The Blue Mutiny: The Indigo Disturbances in Bengal, 1859-1862 [Reprint 2016 ed.] 9781512803501

Table of contents :
Preface
Contents
Abbreviations
I. The Seeds of Contention
II. The Interlopers
III. The Lieutenant Governors
IV. The Conspirators
V. Race, Commerce, and Politics
VI. Act XI
VII. The Magistrates
VIII. “Ki Hookum?”
XI. Nil Darpan
X. Conclusion
Bibliography
Index

Citation preview

IN MEMO RI AM William Norian (1894-1958) Eli Kling (1903-1963)

The Blue Mutiny

The Indigo Disturbances

in Bengal

185Ç-1862

by Blair B. Kling

Philadelphia University of Pennsylvania Press

© ig66 by the Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania Published in Great Britain, India, and Pakistan by the Oxford University Press London, Bombay, and Karachi Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 65-24507

7475 Printed in the United States of America

Preface The silent millions who bear our yoke have found no annalist. — S I R W I L L I A M WILSON HUNTER,

1868

T h e cannonades of the Indian Mutiny of 1857-58 had hardly been stilled when the Government of India was confronted with a new "mutiny" within earshot of Calcutta itself. In the autumn of 1859 the humble cultivators on the extensive indigo plantations of Lower Bengal 1 defied their European masters and refused to sow indigo. Each day, as the disturbances spread and the excitement intensified, the Government was besieged with grim reports from its district officers and desperate petitions from the British mercantile community of Calcutta. T h i s grave threat to Bengal's largest private industry brought the rulers of India face to face with a fundamental policy decision. Should the Government suppress the revolt and administer Bengal as a vast estate reserved for the benefit of British settlers and British capital? Or should the Government's principal concern be the welfare of the peasant masses? Policy was not decided in one edict. During the indigo disturbances it was laboriously hammered out 1 Lower Bengal was the administrative term for Bengal proper, largely coterminous with the present states of West Bengal and East Pakistan.

8

PREFACE

on all levels of government, from the halls of Parliament to the tents of the district officers. In Bengal the indigo disturbances are a well known event celebrated in drama, poetry, and popular history. They occurred at a time when the Indian community of Calcutta was awakening to the first stirrings of national sentiment. Events in the countryside infected the public life of Calcutta where the Bengali community united with sympathetic officials and missionaries in a political struggle against the British mercantile community. From this contest the Bengalis emerged with a heightened political awareness that prepared them, in the succeeding decades, to lead the rest of India in nationalist agitation. Behind these political and administrative developments less spectacular social and economic forces were at work. T h e indigo disturbances originated, on the one hand, in the rise of new social classes in rural Bengal, and on the other, in a deterioration in the economic position of a once-mighty industry. Our concern will be to show the interaction of politics, economic and social change, and administrative practice. For this purpose the vast literature on the indigo disturbances provides us with a penetrating, many-sided view of the fabric of mid-nineteenth century India. My research in India was made possible by a United States Government Fulbright grant. I am grateful for the assistance I received in Calcutta from the Keeper of the Records of the Government of West Bengal and from the staffs of the National Library of India, the Geological Survey, the Asiatic Society, and the Bangiya Sahitya Parishad. In London my research was aided by the librarians of the Commonwealth Relations Office, the British Museum, and the Church Missionary Society. Among the individuals in Calcutta whose generous help

PREFACE

g

facilitated this work were Mr. Satyajit Das of the National Library, Professor Ν. K. Sinha of Calcutta University, and i\lr. K. L. Mukhopadhyay, publisher and "living bibliography." I was first directed to and intrigued with the history of modern Bengal by Professor Richard L. Park, now at the University of Pittsburgh. Professor W . Norman Brown of the University of Pennsylvania, who read an early version of the manuscript, has been my constant teacher and benefactor. I have been truly fortunate in my long association with Professor Holden Furber, my mentor at the University of Pennsylvania, who has given me unsparingly of his wide knowledge and original insights into British-Indian history. For their careful reading of the manuscript and helpful suggestions I am indebted to Professors Herbert H. Kaplan and Robert A. Friedlander of the University of Illinois, and Professor Ainslee Embree of Columbia University. I wish to thank Dr. Muzharul Islam of Rajshahi University, East Pakistan, for his generous assistance in the selection of the Bengali folk proverbs at the head of each chapter. And to my wife Julia, who shared with me each step, from the inception of the idea to the completion of the work, my enduring gratitude. T h e errors in fact and in judgment are, of course, my own. Blah B. Champaign, Illinois June 1964

Kling

Contents Frontispiece—Map of Bengal Preface I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X

7

The Seeds of Contention The Interlopers The Lieutenant Governors The Conspirators Race, Commerce, and Politics Act X I The Magistrates "Ki Hookum?" NilDarpan Conclusion

15 38 63 84 103 125 147 172 196 21 g

Bibliography

225

Index

235

Abbreviations C. M. S.—Church Missionary Society, London C. R. O.—Comonwealth Relations Office, London H. P.—Halifax Papers J . P.—Judicial Proceedings, Government of Bengal R. I. C.—Report of the Indigo Commission, i860

The Blue Mutiny

If any one thinks that such a demonstration of strong feeling, by hundreds of thousands of people as we have just witnessed in Bengal, has no meaning of greater importance than an ordinary commercial question concerning a particular blue dye, such a person, in my opinion, is fatally mistaken in the signs of the time. JOHN

PETER

GRANT

L i e u t e n a n t G o v e r n o r of B e n g a l December

17, i860

I The Seeds of Contention Money, money, money! Even if you work till your body sweats blood, your fist remains empty.

Taka taka taka gaer rokto pani korao hater muthi phaka1

" T H E STORY OF T H E INDIGO INDUSTRY IS M O R E

INTERESTING

historically and more pathetically instructive than that of almost any other Indian agricultural or industrial substance." 2 T h u s Sir George Watt, distinguished botanist and official Reporter on Economic Products to the Government of India, observed with a sentimentalism not commonly found in a prosaic dictionary of economic resources. Reviewing the turbulent history of the blue dye, Watt concluded that from the time it was first undertaken by Europeans early in the sixteenth century the indigo trade had been plagued by one adversity after another. T h e original enemy of indigo was the powerful, wellentrenched woad industry which for over a century obstructed its acceptance in Europe. From the seventeenth to the twentieth centuries indigo was a fugitive among industries, wandering from Gujarat in western India to the West Indies and then back to Bengal in eastern India. 1

Bengali proverbs at the head of each chapter except C h a p t e r V I I

are from the unpublished collection of Dr. Mazharul Islam. 2

George

Watt,

1908), p. 668.

The

Commercial

Products

of

India

(London,

16

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

In Bengal the industry met with such hostility that it was forced to take refuge in Bihar, its ultimate home. At the very time Watt was writing, early in the twentieth century, indigo was entering the final struggle of its unhappy career. Just as it had once ruined the woad industry, indigo, in turn, would soon find its markets captured by Germaninvented synthetic aniline dyes. Although Watt exaggerates his case, one can indeed term indigo the pariah of IndoEuropean commerce. Since prehistoric times indigo had been grown and processed in India, and during the R o m a n Empire and Middle Ages small quantities had been exported to Europe. Indigo was one of the rare tropical products which first attracted European traders to India, and after the Portuguese discovered the sea route to the Indies they began to import indigo in quantities sufficient to supply the entire European market. In the seventeenth century the Dutch successfully destroyed the Portuguese monopoly of the indigo trade. T h e English followed closely on the heels of the Dutch, and soon the English East India Company numbered indigo among its most profitable imports. 3 Most of the dye carried to Europe by these early traders came from western India where it was manufactured according to primitive indigenous methods. 4 Nevertheless, it gradually displaced European-grown woad dyes and brought such handsome returns that it attracted the West 3 On some of the first voyages of the English East India Company to Surat indigo consumed the entire investment and earned the Company a profit of over 400 per cent on its investment. S. A . Khan, East India Trade in the iyth Century (London, 1 9 2 3 ) , pp. 12, 158. 4 William Finch described how the growers of Rajastan combined inferior second and third year growths with good first year leaves "and steepe them together, hard to be discerned, very knavishly." William Foster (ed.), Early Travels in India (London, 1 9 2 1 ) , p. 154. T h e early indigo was formed into balls or flat cakes and adulterated with clay, sand, and oil. See George Watt, Pamphlet on Indigo (Calcutta, 1890), p. 12.

T H E SEEDS OF

CONTENTION

»7

Indian planters into the market. As early as the middle of the seventeenth century high-quality West Indian dye, grown and processed by Europeans under rigorous standards, began to drive Indian indigo from the European market. In 1724 the East India Company, no longer able to compete with the West Indian planters, abandoned the indigo trade.6 Not long after capturing the European market, however, the British West Indian planters voluntarily abandoned indigo in favor of a more profitable cultivation of sugar and coffee. From the mid-eighteenth century the British cloth maker was forced to depend upon Spanish Guatemala and French Santo Domingo for superior and on southern Carolina for middling grade indigo.® During the American Revolution, when the British found all their sources of the dye in enemy hands, the East India Company was once again encouraged to import indigo from India. T h e Company mismanaged its first attempt to revive the trade. From 1779 to 1788 it entered into contracts with a number of private traders who, instead of setting up European supervised factories, supplied the Company at exorbitant prices with inferior Indian manufactured dye from Agra and Oudh. T In 1788 the Company terminated these contracts and gave its support to eight or ten pioneer 5

J . C. Sinha, Economic Annals of Bengal (Calcutta, 1 9 2 7 ) , p. 178. As early as 1648 the trade had been threatened and thought "likely to decline yearly because of the quantities made in Barbadoes, etc." William Foster (ed.), The English Factories in India, 1618-1669 ( 1 3 vols., Oxford, 1926-27), Vol. 1646-1650, p. 179. 8 William Milburn, Oriental Commerce (2 vols., London, 1 8 1 3 ) , II, 213-14; and David Macpherson, History of European Commerce with India (London, 1 8 1 2 ) , p. 200. 7 T h e first of these traders, John Prinsep, tried to start a factory on the West Indian model but failed to obtain a crop. Holden Furber, John Company at Work (Cambridge, 1 9 5 1 ) , p. 291. See also N . K. Sinha, Economic History of Bengal (2 vols., Calcutta, 1956-63), I, 87, 197.

ι8

T H E BLUE

MUTINY

European planters in Bengal who were attempting to manufacture indigo by West Indian methods.8 The Company had discovered that, when manufactured under European supervision, the indigo of Bengal could equal in quality the finest West Indian product. T h e Government of Bengal helped these planters with advances,9 and the Directors of the East India Company sent them samples of fine West Indian dye for their emulation and letters of instruction on processing indigo. They also encouraged experienced West Indian planters to establish indigo plantations in Bengal. 10 In 1796 the Governor General, John Shore, carried out a highly effective measure to improve the quality of indigo exported from Calcutta and to stimulate the industry in Bengal. He placed a 15 per cent duty on all indigo brought into the province from Agra and Oudh, areas which until that time had supplied four-fifths of the indigo shipped from India to London. 1 1 At the end of the century the amount of indigo imported into Great Britain from Bengal was more than double that from all other sources,12 and in 1802, with the industry well established, the Company stopped its advances to the planters. Thus, by the beginning of the nineteenth century the East India Company had brought to life a major plantation industry in Lower Bengal. 8

Furber, John Company, pp. 291-92. East India Company, Reports and Documents Connected with the Proceedings of the East-India Company in regard to the Culture and Manufacture of Cotton-wool, Raw Silk, and Indigo in India (London, 1836), Court to Governor General, 25 June 1793, Indigo, p. 32. 10 Robert Heaven, who had cultivated indigo for thirteen years in the West Indies, was licensed to settle in Bengal for five years to produce indigo. Ibid., Court to Governor General, 27 March 1787, Indigo, p. 6. A letter of instruction is contained in ibid., Court to Governor General, 8 April 1789, Indigo, p. 12. 11 Ibid., Court to Governor General, 28 August 1800, Indigo, p. 58. 12 Pari. Papers, 1826-27, X V I I I , 149 ff. 9

T H E SEEDS O F C O N T E N T I O N

19

Nevertheless, the future of the thriving industry was less than auspicious. From the earliest days there were conflicts between European indigo planters and Indian landholders. One source of conflict was that in Lower Bengal the indigo industry never developed a conventional plantation system. Until 1829 European indigo planters were forbidden by the Government to lease or purchase lands outside their immediate factory grounds. Instead of cultivating indigo on his own land with hired labor the planter was forced to advance money to nearby peasants to induce them to plant the crop. T h e problem of protecting his advance and of acquiring raw material from a peasantry in varying degrees beyond his control brought the planter into continual conflict with his Indian neighbors. Another far reaching problem affecting everyone concerned with indigo was the discrepancy between the supply and consumption of the dye. T h e amount of indigo produced in Bengal was determined not by the needs of European cloth makers but in response to the demands of the remittance trade. Both the East India Company and the private traders under its aegis were interested in indigo primarily as a means of remittance. T h e Company's revenues, derived largely from the land tax of Bengal, were consumed in the many wars fought by the Company in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Since even this revenue was insufficient, the Company borrowed large sums for extraordinary expenditures from the private traders of Bengal. T o pay the Company's debts and enable Company servants and private traders to transfer their personal funds from India to England export commodities were needed for sale in Europe. In 1795, because of its need for remittances, the Company quintupled its advances to the indigo industry. Although a slave revolt had eliminated Santo Domingo indigo from the European market,

20

THE BLUE

MUTINY

India supplied Britain with almost two million pounds more of indigo than it could consume or re-export. In the next year repercussions were felt in India, and production fell by one-half. 13 After 1802 the Company discontinued its advances and from 1807 until 1830 bought indigo for remittance purposes on the open market in Calcutta. These purchases artificially raised the price of indigo, stimulated overproduction, and perplexed the private traders who could never be certain how much the Company would decide to buy in any given year. 14 Indigo was even more important to the private traders as a means of remittance. In the late eighteenth century almost all the private trade, shipping, banking, investment, and insurance in Bengal was controlled by a group of some fifteen Calcutta firms known as agency houses. By borrowing money the Government of India became so dependent on these houses that it "always felt their hands at its throat in any political or financial crisis." 15 One major problem faced by the agency houses was the transfer to England of the profits of their partners and clients. In 1802 the private export of indigo, capitalized by the agency houses, was already more than three times as great as that financed by Company advances. 16 The agency houses were imprudent with their funds, and at the first sign of a good European market risked their borrowed capital in long-term investments in indigo factories. T h e number of indigo plantations capitalized by these houses increased steadily until 1820. By that time India had become a cloth importing instead of cloth ex13 East India Co., Reports and Documents, Court to Governor General, 27 July 1796, Indigo, p. 37. 14 Pari. Papers, 1831-32, X , Pt. I, 1 3 1 . 15 Amales Tripathi, Trade and Finance in the Bengal Presidency, ¡•¡93-1833 (Calcutta, 1956), p. 1 1 . 16 East India Co., Reports and Documents, Indigo, p. 88.

T H E SEEDS OF CONTENTION

21

porting country, and Indian exports were needed desperately to balance this trade and provide remittances. An indigo boom ensued. In the 1820's new indigo concerns, many of them on marginal land, were constructed throughout Bengal and production reached a high in 1826. 17 One year later a depression in England led to a collapse of the market and indigo production in Bengal fell 50 per cent. By 1834 all the largest agency houses had gone bankrupt and the few survivors ceased to provide funds for long-term investment.18 During the next two decades the task of providing capital for indigo as well as other enterprises was assumed by a new group of Calcutta mercantile houses closely associated with mercantile firms in Britain. They acted as agents for indigo concerns by advancing capital for the purchase of factory blocks and for monthly expenses. Ostensibly the new houses had entered the indigo field at a propitious time; except for temporary slumps in 1837 and 1841 the industry in Lower Bengal experienced its greatest prosperity between 1834 and 1847, years during which Europe and America doubled their consumption of the dye. Although the Charter Act of 1833 had opened the interior of India to British capital and led to some diversification of industry, indigo remained the most important private export of Bengal. In the peak year of 1842 indigo accounted for 46 per cent of the value of goods exported from Calcutta.19 But behind this façade of prosperity the industry was as unsound as ever. Because indigo remained the safest 11

Asiatic Journal, T r i p a t h i , Trade 19 Kissen Mohun 1814-18J0 (Calcutta, 163-89. ls

N. S., I, (January-April 1830), 201-20». and Finance, pp. 210 ff. Mullick, Brief History of Bengal Commerce 1 8 7 1 ) , Pt. 3. See also Calcutta Review, L X , 1848,

22

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

article to secure a favorable remittance to London, the amount of capital invested in it still had little relationship to its consumption. Improved means of communication between Calcutta and London further served to encourage speculation. T h e price of indigo in London now depended not upon stocks on hand or current deliveries, but upon reports of the subsequent year's output. In addition many foreign firms without indigenous textile markets to supply bought indigo to hold for speculation. While the price in London depended upon production in Bengal, the reverse also held true. A slump in London prices over consecutive years led to a scarcity of credit in Calcutta and a consequent failure of marginal concerns. In almost every year from 1839 to 1847 the price of indigo declined. 20 T h e mercantile houses which acted as agents for indigo concerns were in turn supported by a new bank, the Union Bank of Calcutta. It had been founded in 1829 by a group of local Indian and British businessmen as a joint-stock bank to afford facilities to commerce. T h e bank did not become involved in indigo until 1839 when its capital increased by 20 per cent and its directors were hard put to find an area for new investment. T h e y reluctantly decided to invest in advances to indigo factories on deposit of title deeds and assignment of the year's produce. T h e bank would loan a planter up to two-thirds the value of indigo in his godowns and the full value of his factory, house, lands and buildings. In 1841, when indigo production dropped 57 per cent from the previous year's output, there was a strong move among the directors of the bank to terminate its indigo investments. But the move failed and after two of the largest indigo agents went bankrupt, the Union Bank found itself with at least 90 per cent of its capital tied up in indigo concerns. There was no way to recover the debts except to operate the indigo concerns 20Economist

(London), February 15, 1845 and May g, 1846.

