Page 215

Chapter 24 – Lord Minto’s Administration, 1807–1810

Lord Minto’s administration, 1807

Lord Minto, who was appointed Governor-General in 1806, was a well-trained politician, and had been engaged for many years in the management of public affairs. He was one of the managers appointed by the House of Commons to conduct the impeachment of Warren Hastings; and the prosecution of Sir Elijah Impey was especially committed to his charge. The interest he had taken in India pointed him out to his Whig colleagues when they came into power, as the fittest member of their body for the post of President of the Board of Control, and the twelve months he passed at the head of that office gave him an enlarged comprehension of Indian questions. He was an accomplished scholar, distinguished above his predecessors by his urbanity, a statesman of clear perceptions and sound judgment, mild and moderate in his views, yet without any deficiency of firmness. He was accepted by the Court of Directors as their Governor-General on the understanding that he should eschew the policy of Lord Wellesley, which was still the great object of terror in Leadenhall-street, and tread in the footsteps of Lord Cornwallis. After his arrival in Calcutta he facetiously observed that when taking leave of

Page 216

the Chairman and his deputy at the India House and asking their final instructions, there seemed to be only two points on which they felt any anxiety – the importance of adhering most scrupulously to the policy of non-interference, and of controlling the consumption of penknives, which appeared by the latest indent to be growing extravagant. On reaching Madras he found himself called upon, as his first act of government, to determine the fate of the Vellore mutineers. Seventeen of the ringleaders had been executed by sentence of court-martial, but six hundred yet awaited their doom. Great difficulty had been felt in obtaining evidence of individual guilt. The excitement and animosity created by the mutiny had, moreover, subsided; the confidence of the army had been restored, and the officers ceased to sleep with pistols under their pillows. Lord William Bentinck advised the adoption of a mild course; the Commander-in-chief advocated a severe example. The Supreme Government, to whom the matter was referred, ordered the whole party to be transported beyond sea, which, to Hindoos, would have been a penalty worse than death. Lord Minto adopted the more generous and lenient counsel of Lord William Bentinck, and ordered that they should be dismissed the service, and declared incapable of ever re-entering it.

Bundelkund – Anarchy of the province, 1807–1812

On his arrival in Calcutta, the early attention of Lord Minto was drawn to the state of anarchy into which the feeble policy of his predecessor had plunged the province of Bundelkund. By the treaty of Bassein the Peshwa had ceded to the Company for the support of the subsidiary force districts in the southern Mahratta country and near Surat, yielding twenty-six lacs of rupees a-year. A twelvemonth after they were exchanged for districts in Bundelkund, and the transfer was considered mutually beneficial. The lands in the Deccan were isolated from the Company’s dominions, and the defence and management of them would have proved both troublesome and expensive, while they abutted on the Peshwa’s territories. The

Page 217

districts in Bundelkund were more handy for the British Government, while the Peshwa’s authority in them was nominal, and they yielded him no revenue. I. The exchange, which received the high sanction of General Wellesley, was effected in a supplementary treaty of December, 1803. The province, however, was a prey to anarchy. It was overrun with innumerable military adventurers, who gained a subsistence by plunder, and who were necessarily opposed to any form of settled government. A hundred and fifty castles were held by as many chieftains, and they were incessantly at feud with each other. The inhabitants, a bold and independent race, were disgusted with the stringency of our judicial and fiscal system, and deserted their villages, and too often joined the banditti. Two forts, Calinger and Ajygur, universally considered impregnable, were held by chiefs who owed all their power to rapine and violence, and headed the opposition to the British authorities. Lord Lake assured the Government in Calcutta that the peace of the province could never be maintained without obtaining possession of these fortresses, which might be effected by a vigorous effort in a single campaign; but Sir George Barlow replied that “a certain extent of dominion, local power, and revenue, would be cheaply sacrificed for tranquillity and security within a more contracted circle.” The sacrifice was made, but the tranquillity and security were more distant than ever. The chiefs who had seized the forts were left in possession of them, and sunnuds, or deeds, were granted to them and to some of the most notorious leaders of the freebooters, recognizing their right to the lands they had usurped, upon a vague promise of allegiance. Due respect was likewise paid to the principle of non-interference, by allowing them to decide their disputes by the sword, and this fair province, endowed with the richest gifts of nature, was turned into a desert.

Lord Minto’s vigorous policy, 1807

Within five weeks after Lord Minto had assumed the Government, he adopted the resolution

Page 218

that “it was essential, not only to the preservation of political influence over the chiefs of Bundelkund, but to the dignity and reputation of the British Government to interfere for the suppression of intestine disorder.” The whole policy of the state was at once changed, and it was announced throughout the province that Government was determined to enforce obedience to its authority. The numerous rajas, who had hitherto treated with contempt the maudlin advice of the commissioner, hastened to make their submission when they found the Governor-General in earnest, and agreed at once to refer their disputes to the decision of British officers. But it was found impossible to extirpate the banditti which infested the country, while they could obtain shelter in the great fortresses; a military force was, therefore, sent to reduce them, and Ajygur was surrendered after a breach had been made in the walls. But one military adventurer, Gopal Sing, by his astonishing skill, activity, and resolution, aided by the natural advantages of a country filled with fastnesses, contrived to evade the British troops in a series of desultory and harassing movements, for a period of four years. He offered his submission at length, on condition of receiving a full pardon and a provision for his family, and the Government, weary of a conflict which appeared to be interminable, granted him a jageer of eighteen villages. The last fortress to submit was the renowned Calinger, which had baffled the efforts of Mahmood of Ghizni, eight centuries before. It was likewise in the siege of this fort that Shere Shah was killed, in 1545, and the Peshwa’s representative, Ali Bahadoor, had recently besieged it in vain for two years. It was surrendered after an arduous siege, in which the British force was, on one occasion, repulsed with the loss of 150 in killed and wounded. The peace and happiness of Bundelkund were restored, to be soon, alas, destroyed again by one of the Company’s pucka, or unscrupulous collectors, who rack-rented the province, and blighted its prosperity as effectively as the freebooters had done before him.

