships, and as the contest, which thus arose between the India House and the Ministry, involved the great question of the substantial powers of government, Mr. Pitt referred the question to the decision of Parliament.
On the 25th of February, 1788, Mr. Pitt introduced a Bill to declare the meaning of the Act of 1784, and affirmed that “there was no step which could have been taken by the Court of Directors before the passing of that Bill, touching the military and political concerns of India, and the collection, management, and application of the revenues, which the Board of Control had not a right to take by the provisions of that Bill.” He stated, moreover, that in proposing his Bill of 1784 it was his intention thus to transfer the whole powers of government to the Crown. The organs of the Court of Directors in the House stated that they never would have supported that measure, if they had supposed such to have been its intent; and they discovered, when too late, that in voting for Mr. Pitt’s Bill they had committed an act of suicide. An objection was raised to the despatch of the regiments on the constitutional doctrine that no troops could belong to the King for which Parliament had not voted the money. Mr. Pitt thereupon stated his conviction that the army in India ought to be on one establishment, and to belong to the King, and that it was not
without an eye to such an arrangement that he had brought forward the present motion. But, notwithstanding the boundless influence which he enjoyed in the House, the members were alarmed at the immense power which he attempted to grasp. Many of his staunch supporters deserted him, and the Opposition were very sanguine in their hopes of being able to overthrow the Ministry on this occasion. There were four tempestuous debates on the question, one of which was prolonged to eight o’clock in the morning. Mr. Pitt had encountered no such opposition in the present Parliament, and to prevent being beaten in the successive stages of the Bill, was under the necessity of making great concessions, and adding several conciliatory clauses to it. The Declaratory Act of 1788 rivetted on the East India Company the fetters which had been forged by the Act of 1784.
The period for which the exclusive privileges had been granted to the East India Company expired in 1793, and on the 23rd of April, the Court of Directors presented a petition to Parliament for the renewal of them. But new commercial and manufacturing interests had been springing up in England with great vigour since the last concession, and petitions poured into the House from Liverpool, Glasgow, Manchester, Bristol, and other seats of industry and enterprise, protesting against the continuance of a monopoly in so large a trade, and the exclusion of the country in general from any share in it. The Court of Directors appointed a Committee to draw up a reply to the petitioners, and to demonstrate that it was essential to the national interests that the East India Company should continue to be the sole agent for managing the commerce and government of India. The Ministry found the existing state of things, more especially since the Declaratory Act, exceedingly convenient to themselves, and resolved to oppose all innovation. Fortunately for the Company, Lord Cornwallis, notwithstanding the Mysore war, had placed the finances of India in a more flourishing condition than they had ever been in before;
and, it may be said, than they have ever been in since. Mr. Dundee was thus enabled to ask the House, with an air of triumph, whether they were prepared to stop the tide of this prosperity, for a mere theory.
The arguments which he adduced for continuing the power and privileges of the East
India Company were, that to throw the trade open to all England would retard the payment of the Company’s debts; that it would check the growing commerce of India, and that it would inevitably lead to colonization and ensure the loss of the country to England. He objected to the dissolution of the Company, because the patronage of India, added to the other sources of influence in the Crown, would destroy the balance of the Constitution. These arguments, solemnly propounded by the Ministers, at a period when free trade was considered the direct road to ruin, were received with blind confidence by the House, and the privileges of the Company were renewed, with little modification, for a period of twenty years. To meet the clamours of the merchants and manufacturers of England, the Company was directed to allot 3,000 tons a year for private trade, but as the privilege was hampered with the heavy charges and delays of their commercial system, it was little prized, and seldom used. An effort was made by Mr. Wilberforce, one of the ablest and most enlightened members of the House, to obtain permission for missionaries and schoolmasters to proceed to India, and give voluntary instruction to the people, but he was vehemently opposed by the old Indians in the Court of Directors, who had imbibed the fantastic notion that the diffusion of knowledge would be fatal to British rule in India, and that the presence of missionaries would be followed by rebellion; and the House was persuaded by Mr. Dundas to reject the proposal.
The Charter, as it is called, of 1793, may be regarded as a faithful reflection of the narrow views of the age, which, considered that the introduction of
free trade and Europeans, of missionaries and schoolmasters, into India, would sap the foundation of British authority. The experience of nearly three-quarters of a century has dispelled this hallucination. Since the extinction of the Company’s monopoly, the trade, instead of being diminished, has increased twenty fold. The free admission of Europeans into India has not endangered the dominion of England; on the contrary, during the great mutiny of 1857, India was nearly lost for want of Europeans. The patronage of India has been trebled in value, and the Company has been abolished, yet, owing to the happy discovery of the principle of competitive appointments, the power of the Crown has not been increased, and the independence of Parliament has not diminished. Christian missionaries have been admitted into India and placed on the same footing as the Hindoo priest and the Mohamedan mollah, and allowed to offer instruction to the natives; and, the education of the people is now considered as much a duty of the state as the maintenance of the police; – yet the feeling of allegiance to the Crown of England has not been impaired.
This collection transcribed by Chris Gage