T H E SEEDS OF

CONTENTION

23

it had acquired, which entailed an enormous outlay for the annual expenses of cultivation. 21 The Union Bank consolidated its indigo concerns under the name "Big Union," but did nothing to reform their management. By accepting the planters' estimates of expenses without thorough investigation, the bank squandered large sums of money, especially in Nadia and Jessore Districts. An Indian landholder told the Indigo Commission of i860 that in the days of the Union Bank money was plentiful in the indigo districts and planters had no qualms about writing off the ryots' debts and disbursing fresh advances each year. Finally, in 1847 its indigo losses caused the Union Bank to fail and the bank brought down with it about thirty Calcutta agency houses.22 T h e fall of the Union Bank had profound repercussions on the indigo industry, altering its financial framework and influencing the system of operation which would exist in the decade leading to the indigo disturbances. Before 1847 almost every factory had been purchased with borrowed capital; after 1847 a large number of the concerns that failed, especially in Nadia and Jessore, were bought cheaply and paid off rapidly, leaving the planters relatively independent. The number of European planters managing small marginal concerns decreased, while the remaining concerns established "local indigo seignories" 23 and expanded their operations. T h e additional underpaid Indi21 Charles Northcote Cooke, The Rise, Progress, and Present Condition of Banking in India (Calcutta, 1 8 6 3 ) , pp. 177-200. 22 Report of the Indigo Commission (Calcutta, i860), Answers 1 7 4 fi. Hereafter the Report of the Indigo Commission will be cited as R . I. C . and the answers given as testimony in Parts 5-7, Minutes of Evidence, will be cited as " A " followed by the answer number. R . I. C . is also available as Pari. Papers, 1861, X L I V , 335 ff. 23 J . P. Grant, "Minute by the Lieutenant Governor of Bengal on the Report of the Indigo Commission," reproduced in full in C. E. Buckland, Bengal under the Lieutenant Governors (a vols., 2d. ed., Calcutta, 1902), I, 238 ff.

24

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

ans and Eurasians hired to supervise production increased the burden of extortion on the peasants while the owners demanded greater economies and authorized less liberal advances to the cultivators. In effect, the fall of the U n i o n Bank led to a more oppressive system of indigo planting in L o w e r Bengal. 2 4 In the dozen years between the fall of the U n i o n Bank and the onset of the indigo disturbances more planters failed than succeeded. 25 A l t h o u g h the price of indigo on the London market almost doubled between 1847 a n c * 1857, this was of little benefit to the planters. Most of the gain was offset by world-wide inflation which resulted from the discovery of new gold fields and the outbreak of the Crimean W a r . By cutting off the supplies of linseed and jute formerly imported from Russia, the war had direct repercussions on the economy of Bengal which was now called upon to supply these two items to the European market. 26 Between 1855 and i860 prices in the m a j o r indigo districts rose 50 to 100 per cent. T h i s inflation was caused not only by the new exports, but also by the Sepoy Mutiny, the b u i l d i n g of the Eastern Bengal Railway and a sharp increase in population. 2 7 A drop in production further annulled any gains which the high price of indigo might have brought the planters. T h e principal reason for this decline was the capricious weather of Bengal which had always been responsible for wide fluctuations in the supply of indigo and had contributed to the crash of the agency houses in the 1820's and 1830's and to the fall of the Union Bank in 1847. Between 21 R . I. C., A. 1470-71 and Pari.

Papers,

1857-58, VII, Pt. I, 60, 98,

142, igo, 209-13. Pari. 26

Papers,

1857-58, V I I , Pt. I, 241.

Daniel H. Buchanan, The

in India

Development

(New York, 1934), p. 242.

R . I. C., A p p e n d i x III.

of Capitalist

Enterprise

T H E SEEDS OF C O N T E N T I O N

25

1848 and 1858 production averaged 23 per cent less than it had in the previous decade.28 In the two major indigo districts, Nadia and Jessore, floods and hail storms lowered production another 15 per cent in the five years preceding the indigo disturbances.29 Though the price per pound might be high, in order to receive an adequate return the amount delivered had to be enough to cover expenses. This uncertainty of production injured the ryots even more than it did the planters and was responsible for much of the discontent leading to the indigo disturbances. In a good year a ryot could produce enough indigo to repay his advance and collect a small profit; in a bad year his expenses exceeded his advance. One fault of the indigo system of Lower Bengal was that the risk of crop failure fell directly upon the ryot. In the five years preceding the indigo disturbances another new development undermined the economic position of the indigo planter of Lower Bengal. For thirty years, from 1826 to 1856, indigo was surpassed as an export only by opium, whose trade was a Government monopoly. In the late 1850's the total value of exports from Bengal continued to rise, but the value of indigo remained much the same. The new item which preempted its rank as an export was food grains of which Bengal supplied over half. In the decade before 1859 indigo accounted for only 10 per cent of the total exports of Bengal. 30 This decline in the importance of his product led to a corresponding decline in the status of the indigo planter. When the Government was no longer dependent upon a single industry for 28

From production figures given in W . M . Reid, The Culture and Manufacture of Indigo (Calcutta, 1 8 8 7 ) , pp. 163-65, and Economist ( L o n d o n ) , 1846-66, passim. 20 Bengal District Gazetteers·, Nadia (Calcutta, 1 9 1 0 ) , p. 74 and Jessore (Calcutta, 1 9 1 2 ) , p. 77. 30 Statistics compiled from Economist (London), passim, and Bengal Commercial Reports (Calcutta, 1 8 5 1 - 5 8 ) .

26

THE BLUE

MUTINY

the economic well-being of Bengal, it was less hesitant to support the peasants in their struggle against the industry. In 1859 there were approximately 500 indigo planters in Lower Bengal. They staffed the 143 indigo concerns producing for export. Those firms which would become involved in the indigo disturbances produced the finest indigo in the world, accounting for 60 per cent of the value of the dye exported from Calcutta and half the value of indigo imported into Great Britain. Almost half the production of Lower Bengal came from two districts, Nadia and Jessore. 31 The ownership of indigo concerns in Lower Bengal was widely distributed. Most of the planters owned only one or two concerns, but a handful of important proprietors stand out from the others. One of these was James Hills who owned eleven indigo concerns in Nadia District. He had come to Nadia in 1815 and acquired his first factory, the Nischintipur, in semi-official partnership with the East India Company. 32 The largest indigo proprietor was the Bengal Indigo Company which owned factories in Nadia, Murshidabad, and Barasat. Indigo production in Dacca and the neighboring districts in eastern Bengal was all but monopolized by J . P. Wise. Robert Watson and Company, the largest planter in the area north of Nadia, owned seven concerns in Murshidabad, Rajshahi, and Pabna. Four concerns which produced indigo for export in addition to many small factories which produced an inferior indigo for the local market were owned by Indians. 33 31

R . I. C., Appendix 17. Henry Cotton, Indian and Home Memories (London, 1 9 1 1 ) , p. 80. 33 New Calcutta Directory (Calcutta, 1 8 5 7 ) . According to one report Indian-produced indigo accounted for two-fifths of the dye produced in Nadia District in 1854. Government of Bengal, General Dept., No. 69, "Report of W . Jackson on Zilla Nuddea," 16 March 1854. In addition to being used locally, some of it was exported to other parts of Asia. 32

T H E SEEDS OF CONTENTION

27

An indigo concern was composed of from five to ten factories. Around the factory clustered a number of outfactories each of which was an indigo-producing unit. T h e indigo concern was headed by a manager, and about onefourth of the concerns were managed by their proprietors.34 The two most influential managers in Lower Bengal were Robert T . Larmour who was General Mufassal Manager for the Bengal Indigo Company, and James Forlong who managed the concerns belonging to James Hills and Company. These two men were responsible for the welfare of millions of people and the security of thousands of rupees invested in land, buildings, and machinery. Forlong was a man of liberal views who knew the value of compromise; Larmour unbendingly opposed any concessions to the peasants. A manager was invested with the legal and executive power to make every ultimate decision over the operation of his concern. He kept the proprietors informed on all matters of importance and sent his agent in Calcutta a monthly abstract of expenditures, orders for stores and seed, and an estimate of the next year's outlay. He was responsible for the successful manufacture of indigo in every factory and out-factory of his concern. When leasing land from a zamindar he also leased villages and became responsible for the collection of rents and the accounts of each village. T h e manager was aided by European assistants, usually hired directly by the proprietors and sent by the manager to supervise production in one or more factories of the concern. 35 In its five concerns the Bengal Indigo Company employed eleven managers and assistants. The managers received 400 rupees per month and 5 per cent of the profits. Assistants earned 50 to 250 rupees per month. Both were provided with housing and horse 34 35

New Calcutta Directory, Reid, Indigo, Ch. 4.

1857.

28

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

allowances. 8 8 E u r o p e a n planters were usually English or Scotch and occasionally French or Eurasian; an Indian never held the position of manager or assistant in a European-owned concern. T h e I n d i a n employees of an indigo concern were g r o u p e d into three separate divisions according to function—administration, production, a n d police. In administration the leading Indian employee was the diwan w h o was in charge of l a n d h o l d i n g and factory accounts, legal matters, and leases. H i s salary in the Bengal Indigo C o m pany ranged f r o m 25 to 30 rupees per m o n t h and a commission of 1/2 to 1 anna per rupee paid to the ryot for indigo plant. H e was assisted by clerks and writers, educated m e n of the B r a h m a n and Kayastha castes, w h o received 5 to 9 rupees per month. 3 7 T h e chief Indian employee in charge of production was the gumashta or steward w h o supervised the cultivation of indigo. His salary ranged f r o m 12 to 20 rupees per month and he was assisted by overseers w h o earned 3 to 4 rupees per month. T h e meager salaries of these employees were augmented by unauthorized commissions exacted from the cultivators. 3 8 T h e police or military division of the staff consisted of lathiyals, bands of professional warriors armed with lathis or sticks. T h e majority were natives of Faridpur and Pabna where entire villages hired out as lathiyals,39 T h e remaining Indian factory servants included the planter's personal assistant and general overseer; and R. I. C „ A. 2088 ff. Ibid.. 38 R. I. C., A. 2092. 39 W. S. Seton-Karr, "Indigo in Lower Bengal," Calcutta VII (Jan.-June 1847), 186-219, and Lai Behari Day, Bengal Life (London, 1909), p. 327. 36

Review, Peasant

T H E SEEDS O F

CONTENTION

29

skilled workmen such as carpenters, gardeners, masons, and messengers. During the manufacturing season buna coolies, brought by contractors from the jungle tribes of Manbhum, Singhbhum, and Midnapur, were employed. Some buna coolies brought their families with them, and the larger factories settled them on the factory grounds. A large factory like Mulnath, headquarters of the Bengal Indigo Company, would employ one hundred of them each manufacturing season, paying them 3 or 4 rupees per month. Local labor was employed during the manufacturing to operate the pumps, boilers, cutting machines and other equipment. Cartmen and boatmen were hired to bring the indigo plant to the factory. 40 In Lower Bengal there were two types of indigo cultivation, nijabad and raiyati. In nijabad, as in a conventional plantation system, the factory supplied the land and seed and hired the cultivators, usually along with their plows and bullocks. Nijabad cultivation took place only on lands adjacent to the factory and on chars, muddy flats formed by the changing course of the rivers. T h e greater part of the land given to indigo cultivation was under raiyati cultivation on partially inundated highlands lying outside the factory grounds. Raiyati land might belong to an Indian zamindar (be-ilaka) or the planter himself might be the zamindar (ilaka). It was cultivated by ryots who had certain tenancy rights in the land and sowed indigo along with other crops. It was when cultivated on raiyati land that indigo conflicted with the interests of ryots and Indian zamindars. In concerns bordering the great rivers of northern and eastern Bengal where char lands were more plentiful, there was a higher proportion of nijabad, but in R . I. C., A. 1940 ff.; [Colesworthy Grant], Rural Life in Bengal (London, i860), pp. 114-15.

30

THE BLUE

MUTINY

Lower Bengal as a whole almost three times as much land was cultivated under raiyati as under nijabad.41 T h e seed for char cultivation was obtained from plant grown in the Agra area. It produced a hardier type of indigo than did local seed, and was able to withstand extremes of inundation and dryness, though the indigo produced from it was not as good and its plant produced only half as much dye as did local seed. T h e muddy chars were usually sown in October by cultivators who moved in rafts over the soft slimy surface and scattered the seeds by hand. T h e seed sunk about two inches into the mud and flourished until the dry winter season approached. T h e plant then appeared to wither and the ground became hard and cracked, down to the roots of the plant. In spring the rains penetrated directly to the roots; the plants again came to life and were ready for reaping in J u n e , J u l y and August. T h e cultivation itself was simple, but the problem of weeds was great. Before the plant was high enough to be damaged, the planters allowed neighboring ryots to graze their cattle on the weeds. In cultivation on the highlands, the land had to be plowed and the clods broken by harrowing before the ground was sown with seeds broadcast. Highland indigo was usually sown in April, watered by the spring rains, and then harvested along with char indigo. Sometimes in less fertile highlands indigo was also sown in October to give it the advantage of being rooted in the ground by the time of the spring rains. But the indigo sown in April and harvested in J u l y and August was of the highest quality. It was this spring sowing which most antagonized the cultivators who wanted to sow their rice at the same time. 42 « R . I. C „ Appendix I. 42 R . I. C., A. 359, i486. Watt, Pamphlet on Indigo, Reid, Indigo, Ch. 9. [C. Grant], Rural Lije, pp. 91 ff.

pp. 21-22.

T H E SEEDS O F

CONTENTION

31

Certain other agronomical characteristics of indigo enlarged the area of conflict between planter and ryot. First, enlightened planters took pride in allowing for the rotation of crops, alternating indigo with rice, tobacco, and other crops. Once a peasant had grown rice on his plot he was reluctant to return the land to indigo. T h i s usually gave rise to a controversy over whether a given plot was "indigo-land" or "rice-land." Second, indigo required scrupulous attention to weeding. T o perform this laborious and time-consuming task the ryot needed constant prodding. Finally, indigo culture called for meticulous timing. It had to be sown immediately before the spring rains and reaped at the moment of perfect maturity before the autumn rains. Nor could it be permitted to lie on the ground after reaping; before indigo began to ferment it was necessary to cart it immediately to a factory for processing. It was because all processing had to be done within one or two days' journey of the reaping that each factory had a number of out-factories. Since it was believed that only Europeans were willing to take the care necessary to produce high quality dye, isolated Europeans were scattered in out-factories throughout Lower Bengal. Isolation often bred fear, and this in addition to the heavy strain of his responsibilities transformed many an ordinarily goodnatured planter into a petty despot. Along with the indigo disturbances there were natural causes for the decline of the indigo industry of Lower Bengal in the 1860's. For the past several hundred years the rivers of Bengal had been shifting eastward. A t one time the Hugli and later the Bhairab River flowing through the center of the province carried a high proportion of the Ganges through the delta into the Bay of Bengal. Today most of the Ganges empties into the Padma

32

THE BLUE

MUTINY

and Meghna Rivers on the eastern border of the delta. 43 T h o u g h this change in the topography had been going on long before i860, a stage was reached in that period, in Nadia District in particular, when the soil was becoming too high for the proper inundation of indigo. 44 Gradually, Jessore and Faridpur were also affected. In all probability, even if there had been no indigo disturbances, the industry would have died out in Lower Bengal. T h e successful manufacture of indigo was no less precarious than its cultivation. Because the first prerequisite for manufacture was an abundant source of clear fresh water, indigo factories were always constructed on rivers. "Chinese pumps" operated by manpower lifted the water from the river into aquaducts which carried the water into the first of a series of well-constructed open-air vats. A small factory was equipped with about six pairs of vats and a large one with as many as fifteen pairs. Each factory was also equipped with a large boiler made of copper or cast iron. Altogether, an indigo concern invested between fifteen and thirty thousand rupees in each factory block, which included buildings and machinery. 4 5 When a ryot brought his plant to the factory it was first measured by a muscular factory servant who placed an iron chain six feet in length around its girth. If given the proper douceur by the ryot, the measurer would pull the chain less tightly. A ryot was given one rupee for either four or six bundles, depending on the quality of the plant and the generosity of the planter. 48 A f t e r measurement of 13

Nafis Ahmad, Economic Geography of East Pakistan (London, 1958), pp. 32-33; S. P. Chatterjee, Bengal in Maps (Calcutta, 1949), pp. 8-11. « R. I. C., A. 2011-13. 4S Estimated from evidence given in Pari. Papers, 1857-58, VII, Pt. I, 176, and R. I. C., A. 78-79, 2895, and Q. 842. R. I. C., Appendix I.