Page 219

Career of Runjeet Sing, 1780–1808

The difficulty of maintaining the practice of non-intervention was still more clearly demonstrated before Lord Minto had been a twelvemonth in office, in reference to the proceedings of Runjeet Sing, whose career now claims attention. On the retirement of the Abdalee from India after the battle of Paniput, the affairs of the Punjab fell into confusion, and the half military half religious community of the Sikhs, who had been oppressed by all the successive rulers of the country, had an opportunity of gradually enlarging and consolidating their power. This country, lying in the track of every invader, from Alexander the Great to Ahmed Shah Abdalee, and which had been subject to greater vicissitudes and a more frequent change of masters than any other Indian province, was now in the hands of the Sikhs. Their commonwealth was divided into fraternities, termed misils, the chief of each of which was the leader in war, and the arbiter in time of peace. Of these clans, twelve were deemed the foremost in rank. Churut Sing, the head of one of the least considerable, had commenced a course of encroachments on his neighbours, which was carried on by his son, Maha Sing. He died in 1792, leaving an only son, Runjeet Sing, who at the early age of seventeen entered upon that career of ambition and aggrandisement, which, by a rare combination of cunning and audacity, resulted in the establishment of a power as great as that of Sevajee or Hyder. He acquired great credit for his prowess when, in 1799, Zemaun Shah entered the Punjab, which was still considered as an appendage of the crown of Cabul. Runjeet Sing had the discretion to aid him in moving his guns across the Jhelum, and was rewarded by the important grant of the town of Lahore, which was the capital of the country even before the Mohamedans crossed the Indus, and had always been associated with the supreme authority in the province. From 1803 to 1806, Runjeet Sing was diligently employed in extending his authority over the different fraternities and chiefs in the Punjab. In 1806, the

Page 220

course of his conquests brought him down to the banks of the Sutlege, and he cast a wishful eye on the plains beyond it.

The Sikh States of Sirhind, 1807

Between the Sutlege and the Jumna lay the province of Sirhind, occupied by about twenty independent Sikh principalities, of greater or less extent, the most considerable of which was Putteeala, with a revenue of about twenty lees of rupees a-year, and a population of a million and a quarter. The chiefs had been obliged to bend to the authority of Sindia, which General Perron had extended to the vicinity of the Sutlege, but two of them, Kythul and Jheend, had rendered important services to Lord Lake in the campaigns of 1803 and 1805, and were recompensed with large grants of land. As the British power had now superseded that of the Mahrattas in this region, these petty princes offered their submission and fealty to it, and, although there were no mutual engagements in writing, considered themselves under the suzerainty of the Company, and entitled to their protection. The ambition of Runjeet Sing, which had as yet received no check, led him to contemplate the annexation of these states, and the extension of his dominions to the banks of the Jumna. He proceeded with his usual caution. A sharp dispute had arisen between the chiefs of Putteeala and Naba, and the raja of Naba invoked the interposition of Runjeet Sing, who crossed the Sutlege with a large body of horse, and dictated terms of reconciliation. No notice was taken of this encroachment by the Resident at Delhi, and Runjeet Sing flattered himself that he had no opposition to apprehend from the Company’s officers. In 1807, the raja of Putteeala and his wife were again at variance regarding a settlement for her son; Runjeet Sing was called in, and crossed the Sutlege a second time. He decreed an allowance of 50,000 rupees a-year to the boy, and received as a token of gratitude a valuable diamond necklace, and, what he valued still more, a celebrated brass gun. On his way home, he levied contributions on some of the petty chiefs, seized their forts and lands, and carried off all their cannon to augment his own artillery, which

Page 221

was at this time the great object of his desire. These successive inroads filled the Sikh chiefs of Sirhind with alarm, and a formal deputation proceeded to Delhi, in March, 1808, to implore the protection of the British Government, whose vassals, they said, they had always considered themselves since the extinction of Sindia’s power; but the encouragement they received was not so decisive as they expected. Runjeet Sing, anxious to discover the views of the British Government in reference to this appeal, addressed a letter to the Governor-General, stating his wish to remain on friendly terms with the Company, but adding, “the country on this side the Jumna, excepting the stations occupied by the English, is subject to my authority; let it remain so.” This bold demand of the province of Sirhind by Runjeet Sing, as a matter of right, brought directly before Lord Minto, the important question whether, in obedience to the non-interference policy of the Court of Directors, an energetic and aspiring chief, who had, in the course of ten years, erected a large kingdom upon the ruin of a dozen princes, should be allowed to plant his army, composed of the finest soldiery in India, within a few miles of our own frontier. The solution of this point could not brook delay; there was no time for consulting the Court, and Lord Minto boldly determined to take on himself the responsibility of extending British protection to the Sikh chiefs, and shutting up Runjeet Sing in the Punjab.

Foreign Alliances, 1808

It had been the policy of the Court of Directors for many years to discourage all alliances with the princes of India, but, at this juncture, they were driven by the irresistible current of circumstances to seek alliances beyond its frontier, for the protection of their interests. The treaty of Tilsit, concluded between the emperor of Russia and Napoleon, was supposed to include certain secret articles which had reference to extensive schemes of conquest in the east. More especially was it believed to provide facilities for the gratification of Napoleon’s views on the British power in India. To anticipate these designs, it was resolved to block up his path

Page 222

to India by endeavouring to contract defensive alliances with the princes whose territories lay on the route, and to dispatch missions to Persia, Afghanistan, and Lahore. Mr. Charles Metcalfe, a young civilian, who had been trained up in the school of Lord Wellesley, and, indeed, under his own eye, was selected for the Punjab embassy.

Embassy to Runjeet Sing, 1808

The task assigned him was one of no ordinary difficulty: on the one hand, he was to frustrate Runjeet Sing’s favourite project of extending his dominion across the Sutlege, on the other, to conciliate his co-operation in opposing the approach of a French army from the west. Runjeet Sing received the mission with coldness and suspicion. His personal bearing towards the envoy was discourteous, all intercourse between the camps was interdicted, supplies were refused, and the bankers were incited to refuse to cash his bills, while his messengers were waylaid and his letters opened. But he was resolved to allow no hostile conduct on the part of Runjeet Sing to damp his ardour, or turn him aside from his object. When at length he had obtained an opportunity of explaining the object of his mission, the Sikh cabinet intimated that the alliance appeared to be one in which the British rather than the Punjab Government was interested, and that as it was intended to benefit the Company, it ought also-to include some advantage for the Punjab. They did not object to the proposed treaty, but it must recognise the sovereignty of Runjeet Sing over all the Sikh states on both sides the Sutlege. Mr. Metcalfe replied that he had no instructions to make this concession; but, while the negotiation was in progress, Runjeet Sing broke up his encampment at Kusoor, and crossed the Sutlege a third time, and for three months swept through the districts of Sirhind, plundering the chiefs, and compelling them, with the exception only of Putteeala and Thanesur, to acknowledge his authority. The British mission was dragged in his train, but Mr. Metcalfe felt that his presence seemed to give countenance to these aggressions, as Runjeet Sing intended it should, and after proceeding several

Page 223

stages, refused to advance farther, and eventually encamped at Amritsar, to await the return of the Lahore ruler.