T H E SEEDS O F C O N T E N T I O N

33

the plant, coolies carried it into the upper of each pair of vats where it was stacked with the leaf up and down. When the vat was filled to overflowing, the plant was pressed down by bamboo shafts. T h e vats were next filled with clear river water until the plant was covered, and the plant was allowed to ferment overnight, for ten to twelve hours. In the morning the planter examined the surface of the vat for the correct hue of purple and copper with blue froth, and dipped a thermometer into the water to check the temperature. If he considered the plant steeped, he ordered the plug pulled out of the upper vat. T h e liquid, now of an orange color and disagreeable odor, was run off into the lower vat where through oxidation it took on a greenish color with a yellow froth. T h e leaves and stalks were removed from the upper vat and later used to fertilize the fields and provide fuel for the boilers. When the liquid had been drawn into the lower vat, ten coolies jumped into the vat up to their hips and, arranging themselves in two rows, began to stir and beat the liquid with bamboo paddles. This process continued for about two hours, with the men arranging themselves in various formations in the nature of a ritualistic dance, accompanied by chanting. When the planter considered the liquid to be sufficiently oxidized, he signaled the coolies to jump out of the vat; they did this one at a time after running in a circle to give the liquid a final swirl. T h e liquid was allowed to stand until a fine blue grain separated out and settled to the bottom of the vat. T h e brownish waste water was drawn off the top and the sediment-filled liquid at the bottom was pumped into the boiler, located in an enclosed building. While being boiled the thick mixture was occasionally stirred by a mechanical apparatus. After boiling for about two hours, the liquid was run off onto sheeting which had been spread across a shallow vat, leav-

34

THE BLUE

MUTINY

ing the sediment which had been strained out. T h e sheeting with the sediment was then doubled over and placed into pressing boxes which were screwed down to press out all excess moisture. T h e compressed sediment, now in the form of large rectangular blocks, had the consistency of bar soap. T h e blocks were cut into long bars and these into 3 or inch square cakes of indigo. Each cake was stamped with the initial of the manufacturer and a number indicating the day of its production. Next, the indigo was taken to a drying room, neatly arranged on shelves, and left to dry for about three months. In drying the weight of each cake was reduced from about 24 to 8 ounces. Finally, the indigo was packed into boxes and sent down the river to Calcutta where it was sold at auction.47 T h e entire process was closely supervised by the European planter; each stage was carefully timed and after each step samples were tested. Either too much or too little time spent in any stage would have resulted in the spoilage of the entire batch. Almost 2,000 square feet of land were required to produce one 8 ounce cake of indigo, equivalent to eight cakes from every bigah48 of land sown with indigo. At the prevailing price of 200 rupees per maund49 in Calcutta, a bigah of land cultivated with indigo brought the planter about 12 rupees. For one bigah's production of indigo plant the ryot received an average of 2 rupees 8 annas. The cost of manufacture according to one estimate was about 50 rupees per maund,50 or roughly 2 rupees per bigah of indigo. Thus, the total cost to the planter to purchase and 47

[C. Grant], Rural Lije, pp. 114-36. Grant gives an eye-witness description of the manufacturing process at Mulnath Factory well illustrated with line drawings. 48 A bigah in Lower Bengal was equivalent to one-third of an acre. 49 A maund was a unit of weight approximately equal to 75 lbs. avoir. 50 Watt, Pamphlet on Indigo, p. 56 and R . I. C., Appendix I.

T H E SEEDS O F C O N T E N T I O N

35

manufacture the indigo was about 4 rupees 8 annas per bigah.51 In a good year the return to the concern was 7 rupees 8 annas per bigah. Out of this was paid the land rent, legal expenses, interest on loans and costs of capital expansion, as well as salaries, wages and repairs. Usually expansion entailed, not money invested in new works, but money spent to increase zamindari rights, to ensure thereby a more secure supply of indigo plant. Such investments yielded no long-term gain in profits and became increasingly burdensome when the ryots became more contentious or when the zamindars raised their rents to force the planters to purchase rather than lease under-tenures. In those years when production was lower than usual, from 1855 to 1858, the fixed charges devoured most of the profits. During the indigo disturbances many concerns were sustained only by loans from their Calcutta agents. When we analyze the cost to the ryot of producing a bigah of indigo, we can understand why it was so unpopular a crop. T h e following are three sample estimates of the cost per bigah of growing indigo given before the Indigo Commission of i860: Rent Seed Cultivation Sowing Weeding Cutting Stamp (for contract)

r. 0 0 I

0 0 0 0 3

as. 10

4 0 4 8

4 2

0

P· 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

52

« R . I. C „ A . 2895. 52 R . I. C., A . 604. T h i s is from testimony given by R . P. Sage, planter of Nadia and Jessore Districts. Sage testified that in addition to being paid 2 rupees for the indigo plant the ryot would receive 4 rupees per maund for indigo seed taken from the stumps of the plant. Therefore, the ryot's total profit from the bigah would be 1 rupee.

THE BLUE

3«

MUTINY

Plowing Sowing Harrowing Hoeing Cutting Cartage

r. 0 0 0 0 0 0

as. 4

5 4

P· 0 0 0 0 0 0

Seed Rent

0 0

8 8

0 0

(3) Plowing Weeding Cutting Seed Rent

ι

(2)

3

2 2 2

1 0 0 0

14

13

0 6 4 5

paid by ryot)

o 0 0 0 4 454

In i860 the Lieutenant Governor of Bengal calculated that the ryot lost 7 rupees per bigah when he cultivated indigo in place of another crop.55 Along with the ryot's expenses of cultivation must be placed the various bribes which he was obliged to give to every factory servant with whom he came into contact, to the head ryot who arranged with the planter for cultivation in his village, and later, contributions for lawsuits and other expenses incurred extricating himself from the indigo contract. Nevertheless, the ryot continued to live and to support his family. He managed to maintain himself because he sowed rice and other crops in addition to indigo, and be53

R . I. C., A. 2049. Testimony of R . T . Larmour, Mulnath Concern. 64 R . I. C., A. 3270. Testimony of a ryot of Nischintipur Concern, Nadia District. 55 Buckland, Lieutenant Governors, I, 24g.

T H E SEEDS O F C O N T E N T I O N

37

cause he was sometimes given his advance in spite o£ debts to the factory incurred in previous poor years. The balances against him on the factory books continued to mount and eventually were written off as bad debts. The planter's object in maintaining the debt was to use it as a threat to force the ryot to cultivate indigo. T o the planter every other consideration was secondary to obtaining as much indigo plant as possible.

II The Interlopers Bherar rrwddhe bagh hak dake bajimat

To prevail among sheep a tiger need only growl.

THE POLEMIC LITERATURE OF THE INDIGO DISTURBANCES RE-

introduced into current usage the old epithet "interloper." T h e term originally referred to the private traders who, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, dared to intrude into the commercial monopoly of the East India Company. Indian officials of 1859-1862 would have been reluctant to acknowledge any similarity on the question of private trade between themselves and their mercantilist forebears. Nevertheless, there was a certain validity in the planters' complaints of a renewed hostility toward private enterprise in high places. In some respects official attitudes toward the "interloper" had, by i860, come full circle since the early days of the East India Company. Before 1813 the majority of administrators of the Company's government were strongly opposed to the settlement of private British subjects among the peasantry. Feeling none too secure in their position, the Company's officials feared that Europeans of the "lower orders" would undermine the Company's supremacy by offending Indian sensibilities, sullying the reputation of the British, and causing dissatisfaction with British rule. In addition, they were apprehensive lest private British subjects would follow

THE

INTERLOPERS

39

the American precedent and try to establish a settlerdominated government in Bengal. 1 However, because they badly needed Indian products f o r remittance purposes, the officials granted licenses to indigo planters and subsidized the industry. Considering the private planters a necessary evil, the Company restricted them in two ways. First, through Regulation 23 of 1795 private entrepreneurs licensed to settle in the mufassal (the countryside, as distinct from Calcutta) were permitted to hold no more than fifty bigahs of land. Second, the Company's government endeavored to bring the planters under the jurisdiction of its own courts. T h e parliamentary Regulating Act of 1 7 7 3 had limited the jurisdiction of the Company's courts to the indigenous population and placed British subjects under the Supreme Court in Calcutta, appointed by the Crown. But Lord Cornwallis, while liberally dispensing licenses to planters, brought them under the jurisdiction of Company courts in civil cases involving less than 500 rupees. T o evade the Regulating Act he invested the Company's district judges with the powers of Justice of the Peace under the authority of the Calcutta Supreme Court so that in theory the planters remained under the King's justice. 2 T h e early planters were no sooner permitted to settle in the mufassal than they began to abuse their powers. One example found in the records of the year 1796 for the chief revenue court of Bengal, the Sadr Diwani Adalat, tells of two Muslim zamindars who complained that a planter forcibly plowed up a half-grown food crop and sowed indigo in its place. T h e planter also beat the ryots to extort agreements from them and carried off their bamboo, toddy 1

Pari. Papers, 1 8 3 1 - 3 2 , V I I I , 339-467. M . N . G u p t a , Analytical Survey of Bengal cutta, 1 9 4 3 ) , pp. 25, 3 1 5 - 1 6 . 2

Regulations

(Cal-

40

T H E BLUE

MUTINY

trees, and straw. When the indigo was delivered the planters refused to pay the full amount stipulated in the contracts. T h e two zamindars complained that many of their ryots had fled to the hills leaving them without tenants, and that neither the district judge nor collector would heed their petitions. 3 T h e Indian Government was well aware of the abuses of the planters. In 1810 the Governor General, Lord Minto, observed that the planters had made "a habit" of forcing the ryots to receive advances and cultivate indigo. He revoked the licenses of four planters and instructed his magistrates to restrain planters from the illegal detention and flogging of ryots, engaging in affrays with other planters, and other acts of violence. 4 From the time of Lord Minto in 1810 to that of Lord Canning in 1859 the Government of India issued no further strong statements condemning the behavior of the indigo planters. T h e oppression and violence continued, but after 1813 the Government was less concerned with Indian sensibilities. In addition, the planters benefited from public enthusiasm for free trade and evangelicalism given official recognition in the Charter Act of 1813 which ended the commercial monopoly of the Company and legalized missionary activity in India. T h e Charter Act required a British subject who wanted to proceed to India to apply, as before, to the Court of Directors for permission. But as an accommodation to private adventurers the Act ruled that if the Directors refused permission the applicant might appeal to the Board of Control which could override the Directors. Once in India a British subject needed the approval of the Governor General if he wished to reside outside Calcutta, Bombay or Madras, and the Governor General was empowered to deport him if he misSinha, Economic History of Bengal, * Pari. Papers, 1812-13, V I I I , 387 ff. 3

I, 209-210.

THE

INTERLOPERS

41

behaved. British subjects who resided in the mufassal were subject to the C o m p a n y courts in civil suits b r o u g h t against them by Indians; but, where Indians could appeal decisions only to the Sadr Diwani Adalat, the settlers retained the right to appeal their cases to the Calcutta Supreme Court. A few years later the planters received their first important concessions f r o m the Government of India. In 1823 L o r d Amherst, the G o v e r n o r General, enabled planters to recover by summary suit advances made to ryots. T h e planter was also given a lien on any crops produced o n land for w h i c h he had given indigo advances and was protected against the interference of zamindars d u r i n g the selling and delivery of the indigo plant. In an even more unprecedented decision, Amherst first opened the doors to the leasing of lands to Europeans in 1824 w h e n he authorized coffee growers, and soon afterwards, cotton and sugarcane planters to lease lands. 5 In London, however, those Directors at India House w h o were hostile to European settlement were k e e p i n g a watchful eye on the proceedings of the liberal Governors General. W h e n L o r d Ellenborough became President of the Board of C o n t r o l in 1828, he joined these critics in their attack against the new Governor General, W i l l i a m Bentinck. 6 O n A u g u s t 6, 1828 the C o u r t of Directors wrote Bentinck that it had been receiving reports of plunder, affrays, confining and assaulting cultivators, and seizing of lands by planters against w h o m the local courts had proven ineffective. W h e n Indians complained, wrote the Directors, their petitions had been set aside for months. B u t w h e n agency houses complained about certain suits g o i n g against planters, their petitions were acted u p o n Pari. Papers, 1831-32, VIII, 271. " Tripathi, Trade and Finance, p. 228. 5

42

THE BLUE MUTINY

immediately and the Government had gone so far as to interfere with the courts in their cases. T h e Directors instructed Bentinck to enforce the laws with greater strictness and called for a full report on the conduct of the planters. 7 Bentinck at the time was trying to save from bankruptcy the Calcutta agency houses which had most of their money tied up in indigo concerns. In 1829, a t request of these houses, he extended to indigo planters Amherst's regulation giving coffee planters the right to lease lands. By Regulation V of 1830 he went even further and authorized the summary criminal trial and imprisonment of ryots who broke indigo contracts. T o extricate himself from indigo planting a ryot was now required to furnish proof that his contract had expired, pay up outstanding balances on his advances, and, if the planter refused to accept these balances, seek his remedy in a civil suit. T h e law effectively bound the ryot to indigo cultivation. 8 In defending his regulations Bentinck wrote the Court of Directors that if the Government removed their disadvantages the indigo planters could become a blessing to India. Planters holding lands in their own names would take an interest in improving the condition of their tenants. Conflicts between planters over disputed crops would cease, and healthy competition take its place. Fundamentally, he argued, the presence of Europeans in the mufassal would help "civilize" the Indians by diffusing European arts and sciences among them. Bentinck envisioned the rise of a new India with religious sects incorporating Christian ethics and a populace demanding European luxuries and English education, inaugurating new commercial enterprises, and cooperating with Europeans in 7

β

Pari. Ibid.

Papers,

1831-32, V I I I , 374-77.

THE

INTERLOPERS

43

business. Nor did the Governor General neglect to mention the importance of encouraging indigo production for remittance purposes. In reviewing the reports from his district officers on the conduct of the indigo planters Bentinck concluded that the occasional misconduct of the planters was more than offset by the benefits they brought to the countryside. In spite of the fact that the planters had labored under severe legal handicaps, every factory was "a circle of improvement." 9 T h e Court of Directors read Bentinck's arguments with obdurate skepticism. T h e y disallowed his criminally enforceable contract act, but reluctantly confirmed his resolution on the leasing of lands by indigo planters, though they shortened the legal duration of such leases from sixty to twenty-one years. T h e Directors wrote that in giving weight to the reports of his district magistrates on the conduct of the planters the Governor General had been less than judicious. "It is obvious that such accounts must be received with some allowance for the delicacy of the inquiry, and for the disposition men naturally feel to speak favourably of those with whom they are in habits of familiarity and of social intercourse." In refutation they quoted at length from other reports telling how contracts were forced on unwilling ryots by planters' lathiyals or forged by Indian factory servants. 10 In contrast to Bentinck's liberalism and faith in British character, the outlook of the Directors was conservative and timid. Typical of Bentinck's major opponents in the Court of Directors was Neil Benjamin Edmonstone who had served the Company in India as Persian translator and as a member of the Governor General's Supreme Council. From 1818 until 1834 he was a prominent member of the »Ibid., 10

Ibid.,

273-84. 334-40.

44

THE BLUE MUTINY

Court of Directors. In his opinion the Company had b e e n able to hold India only because it had never interferred with the people's full exercise of their own religions and laws. Indians, he felt, should not participate in any way in the Government. T h e y should be tried under their o w n laws in separate courts and never be called upon to serve on juries to judge Englishmen. Because of differences in character, religion, habits, and language, their association with Europeans as equals would lead to continual strife. Edmonstone resented that the "momentous question o£ admitting Europeans and allowing them to become landholders" had been settled by the Governor General without prior consultation with the Court of Directors. 11 T h e issue between Lord William Bentinck and the Court of Directors was resolved by the Charter Act of 1833 which confirmed the East India Company as the Government of India for another twenty years. After collecting evidence for three years the parliamentary select committee which prepared the Act reported that, for the most part, the introduction of British capital and its employment in the districts had been beneficial. But, in view of the defective state of the judicial establishment, the committee recommended that admission of Europeans into the mufassal be carefully controlled. By the Charter Act British subjects were permitted to settle in any territory which had been under the rule of the Company in 1800. T o counterbalance the opening of India to British settlers the Act greatly enhanced the powers of the Governor General in Council. He was provided with a Legislative Council whose laws were to have "the same force and effect within and throughout the said territories as an Act of Parliament." T h e Charter Act also provided for the appoint11

Ibid., 1831-32, IX, 803-26.

T H E INTERLOPERS

45

ment of a Law Commission to enquire into the courts and the operation of the laws. 12 T o head the Law Commission the Company appointed Thomas Babington Macaulay. He arrived in India in 1834 to serve as the first Legal Member of the Governor General's Legislative Council. Macaulay shared the Utilitarian conviction that legal codes should be constituted along rational and functional lines, and as a liberal he believed that the major role of government should be to administer justice purely and cheaply. As an advocate of "westernization" he saw that only when the people learned to place more confidence in the courts and to face tyranny without fear would their "national character" improve. 13 One of Macaulay's major assignments, and one most congenial to him, was to accomplish what Bentinck had suggested but postponed in 1829, formulation of equal laws for Indians and Europeans. Accordingly, he drafted Act X I of 1836 which removed the right of Europeans to appeal to the Supreme Court in civil cases. It is noteworthy that the principal opponents of his proposal were not the indigo planters but the British barristers who practiced before the Supreme Court in Calcutta. Macaulay defended his measure on grounds that the Government should not support the special privileges of any group, but should act as a firm and impartial despotism and do justice to all without distinction of race. In a caustic minute on the measure he denounced the attempt of the Europeans in Calcutta to form a racial oligarchy. 14 W i t h the exception of Act X I of 1836, the application "Ibid., 1831-3«, VIII, «6-27. 1 S C . D. Dharker, Lord Macaulay's Legislative Minutes (Madras, 1946), pp. 272 ff. See also Eric Stokes, The English Utilitarians and India (Oxford, 1959). 1 1 Dharker, Macaulay's Minutes, pp. 182-196, 272 ff.

46

THE BLUE

MUTINY

of Macaulay's principles to the Bengal mufassal was, like his draft of an Indian penal code, set aside for over two decades. Nevertheless, the twenty years between Macaulay's departure from India and the Sepoy Mutiny were not uneventful in the shaping of policy toward European settlement in India. T w o movements were at work in widely separated places, each of which would profoundly influence thât policy during the indigo disturbances. The first took place in England. Here evangelicals and humanitarians united with Lancashire cotton interests in the British India Society formed in 1839 and in the Indian Reform Society organized in i853· 1 5 T h e evangelicalhumanitarian wing wanted to diffuse British civilization and Christianity in India; one important medium of this diffusion would be British settlers living among the people. T h e Lancashire wing was interested in the growing of cotton within the Empire, best accomplished under the supervision of British settlers. Other business interests wanted to increase the production and export of Indian raw materials, especially tea, sugar, wool and iron. The politically oriented wanted to protect India against Russian expansion by colonizing the northwest frontier and fostering Indian trade with Tibet and Central Asia. 16 In 1858 the movement favoring European colonization in India reached its climax. In Parliament it was led by the humanitarian elder statesman William Ewart, supported by other humanitarians as well as by representatives of the Midlands manufacturing areas. Its opponents were the "Indian authorities," shareholders and officials of the East India Company and men with experience in the 16

S. Maccoby, English Radicalism, 1853-1886 (London, 1938), pp. 16-17, 36416 3 Hansard's Parliamentary Debates, C X L I X , (16 March 269-93.

T H E INTERLOPERS

47

Company's Indian service. Parliament, on Ewart's motion, appointed the Select Committee on European Colonization and Settlement in India which collected evidence for two years. In its report the committee called on the Government of India to encourage settlement by reforming the administration of the judiciary and police, improving roads and communications, and removing all doubt about the right of Europeans to settle in India. 17 T h e only sour note against colonization was that sounded in the testimony on the behavior of the indigo planters of Bengal. These testimonies, the committee reported, were "painful to read." If treated in a "just and temperate" manner the Indian would cooperate with and form an attachment to the European. T h e report concluded with an appeal to every settler to conduct himself with a deep sense of responsibility to the natives and to his own country. Thus, at the onset of the indigo disturbances public opinion in England, though critical of the indigo planters, generally favored European colonization in India. 18 T h e second movement which would affect the status of the European settler took place in India. A new attitude toward local administration was spreading through the ranks of the Company's service. In the North-Westem Provinces Robert Bird and James Thomason in the 1830's and 1840's introduced a system of district government known as "authoritarian paternalism." It was later introduced into the Punjab by John Lawrence. In Bengal the Governor General, Lord Dalhousie (1848-1856), took preliminary steps to reorganize the internal administration which had been virtually neglected since the days of Lord 1 7 Although Act IV of 1837 gave British subjects unrestricted right of entry, there was a provision in the Penal Code referring to unauthorized entrance which threw doubt on the status of immigrants. 18 Pari. Papers, 1859, Session II, V, 276.

48

T H E BLUE MUTINY

William Bentinck. When, during the Sepoy Mutiny, the Punjab remained loyal to the British the success of the new school was considered proven. After the Mutiny its influence was brought to bear on Lower Bengal where it became the policy of the Government to concentrate and increase its authority on the district level. 19 Macaulay in his day had compared the hostility of the new "paternalists" to that of the old administrators of the East India Company: It is impossible that any rational person can be so prejudiced against the Company and its servants as really to believe that, having given up all connexion with trade, they are still jealous of all other traders. But there is a jealousy, widely different from the old commercial jealousy, of which the Company is invidiously and unfoundedly accused by the petitioners—jealousy which it is their duty and that of all who are in authority under them to entertain. That jealousy is—not the jealousy of a merchant afraid of being undersold, but the jealousy of a ruler afraid that the subjects for whose well-being he is answerable, should be pillaged and oppressed.20 T h e fortunes of the indigo planter depended even more upon his immediate relationships with local officials, zamindars and peasants than it did upon Government policy. Until well into the nineteenth century the private planters benefited from the presence in the mufassal of the East India Company's commercial residents, business agents who were provided with large amounts of capital to purchase local products for the Company's investment. Commercial residents were also permitted to do business on their own account, and many manufactured indigo to sell to the Company and private traders. T h e y assisted the private indigo planters with loans, frequently allying with 19 20

Stokes, English Utilitarians, pp. 240-46. Dharker, Macaulay's Minutes, p. 196.

THE

INTERLOPERS

49

them against the collectors and joining with them in arrangements for mutual profit. When the office of commercial resident was discontinued after 1834, the planter lost a valuable ally in the mufassal.21 The collector, who was responsible for the welfare of the local inhabitants as well as for that of the East India Company, found himself in an ambivalent position when trying to deal with a commercial resident who abused his powers. In 1789 the Commercial Resident at Goamalti, Henry Creighton, was reprehended by the Collector of Dinajpur, George Hatch, for forcing the local zamindar to supply him with boats for the indigo harvest. Hatch warned Creighton that if he continued his high-handed behavior the authorities in Calcutta would be informed. On the other hand, Hatch promised to help him in his business if he could do so "without putting any restraint upon the inclinations of the inhabitants," and to inform the ryots that "it is expected of them to contribute their aid in furthering the culture and manufacture of indigo." 22 In general, the Board of Trade encouraged and supported the planters while the Judicial Department maintained a careful watch on their abuses. 21

William Wilson Hunter, Annals of Rural Bengal (7th ed., London, 1 8 9 7 ) , pp. 349-68, gives an account of the relations between a commercial resident, a collector and a private adventurer. Charles Grant served as a commercial resident and planted indigo on his own account in Malda District from 1 7 8 0 to 1787. In 1788 as a member of the Board of T r a d e in Calcutta he continued to help his fellow planters by loaning them money and assuring that indigo remained on the list of Company investments. Ainslee Embree, Charles Grant and British India (New York, 1962), p. 84. Another important commercial resident planting indigo was George Udny who employed William Carey as his assistant before the missionary joined W a r d and Marshman at Serampore to perform his momentous educational work. George Smith, Life of William Carey (London, Everyman Ed., η. d.), pp. 58 ff. 22

Bengal District Records:

Dinajpur

(Shillong, 1 9 1 4 ) , I, 309 ff.

50

THE BLUE

MUTINY

T h e relationship between planter and district officer varied with the individuals concerned. It depended on the social status of the individual planter, his "breeding," and his bank account as well as on the maturity, experience, and sense of mission of the official. T o a lonely magistrate the home of a wealthy planter must have seemed a paradise in comparison to the neglected, rambling and crowded homes of the Indian zamindars. T h e feelings of Colonel Gastrell, a settlement officer assigned to Jessore soon after the indigo disturbances, were probably typical. T h e numerous indigo . . . factories . . . impart an air of civilization to and greatly enliven the scenery whenever they appear. . . . There is an appearance of solid and unmistakable comfort about them generally, that is exceedingly refreshing and delightful. Always built in the most open spots, they stand boldly out and offer a striking contrast to the neighboring Bengalee habitations, which are so buried in jungle as to be barely visible until arriving within a few yards of them.23 Yet the planters often felt they were being abused by the officials. "If the planter has good pig-sticking ground around his factory, he is not under a social ban, but he is very often very ill-used," reported one planter. 24 T h e Secretary of the Indigo Planters' Association, William Theobald, told the Committee on Colonization that the young, inexperienced civilians who were flooding India since the examination system had been instituted in 1854 were more biased against the planters than their predecessors. T h e y were in the power of their Indian translators and were "earwigged by worthless natives to prejudice against their own countrymen." 2 6 Against these testimonies 23 J . E. Gastrell, Report on the Districts of Jessore, Fureedpore Backergunge (Calcutta, 1868), p. 7. " Pari. Papers, 1859, Session I, IV, 1 7 1 . 25 Pari. Papers, 1857-58, V I I , Pt. I, 60.

and

T H E INTERLOPERS

51

must be placed the conclusion of the Indigo Commission of i860. "If anything, the bias of the English Magistrate has been unconsciously towards his countrymen, whom he has asked to his own table, or met in the hunting field, or whose houses he has personally visited." If this had not been the case, reported the Commissioners, "a cultivation of the character which we have clearly shown indigo to be would not have gone on for such a length of time."2® Along with their complaints about the bias of the civil service, the planters objected to the conduct of the local courts. Although in criminal matters the planters were exempt from the jurisdiction of any court below that of the district magistrate, in civil matters they were under the jurisdiction of all mufassai courts. T h e three lowest courts, those of the munsifs, sadr amins and principal sadr amins, were predominantly staffed by Indians. In prosecuting minor cases against ryots and small landholders, the planters left the court work to their agents, either factory servants or Indian mukhtars (attorneys). T h e corruption of the courts was universally acknowledged, not because the judges themselves were corrupt, but because the minor court officials could be bribed and the witnesses were untrustworthy. T h e courts were frequented by the most venal members of mufassai society, semi-literate mukhtars, vakils (pleaders) and court clerks. Respectable Indians considered it disgraceful to attend the courts and avoided it whenever possible. T h e major problem of the judge was to learn the simple truth of the matter at hand, buried as it was beneath a mass of perjured statements and forged documents. 27 A n 2« R . I. C., Pt. I, Report, 27

Hodgson Pratt, Articles

don, 1857).

p. 30. and Letters

on Indian

Questions

(Lon-

52

THE BLUE

MUTINY

old mukhtar admitted to the planter James Forlong, "I am obliged to get all the witnesses, and, worst of all, forge all the documents." 28 Because the courts were alien to Indian tradition and usually outside the village area, there was none of the restraint of peer-approval which supported village morality. Instead of bringing to the mufassal the high judicial standards of England, the planters were satisfied to "play the game" according to Indian rules. During the indigo disturbances the courts became the principal battleground between the planter and his opponents in the mufassal. The role of the Government in the disturbances was to increase the number of district and sub-district courts and to staff them with magistrates imbued with rigid judicial standards. In the days before an effective administrative system was introduced into Bengal, the Indian zamindars were the only other powers in the mufassal able to restrain the planters. The zamindari system, as reformed and regulated by Cornwallis, had both advantages and disadvantages for indigo planting by Europeans. One disadvantage was that the peasants who cultivated indigo were not free to contract with the planters; there was always a third party interested in what the ryot grew whose tacit agreement was necessary. On the other hand, once he had appeased the zamindar, it was possible for the planter to contract for thousands of bigahs of indigo at one stroke. In those early years the planters often found the zamindar strongly opposed to his ryots taking advances and cultivating indigo. T h e zamindars objected mainly because indigo was not a profitable crop, and they had great difficulty in realizing their rents. The planters often went with bands of lathiyals to establish their right to sow; when zamindars 28

R. I. C., A. 3172.

T H E INTERLOPERS

53

themselves tried to manufacture indigo, the planters ruthlessly tried to prevent them. 28 Before 1829, when the planters were limited by the Government to holding only enough land for their factories and grounds, almost all cultivation was theoretically be-ilaka, that is, on land controlled by an Indian landholder and not by the indigo planter. T h e major concern of the planters was to increase their power over the peasants, first through the expediency of holding leases in the names of their Indian servants (banami), and after February 1829 in their own names. But because Bentinck's regulation of 1829 extending to indigo planters the right to lease lands was so overburdened with restricting conditions, only a handful of planters took advantage of it.80 T h e planters' position was greatly improved when, in 1837, c he Government enacted that any subject of the Crown could acquire and hold in perpetuity, or for any length of time land in any part of the territories of the East India Company. 31 Thenceforth, the major objective of the planters became to increase their ilaka cultivation. T h e early restrictions had forced the planters to lose irretrievable opportunities to acquire land cheaply in the early nineteenth century, and now they were obliged to spend much of their resources on acquiring zamindaris through purchase and on holding them with litigation. Nevertheless, by the time of the indigo disturbances most of the cultivation in the large concerns of Lower Bengal was ilaka, in which the concern was the landlord. T h e Bengal Indigo Company grew indigo on only 17,000 bigahs of be-ilaka land out of its total cultivation of 75,000 bigahs. 28 Hari Ranjan Ghosal, Economic Transition dency, 1793-1833 (Patna, 1950), pp. 82-87. 30 Pari. Papers, 1831-32, VIII, 431-33. 81 Act IV of 1837.

in the Bengal

Presi-

54

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

In James Hills' concerns, only 14,000 out of the total 67,000 bigahs of indigo cultivated were be-ilaka.S2 In the lawless condition of Bengal before the improvement of administration under the lieutenant governors, planters and zamindars frequently settled their quarrels in battle. T h e affray between bands of lathiyals had been an institution in Bengal long before the arrival of the European planters, and planters soon learned to follow the example of neighboring zamindars and retain large numbers of lathiyals and spearmen. T h e permanent force could be increased by hiring levies from the surrounding villages, especially in east Bengal. Free lance lathiyals were always available for employment. One planter testified before the Committee on Colonization: " I quarreled one evening with a zamindar and before 24 hours were over 400 of these men offered me their services." 83 During the thirty or forty years preceding 1847 every one of the more than fifty concerns in Lower Bengal had been involved in an affray. Whenever a planter proposed to establish a new factory, the ryots in the neighborhood would appeal to their zamindar for protection and hostilities would ensue. T h e principal movers stayed behind the scenes and the opposing forces were led by their head servants. There were also cases of affrays between planters, but the usual contest was between planter and zamindar. From about 1845, a n d especially after the formation of the Indigo Planters' Association in 1851, encounters between planters had ceased. Affrays between planters and zamindars were greatly curtailed by the passing of Act IV of 1840 which increased the powers of the magistrate in dealing with disputes over land and water rights. The ryot was the chief victim of these contests. Whoever won, his 32

R. I. C., Appendix I, A. 2895, and A. 661 S. 33 Pari. Papers, 1859, Session II, V, 272.

THE INTERLOPERS

55

crops were destroyed, his villages looted, and his cattle driven off. 34 Gradually the struggle for rights over land shifted to the courts and the b a r g a i n i n g table. A l t h o u g h the planters complained of zamindari opposition due to jealousy or political and social rivalry, the Indigo Commission reported that the only difficulty experienced by the planters in acquiring land had been that of "settling the pecuniary terms." T h e zamindar asked exorbitant prices for leases a n d sometimes led his ryots against indigo sowing in order to force the planter to negotiate for a lease. 36 T h e zamindar had other less material rights in the mufassal f o r w h i c h he considered the planter a rival. In Nadia, where by i860 the planters were in practice landlords of two-thirds of the district, 3 8 the zamindars felt their "rank and authority in society" c r u m b l i n g and were jealous of the planters on that score. 87 T h e y objected to the planters' negotiating directly w i t h their ryots for indigo w i t h o u t asking f o r the zamindar's mediation. W h e r e the zamindari had been in one family for generations, the ryots w h o had come u n d e r the concern's estate may have felt a loyalty toward their old zamindar. B u t in Nadia, at least, most of the zamindars were themselves newcomers, and the planters had little trouble in this respect. 88 In addition, the zamindars were o f t e n absentee landlords, whereas the planters lived a m o n g the people. T h e planters held lands u n d e r almost every type of tenure, from zamindari d o w n to sub-tenancy of a ryot. As 34 W. S. Seton-Karr, "Indigo in VII (1847), 186-219. 35 R . I. C., Pt. I, Report, p. 13. 36 Englishman (Calcutta), Jan. long. 37 R. I. C., A. 2912 (Testimony 38 R. I. C., Pt. I, Report, p. 13

Lower Bengal," Calcutta

Review,

24, i860. Letter from James Forof James Forlong). and A. 2914-15 (Forlong).

56

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

a zamindar his rights were limited by a peculiarity of the land-tenure system of India. H e may have been the proprietor of the land under the Permanent Settlement, but land already occupied was beyond his management. H e was allowed to lease his land and collect rent, but not to dictate what crops were to be cultivated. If, however, his tenants objected to growing indigo, he could, until the R e n t A c t of 1859 (Act X), evict them for non-payment of rent. (Certain resident ryots were theoretically exempted f r o m eviction, b u t their rents were liable to enhancement if they fell below certain obscurely determined prevailing rates.) B u t under the Permanent Settlement, lands occ u p i e d by cultivators were to be let. O n l y reclaimed wastelands and chars within the planter's estate could legitimately be cultivated as nij or "home f a r m " lands w i t h hired labor. 38 U n d e r an Indian zamindar the planter might hold a patni taluk, a lease with all the rights of the zamindar, transferable and heritable and with permanently fixed rent. U n t i l the passage of Act X I of 1859 patni leases as well as most other leases were automatically dissolved w h e n a zamindari was sold for arrears of revenue. Beneath the patni tenure were various levels of under-tenancy with fixed permanent rents called as a general class dar-patnis; below these a planter could acquire a temporary lease subject to enhancement on renewal. 4 0 W h e n the planter f o u n d that he could not control production from above, he sometimes tried to obtain a khartouli lease, or sublease from a ryot. 4 1 U n t i l the passage of A c t X of 1859 the planters, along 39 Β . H . Baden-Powell, Land-Systems of British O x f o r d , 1892), I, 166-68, 628. *o Ibid., pp. 543-46. 4 1 B u c h a n a n , Development of Capitalist Enterprise

India

(3 vols.,

in India,

p. 49.

T H E INTERLOPERS

57

with other zamindars, had an almost unlimited right of enhancement. Usually the tenants of planters paid less in rent than did those of Indian zamindars, the difference being made up because indigo did not pay as well as rice and other crops. But the threat of enhancement was ready for use at any time against ilaka ryots who were backward about sowing indigo. During the indigo disturbances the planters fell back upon these powers of enhancement, only to find that by Act X of 1859 they had been stripped of much of their power as landlords. Those planters who held lands under Indian zamindars, including many who had their own zamindari estates in neighboring areas, were constantly threatened by another law peculiar to the Permanent Settlement. Whenever a zamindari estate was sold for arrears of revenue, all the numerous under-tenures, except those of certain resident ryots, were cancelled. Lands leased by Europeans for homes, gardens or manufactories were exempted, but all the other lands which a planter had leased were cancelled and liable to rent enhancement, or to non-renewal by the new owner. 42 T h e Sale Laws of 1841 and 1845 removed any doubt that the new purchaser could enhance the rents of all under-tenants and eject tenants.43 One of the major objectives in the formation of the Indigo Planters' Association had been to urge the passage of a new sale law to protect undertenures. Revenue officers, missionaries and the lieutenant governors of Bengal all favored a new sale law. It was opposed by the Indian zamindars who considered it to be special legislation in the interest of the 42

Reg. X L I V of 1793, sec. 5; see also Baden-Powell, Land Systems, I, 437. Sometimes a zamindar re-purchased his own estate banami after having allowed it to be sold at Government auction in order to wipe clean all leases and to enhance or evict at will as the " n e w " owner. 43 Baden-Powell, Land Systems, I, 148.