Runjeet ordered to retire, 1808

Lord Minto, finding Runjeet Sing still bent on the subjugation of Sirhind, determined to lose no further time in arresting his progress, if necessary, by force of arms. By this time, moreover, Napoleon was entangled in the affairs of Spain, and the idea of an invasion of India, if it had ever ripened into a design, was abandoned. All anxiety for these foreign alliances was removed, and Lord Minto, having no longer anything to ask of Runjeet Sing, was enabled to assume a higher and more authoritative tone. The Commander-in-chief, then in the north-west, was directed to hold an army in readiness to march down to the Sutlege, and a letter was addressed to Runjeet Sing, telling him in firm and dignified language that by the issue of the war with the Mahrattas, the Company had succeeded to the power and the rights they had exercised in the north of Hindostan. The Sikh states of Sirhind were now, therefore, under the protection of the British Government, and would be maintained in all their integrity; the Maharaja must consequently restore all the districts of which he had taken possession during his late incursion, and confine his military operations in future to the right bank of the Sutlege. Runjeet Sing, on the termination of his expedition to Sirhind, hastened back to Amritsar to exchange the toils of the camp for the enjoyments of the harem. Like Hyder Ali, he was the slave of sensual indulgence when his mind was not absorbed in the excitement of war. On the evening of his arrival, Mr. Metcalfe waited on him to present the letter of the Governor-General, but he exclaimed that “the evening was to be devoted to mirth and pleasure,” and called for the dancing girls, and then for the strong potations to which he was accustomed, and before midnight was totally incapacitated for business. The communication from Calcutta remained for several days without acknowledgment, and, as it afterwards appeared, even without perusal. On the 12th December, Mr. Metcalfe transmitted

Page 224

him a note, repeating the statements contained in the Governor-General’s letter, pressing the demands of Government on his attention, and pointing out the danger of refusing to accede to them, stating, however, that the British Government was anxious to maintain the most amicable relations with him. This letter, which seems to have given him the first monition of the hazard he was incurring of a serious collision with British power, staggered his mind, and brought him to reflection. Other perils had also beset him. At Amritsar, his favourite Mohamedan mistress had caused a Hindoo to be circumcised. That holy city, the Benares of the Punjab, was thrown into a state of religious frenzy; all the shops were closed, and the priests threatened to excommunicate any who should venture to open them. Runjeet Sing, terrified by this storm of fanaticism, escaped to Lahore, but was pursued by the devotees and brahmins, who sat dhurna at his palace gate. This practice consisted in sitting night and day, fasting and praying, at the gate of the victim, till the demand was granted. If persisted in, it might involve the death of a brahmin, and it was therefore generally successful. So effective is this mode of intimidation, that it has been found necessary to prohibit it, under severe penalties by a special Regulation.

Mr. Metcalfe’s firmness, 1809

Runjeet Sing contrived to pacify the priesthood and laity of Amritsar, but continued from day to day to evade any explanation with Mr. Metcalfe, who peremptorily demanded an audience on the 22nd December, and announced to him that a British force was on the point of advancing to the Sutlege, which would sweep his garrisons from Sirhind. He bore the communication for some moments with apparent composure, but unable, at length, to control his feelings any longer, rushed out of the room, mounted his horse, and galloped about the courtyard for some time with frantic vehemence, followed by his body guard, while his ministers continued the conference with Mr. Metcalfe. It would be tedious to detail the various interviews which took place between them and Mr. Metcalfe for two months, or the constant

Page 225

attempts which were made to overbear or to overreach him, or the endless postponements and delays of this oriental court. Mr. Metcalfe was proof against all cajolery, and continued with invincible firmness to insist on the restoration of all the conquests which Runjeet Sing had made on his late incursion. It was a bitter pill for him to swallow, but he was constrained in the end to submit. In all the range of British Indian history there are few incidents to be found more remarkable than the arrest of this young and haughty prince, in the full career of ambition and victory, by the mandate of a youth of twenty-four. Runjeet’s lingering reluctance to relinquish his conquests was effectually removed by the arrival of Colonel Ochterlony with a British army on the banks of the Sutlege, and the issue of a proclamation declaring the states lying between that river and the Jumna under British protection.

Treaty with Runjeet, 1809

On the 25th April, 1809, a treaty was concluded at Amritsar to “establish perpetual amity between the British Government and the State of Lahore.” It provided that the British Government should have no concern with the territories and subjects of the raja north of the Sutlege; and that the raja should not commit any encroachments, or suffer any to be committed on the possessions or rights of the chiefs under British protection south of it. The treaty, which consists of only fifteen lines, is one of the shortest on our records, and is, perhaps, the only one which was never infringed. Runjeet Sing subsequently became the most formidable native power in India, and organised an army under European officers, which, after his decease, shook the British empire to its foundation, but for thirty years, up to the period of his death, he maintained the “perpetual amity” with scrupulous fidelity. Colonel Ochterlony, on withdrawing the army from the province left a garrison in Loodiana, and that fort became our frontier station in the north-west; and thus the British standard, which Lord Wellesley had planted on the Jumna, was six years after erected by Lord Minto on the banks of the Sutlege.

Page 226

Embassy to Cabul 1808

The embassy sent to Cabul to form a defensive alliance against a French invasion, was fitted out on a scale of magnificence intended to impress the Afghans with an idea of the power and majesty of the Company, and it was entrusted to Mr. Mount Stuart Elphinstone, one of the Wellesley school of Indian statesmen. The ruler of Afghanistan, Shah Soojah, the brother of Zemaun Shah, held his court at Peshawar, which the envoy reached on the 5th March, 1809. His reception was marked with the greatest courtesy, but the ministers did not fail to observe that the object of the mission was to promote the interests of the Company rather than those of Afghanistan. They had nothing to dread from the arrival of the French, and desired to know what benefit the Governor-General intended to bestow on them for preventing the passage of a French army through their passes; they were anxious, moreover, to ascertain what arguments or allurements the French had to offer, before they committed themselves. It appears unaccountable that the members of the Supreme Council in Calcutta, thoroughly acquainted as they were with the oriental character, should have fitted out a costly and pompous embassy to a native court to solicit an alliance, without proposing any reciprocal benefit. But, while the negotiations were pending, the expedition which Shah Soojah had imprudently sent to Cashmere to regain possession of that province, was entirely defeated. His brother Mahmood took advantage of this disaster to seize Cabul and Candahar, and to threaten Peshawar. Shah Soojah, whose army was annihilated, and whose treasury was empty, earnestly solicited pecuniary aid from the British Government, and Mr. Elphinstone strongly recommended a grant of ten lacs of rupees. As all Afghan soldiers are mercenaries, this sum would have brought a sufficient number of adherents to his standard to restore and consolidate his power. But the dread of a French invasion had died out, and it was no longer deemed important to conciliate the ruler who held the “gate of India,” as Cabul was then deemed. The request was refused, and the embassy recalled. It is no

Page 227

improbable conclusion that if this aid of ten lacs of rupees had been granted to Shah Soojah in this emergency, and he had thereby been enabled to maintain himself in Afghanistan, the Company would have been spared the fifteen hundred lacs of rupees which were wasted, thirty years after, in the abortive attempt to restore him permanently to his throne, and enable him to keep the “gate” shut against the Russians, who were supposed to be knocking at it. Shah Soojah, however, gave his consent to a treaty stipulating that any attempt of the French to advance through Afghanistan should be opposed, at the cost of the Company’s treasury; but when it arrived with the ratification of the Governor-General on the 9th June, 1810, there was neither king nor ambassador to receive it. Shah Soojah was totally defeated by his rival, and fled across the Indus, and Mr. Elphinstone was returning to Hindostan; and of this expensive embassy there remained no other result but the noble history of it compiled by the envoy, which gave Europe the first authentic description of the region rendered memorable by the achievements of Alexander the Great.

Affairs of Persia, 1808

The third embassy to counteract the supposed projects of Napoleon was sent to the court of Persia. At the commencement of 1806, the king of Persia wantonly involved himself in a war with Russia, which proved highly disastrous, and ended in depriving him of several of his valuable provinces. In his exigency he applied to the government of Calcutta, and, on the strength of the treaty concluded by Colonel Malcolm in 1800, demanded aid against the encroachments of Russia.

French embassy, 1807

But England was in alliance with the emperor, and the assistance was necessarily refused, on which the king made application to Napoleon, who eagerly embraced the proposal, and sent General Gardanne as his envoy to Teheran, which he reached in December, 1807, with a large military suite. He was also accompanied by a body of engineer and artillery officers, some of whom were dispersed over the country, to investigate its resources

Page 228

and to make professional surveys, while others were employed in drilling the Persian levies, and introducing the system of European tactics and discipline. A treaty was speedily concluded, which provided that the Emperor should regain from Russia, and restore to Persia, Georgia and other frontier provinces which had been alienated; that any French army marching through Persia towards India should be supplied with provisions and joined by a Persian force; that the island of Karrack should be ceded to France; and that, if the emperor desired it, all Englishmen should be excluded from the king’s dominions. The English Ministry, who considered the French embassy the advanced guard of a French army, determined to counteract these hostile designs, and to plant an ambassador at Teheran as the representative of the Crown, the Company, however, bearing all the expense of the mission. Sir Arthur Wellesley and Lord Minto, before he left England, earnestly recommended Colonel Malcolm for this duty, for which he was pre-eminently qualified by his skill in oriental diplomacy, his knowledge of the Asiatic character, and, more especially, by the popularity he had formerly acquired at the Persian court. But the Court of Directors could not forget the lavish expenditure of his mission in 1800, amounting to seventeen lacs of rupees, and there were little minds among them who could not forgive his being a disciple of Lord Wellesley.

Sir Harford Jones’s mission to Persia, 1807

Mr. Harford Jones, who had resided forty years at Bushire, first as a merchant, and then as the British consul, was selected for the post, created a baronet, and directed to proceed to Persia by way of Petersburg, where he was to concert measures of co-operation with the emperor of Russia. Meanwhile, came the defeat of the Russians at Friedland, the peace of Tilsit, and the alliance of the two emperors. Sir Harford was therefore directed to proceed direct to Bombay, where he arrived in April, 1808.

Col. Malcolm’s mission and its failure, 1808

This appointment was made by the Ministry of which Lord Minto was a member, and while he

Page 229

himself presided at the Board of Control. He was not ignorant that after the despatch of a French minister by the emperor Napoleon, the Cabinet considered it necessary, that the British minister should appear at the Persian court as the representative of the Crown, and not of the Company. But, on his arrival in Calcutta, Lord Minto considered that “the separation which there was reason to apprehend between Great Britain and Russia” released him from the restrictions thus imposed on him by the policy which the Cabinet had adopted regarding the Persian mission. He resolved therefore to despatch Colonel Malcolm to the court of Persia to represent the Indian Government, and directed Sir Harford Jones to remain at Bombay till the result of the new mission could be known. On landing in Persia, Colonel Malcolm determined to approach the throne “with the language, not of supplication, but of temperate remonstrance and offended friendship.” Forgetting that the influence of the French at Teheran was supreme, and that they were feeding the king with hopes of deliverance from the grasp of Russia, presuming, also, on the ascendency he had acquired in his former mission, Colonel Malcolm assumed a dictatorial tone in his communications with the court. He despatched one of his assistants to the capital, but on his arrival at Shiraz he was forbidden to advance farther, and Colonel Malcolm was directed to place himself in communication with the viceroy of the province, the king’s son. Considering the authority then exercised by the French embassy at the Persian court, the king might have been expected to order the English minister peremptorily to quit his dominions, rather than permit him to enter into negotiations with his son. But Colonel Malcolm, instead of making any allowance for the king’s position, or waiting for a turn in the tide of events, took umbrage at this message, precipitately abandoned the mission, and embarked with his suite for Calcutta. The intelligence of this disappointment reached Lord Minto on the 12th August, and he immediately wrote to Sir Harford Jones, removing the interdict on his movements, and

Page 230

leaving him at liberty to prosecute the mission which the Crown had entrusted to him.

Military expedition to Persia, August, 1808

Ten days after the despatch of this letter, Colonel Malcolm landed in Calcutta, breathing vengeance against the Persian court for the fancied indignity inflicted on him. He readily persuaded Lord Minto and the Council that the only effectual mode of defeating the influence, or, as he called it, the intrigue, of the French at Teheran, was to make a military demonstration. Arrangements were immediately made for the despatch of a large force under the direction of Colonel Malcolm, to the Persian coast to occupy Karrack, an island in the Persian Gulf, thirty-three miles from the port of Bushire, which, in the glowing anticipations of Colonel Malcolm, was to become the emporium of commerce – though it contained no port – the seat of political negotiations, and the pivot from which we were to overawe Persia, Arabia, and Turkey. At the same time, a second letter was sent to Sir Harford Jones, dated seventeen days after the first, forbidding him to quit Bombay, but he had embarked for Persia two days before it arrived. Lord Minto then despatched a third letter to him in Persia, announcing the military expedition, and commanding him to return forthwith to India. This communication did not, however, reach him before he had commenced negotiations with the Persian ministers at Shiraz, and their minds were filled with such indignation and alarm, on learning its contents, that Sir Harford deemed it necessary to appease them by assuming, as the representative of the Crown, an authority independent of the Governor-General, and giving them the solemn pledge that no aggression whatever should be committed on the Persian territories, as long as the king manifested a disposition to cultivate friendly relations with England. He then prosecuted his journey to the capital which he reached in February, 1809. As soon as the report of these transactions reached Calcutta, Lord Minto addressed a letter to the king of Persia, disavowing the authority and

Page 231

the proceedings of Sir Harford; and he likewise directed the envoy peremptorily to leave the country, threatening to dishonour his bills if he disobeyed the order. But in the meantime the object of the mission had been successfully accomplished. The union of interests which had been established between Russia and France deprived the Persian monarch of all hope of any aid from Napoleon for the recovery of the provinces he had lost.