58

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

Europeans. 4 4 Finally, Act X I of 1859 provided for the registration of undertenures, the protection of undertenure rights, and the separate payment of revenue by shareholders in estates. 45 W i t h the gradual improvement of administration in Bengal, the relationship of the planter to the ryot also changed. T h e early accounts are filled with stories of personal cruelty and violence by planters to force ryots to sow indigo. 4 8 A l t h o u g h in the years immediately preceding the indigo disturbances somewhat more subtle methods were used to coerce the ryots, they now had fewer opportunities to escape the grinding tyranny of the indigo system. T h e planters organized themselves and no longer competed with one another for the ryot's crop. As the planter improved his land tenure position, the ryot found it more difficult to free himself f r o m indigo. Although the planters were now a more civilized body, they were also more efficient and forced cultivators to take greater pains to produce the fine quality indigo in which they took such pride. Accounts of oppression by the planters should be viewed in relation to prevalent mufassal morality. T h e planters were probably no more oppressive than the Indian zamindars, though they may have seemed so to a peasantry who were unaccustomed to their novel demands. Furthermore, ryot-planter relationships were not unremittingly hostile. T h o u g h exaggerated, the planters' claims that they saved many ryots f r o m starvation in times of drought and protected them f r o m rapacious zamindars had some founda44 Pari. Papers, 1857-58, V I I , Pt. I, 60. C. D. Field, Introduction to Regulations of the Bengal Code (Calcutta, 1897), PHindoo Patriot, February 5, 1857. 45 Field, Bengal Code, pp. 122 ff. T h e act opened the door to the multiplication of sub-tenancies which has plagued Bengal to this day. 46 See, for example, J o h n G. Reilly, Journal of a Wanderer (London, 1844), pp. 65-74.

T H E INTERLOPERS

59

tion in fact. A few planters, like Thomas Savi of Moisganj and N. Pogose of Dacca were apparently innocent of any oppression. Others assauged their consciences with good works. According to the inscription on his tomb Henry Creighton, the commercial resident and planter of the late eighteenth century, built vernacular schools for the poorer children in his district.47 H. Mackenzie of Jingergattcha, whose oppressive behavior precipitated the indigo disturbances in Barasat, liberally dispensed medicine and supported a school for one hundred boys.48 T . J . Kenny of Pabna49 and the planters of Magura Subdivision in Jessore50 built charity hospitals. The "white sheep in a black flock,"51 however, was James Forlong, the moral leader of the planters during the indigo disturbances. Forlong first came to Lower Bengal as a young assistant planter in 1830 and by 1836 was placed in charge of Mulnath, an indigo firm then belonging to Messrs. Hills and White. At Mulnath Forlong became known for his responsible behavior, bringing "quietness and peace" to an area once filled with "turmoil and trouble." In 1842 he built the only hospital between Calcutta and Krishnagar and employed a well-trained Indian doctor to direct it. He supported two schools; one for lower caste children and one for the higher caste students for whom he hired a teacher from Calcutta to give instruction in English. By 1854 Forlong was already manager of twenty-three indigo factories with which were associated 300,000 people. At Mulnath he built an English-style country mansion, 47

Bengal District Records: Dinajpur, I, 309 ff. R . I. C., A. 870 (Rev. J . H. Anderson, Baptist Missionary Society, Jessore). 49 Englishman, January 13, i860. 60 J . Westland, Jessore (2d ed., Calcutta, 1874), p. 2 1 1 . 51 Hindoo Patriot, October 10, i860. 48

6o

THE BLUE MUTINY

furnished it elaborately, and surrounded it w i t h landscaped parks. His workday usually included a tour of his factories, fields and villages. O f t e n he w o u l d stop to settle a quarrel b e t w e e n t w o ryots over a field b o u n d a r y or hear a grievance against one of his factory servants. W h e n he visited the village school " a b o u t one h u n d r e d little dark urchins, with pens and p a l m leaves in hand, a n d w i t h school master at the head . . . make their salam to the sahib, their friend and patron." 5 2 In 1856 he left M u l n a t h , w h i c h had been sold to the Bengal Indigo C o m p a n y , and was employed by Hills and C o m p a n y as general mufassal manager w i t h headquarters at N i s c h i n t i p u r where he lived d u r i n g the indigo disturbances. In N o v e m b e r i860, i n the midst of the disturbances, he resigned and moved to C h a m p a r a n District in Bihar where he continued his career as an indigo planter a n d leader of the planter community. 6 3 A conscientious planter like James Forlong was closer to the people than their district magistrate, and to them he represented the g o v e r n m e n t of their distant rulers. B u t fundamentally his position in the mufassal was as untenable as that of his less h u m a n e and less scrupulous fellow planters. T h e entire indigo industry of L o w e r Bengal ultimately rested on a foundation of coercion and intimidation, and changes were taking place in mufassal life w h i c h w o u l d make the system intolerable. O n e of these was the growth of Calcutta and its increasing influence on all classes of mufassal society. Calcutta in the 1850's was seething with political and intellectual activity. M u c h of the excitement was communicated to the mufassal through the rural upper classes w h o sent their sons to be educated in the city and through villagers w h o had migrated to Calcutta and returned to their village homes for holidays. In 62 53

[C. Grant], Rural Life, p. 39. Hindoo Patriot, Oct. 10 and Nov. 14, i860; Reid, Indigo,

p. 155.

T H E INTERLOPERS

6l

the indigo districts themselves colleges offering Western curricula were being established—at Dacca in 1841, at Krishnagar in Nadia District in 1845, and at Berhampur in Murshidabad District in 1853. Between 1852 and 1854 English secondary schools were founded in many of the indigo districts.54 Other events of a political nature excited the peasantry. One of these was the Farazi disturbances which reached their height in the 1830's and 1840's. T h e Farazis were a tightly organized puritanical sect among the Muslims of eastern Bengal. They collected funds, refused to pay rents, administered their own justice, and attacked and plundered the estates of Hindu zamindars and European indigo planters. Though the movement was checked by 1859, many of the peasants who participated in the indigo disturbances were Farazis, skilled in military organization and the use of arms. 55 A second was the Santal Rebellion of 1855-57 in which the aboriginal tribal peoples of western Bengal rebelled first against Hindu moneylenders, then against zamindars and indigo planters. 56 T h e third was the Sepoy Mutiny. Though it hardly touched the indigo districts of Lower Bengal, it heightened racial tension by reminding the planters of their isolation and giving them an opportunity to exercise emergency police and magisterial authority. T h e people lived in fear of violence from both sides—from stray bands of north-Indian sepoys and from newly organized European "volunteer" forces. One such force, composed of discharged seamen and loafers, was assembled in Calcutta and sent to Jessore where it intimidated the surrounding villagers. 57 Finally, and of greater consequence in the 64

mufassal,

See relevant Bengal District Gazetteers. " " F a r a i d i Sect," Encyclopedia of Islam (London, 1927), II, 57-59. M K. K. Datta, The Santal Insurrection of 1855-57 (Calcutta, 1940). 57 See W . S. Seton-Karr, Sepoy Mutiny . . . in . . . Jessore (London, 1894).

62

THE BLUE

MUTINY

were the steps begun under Lord Dalhousie to improve the internal administration of Bengal. Among these were the undertaking of a revenue survey, the organization of an effective police corps along the Bengal section of the Grand Trunk Road, and the appointment of a special commission for the suppression of dacoity. Collectors were urged to tour among the people of their districts, and measures were taken to raise the standards of the mufassal courts.58 These were small beginnings, but the pace of reform would accelerate under Lord Canning, so that by the time of his departure from India in 1862 Bengal had become one of the better administered provinces of British India. Above all, Lord Dalhousie strongly advocated that the home government sanction the appointment of a permanent Lieutenant Governor of Bengal. Before 1854 the Governor General had been responsible for the internal administration of Bengal in addition to his heavy all-India duties. Dalhousie's recommendation was incorporated into the Charter Act of 1853 and in 1854 he nominated for the new post the leading member of his council, Sir Frederick Halliday. 59 58 50

Buckland, Lieutenant Ibid., XV ff.

Governors,

I, xxxi ff.

III The Lieutenant Governors Rajar gune rajyabas rajar dose sjrbonas

The virtues of the king bring happiness to the realm. His sins bring utter destruction.

AFTER HE TOOK OFFICE AS THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR OF

Bengal, Sir Frederick Halliday's responsibilities were surpassed only by those of the G o v e r n o r General himself. His authority extended over Bengal, Bihar, Orissa, Assam, and contiguous states, an area of 253,000 square miles with a population of forty millions. T h e five years d u r i n g w h i c h Halliday held the office were momentous ones in the history of Bengal. T h e y included the Santal R e b e l l i o n and the Sepoy M u t i n y , the Education Despatch of 1854 w h i c h provided for the establishment of Calcutta University, and the H i n d u W i d o w ' s Remarriage Act, a landmark in social reform. A l t h o u g h H a l l i d a y did not take the leading role in any of these events, he invariably supported the side of progress and order. Halliday had a direct influence on the formulation of four other measures w h i c h were of more consequence to the Bengal mufassal. T h e first was police reform. A l t h o u g h most of his recommendations were enacted under his successor, d u r i n g his o w n administration a corps of 7,000

64

T H E BLUE

MUTINY

military police, about half of whom were mounted, was established in Bengal. A second reform which made headway under Halliday was the improvement of criminal justice. In 1843 Nadia Division, which included the largest indigo producing districts of Lower Bengal, had only four magisterial courts. By the end of Halliday's term there were thirteen. Of still greater importance was the Rent Act of 1859 which curtailed the powers of zamindars and improved the tenure status of ryots.1 Finally, in April 1859 the offices of district collector and magistrate in Bengal were united. T h i s step, which had been advocated by Lord Dalhousie, followed from the enhanced influence of the school of "authoritarian paternalism" after the Mutiny. T h e highest district official remained, as before, the civil and sessions judge. But the executive po\vers, which had previously been divided between a collector in charge of revenue and a magistrate in charge of police and original criminal jurisdiction, were now united. T h e new magistrate collector became the center of power in his district. 2 Only when one turns to his policies toward indigo planters and cultivators, does one find blots on his distinguished 1 H a l l i d a y was e x t r e m e l y u n p o p u l a r w i t h the H i n d u community of C a l c u t t a w h i c h r e f u s e d to sign the customary eulogistic address on his d e p a r t u r e f r o m I n d i a . T h e Hindoo Patriot c o m m e n t e d that his career was " r e m a r k a b l e f o r selfishness a g g r a v a t e d by intense meanness, for i n s o l e n t b l u n d e r s , systematic insincerity a n d a n u m b e r of hasty doings w h o s e p e r n i c i o u s effects it w i l l take a q u a r t e r of a century to u n d o . " H a l l i d a y was d e n o u n c e d for his g e n e r a l inactivity, his s u p p o r t of a p r o p o s a l to i n t r o d u c e B i b l e study i n t o G o v e r n m e n t schools, his i n d u l g e n c e of the i n d i g o planters, a n d , a b o v e all, his s u p p o r t of the R e n t A c t of 1859. T h i s the Hindoo Patriot called an a t t e m p t to l e v e l the n a t i v e aristocracy " t o o n e s t a n d a r d of social e q u a l i t y w i t h the r u r a l classes." Hindoo Patriot, M a y 5, 1859. 2 T h e career of H a l l i d a y is s u m m a r i z e d i n B u c k l a n d , Governors, I, 1-64.

Lieutenant

T H E L I E U T E N A N T GOVERNORS

65

record. His partiality toward the planters emanated from a conviction that the economic future of Bengal depended on the enterprise of Europeans in the mufassal. He believed that if they were given responsibility for their own good behavior and shown respect by the Government, the indigo planters themselves would curtail their excesses and reform the system. When Halliday first toured Bengal in August 1854, the zamindars, vakils, and mukhtars of Nadia District petitioned him for relief from the "tyranny and oppression" of indigo planters which, they wrote, was a "topic of indignant animadversion in every rank of native society." They protested that the indigo planters were tried by different laws from the natives and that the police were partial towards the planters and coerced the zamindars and ryots into subservience to them. The planters compelled the ryots to grow indigo on land previously devoted to food crops and then underpaid them for the indigo plant delivered. In addition, they complained that the ferry funds had been taken from the control of the zamindars and were now administered by ferry fund committees dominated by indigo planters who used the funds to build roads to benefit the factories and not the people. The petition also pointed out that half the land in Nadia District was virtually in the hands of the indigo planters; for, although the zamindars were the legal landowners, they could not, as a conquered race, reject the applications of the planters for patni leases. Halliday called the petition "vague and probably not credible" and did nothing to investigate the grievances.3 But the Hindoo Patriot, the leading English-language Indian-published newspaper of Calcutta, hailed the peti3

J. P. 117-28, Oct. *6, 1854.

66

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

tion as evidence of the d a w n of political consciousness in the Bengal mufassal. " T h e y are learning to exercise the privileges of British subjects to meet together in public, discuss questions of p u b l i c importance and to convey full expression of their opinions thereupon to their rulers." 4 In contrast to the m a n n e r in which Halliday treated the petitions of the natives, he devoted a good deal of attention to the complaints of the planters. Foremost a m o n g the planters' requests was a law to enforce indigo contracts in the criminal courts. Bentinck's government had passed just such a law, R e g u l a t i o n V of 1830, w h i c h the C o u r t of Directors overruled in 1835 o n the grounds that it could not sanction special legislation in favor of one class to the detriment of another. Halliday studied the p r o b l e m for almost two years, called for the opinions of his district officers on the matter, and concluded that special legislation was necessary to prevent indigo disputes. B u t his intention to seek such legislation was set aside d u r i n g the tumultuous events of 1857. a T h e anxieties accompanying the Sepoy M u t i n y led Halliday to take a step w h i c h d i d m u c h to provoke the crisis in the indigo districts a few years later—he invested a large n u m b e r of planters with the powers of honorary magistrate. H e did this over the objections of two-thirds of the indigo planters, all the zamindars except one, half the district officers and the organized protest of the British Indian Association w h i c h represented the leading Hindus of Calcutta. Between his first appointments on A u g u s t 1, 1857 and the withdrawal of their powers on February i, 1859, twenty-nine European planters and one Indian zamindar were appointed honorary magistrates. A l t h o u g h the honorary magistrates seldom overtly abused their 4

Hindoo Patriot, August 17, 1854. J. P. 26-28, June 12, 1856 and 71-84, Oct. 2, 1856.

T H E L I E U T E N A N T GOVERNORS

67

powers, the very existence of those powers did much to intimidate all sections of Indian society in the mufassal. The peasants expressed their indignation in popular songs and sayings, among them, " J e rakhak se bhakhak," ("the man appointed our protector is our devourer"). 9 James Forlong, who had served as an honorary magistrate himself, and who had originally favored the policy on grounds that the planters should be made responsible for bringing order and civilization to the mufassal, believed that Indian zamindars also should have received appointments as honorary magistrates. T h e Indian gentleman, he thought, would have appreciated such a compliment from the Government and fulfilled his duties honorably. Their snubbing by the Government, Forlong believed, later led the British Indian Association to take up the cause of the ryots against the planters.7 T h e native editor of the weekly Calcutta newspaper, the Indian Field, wrote that "the system of Honorary Magistrates . . . has irritated the people of Bengal to an extent compared with which the greased cartridge of Hindoostan is a trifle." 8 It was in Barasat District, the nearest indigo district to Calcutta, that the events were to occur which touched off the indigo disturbances throughout Lower Bengal. Three outstanding civil servants in the district dared to stand up to the planters. Halliday transferred two of them and the third was vindicated only after Halliday's successor, John Peter Grant, took office. T h e ryots of Barasat had a long 6

R. I. C., A. 1628 (Rev. James Long) . On honorary magistrates see J . P. 18-ig, April 17, 1856; 229-31, Nov. 5, 1857; 28-31, June 1858; and 243, Aug. 19, 1858. Also, Hindoo Patriot, Mar. 4, 1858; R. I. C., Pt. I, Report, p. 36 and Appendix X X V ; and C. R . O., Judicial and Legislative Despatches to India, original drafts, Vol. 2. Nos. 21 and 59 of 1859. 7 R . I. C., A. 3184-86 (James Forlong). 8 Indian Field, November 27, 1858.

68

THE BLUE MUTINY

history of organized opposition to indigo cultivation. In 1832 Barasat had been a center of the Farazi disturbances, which included the burning of indigo factories along with the nonpayment of rents to Hindu zamindars. Ashley Eden, one of the magistrates of Barasat, testified before the Indigo Commission that the ryots of Barasat District were the most intelligent he had encountered. Living near Calcutta and in constant communication with city merchants these Barasat ryots were politically sophisticated. As Farazis they were well organized and frequently met together to exchange ideas. T h e military stations at Dum Dum and Barrackpur increased the value of their produce; jute manufacturing and railroad construction raised the prevailing wage rate. With three subdivisional magistrates in addition to the sadr magistrate the police were well supervised and justice readily available.® Because of its proximity to Calcutta, Barasat was a choice plum for the civil service and was usually awarded to influential and independent young officers. One of the first officials in the district to incur the wrath of an indigo planter was Abdul Latif, Deputy Magistrate of Kalaroa. On May 9, 1854, W. F. Fergusson, a Calcutta merchant and proprietor of the Jingergattcha Concern, complained to the Government of Bengal that though never before had there been any complaints in any of the concern's ninety villages, "no sooner does Abdool Luteef [sic] obtain power than the ryots in the whole of that part of the country refuse to sow and to fulfill their contracts." T h e manager of Jingergattcha, H. Mackenzie, complained that Abdul Latif stopped the sowing of indigo whenever a ryot presented a petition, but told planters to present their grievances to the civil court for redress. Mackenzie also complained that the deputy magistrate had ignored his » R. I. C., A. 3629.

T H E L I E U T E N A N T GOVERNORS

69

charges naming certain "ringleaders" who agitated against the factory, had sent police to stop factory people from entering villages, and had been disrespectful in his form of address toward the planter. His habitual refrain from the bench, said Mackenzie, was: "How well known is the oppression of the indigo sahibs!" After an investigation of Abdul Latif's behavior by the Commissioner of Nadia, Halliday transferred him to a less important and sensitive area. 10 A t the time Abdul Latif's career was just beginning. Under subsequent Lieutenant Governors he was to serve with distinction on the Bengal Legislative Council, the Calcutta Corporation and the Income T a x Commission. In time he became the leading Muslim of Calcutta and his community's spokesman to the Government. 11 A second remarkable officer to serve in Barasat was J. H. Mangles. In 1855, in a dispute between the ryots and the Barasat Concern of the Bengal Indigo Company, Mangles ruled in favor of the ryots saying that they had been forced illegally to take indigo advances. As a result the ryots renounced the cultivation of indigo that year and the output of the Barasat Concern was negligible. Mangles was reprimanded by Halliday himself. 12 In the following year in response to the request of the Lieutenant Governor for reports on indigo disputes, Mangles was one of the few officials who forthrightly condemned the system.18 As a result of pressure on the Government by the planters, Mangles was transferred to another district. Ashley Eden, his successor as joint magistrate, was the nephew of the Earl of Auckland and later himself held J. P. 124-31, June 15, 1854. F. B. Bradley-Birt, Twelve Men of Bengal Century (4th ed., Calcutta, 1927), pp. 111-39. 1 2 R . I. C., A. 3608 and 3626 (Ashley Eden). 10

11

13

in the

J. P. 26-28, June 12, 1856 and 71-84, Oct. 2, 1856.

Nineteenth

ηο

THE BLUE

MUTINY

office as Lieutenant Governor of Bengal. Before coming to Barasat he rendered valuable service to the Government in the Santal Rebellion. Exhausted from that experience, he went to Mauritius for a rest, and while there took time out to expose the oppression of the Creole planters toward their coolies. 14 In Barasat, however, Eden did not at first show any evidence of prejudice against indigo planters. On the contrary, he later admitted having "favored my own countrymen in several instances." 15 Eden's immediate superior was Arthur Grote, Commissioner of Nadia Division. Apparently it was the planters who first antagonized Eden by complaining to Grote about some minor rulings he had made under the impression that it was his duty to dispense even-handed justice. Urged by the planters, one of whom was R . T . Larmour, Grote had ordered Eden to reverse some judicial decisions. T h i s experience, in addition to his inherent sense of justice, brought about a change in Eden's attitude—never again would he abandon his principles to placate his superiors. In February 1859 Messrs. Prestwich and Warner of the Hobra Concern in Barasat asked Eden to persuade their ryots to take advances as he had done for another planter two years earlier. He refused to oblige them, and suggested that their only solution was to offer the ryots a better price. Eden issued a rubakari or statement on the Hobra case which became known to Larmour's villagers in the neighboring Barasat Concern, who soon petitioned him for help against the forced cultivation of indigo. On March 16, 1859, Eden issued the following orders to his assistant, the Deputy Magistrate of Mitterhaut: 14

Sketch of the Official Career of the Honorable Ashley Eden, C. S. I. (Calcutta, 1 8 7 7 ) . 15 R . I. C., A. 3602 (Eden). See also R . I. C., A . 47a and 3576.

T H E L I E U T E N A N T GOVERNORS

7 I

Since the ryotts can sow in their lands w h a t e v e r crop they like, no one can w i t h o u t their consent a n d by violence sow any other crop. O r d e r e d therefore T h a t the original petition be sent to the D e p u t y M a g i s t r a t e of M i t t e r h a u t in order that he may send policemen to the ryotts' lands to p r e v e n t any disturbances that are likely to ensue f r o m any compulsory cultivation of their lands a n d instruct t h e m not to allow any one to interfere w i t h that if the l a n d is really that of the ryotts'. If the ryotts w i s h to sow i n d i g o or a n y t h i n g else the policemen w i l l see that there is n o disturbance.

One month later Larmour wrote Eden a personal letter asking him to modify his order. Eden's reply was that this communication should have been sent in the form of a petition on stamped paper, "as I do not consider that it is desirable to carry on a correspondence with a party to a suit in my Court on subjects connected with the case." He said that he had nothing to do with either the civil or moral obligations of the ryots to fulfill their contracts. Whenever he had advised them to carry out their obligations, they invariably had denied entering into engagements voluntarily. If his ryots break their contracts, Larmour should take his complaint to the civil court. On March 28 Larmour wrote to Commissioner Grote that Eden's proceedings had been prejudiced and unfair, that the presence of the joint magistrate in Charghat had resulted only in encouraging more petitions from ryots, and that Eden had done "all in his power to instigate the ryotts not to sow." He appealed for Grote's help, without which, he said, he could not hope to grow indigo. Grote sent Larmour's complaint to Eden and ordered the joint magistrate to explain his "non-interference principle." Grote accused Eden of imprudently allowing the latter's subordinates to believe that he opposed the existing system of indigo planting, and further expressed his disappointment to find the magistrate "again falling into

72

T H E BLUE M U T I N Y

a mistake that I had to correct last year." Grote suggested that instead of instructing the police to protect the ryots Eden should have warned the police to be especially alert against any disturbance by the ryots. He accused Eden of giving the darogha (superintendent of police) too much responsibility in deciding which lands were really the ryot's own and said that such questions of ownership could only be settled in the revenue and civil courts. Eden, in a letter to Grote on April 18, protested that if all parties admit that the land is really that of the ryot, the question of land ownership is then put aside and the question of forced entry on the ryot's land is the one before the darogha. By bringing up the matter of ownership Grote had avoided the main issue. Eden believed that it was not the function of the police to protect the servants of planters who trespass on the property of ryots. It had been customary, when giving advances for indigo, for the planter regularly to inspect the ryot's crop, to make certain that it was being weeded and otherwise cared for. But Eden felt that the ryot, when entering an engagement, agreed only to sow the lands himself, and that the planter had no right to inspect the crops. Grote sent the complete record of his correspondence with Eden to the Lieutenant Governor for a final decision. T h e decision was one of the first made on an indigo subject by John Peter Grant, less than two months after assuming office. Grant agreed entirely with Eden, saying he defended his actions with "much intelligence and force." T h e question was whether or not the police could protect ryots from the physical interference of strangers on their undisputed land. T h e darogha, Grant ruled, had the duty to prevent a clear case of trespass; and if the planter felt himself wronged, he could go to court. Indigo "cannot be supported at the expense of justice." 16 i e j . P. 156-64, July 21, 1859.

THE

L I E U T E N A N T GOVERNORS

73

O n August 17, 1859, Eden sent extracts from the Government letter to the three deputy magistrates of Barasat. He left the district a few days later and, without his knowledge, Hem Chandra Kar, Deputy Magistrate of Kalaroa, published the following proclamation: T o the Darogah of Thanna Kalarooah . . . in cases of disputes relating to Indigo Ryots, they shall retain possession of their own lands, and shall sow on them what crops they please, and the Police will be careful that no Indigo Planter nor anyone else be able to interfere in the matter; and Indigo Planters shall not be able forcibly to cause Indigo to be sown on the lands of those Ryots on the ground that the Ryots have consented to the sowing, etc., of Indigo. If Ryots have so consented, the Indigo Planter may bring an action against them in the Civil Court. T h e Criminal Court has no concern in these matters because, notwithstanding such contracts, or such consent withheld or given, Ryots may urge unanswerable excuses against the sowing of Indigo. 17 A knowledge of this parwana along with Eden's rubakari of February 1859 spread throughout the district. As Eden testified before the Indigo Commission, "Ryots came from Jessore and Kisnaghur and took authenticated copies of my order, knowing that the effect of the intimation would be, to spread gradually throughout Bengal, a knowledge of the fact that it was optional with ryots to enter into contracts or not, as they thought fit."18 T h e circulation of this proclamation followed a tour made by John Peter Grant to Krishnagar by only a week or two and undoubtedly reinforced the beliefs of many ryots and their leaders that the time for action was ripe, and that now there was hope for Government support in throwing off the hated system. John Peter Grant (1807-1893) had taken office as the second Lieutenant Governor of Bengal on May 1, 1859. " J . P. 232-39, Sept. i860. 1 8 R . I. C., A. 3626 (Eden).

74

THE BLUE

MUTINY

H e came to the office after thirty-one years of service in various official posts, most of which were at the headquarters of the Government. Under L o r d Dalhousie, from 1848 to 1852, Grant had served as Secretary to the Government of Bengal. Because of Dalhousie's absence from Calcutta d u r i n g this period, Grant was the de facto ruler of L o w e r Bengal, and many of the G o v e r n o r General's recommendations for reforming the administration of Bengal were implemented by Grant. Grant is described as comb i n i n g "an indolent sleepy manner" with "extraordinary activity of m i n d , " and of having "large and liberal views" but "retiring and inaccessible habits." His outstanding ability was his skill in argument. Grant's reports were filled with "touches of quiet h u m o r or subdued sarcasm" and were considered the "best state papers recorded by the G o v e r n m e n t of the day." 1 9 H e was able to uncover the questions which lay at the heart of c o m p l e x issues and to argue his case with irrefutable logic. A p p a r e n t l y Grant's views had been strongly influenced by those of A l e x a n d e r Ross who was a M e m b e r of the Supreme Council when Grant first came to Calcutta to assume a post with the Board of R e v e n u e in 1834.20 Grant, like Ross, believed that "law was to be the sole instrument of change." 2 1 W h i l e proponents of the "paternalist" school advocated a strong district executive, G r a n t argued that the power of the district should reside with the district judge. W h e n Dalhousie, and later C a n n i n g and Halliday, advocated the union of the offices of collector and magis19 Buckland, Lieutenant Governors, I, 166-67, q u o t i n g Sir John Kaye. 20 In his " M i n u t e on the Report of the I n d i g o Commission" Grant wrote of A l e x a n d e r Ross: ". . . then, as always, a man of large mind, remarkably free from all prejudice. . . ." Buckland, I, 242. 21 T h e views of Alexander Ross are summarized in Stokes, English Utilitarians, p. 235.

T H E LIEUTENANT GOVERNORS

75

trate in Bengal, Grant stood alone in opposition. He argued that the new magistrate-collector would outshine the district judge in importance and that the Government would be hard-pressed to find good men to take the office of judge in preference to that of magistrate-collector. A strong paternal executive might have a place in more primitive areas, but, Grant reasoned, "in Bengal, as in all other wealthy and highly civilised countries, the prosperity of agriculture and commerce depends more on the judge than on any other single office. . . . The Government looks to the Magistrate and Collector, the people look to the Judge." 22 As a liberal, Grant believed that the role of government should be to remove restrictions on the individual and enable him to enjoy the results of his labor. In one official paper he argued that compulsory labor on irrigation works, such as had occurred in Madras, was unwarranted and "is no more necessary in India than in England." 28 Government, on the other hand, had an obligation to do what the "people themselves would do if they had the necessary organization and resources."24 In India this included the construction of public works and laying the foundations for industry. In 1854 he strongly recommended that the Government support practical education at Presidency College, particularly engineering, and physical and biological sciences.25 In a remarkable minute written in 1855 supporting canal construction in Bihar, Grant argued in part that transport canals would enable the assembly of locally mined coal, lime, and iron ore and 22

W. S. Seton-Karr, Grant pp. 130-31. 28 Ibid.., p. 124. 24 Ibid., p. 120. 25 Ibid., pp. 127-28.

of Rothiemurchus

(London,

1899),

76

T H E B L U E MUTINY

would "lead to the opening of iron works in the country." 29 Nor did Grant oppose the indigo planters on any doctrinaire principle. He believed that if their system were more sound they could, like the planters of Benares, become a blessing to the surrounding country. His major complaint was that they restricted the freedom of enterprise of the ryots. From the first, Grant's decisions on indigo subjects more than fulfilled the expectations of those who suffered from the system. On J u n e 3, 1859, he vetoed a proposal of the Magistrate of Rajshahi for special legislation in favor of indigo planters. On July 21 he overruled Arthur Grote in favor of Ashley Eden. In August and September he toured eastern Bengal by water, touching at Krishnagar and Berhampur. At Berhampur he was presented with five petitions against the abuses of an indigo planter by persons who had followed him from Krishnagar. 27 Five years earlier Halliday on his first tour had also been presented with a petition by the people of Krishnagar. While the petition of 1854 had been presented by zamindars, vakils and mukhtars and the complaints were of a general nature, the petitions of 1859 were presented by ryots and smalllandholders and were specific in their charges. T o the surprise of the petitioners, Grant paid close attention to their complaints. T h e petitions were from the inhabitants of Haudeah, Meherpur and Hanskhali Thannas in Nadia District complaining of the oppressions of William White of the Bansbaria Concern and charging him with plunder, cutting down their trees, taking lakhiraj (revenue-exempt lands) title deeds from ryots, digging up lands in the vise Ibid., p. 142. 27 J . P. 232-39, Sept. i860.

T H E L I E U T E N A N T GOVERNORS

77

cinity of their houses and the kidnapping and illegal imprisonment of two petty landholders, Okhil Chandra Biswas and Situi Tarafdar. On August 15 the Lieutenant Governor ordered Mr. Reid, the Officiating Commissioner of Nadia Division, to report on the investigation of the complaints. Reid reported on September 9 that Cockerell, the magistrate, had dismissed the plunder charges as not proved, though his deputy magistrate, Dwarkanath Dey, had recommended fines and the imprisonment of factory servants on those charges. In the case of the kidnapping and imprisonment of Okhil Chandra Biswas, who had once been an employee of Bansbaria and was now a moneylender and petty landholder, Howell, the deputy magistrate, had allowed the case to be settled out of court. Biswas now renewed his charges claiming that he had been flogged and confined for one month for not taking indigo advances, and his case was now brought to trial. In the case of Situi Tarafdar six factory servants were convicted of kidnapping, but Situi was still missing. It was later proved that he had died in July 1859 while imprisoned in a factory godown. On receiving these reports the Lieutenant Governor replied 011 October 23 that he had "derived an unfavorable impression of the magisterial authorities protecting oppression" and that the people's complaints of a lack of protection by the Government appeared to be only too true. He called for more active and intelligent measures and a full accounting by Howell and Cockerell.28 Although Grant's resolution was blunted by the incompetence of his district officers, there was at last reason to believe that the planters would soon be curbed, and Grant 28 Letter from Government of Bengal to Commissioner of Nadia Division, October 23, 1859, reprinted in Indian Field, December 17, 1859. Also, J . P. 73-77, Dec. 1859 and 60-67, Nov. 19, 1859.

78

THE BLUE

MUTINY

was not long in finding officials who would make his will felt. The Indian Field commented on the affair of the petitions saying that the ryots were astonished at getting justice done after all these years and had begun to question the assertions of the planters that the Government favored the growing of indigo against the will of the ryots. The ryots had even believed that one of the great indigo concerns nominated the officials of Nadia. They remembered how Halliday had been taken on an elephant to the scene of some of the greatest outrages by a planter and had "acted the part of an hysterical Marius and laughed with the manager over the ruins of Goaltollee and admired the indigo sown where a prosperous village once stood." They had seen their oppressors made honorary magistrates and good deputy magistrates removed. There was nothing new in these petitions; similar ones had been presented to Halliday on his first tour and according to the Indian Field, they were never unfolded.29 The indigo disturbances began in the autumn of 1859. Grant's visit and news of Eden's parwana had spread to the area around Krishnagar, the capital of Nadia District north of Barasat and a communications center between Calcutta and Murshidabad. In the autumn of 1859 the peasants in the area refused to take advances for the spring sowing. Other disturbances reported in the fall of 1859 include one in Pabna, a district northeast of Nadia. Here disturbances in the Sirajganj area were related to old zamindar-planter conflicts while the peasants were under Farazi influence.30 Peasants near the town of Murshidabad refused to take advances from Watson and Company in the autumn of 1859, and an armed attack by the planters was repulsed by the bellicose villagers.31 It is not improbable 29 30 31

Indian Field, December io, 1859. J. P. 90-93, June 25, 1858 and 105-11, Feb. i860. J. P. 82-87, April i860.

THE

L I E U T E N A N T GOVERNORS

79

that the disturbances in Murshidabad were produced by the events in Krishnagar which is linked to the northern town by the Hugli River. Jessore District, which in i860 became a center of unrest second only to Nadia, was relatively calm in 1859. T h e early disturbances of the autumn of 1859 were followed by a quiet winter season. But with the approach of the sowing season in the spring of i860 disturbances flared up once again, now encompassing the entire delta area. T h e y were temporarily quelled only by the enactment of a criminally enforceable contract law in April i860. In dealing with these early disturbances John Peter Grant's major problem was to inculcate his district officers with his own ideas of justice. In one case Grant admonished the Commissioner of Rajshahi, F. Gouldsbury and the District Magistrate of Murshidabad, Beaufort, for taking the side of Watson and Company against a Hindu widow. In the autumn of 1859 the villagers of Kalinagar, about eight miles east of Murshidabad city, had refused to sow indigo and resisted the company's armed retainers with lathis. O n January 7, i860 the villagers petitioned the Lieutenant Governor against the collector's having awarded a one-year lease of a Government-owned estate to Watson and Company. T h e company had outbid the previous farmer, a Hindu widow, who had an option to receive back the lease at the end of the year in May i860. T h e ryots, in their petition, protested against a series of outrages committed by the concern, including the forging of indigo contracts and the looting of their village. T h e y also accused the magistrate of assisting the planters to force them to sow indigo in the char. H. Kean, the Assistant Magistrate of Murshidabad, investigated their claims and reported that the ryots had not protested the lease when it had been filed, nor had they ever before denied the validity of their contracts, and that their complaints against

8o

THE BLUE MUTINY

the concern were exaggerated. In addition, he said, the ryots themselves had never seen the petition w h i c h had been presented to the L i e u t e n a n t Governor. It had been drawn u p at B e r h a m p u r by the widow's agent, and all the signatures were in one handwriting. B o t h Beaufort and G o u l d s b u r y recommended that the lease be renewed in favor of W a t s o n and C o m p a n y w h e n it should come d u e in M a y i860, a n d that the widow's option be cancelled on grounds that her agent had been inciting the ryots. G r a n t took a different view of the matter. O n sending the case to the Board of R e v e n u e he commented that he saw no reason to withhold the lease f r o m the widow only because she had quarreled w i t h W a t s o n and C o m p a n y , and he recommended that the officials remain neutral in the dispute. It appeared to h i m that the lease had been given to the indigo concern at a rack-rent bid without reference to the rent paid by the ryots, and that the company probably had intended to make u p the difference by sowing indigo. In that case the objection of the ryots was legitimate. T h e f a r m i n g out of Governmento w n e d estates w i t h o u t reference to the lawful rights of the ryots, he held, was not in accordance with the principles adopted by his Government. 3 2 In another case, in the subdivision of J a n g i p u r in the extreme northwest of Murshidabad District, Charles B. Maseyk of the K u d u m s a r Concern attacked the home of Jaggobandha Dutt, the proprietor of a mahal which had been leased in previous years to Maseyk. D u t t had transferred the lease to another farmer w h o offered h i m a higher rent. A c c o r d i n g to a petition f r o m D u t t to the L i e u t e n a n t Governor, Maseyk attacked h i m w i t h f o u r hundred armed men, pushed in a wall of his house with an elephant, dragged out the w o m e n and children, sacked 32 Ibid.