Sir Harford Jones’s treaty, 1810

The proposals of the British minister were readily accepted; the French embassy was dismissed, the Persian envoy at Paris was recalled, and a Persian ambassador was sent to London in company with Mr. Morier. A preliminary treaty was concluded, the salient points of which were that any treaty made with other European powers should be considered as void, that no force commanded by Europeans should be permitted to march through Persia towards India, and that if any European army invaded the Persian territory, the British Government should afford the aid of a military force, or, in lieu of it, a subsidy, which, after long discussions, was eventually fixed at twelve lacs of rupees a-year. Lord Minto felt that Sir Harford had authentic credentials for his mission, and that the national faith was pledged by his engagements; the treaty was accordingly ratified by the Government of India. The unwise project of a military expedition adopted under the influence of Colonel Malcolm’s irritated feelings, and which, if it had been carried out, would have entailed an intolerable expenditure, and wounded the pride of the king and his people, was discreetly abandoned. The Persian mission was thus brought to a conclusion, and Colonel Malcolm returned to Madras.

Second mission of Colonel Malcolm, 1809

Lord Minto, however, felt that the rank and estimation of the Government of India had been compromised, within the sphere of its influence, by the mission of Sir Harford Jones from the Crown, and that it was necessary to restore it to the eminence it had previously enjoyed. He considered it among the first of

Page 232

his duties “to transmit to his successor the powers, prerogatives, and dignities of the Indian empire, in its relations with surrounding nations, as entire and unsullied as they were confided to his hands.” “Under this impression he entreated Colonel Malcolm “to go and lift the Company’s Government once more to its own height, and to the station that belonged to it.” Another embassy was fitted out in the most costly style to eclipse that of the Crown, with no other object than to establish the prestige of the East India Company in Asia, which the Crown was deemed to have impaired by taking the conduct of Persian diplomacy into its own hands. It was a most extraordinary mission for a most extraordinary purpose. Colonel Malcolm, whose genial humour and princely presents had made a very agreeable impression on the court eight years before, was welcomed with enthusiasm as he passed through the country to the royal presence. But in that presence was the ambassador of the Crown, whom the Government of India had thought fit to treat with the greatest contumely, disavowing his authority, dishonouring his bills, and sparing no pains to “blacken his face in the eyes of the Persian court.” If he manifested any personal feeling at the unworthy treatment he had received, there are few who will not be prepared to condone it; and no one with a touch of loyal sentiment will censure him for the effort he made, at this difficult crisis, to uphold the dignity of the sovereign he was deputed to represent, against the pretensions of one who was only the delegate of an inferior authority, and who had no business at all at Teheran. There was every prospect of an unseemly and dangerous collision. The Persian courtiers were by no means distressed to find two rival ambassadors of the same nation contending for their favours, and they were preparing to play off the one against the other, in the hope of a golden shower of presents. But the good sense of Sir Harford and Colonel Malcolm gradually smoothed down all asperities, and it, was not long before they agreed to unite their efforts to baffle the intrigues and the cupidity of the court. Colonel

Page 233

Malcolm was received with open arms by the king, who considered him the first of Englishmen. “What induced you,” said he at the first interview, “to hasten away from Shiraz, without seeing my son?” “How could I,” replied the Colonel, with his ever ready tact, “after having been warmed with the sunshine of your majesty’s favour, be satisfied with the mere reflection of that refulgence in the person of your son?” “Mahsalla!” exclaimed the monarch, “Malcolm sahib is himself again.” But this agreeable communion was speedily interrupted by despatches from England, announcing the determination of the Ministry to supersede both Sir Harford Jones and Colonel Malcolm by an ambassador from England. Sir Gore Ouseley had acquired the confidence of Lord Wellesley by the great talents he exhibited when in a private station at the court of Lucknow, and upon his recommendation was appointed to Teheran as the representative of the king of England. The relations with the Persian court have from that period been retained by the ministers of the Crown in their own hands – a measure, which if judged by its general results, has not been successful, except, perhaps, when they have selected officers from the Indian service for the post. To manifest his esteem for Colonel Malcolm, the king instituted a new order of knighthood, that of the Lion and the Sun, and bestowed the first decoration on him. His mission, which cost twenty-two lacs of rupees, was beneficial only in developing the talents of the able assistants who accompanied him, Pottinger, Ellis, Briggs, Lindsay, and Macdonald, all of whom rose to distinction. The expenses of Sir Harford Jones were also imposed on the Company’s treasury, and the two embassies did not cost them less than thirty-eight lacs.

Ameer Khan’s attack on Nagpore, 1809

To return to events in India. It has been already - noted that Lord Minto had felt it necessary to repudiate the policy of non-interference in the case of the Sikh chiefs of Sirhind, and to take them under the protection of the British Government against the encroachments of Runjeet Sing. Within four months of the signature

Page 234

of the treaty with that prince, another occasion arose to test the propriety of maintaining this principle. In 1809, the adventurer Ameer Khan had reached the zenith of his power. In the course of ten years he had gradually created a principality, which yielded a revenue of about fifteen lacs of rupees a-year. He was the recognised chief of the Patans, who had for several centuries played an important part in the revolutions of Hindostan, and his adherents were anxiously looking forward to the fulfilment of the prediction of a holy mendicant that he was destined to found a new Patan dynasty at Delhi. But he had not the genius of Sevajee, or Hyder, or Runjeet Sing, or indeed any aspirations beyond those of a predatory chief. His army was too great for his resources, and, having drained the chiefs of Rajpootana, he was obliged to seek for plunder in more remote provinces. He determined to select the raja of Nagpore for his victim, and a pretext was not long to seek. Holkar, for whom he professed to act during his insanity, had been despoiled, as he stated, of some valuable jewels twelve years before, when, on seeking refuge with the raja, he was thrown into confinement at the instigation of Sindia. These jewels were now claimed, but the raja treated the demand with the contempt it deserved. Ameer Khan was, however, resolved to enforce it, and poured down across the Nerbudda with an army of 40,000 horse and 24,000 Pindarees, and on his march to Nagpore sacked the town of Jubbulpore. The raja was only an ally of the Company, and not entitled to claim its protection, but Lord Minto did not hesitate to affirm that “there could be but one solution of the question, whether an interfering and ambitious Mussulman chief, at the head of a numerous army, irresistible by any power except that of the Company, should be permitted to establish his authority on the ruins of the raja’s dominions, over territories contiguous to those of the Nizam – likewise a Mohamedan – with whom projects might be formed ... inimical to our interests.” The raja had not so much as solicited our aid, though he was happy to welcome it when he found that he was not expected to pay

Page 235

for it, but two armies were ordered into the field for the defence of his territories, from which Ameer Khan was required to withdraw. In the name of Holkar he protested against the injustice of this interference, and appealed to the treaty concluded by Sir George Barlow, which bound the British Government not to interfere in his affairs. The argument might be unanswerable, but it no longer carried any weight.