T H E L I E U T E N A N T GOVERNORS

8l

their jewels and one lakh of rupees and kidnapped him and another man, holding them for ten days. Dutt's brother petitioned the Assistant Magistrate of Aurangabad, J . W. Furrell, for help, and Maseyk was summoned to court; but before appearing he arranged with Dutt to call off the complaint on condition that the stolen money be returned. Dutt agreed to the compromise, but not long afterwards was again captured and confined by Maseyk until released by a darogha. After waiting in vain for action from the magistrate at Berhampur, Dutt petitioned the Lieutenant Governor who called upon the Commissioner of Rajshahi for an explanation. Finally, the crime was investigated and Maseyk was convicted and sentenced to one year's imprisonment and a fine of one thousand rupees. Furrell was called upon by the Government to explain his laxity in the case.38 In this instance, as in others, the Lieutenant Governor repeatedly cautioned his officers against accepting compromises and the withdrawal of charges by Indian plaintiffs against criminal acts committed by indigo planters. He realized that the great power exercised by the planters discouraged the Indians from prosecuting their cases through to the finish, both out of fear of retaliation by the planters and a belief in the futility of bringing suits before biased magistrates. T h e most reprehensible official during the indigo disturbances, C. B. Skinner, Joint Magistrate of Jessore, was more than once admonished for his partiality, not only by the Lieutenant Governor but also by W. S. Seton-Karr, at that time a sessions judge. One celebrated case involved Campbell McArthur of the Mirganj Concern on the Jessore-Faridpur border. In 1859 the Government proposed to locate the headquarters of a new subdivision at 83 J . P. 406-408, April i860; and C. R . O., Jud. and Legis. Letters Received from India, Nos. 56 of i860 and 21 of 1861.

82

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

G o p a l g a n j near a factory of the concern. M c A r t h u r wrote to the G o v e r n m e n t protesting that the ryots w o u l d be only too prone to litigation " w i t h the means at their doors." 3 4 T h e planter's protest was taken under consideration, and while the case was pending, A . J. Bainbridge, the deputy magistrate, on g o i n g to dine with M c A r t h u r , was met by a ryot w h o led h i m to the factory godown. T h e r e he discovered at least three ryots w h o had been held as prisoners for two months for not agreeing to cultivate indigo. Bainbridge set them free, and C . B. Skinner p u t M c A r t h u r and five factory servants on trial. M c A r t h u r was fined 500 rupees, his servants were imprisoned. In the appeal, SetonKarr, the sessions judge, took the occasion to criticize the laws which virtually exempted Europeans from mufassal criminal jurisdiction: Looking to the difference of the Laws for Englishmen and Natives, and to the particular circumstances of this case, I cannot altogether reconcile myself to a decision by which the owner of the factory, an Englishman, should leave the Court with a fine, though a heavy fine, while the servant, a Native and an old man to boot, should leave the Court, not under fine, but for the Jail, under a peremptory order of imprisonment. 35 Soon afterwards, G o p a l g a n j became a subdivisional headquarters. In spite of the allegations of the planters, J o h n Peter Grant was not an inveterate enemy of indigo planting. W h e n the ryots w h o cultivated indigo for T . E. O m a n of the Sinduri C o n c e r n in Nadia petitioned the Lieutenant Governor for the redress of a list of grievances which included forced cultivation, the necessity to bribe factory servants, and fear of attack by planter's lathiyals, G r a n t reBuckland, Lieutenant Governors, ss J. P. 321-23, June 30, 1859.

34

I, 245.

THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNORS

83

plied that the complaints were too general, that hereafter they should petition through the proper channels, that they were free to enter contracts or not of their own free will, and that they were wrong in offering bribes to factory servants.36 T h e Hindoo Patriot commented that the Lieutenant Governor's reply was proof that, notwithstanding the complaints of the indigo planters, the Government was not allying itself with the peasantry; but, after years of pampering the indigo industry, it "has simply desisted from zealously siding with the planters and interfering with the operations of the law." 37 »This editorial shows an intuitive grasp of Grant's official position. He was not taking the side of the peasants against the planters. Frequently he rebuked his district officers for their bias in either direction. T h e Government in his view must remain entirely neutral. T h e ryots and planters were both capitalists; the ryots were responsible for the contracts they had entered into even under duress. T o Grant the greatest abomination was violence; the greatest virtue, the legal process. 86 87

J. P. 146-47, March 22, i860. Hindoo Patriot, March 10, i860.

IV The Conspirators Gaer morol deser neta tare koo moner kotha

The village headman looks after the people. To him take your troubles.

GOVERNMENT ACQUIESCENCE

HAD BEEN THE MAINSTAY

OF

the indigo system in L o w e r Bengal. N o w that John Peter G r a n t had proclaimed a new role for the Government, the peasants seized the opportunity to free themselves f r o m indigo planting and looked for support to the other classes in the mufassal—the zamindars, the petty landholders and moneylenders, and the substantial ryots and village headmen. O f the zamindars few actively participated in the indigo disturbances and those few did so to settle personal feuds w i t h planters. A more active leadership was provided by the petty landholders and moneylenders, a group that held leases under zamindars and in turn subleased lands to ryots. M a n y had connections with indigo concerns, and some had accumulated small fortunes while serving as factory gumashtas and clerks. Some of them, recognizable by their surname "Biswas," belonged to the Kaibarta caste. O r i g i n a t i n g as a low caste of agriculturalists and fishermen, Kaibartas were employed by indigo planters to perf o r m tasks considered unsavory by Brahmans and Kayasthas b u t requiring administrative ability. Sometimes they led the ryots against their former European em-

T H E CONSPIRATORS

85

ployers, but not infrequently could be induced by the planters to desert the ryots and return to the factory with lucrative appointments.1 The cultivators were used as pawns in the competition for better positions on the factory staff. The most active and numerous group of peasant leaders were village headmen and substantial ryots. As spokesmen for the villagers they were approached by the planters to contract on behalf of the cultivators to supply indigo. If they refused they were taken hostage by the planters and confined in factory godowns.2 Many of the peasants themselves were potential fighting men. Among these were members of a caste called Aguri, traditionally believed to be manly, hot-tempered and independent. In Lai Behari Day's novel, Bengal Peasant Life (1909), the leading character is an Aguri who fits well the caste description. Lai Behari writes that "there is amongst them a sort of esprit de corps which is hardly to be found in any other class of Bengalis." He describes them as stronger, more industrious, wealthier and more independent than the average peasant. In one episode of the novel the hero tries to convince his more timid friends to organize a combination against their zamindar who has been demanding illegal exactions. In a neighboring village the hero's brother-in-law, another Aguri, persuades the village headman to take arms against an oppressive indigo 1

Jogendra Nath Bhattacharya, Hindu Castes and Sects (Calcutta, 1896), pp. 279-80. In the play Nil Darpan the planter reprimands his diwan, a Kayastha, for being too lenient with the ryots. H e tells the diwan: " T h e business of the Dewan is not that of the Kayt caste; I shall drive you off and give the business to a Keaot (Kaibarta)." T h e diwan answers: " M y Lord, although I am by caste a Kaystha, I do my work like a Keaot." Dinabandhu Mitra, Nil Durpan (3d. Indian ed., Calcutta, 1958p]), p. 10. 2 R . I. C „ A . 581-83 (R. P. Sage, planter).

86

T H E BLUE

MUTINY

planter. They enlist the aid of their zamindar, but the zamindar's lathiyal force is beaten. 3 Another caste which may have been a chief participant in the indigo disturbances was the Chandal, a low caste of cultivators and boatmen also characterized by an unusual amount of selfreliance. Men from a Chandal subcaste called the Pod, numerous in Jessore District, were employed as lathiyals * Muslim ryots were not as active against the planters as were Hindu. But the Muslims were imbued with a spirit of fellowship lacking in many of the Hindu cultivators. James Forlong testified that a leading Muslim ryot who wanted to abandon a league against his factory was not free to do so because everyone in the league had pledged his loyalty by kissing the Koran.® Outside rural Indian society there were two other groups which provided leadership. One consisted of a small number of Calcutta-educated mukhtars and journalists who took up the cause of the ryots in the mufassal courts and sent reports on the plight of the peasantry to the Calcutta Indian press.6 T h e second was the missionary group. In the mufassal the missionaries were not too effective; their reports, however, brought results when publicized by the missionary and humanitarian societies in Calcutta and London. 3

Lai Behari Day, Bengal

Peasant

Life

(London, 1909), pp. 278,

323 ff· 4 Englishman, April 14, i860, and H. H. Risely, Tribes and Castes of Bengal (2 Vols., Calcutta, 1891), I, 183 ff. »R. I. C., A. 2213. β A public-spirited mukhtar "with a good English education" advertised in the Hindoo Patriot of April 21, i860 for employment by a zamindar or other suitors in the courts of Nadia and Jessore, saying he would perform for comparatively little remuneration instead of the "illegal exactions of the present uneducated and badly trained mukhtars." See also Chapter V., below.

T H E CONSPIRATORS

87

The handful of prominent zamindars who aided the peasants worked through their agents who organized and instigated the ryots and harassed the planters in the courts. Foremost among these zamindars was Ramrutton Roy, head of the senior branch of the Narail family of Jessore. His vast holdings, enlarged at the expense of lesser zamindars, extended from Jessore into Nadia, Pabna and Faridpur Districts.7 In him the indigo planters saw only "a grasping, deceitful and turbulent neighbor." 8 But to his countrymen he was a generous, scholarly man who lived a simple orthodox Hindu life amidst great wealth.® Ramrutton Roy had two motives for supporting the peasants against indigo planters. First, by using the threat of peasant disturbance he could force the numerous planters who held patni leases under him to pay higher rents. Second, he opposed the encroachment of the Europeans on principle, because he resented the alienation of his land and the curtailment of his power over the peasants. His opposition to the planters took several forms. T h e zamindar's lathiyals met those of indigo planters in the fields of Jessore, Faridpur and Pabna. His mukhtars and vakils used every opportunity to pursue litigation with planters over leases, some held since the i84o's. 10 One of Ramrutton Roy's agents, Mohesh Chandra Chatterjee, was considered by the district magistrate to be the most dangerous agitator in Nadia. 1 1 By i860 Mohesh Chandra was a venerable English-educated man of 59 years, wealthy in his own right. In his youth he had 7

Westland, Jessore, pp. 167 ff. Government of Bengal, General Dept., No. 164, "Report of J. Dunbar on Tour of Jessore District," 29 April 1854. 9 Hindoo Patriot, April 28, i860. 10 R. I. C., A. 3347-51 (George Meares, planter) and J . P. 90-93, June 24, 1858 and 170-74, Oct. 21, 1858. 11 J . P. 259, March 29, i860. 8

88

THE BLUE

MUTINY

worked as a writer for various European indigo planters. After 1848 he left the service of the planters and was employed as an agent for certain great zamindars, then as an official in the magistrates' courts in Hugli and Serampore, and finally as manager of Ramrutton Roy's estates in northwest Jessore. Mohesh Chandra had first come into conflict with an indigo planter in 1839 when he was employed by James Hills. Hills wanted some property belonging to Mohesh, which was reluctantly leased to Hills; Mohesh then left the planter's service. In 1859 he refused patni leases to two other planters, James Tissendie and Archibald Hills of the Katchikatta Concern. 12 In mid-February i860 the ryots of Katchikatta, under Mohesh Chandra's influence, lodged a complaint with the magistrate against the concern. 13 In retaliation the firm brought suit against Mohesh Chandra for holding nightly meetings during which he exhibited parwanas hostile to indigo planting and encouraged the ryots not to sow. 14 T h e case was dropped for insufficient evidence, but Mohesh, fearing further litigation, left the mufassai and lived in Calcutta until the summer of i860. 16 In August 1860 he is reported to have organized a demonstration by thousands of ryots on the riverbank alongside John Peter Grant's boat during the Lieutenant Governor's tour of Pabna. 16 Mohesh Chandra is also said to have supported Narayan Chandra Mukherji, an English-educated mukhtar who aided the ryots with legal matters and served as a correspondent of the Hindoo Patriot.1'' Although it 12

R . I. C., A. 3 5 1 8 (Mohesh Chandra Chatterjee). « R . I. C., A. 3 1 1 1 (Archibald Hills, planter). 14 R . I. C., A. 3071 (A. T . Maclean, Dep. Mag.). 15 R . I. C., A. 3 5 1 6 (Mohesh Chandra Chatterjee). 16 G. G. Morris, Report of the Special Rent Commissioner cutta, 1861), part 2. 17 Hindoo Patriot, June 30, i860.

(Cal-

T H E CONSPIRATORS

89

cannot be known how much of Mohesh Chandra's activity was performed on orders from Ramrutton Roy, as the great zamindar's agent there is no doubt that he at least had his tacit support. Two other prominent zamindars who discreetly took part in the indigo disturbances were Srigopal Pal Chaudhari and his brother, Sham Chandra Pal Chaudhari. They, like Ramrutton Roy, were scions of a family of "new" zamindars whose estates had been acquired in the nineteenth century. The Pal Chaudhari family had reached its apex in 1840; by i860 it had lost much of its wealth through intrafamily lawsuits. Through careful management, however, Srigopal and his brother preserved and extended their own estates which were centered in western Jessore.18 Srigopal's home in Ranaghat was a meeting place for other landholders with anti-planter sentiments including his brother and Ramrutton Mullick. 19 Srigopal also owned indigo factories, but they were operated with less efficiency than European factories. He claimed to have purchased a factory at the solicitation of the ryots to prevent it from falling into the hands of a European planter. According to his testimony before the Indigo Commission his own ryots sowed indigo voluntarily, and if the plant delivered by a ryot fell short of the amount for which he had contracted, the shortage was overlooked. From fear of affrays and lawsuits with European planters, he frequently gave them leases, claiming that "if an European assistant planter who holds a lease from us is summoned into court, he will get a chair near the Magistrate while we, the zemindars, who created the lease, will have to stand at a distance."20 18

Westland, Jessore, pp. 146-47. J . P. 259, March 29, i860. 20 R . I. C., A . 3 5 5 1 (Srigopal Pal Chaudhari).

19

90

THE BLUE

MUTINY

Sham Chandra Pal Chaudhari was less cautious than his brother about involving himself in conflicts with the planters. His major opponent was Robert T . Larmour of Mulnath, General Mufassal Manager of the Bengal Indigo Company. After losing a lawsuit to Larmour over certain land tenures near Mulnath, Sham Chandra refused to surrender the land, and in January 1858 his lathiyals attacked one of the planter's assistants. T h e zamindar was ordered by the magistrate to put up a recognizance of 5000 rupees to keep the peace. In January and again in February i860 Sham Chandra's lathiyals, led by his gumashta, Nobin Biswas, attacked another European assistant of the Mulnath Concern and, although there was insufficient evidence for any convictions, the Magistrate of Nadia ordered Sham Chandra to be carefully watched and arrested at the first sign of intrigue. 21 By the summer of i860 Sham Chandra gave up the struggle and negotiated a truce with Larmour. 22 Larmour had to contend with still another zamindar, Brindaban Chandra Pal Sarkar of Sibnibas. For many years the family of the zamindar had been embroiled in a dispute with Larmour over the ownership of Sibnibas Village. In 1859 the Sadr Diwani Adalat ruled that the village belonged to Larmour. 23 But his possession was shortlived; in i860, taking advantage of the weakened financial condition of the concern during the indigo crisis, the zamindar's father purchased the village. 24 Larmour testified before the Indigo Commission that Brindaban Chandra secretly incited the ryots, who collected in great numbers at his 21

R. I. C., App. X I ; J . P. 92-95, April i860 and 259, March 29, i860. 22 R. I. C., A . 2834 (W. J . Herschel, Mag.). 23 R. I. C., A . 2 1 7 3 (R. T . Larmour). 24 Bengal District Gazetteers, Nadia, p. 191.

THE CONSPIRATORS

g1

place, to reject the cultivation of indigo. He also aided the ryots with money and advice, and even paid up their damages decreed under the penalty clause of Act X I of i860.25 Although the hard-pressed ryots and the minor landholders looked to the great zamindars for their initial encouragement, not infrequently the zamindars lost control of the movement as it progressed, and the initiative devolved to the lower classes. By the time of the rent disturbances of 1861 the zamindars were cool toward the movement. This devolution of initiative is illustrated in a series of disturbances taking place in February and March i860 involving indigo concerns in the northwest corner of Murshidabad. T h e ryots of one concern, the Aurangabad, were instigated by a neighboring zamindar, Jadbandhu Ghose, whose objective weis to force the manager to appoint his brother, Dwarkanath Ghose, as gumashta. Jadbandhu in turn worked through three minor landholders in direct contact with the ryots—Morad Biswas, Sauhaus Biswas and Lallchand Saha. T h e ryots, on their part, had genuine grievances against the concern but patiently endured their oppression. T h e manager of Aurangabad Concern was A. D. McLeod, who was assisted by a Mr. Rice and a gumashta, Mir Tufazil Hussein. T h e proprietor, David Andrews, who lived in Calcutta, had left orders that the production of indigo be increased by several hundred bigahs. Since the cultivation of the concern was ilaka, the concern was also the landlord of the cultivators, which put the ryots in a poor position to refuse the concern's demands. Mir Tufazil Hussein was an unusually venal gumashta, intent upon taking advantage of the new demands to line his own pockets. Neither McLeod nor Rice could restrain the Mir: McLeod was influenced by his mistress, Purno Bibi, who 2'R. I. C., A. 2172-74 (R. T. Larmour).