Defeat of Ameer Khan, 1809

But while the British troops were on their march, Sadik Ali, the commander of the Nagpore army, repulsed Ameer Khan and obliged him to retreat to Bhopal. There he recruited his force, and re-assembled the Pindarees, whom he had been obliged to dismiss during the rains, and advanced into the Nagpore territories, but was a second time defeated by the troops of the raja, a considerable body of whom is said to have consisted of Sikhs. He returned a third time to the conflict, and blockaded the Nagpore army in Chouragur, while his Pindarees spread desolation through the surrounding districts. But the British divisions were now closing upon him, and, under the pretence of an earnest request for his services by Toolsee bye, the regent of the Holkar state, he withdrew with his army to Indore. Colonel Close took possession of his capital and his territories, and the extinction of his power appeared inevitable, when the British troops were unexpectedly recalled. He was allowed to recover his strength, and Central India was left for seven years longer at his mercy, because Lord Minto was apprehensive that the further prosecution of hostilities, after Nagpore had been effectually protected from his aggressions, might lead to complications displeasing to the Court of Directors. But the tide was beginning to turn at the India House against this neutral policy.

New policy at the India House, 1811

In reviewing these transactions, the Court of Directors expressed their approbation of the conduct of Lord Minto, but veiled it under the sophism that “as it was a measure of defensive policy, it could not be deemed a violation of the law, or a disobedience of the orders prohibiting interference in the disputes of foreign states;” as if interference for

Page 236

the protection of Jeypore and Boondee did not equally come within the category of a “defensive policy.” The Court went further, and questioned the propriety of the moderation which Lord Minto had exhibited towards Ameer Khan. “We are not satisfied,” they said, “with the expediency of abstaining from disabling any power against whom we may have been compelled to take up arms from renewing his aggressions;” at the same time, they strongly advised the conclusion of a subsidiary treaty with the raja of Nagpore, though it would have involved the necessity of protecting him against all opponents, and extended the circle of those defensive alliances which had been reprobated six years before. But when this despatch reached Calcutta Lord Minto was in Java, and when he returned he found himself superseded in the Government.

Sir George Barlow at Madras, 1807–10

Sir George Barlow, who had been appointed to succeed Lord William Bentinck in the Government of Madras, proceeded to that Presidency on the arrival of Lord Minto. During the twenty months in which he filled the office of Governor-General he had disgusted society by his cold and repulsive manners, and the absence of all genial and generous feeling in the intercourse of life. He was never able to obtain that deference and respect, or to exercise that personal influence which is so important to the efficient administration of public affairs. The duties of retrenchment, at all times invidious, which devolved on him, were performed in the most ungracious manner. He manifested on all occasions a lofty sense of his official dignity, and exacted a stern and implicit obedience to his will. But that which was regarded in the case of Lord Wellesley as the natural absolutism of a great mind, was in Sir George Barlow resented as the vulgar despotism of power. The feeling of personal aversion which pervaded the community was heightened by a contempt of his abilities. At Madras, he became unpopular by isolating himself in a small circle of officials and confidants, and his administration has been described, and not unjustly, as a “season of unprecedented private misery, and unexampled peril and alarm.”

Page 237

Case of Mr. Sherson, 1808

The first occasion of offence arose from his unjust proceedings against Mr. Sherson, a civil ser want deservedly held in high estimation. He was superintendent of the stores of rice laid in by the Government of Madras against the periodical famines on that coast. A charge of fraud had been brought against him, which was under investigation when Sir George Barlow entered on the Government. His accounts were submitted to the scrutiny of the civil auditor and pronounced correct, but as they did not happen to tally with the native accounts kept in the office, the new Governor removed both the auditor and Mr. Sherson from their situations. A prosecution was likewise commenced against Mr. Sherson in the Supreme Court, which ended in his honourable acquittal. The Court of Directors condemned these proceedings without reserve, restored Mr. Sherson to the service, and compensated him for his loss by a donation of 70,000 rupees.

The Carnatic Commission, 1808

Sir George Barlow incurred still greater obloquy by his proceedings in reference to the Carnatic Commission, appointed by Act of Parliament to investigate the debts of the nabob, for which the Company became responsible when they took over the Carnatic. The claims on the nabob amounted to the gigantic sum of thirty crores of rupees, of which the validity of less than a tenth was eventually substantiated. But the bonds were considered negotiable securities, and many of them, though originally fraudulent, had been honestly purchased, and the whole community of Madras, not excepting the officers of Government, was deeply interested in the enquiry. To secure impartiality, the Commissioners were selected from the Bengal Civil Service, and they had just opened their court when Sir George Barlow took his seat at the Council board. They appointed one Reddy Rao, who had been an accountant in the finance office of the late nabob, as their confidential adviser. A bond which he held came up for examination; its validity was impeached by a native, named Papia, but the Commissioners pronounced it genuine, and resolved to prosecute Papia’s witnesses for

Page 238

perjury. He anticipated this movement by charging Reddy Rao before a magistrate with forgery, and he was committed for trial. The Commissioners appealed to the Governor for support, and he ordered the Advocate-General to defend the case. The legitimacy of such a proceeding cannot be controverted; but the mere appearance of a public officer, in his official capacity, in connection with the investigation of claims which Government was interested in disallowing, created a feeling of indignation and dismay among the creditors, European and native, inasmuch as it could scarcely fail to deter timid natives from coming forward to give evidence. This feeling was intensely aggravated when the Governor, in a spirit which was considered vindictive, dismissed the magistrate who had committed Reddy Rao, expelled from the country Mr. Parry, a merchant, who had manifested opposition to the Commissioners, and banished Mr. Roebuck, a civilian of long standing, for his share in the proceedings, to a remote post of inferior rank and emolument, where he died soon after. Three actions were brought in the Supreme Court in reference to this transaction; and Reddy Rao was convicted by the jury of forgery, but recommended to the favourable notice of the Crown by the judge of the Supreme Court, on the ground of his innocence. He received a pardon, as a matter of course, but before it could reach India he had terminated his existence by swallowing poison; and it was discovered after his death that the bond was spurious, and that he was deeply implicated in all the villainies of the Carnatic bonds.

The Madras Mutiny, 1809

These undignified proceedings affected the reputation and the strength of the Madras Government, but the mutiny of the European officers of the army which was to be attributed in a great measure to the same violent and arbitrary spirit, threatened its very existence. Thrice in the course of less than half a century had the Company’s Government been shaken to its foundation by the sedition of its European officers. The mutiny of 1765 was overcome by the undaunted firmness of Lord Clive. That of 1796 and

Page 239

’97 was fostered by the feebleness of Sir John Shore, and extinguished by the simple mandate of Lord Wellesley, who, seeing a number of malcontent commanders congregated at his first levee, peremptorily ordered them to rejoin their regiments within twenty-four hours. The glance of his very remarkable eye had, it was said, quenched the mutiny. In the present instance a feeling of dissatisfaction had been for some time fermenting in the Madras army, and not without cause. There was an invidious distinction between the pay of the European officers in Bengal and Madras, and all posts of command and dignity were monopolised by the officers of the royal army. This spirit of discontent was unhappily promoted rather than repressed by the demeanour of the Commander-in-chief. A seat in council, with an additional allowance, had always been attached to the office, but on the dismissal of Sir John Cradock after the Vellore mutiny, the Court of Directors had refused it to his successor, on some technical ground, and filled up the vacancy with a civilian. The General considered this a personal grievance and affront, and he did not care to conceal the exasperation of his feelings from the officers of the army, who were the more disposed to sympathise with him as they were thereby deprived of a representative of their interests at the Council board.

Abolition of the tent contract, 1809

Since the close of the Mahratta war the Court of Directors had been fierce for retrenchment, and had threatened “to take the pruning-knife into their own hands,” if they found any hesitation on the part of the Madras Government to use it. Among the plans suggested for reducing the military charges was the abolition of the tent contract, which furnished the officers in command of regiments with a fixed monthly allowance to provide the men with camp equipage, whether they were in the field or in cantonments. The system was essentially vicious, but not more so than all the other devices in the King’s and Company’s army for eking out the allowances of commanding officers by anomalous perquisites. The Quartermaster-general, Colonel John Munro, had been requested to draw up a report

Page 240

on the subject, and both Sir John Cradock and Lord William Bentinck had come to the determination to abolish the contract, when they were suddenly recalled. It fell to the unhappy lot of Sir George Barlow, already sufficiently unpopular, to carry this resolution into effect.

Charges against Col. Munro, 1809

This retrenchment increased the resentment of the officers, and they determined to wreak their vengeance on the Quartermaster-general, who had stated in his report that the result of granting the same allowance in peace and in war for the tentage of the native regiments, while the expenses incidental to it varied with circumstances, had been found, by experience, to place the interest and the duty of commanding officers in opposition to each other. This was a harmless truism, but when the body is in a state of inflammation, the least puncture will fester. The officers called on the Commander-in-chief, to bring Colonel Munro to a court-martial, for aspersions on their character as officers and gentlemen. The Judge Advocate-general, to whom the question was officially referred, considered that the officers had neither light nor reason on their side; but General Macdowall, then on the eve of retiring from the service, yielded to their wishes, and at once placed him under arrest. He appealed to the Governor in Council, under whose authority he had acted, and the Commander-in-chief was ordered to release him With this mandate he was constrained to comply, but he gave vent to his feelings in a general order of extraordinary violence, in which he protested against the interference of the Government, and stated that nothing but his approaching departure for Europe prevented his bringing Colonel Munro to trial for disrespect to the Commander-in-chief, and contempt of military authority, in having resorted to the power of the civil government in defiance of the judgment of the officer at the head of the army. Colonel Munro’s conduct was likewise stigmatised as destructive of military subordination, a violation of the sacred rights of the Commander-in-chief, and a dangerous example to the service.

Page 241

Sir George Barlow had up to this point acted with great forbearance and dignity, but he now lost his balance, and, instead of treating the order with contempt as an ebullition of passion from an intemperate officer, who was already on board the vessel which was to convey him to Europe, or directing it to be erased from the order-book of each regiment, issued a counter order, couched in language equally tempestuous and objectionable, charging him with violent and inflammatory proceedings and acts of outrage. The resignation of the service in India is always sent in by the last boat which leaves the ship, and the officer thus enjoys the benefit of his pay and allowances to the latest moment. Sir George took advantage of the circumstance that the Commander-in-chief’s resignation had not been received, to inflict on him the indignity of deposition from his office. He proceeded still further to commit his Government by suspending Major Boles, the deputy adjutant-general, who had signed the order. The Major pleaded, that by the rules of the service he was bound to obey the orders of his superior officer, and that he had acted in a ministerial capacity. He had as unquestionable a right to the same protection in this case as Sir George had considered Colonel Munro entitled to, when he was arraigned for obeying the orders of the Governor in council, in reference to the report on the tent contract. The consequence of this rash act was precisely what might have been expected in the excited state of the army. Major Boles was regarded as a martyr, and addresses poured in upon him from every division and every station, commending his conduct, reprobating the proceedings against him, and proposing to raise subscriptions to compensate the loss of his salary.

Sir George suspends the officers, 1809

Three months passed on after the departure of General Macdowall – who was not destined to reach home as the vessel foundered at sea – and the ferment created by these proceedings had begun to subside, when Sir George blew the dying embers into a flame. In the height of the excitement a memorial had been drawn up to

Page 242

the Governor-General, reciting the grievances of the Madras army, but all idea of transmitting it was dropped, as the agitation moderated. The reports which Sir George received from the officers commanding stations, relative to the feeling of their subordinates, was, as he acknowledged, very satisfactory; but, on the 1st of May, in a spirit of infatuation, he issued an order suspending four officers of rank and distinguished reputation, and removing eight others from their commands, on the ground of their having promoted the memorial, which had been clandestinely communicated to the Government. The whole army was immediately in a blaze of mutiny. The officers at Hyderabad were found to have taken no part in the memorial, and Sir George had the imprudence to compliment them officially for their fidelity, but they indignantly repudiated the distinction, and announced to the rest of the army their entire disapproval of the order of the 1st of May, and their resolution to make common cause in contributing to the support of the suspended officers.

Outburst of the Mutiny, 1809

A hundred and fifty-eight officers of the Jaulna and Hyderabad divisions, signed a flagitious address to Government, demanding the repeal of the obnoxious order, and the restoration of the officers, in order “to prevent the horrors of civil war, and the ultimate loss of a large portion of the British possessions in India, and the dreadful blow it would inflict on the mother country.” The Company’s European regiment at Masulipatam broke out into open mutiny, placed the commanding officer under arrest, and concerted a plan for joining the Jaulna and Hyderabad divisions and marching to Madras to seize on the Government.

Firmness of Sir George Barlow, 1810

Sir George Barlow had thus, by his want of temper and discretion, goaded the Madras army into revolt, and brought on a portentous crisis. Colonel Malcolm, Colonel Montresor, and other officers of high standing and great experience, advised him to bend to the storm, and recall the obnoxious order of the 1st May. But while secretary to Government in Calcutta, he had seen the disastrous

Page 243

effects of Sir John Shore’s timidity in similar circumstances, and in the true spirit of Clive, he exhibited undaunted resolution in dealing with the mutiny, such as almost to make amends for the folly which had caused it. He resolved to vindicate the authority of Government at all hazards. He could command the resources of Bengal, Bombay, and Ceylon. The new Commander-in-chief, as well as the officers of high position and rank, were ready to support him. The King’s regiments adhered firmly to their duty, and he determined, if necessary, to march the loyal portion of the army against the disaffected. To test the feelings of the officers, he demanded the signature of all, without distinction, to a pledge to obey the orders, and support the authority of the Governor in council at Fort St. George, on pain of removal from their regiments to stations on the coast, though without the forfeiture of either rank or pay; but the majority of the officers, even among the faithful, declined to affix their signatures to the pledge, and it is said to have been signed by less than a tenth of the whole body. The commanders of native regiments were likewise directed to assemble the sepoys and assure them that the discontent of the European officers was a personal affair, and that the Government had no intention to diminish the advantages which they enjoyed, but were rather anxious to improve them. This appeal to the native soldiery against their European officers was a hazardous policy, calculated to sap the foundations of military discipline. But the sepoys and their native officers resolved to remain faithful to their salt, and there was no collision except at the single station of Seringapatam, where the native regiments commanded by disaffected officers refused to submit, and were fired upon by the King’s troops, and a hundred and fifty killed and wounded.

The mutiny quelled, 1819

The energetic proceedings of Sir George Barlow staggered the officers, and induced them to pause on the verge of a rebellion against the constituted authorities of their King and country, which must for ever have blasted their reputation and their prospects. Lord Minto had,

Page 244

moreover, announced his intention of repairing forthwith to Madras, and the general confidence which was felt in his justice and moderation contributed to bring the officers round to a sense of duty. The Hyderabad brigade, which had been the foremost in the mutiny, was also the foremost in repentance. On the 11th August, the officers addressed a penitent letter to Lord Minto – not to Sir George Barlow – signed the pledge, and advised their brother officers to follow their example. The defection of the Hyderabad force from the common cause broke the strength of the combination. The Jaulna brigade, which had made two marches towards Hyderabad, returned to its cantonments and submitted to Government. On the 16th, the European regiment at Masulipatam sent in its adhesion to the test; the seditious garrison of Seringapatam surrendered that fortress, and a profound calm succeeded the storm which had so lately threatened to uproot the Government. On reaching Madras, Lord Minto issued a general order repro-. bating the conduct of the mutineers, and announcing his determination to inflict punishment where it was due. But he also expressed his anxiety for the character and welfare of the Coast army, in kind and conciliatory language, which produced the happiest impression on the minds of men who had been accustomed only to the harsh and haughty communications of Sir George Barlow. All the Hyderabad officers were pardoned in consideration of the valuable example they had set to the army. A general amnesty was granted to all but twenty-one officers, of whom four were cashiered and one acquitted; the others accepted the alternative of dismissal; but all who had been cashiered or dismissed were subsequently restored to the service. The mutiny was the subject of long and acrimonious debates at the India House, which terminated, after many protests, in the recall of Sir George Barlow, and he, whose nomination to the office of Governor-General had been twice cancelled, and who had enjoyed that honour provisionally for a period of twenty months, was deposed from the inferior poet which had been conferred on him, and consigned to oblivion. It

Page 245

Recall of Sir George Barlow, 1811

was in connection with the administration of Sir George Barlow and of Lord Minto, respectively, as Governors-General, that Mr. Edmonstone, who had served under both as public secretary, and who was one of the most eminent and sagacious of the Company’s servants in India, and subsequently the Nestor of Leadenhall-street, affirmed that “he was averse to selecting Governors from among those who had belonged to the service ... and that a person of eminence and distinction proceeding from England to fill that office, if duly qualified by talent and character, carried with him a greater degree of influence, and inspired more respect than an individual who had been known in a subordinate capacity.”

Suppression of Piracy, 1809

The suppression of piracy is the especial vocation of the British nation in the east, and the attention of Lord Minto was at this time imperatively called to the performance of this duty. On the Malabar coast, at no great distance from Bombay, the chiefs of Kolapore and Sawuntwaree were required to surrender their piratical ports, and to enter into an engagement to renounce and to punish piracy, to which they had been addicted from time immemorial. A more important enterprise was the suppression of this crime on the coast of Arabia, known from the most ancient times as the pirate coast, where it was practised chiefly by the Joasmis. The Arabs were the bravest soldiers and the boldest seamen in the east. The Joasmis had recently embraced the tenets of the Mohamedan reformer Wahab, and thus added the ferocity of fanaticism to the courage of the national character. The only alternative which they offered to their captives was the profession of the faith of the prophet, or instant death. Their single-masted vessels, called dows or bugalas, ranging from 150 to 350 tons, and manned with 150 or 200 men, according to the size, carried only a few guns, but they sailed in company, and it was rarely that any native craft was able to escape their pursuit. They had long been the terror of native merchant sloops, but had wisely avoided molesting English vessels. At length they became emboldened by the inactivity

Page 246

of the English cruisers, which were not authorized to interfere with them, and in 1808 attacked and captured the “Sylph,” with Sir Rexford Jones’s native secretary on board. The next year the “Minerva,” a large English merchantman, fell in with the pirate squadron, and after a running fight of two days was carried by boarding. The pirates brought all the Europeans, one by one, to the gangway, and cut their throats, with the pious ejaculation, Alla Akbar! Great is God! Lord Minto was resolved to exterminate the whole litter of pirates, and a large armament was sent against their chief stronghold, Ras-al-kaima, on the coast of Arabia. It was defended with Arab obstinacy and carried by British valour. The whole town, with all the valuable merchandize which had been accumulated in many piratical expeditions, and an entire fleet of bugalas was delivered to the flames. Several other towns of inferior note on the coast were attacked and captured, and in one of them four hundred Arabs perished before it was surrendered. The blow was effectual, and for the time piracy was suspended in these waters, but the inveterate habits, the boldness, and the fanaticism of these Arab corsairs, led at length to the revival of it with greater audacity, and to a more signal chastisement.

This collection transcribed by Chris Gage
hosted by ibiblio Support Wikipedia