92

THE BLUE MUTINY

was bribed by the gumashta with gifts and cash. R i c e , a man of sixty years, was afraid of jeopardizing his j o b by interfering with the gumashta. A l l this gave the M i r a free hand for extortion. H e informed the ryots that the lands they now sowed with rice would be p l o w e d u p and sown with indigo unless they paid him a bribe. T h e ryots were further exasperated when he sowed p u b l i c thoroughfares with indigo and charged them for access to the b a t h i n g ghats and the river. H e infuriated a village of Muslims by threatening, if he were not paid a bribe of eighty rupees, to force their women to weed indigo. W h e n the villagers agreed to pay half of what he demanded, b u t n o more, he sent his men to capture the village spokesmen. It was through the rescue of these captives that the ryots first displayed their fury. O n February 23, i860 the M i r went to measure some village lands and became involved in an argument with the villagers. Realizing that they were not in their usual docile mood, he galloped back to the factory pursued by hundreds of ryots, w h o dragged h i m from a shed in which he had hidden and beat h i m severely. By the end of the day over three thousand ryots had joined in a march on the factory, while the police stood by afraid and helpless. T h e men responsible for organizing the ryots were Morad Biswas, Sauhaus Biswas and Lallchand Saha. T h a t night they planned an attack on the Kalapani Factory where Rice and his family lived. T h e next m o r n i n g the ryots gathered to the beat of a d r u m and five h u n d r e d moved on the factory to force Mrs. Rice and her daughters to weed indigo. But the Rice family had been w a r n e d and had narrowly escaped the night before. T h e ringleaders continued to flaunt their power by calling out the ryots for further attacks and lathiyal battles and then dismissing them before the battles materialized. Ultimately, the con-

T H E CONSPIRATORS

93

cern was so intimidated that the proprietor arranged a compromise which included the dismissal of the M i r and the appointment of Dwarkanath Ghose, the zamindar's brother, as gumashta. T h e three ringleaders and the zamindar were now satisfied with the settlement and tried to pacify the ryots. But the cultivators felt that the amount of indigo to be sown was still too burdensome, and demanded further resistance. In addition, the other factory servants employed by McLeod encouraged them to continue the disturbances, hoping that Andrews would eventually dismiss McLeod himself. A t this stage the ringleaders found themselves borne along by the torrent which they had set loose; they were no longer in control of the ryots, but prisoners of a movement which they still appeared to direct. T h e ryots finally decided to renounce the cultivation of indigo altogether. A s Browne Wood, the special investigator appointed by the Lieutenant Governor, reported: A regular league was now formed against indigo cultivation, oaths were subscribed to by both Hindoos and Mussulmans, Ryots of one village were called upon, by beat of drum, to assist those of another, if molested by the planters' servants, etc., and if pressed to cultivate indigo by such servants they were to resist; signals were made and given, subscriptions raised; villagers turned out by the beat of drum and proceeded in large bodies armed to any alleged threatened spot; in fact, they had it all their own way, the Police were afraid and had been bought over by the Ryots. T h e disturbances spread across the Ganges into Malda District where David Andrews owned another factory, the Bakrabad. On March 20 some three hundred ryots attacked the factory, entered the office and destroyed the ledgers. T h e y next attacked the residence of the manager

94

T H E B L U E MUTINY

and carried off some of his belongings including several guns and a sword. In the meantime the leaders, in order to distract the boisterous peasants from further attacks on Andrews' concern, began to plot an attack against a neighboring factory managed by a Mr. Lyons. Lyons' ryots had never brought any complaints against the planter, though some cases of petty oppression had been charged against his subordinates. The main instigator of the attack on Lyons was Morad Biswas, who had once served as a rent collector for Lyons and whose own tenants included many of the Muslims who cultivated for Lyons. By threatening Lyons with an attack he almost forced the planter into agreeing to appoint him gumashta, as Andrews had appointed Dwarkanath Ghose. Now, when the other ringleaders wanted to continue with their plans to attack Lyons' factory, Morad, on the point of reaching an agreement with the planter, wanted to withdraw from the league. But the ryots were determined to prevent him from deserting them as had Jadbandhu Ghose, and they invited him to attend a meeting on the evening of March 19 when the most influential men of the league met at Momrezpur. Morad attended and was probably asked his intentions. Although he kept in the background while the leaders planned their attack, to prove his loyalty he offered the services of his son, Kutub Biswas. Early the next morning a large number of ryots, including many from Andrews' concern, armed with spears and swords, attacked Lyons' factory. Lyons had with him only a handful of guards, and in panic opened fire on the mob, killing two and wounding five. Fortunately for the planter a Government steamer, the H. M. S. Pioneer, arrived at a point opposite the factory and, as a party from the ship rescued Lyons, the ryots dispersed. Morad was arrested,

T H E CONSPIRATORS

95

put on board the Pioneer and taken to Berhampur for trial. Lallchand Saha and Rutton Mandai, another leader, were arrested at Berhampur where they had gone to present a petition. Altogether, twenty-four principal assailants in the attack were apprehended. By March 26, i860, Browne Wood reported to the Lieutenant Governor that all was quiet in the neighborhood.2® Two other minor landlords and moneylenders who became leaders of the peasants have become legendary heroes in Bengal.27 They were Digambar Biswas and Bishnu Charan Biswas, leading Indian employees of the Bansbaria Concern in Nadia District. The proprietor of the concern, John White, a benevolent old man, had retired to England in 1858 leaving in charge his son, William White. Young White ran the concern along harsher lines than had his father, holding court, administering corporal punishment and using his friendship with the Magistrate, F. E. Cockerell, to convince the villagers that the officials had an interest in the concern. Under his father the output of indigo had declined, and William was determined to increase it at the expense of the ryots.28 Perhaps this change in policy caused Digambar and Bishnu Charan Biswas to leave his service. White used his influence to prevent the ryots of Digambar's village, Poragaccha, from repaying their loans to Digambar. Known as an enemy of the concern, Digambar attracted complaining peasants from different parts of Nadia, and after consulting with his co-worker, Bishnu Charan and with others of his class, he sent messengers to various villages to encourage the ryots to re26 J. P. 211-29, 242, 248, March i860; 99-100, April 2, i860; 66-67, 79-80, 88, 102-104, 425-33, April i860; Β 432-35, June i860; 402-404, Nov. i860. 27 They were immortalized by Sisir Kumar Ghose in his Indian Sketches (Calcutta, 1898), pp. 140-47. 28 Hindoo Patriot, Aug. 26, 1858.

g6

THE BLUE

MUTINY

nounce indigo. Only the people of Govindapur near Hanskhali agreed to follow his plan. On September 13, 1859, White sent more than a hundred lathiyals, some mounted on elephants, to attack Govindapur. But they were beaten off by spearmen hired by Digambar who were aided by the villagers. After an investigation by the Magistrate of Nadia, L. R. Tottenham, the judge fined White three hundred rupees for the attack.29 Digambar Biswas' own village was attacked several times, but gradually he acquired a force of lathiyals to protect it. T o enlist more peasants to his cause he paid their debts to the planters, spending the enormous sum of 17,000 rupees. Digambar received protection for his family from the Zamindar of Ranaghat, Srigopal Pal Chaudhari, and continued to lead the peasants in presenting petitions and organizing resistance. Eventually his funds were exhausted and he died a poor man. 30 Still another example of landlord leadership was the Mullick family of talukdars who owned the village of Jayrampur. T h e Mullick brothers, Ramrutton, Rammohun and Girish, were middle-class Brahmans who had been employed as factory diwans and gumashtas and had leased lands to the neighboring Lokanathpur Concern. 31 Girish Mullick had been diwan of the concern's Birkistapur Factory until removed from employment in March i860 on a charge of dacoity. 32 T h e manager of the concern, George Meares, accused the Mullick brothers of instigating his ryots to refuse to sow indigo, and in March 28 Letter from Tottenham published in Hindoo 1860. 30 "Indigo in Nadia," Bharatbarsha, Magh 1326 1920). 31 Hindoo Patriot, March 24, i860 and J . P. 259, 32 R . I. C., A . 1386-87 (Fakir Mahomed, ryot of

Patriot, J a n . 2 1 , B. S. (Jan.-Feb. March 29, i860. Nadia).

T H E CONSPIRATORS

97

i860 the Joint Magistrates of Jessore, Molony and Skinner, issued warrants for their arrest. In a letter to the Hindoo Patriot, Girish Mullick told of his harassment by the planters and the Government and blamed it on the collusion of Meares with Joint Magistrate Skinner. Girish wrote that he had been illegally confined by Meares until discovered and released by the darogha. When the darogha reported this to Skinner, the magistrate, instead of bringing Meares to account, fined Girish's mukhtar, Gopi Chatterji, for contempt of court. T h e darogha himself was later fined and transferred. Mullick's case against the factory was dismissed, and instead a warrant was issued for his arrest and that of his two brothers as disturbers of the peace. He was captured and taken by Herschel, the Magistrate of Nadia, to Krishnagar where lie had to furnish a bail of 4000 rupees. Even after raising the money, he was sent back to Jessore, tried by Molony and convicted. Molony's decision held Girish Mullick responsible for "exciting the people's minds and giving bad counsel. . . ," 3 3 His brothers remained at large, and the head of the family, Ramrutton Mullick became known by the people as the "Indigo-plant destroyer" and "the Nana of Bengal." 3 4 T h e village headmen or mandais whose names appear as leaders in the records of the indigo disturbances are too numerous to recite. 35 Whether or not they acted on their own initiative without the prior support and approval of their zamindars and landlords is a matter for conjecture. T h e best informed district magistrate, William J . Herschel, was asked by the Indigo Commission whether he 33

J . P. 223-25, March 29, i860 and Hindoo Patriot, May 19, i860. Hindoo Patriot, March 24, i860 and J . P. 386-92, April i860. 35 J . P. 264-66, Mar. 29, i860; 92-95, April i860; 11-14, Mar. 1861; Hindoo Patriot, July 4, i860. 34

g8

THE BLUE

MUTINY

knew of any head ryots with "sufficient resolution and knowledge" to agitate their own ryots and form intervillage combinations. He replied that he could "point out hundreds such." These village headmen were the ones who suffered most directly from indigo planting. T h e y were forced by the planters to take advances and contract to grow indigo on land which they cultivated with hired labor or leased to landless tenants. When the value of crops other than indigo increased, they were the group that sustained the financial loss of indigo cultivation. N o particular mandai, however, stands out as a leader. As Herschel testified: "Leaders have sprung up in one village who have, in an incredibly short space of time, gained an enormous influence in numbers of adjacent villages, and have lost it almost as quickly." 3 6 T h e group of leaders towards whom the planters were most hostile were the missionaries. T h r e e of them, the Reverends Christian Bomwetsch, J . G. Lincke and Frederick Schurr of the Church Missionary Society %vere stationed in Nadia District among the ryots cultivating for James Hills and Company. T h e y were German Lutherans who had been brought to Lower Bengal to staff mission posts when not enough British missionaries could be found to live under the primitive conditions of the mufassal,37 T h e planters' newspaper, the Englishman of Calcutta, more than once vented its spleen upon these dedicated men: "Where is the German's fatherland?" is a question we have heard with all sorts of replies. . . . the wandering German of the very lowest class being nearly as unwelcome an intruder upon strange soils as the Chinaman and for very much the 3«R. I. C., A. 2832 (W. J . Herschel). 37 Julius Richter, A History of Missions in India (New York, 1908),

p· 193·

THE

CONSPIRATORS

99

same reasons. . . . [Some] seem to have established themselves with great effect in the benighted district of Kisnaghur. Schurr, Lincke, Bomwetsch and Blumhardt are names long known and far famed among the oppressed of the land. . . . Germans have no right to conspire against the Englishman, particularly the English settler. . . . 38

Of these missionaries Bomwetsch was the most active. In the early 18.50's the zamindars in the area of his mission, Balabhpur, had been selling and leasing their lands to the Ratnapur Factory. T h e village headmen came to Bomwetsch pleading with him to lease the land himself to save them from indigo cultivation. Minor landlords had asked him to take over their lands, and the peasants were willing to raise half the purchase price themselves. T h e ryots of a nearby Christian village believed Bomwetsch was especially obligated to protect them. Bomwetsch sent them home saying he could do nothing for them and advised them to compromise with the planters. When the planter threatened to destroy their village, they agreed to sow.89 Bomwetsch left the mission in 1855 but returned in 1859 to prevent his converts from joining a Roman Catholic priest who, with the aid of the indigo planters, had begun to work in the area. After a protest from the Bishop of Calcutta, the concern's general manager, James Forlong, refused the priest a site for his church. 40 O n his return to Balabhpur Bomwetsch was surprised to find the condition of the ryots worse than it had been in 1855. Because of the low price of indigo the ryot was now forced to spend more time weeding and plowing and to sow more land for the Englishman, June 8, i860. Letter from Rev. Christian Bomwetsch in Indian Field, April 21, i860. 40 C. M. S., letter from Rev. James Long to C. M. S. London, May 17, 1859, and R. I. C., A. 925-26 (Rev. Lincke). 38

39

lOO

THE BLUE MUTINY 41

planters. On the other hand, the peasants had heard that the Government of India had lately been taken away from the East India Company and placed directly under Queen Victoria. T o their new queen they attributed supernatural powers and believed that, at last, relief was at hand. 42 In 1859 Bomwetsch was caught up in the atmosphere of defiance. T h e ryots considered him their advocate, and he freely gave them advice. In one case he took a petition on behalf of some timid villagers and presented it to Officiating Commissioner Reid. 4 3 He also launched a campaign of letter-writing in the two pro-ryot newspapers of Calcutta, the Indian Field and the Hindoo Patriot, condemning the indigo system and specifically the oppression of the Nischintipur Concern with which he was intimately acquainted. James Forlong and a number of anonymous writers answered his charges with attacks in the columns of the Englishman. Some unsigned letters insulted him for his marriage to a Bengali girl; others cast aspersions on his nationality: This creature of circumstances, who has arisen . . . as the scarfoeus emerges from his native dung, is not an Englishman; his name bespeaks him a denizen of the filthy juden-strasse of some obscure little German Dorf where he fattened upon rye bread with occasional feasts of sour-krout and a stray taste of greasy wurtzel. . . ,44 In reply to the more serious letters, the missionary denied that his aid to the peasants was in any manner inflamatory, admitting only that he told the ryots there was no law to force them to plant indigo, that they were free to refuse 41 42 43 44

R. I. C., A. 781 (Bomwetsch). R. I. C., A. 918 (Lincke). Indian Field, Jan. 21, i860. Englishman, June 5, i860.

T H E CONSPIRATORS

ΙΟΙ

advances, and that the new Lieutenant Governor was the embodiment of justice itself.4® While Bomwetsch was absent from the Balabhpur Mission between 1855 and 1859, his post ivas held by the Reverend J . G. Lincke. Lincke bore the brunt of peasant complaints arising from the expansion of the Nischintipur Concern during those years. In 1857 the Christian village of Meliapatta fell into the hands of the planters and Lincke took into court a case of oppression committed by the factory people against some of the villagers. The planters retaliated by severing communication with the missionaries, refusing to hear any more complaints presented by them, and trying to wean their Christian ryots from them by encouraging the peasants to refuse to repay their debts to the mission loan fund. Lincke, in a state of profound despair, predicted the eventual dispersal of his impoverished and oppressed congregation.48 In 1858 Gow Smith, the manager of Ratnapur Factory, attacked Bhobayparah Village whose possession was being contested in court between the concern and a zamindar. Smith's lathiyals looted and burnt the village and molested the villagers, who complained to Lincke: "We have no rest day or night. Our zamindar is not strong enough to protect us." When the planter's lathiyals lingered in the neighborhood robbing, disrupting trade, and attacking women, Lincke asked the Church Missionary Society in Calcutta to notify Halliday of the attack. The Lieutenant Governor ignored the Society's petition.47 Between the assault on Bhobayparah in 1858 and the 45

Indian Field, Dec. 3 1 , 1859. C. M . S., Annual Report of the Balabhpur Mission Station (J. G. Lincke) to C. M . S. London, Sept. 30, 1857. 47 C. M . S., letter from Lincke to Cuthbert, April 10, 1858. See also J . P. 243, Aug. 19, 1858; Hindoo Patriot, Sept. 2, 1858; and R . I. C., A p p . X X I . 46

102

THE BLUE M U T I N Y

next attack, which occurred early in i860, a change had come over the villagers in the area of the mission. T h e people had learned to rely upon themselves rather than on the hired lathiyals of their zamindar. In the winter of i860 the ryots cultivating for the R a t n a p u r Factory refused to take advances and enter into contracts, and the factory sent hundreds of lathiyals to surround Balabhpur Village and intimidate the villagers. T h e lathiyals met with unexpected resistance. T h e villagers had organized themselves into "companies" each specializing in the weapon it f o u n d most suitable—bows and arrows, slings ("like D a v i d of old"), bricks, bale-fruit, brass plates thrown horizontally ("which does great execution"), earthen pots thrown by the women, lathis, and finally, the fiercest of all, a dozen men armed with spears. Bomwetsch, w h o heard of these preparations from some of his students, reported that one skillful spearman had routed a hundred lathiyals. T o the delight of the missionary and the villagers, the lathiyals retired and the village freed itself from the b u r d e n of sowing indigo in the spring of i860. 48 W h i l e the planters contended with zamindars, ryots and missionaries in the mufassai, other struggles were taking place in Calcutta and London. Here the proprietors of indigo concerns, and British merchants and barristers clashed with the partisans of the cultivators—the Bengali intelligentsia, the missionaries, and the humanitarians. T h e victories of the cultivators in the mufassal would, i n time, be engulfed in a sea of poverty, but the victories of the intelligentsia would form the basis of a new political order in India. 48

Letter from Bomwetsch in Hindoo

Patriot, Feb. 11, i860.

ν Race, Commerce, and Politics Casa more kaj furi babur mukhe kothar tubri.

While the peasants work themselves to death, the gentlemen mouth galaxies of words.

NEWS OF THE INDIGO DISTURBANCES REACHED CALCUTTA IN

the late summer of 1859. T h e exploitation of the indigo cultivators had already become the central political issue in the capital of India. Now emotions quickened as the proprietors of large indigo concerns along with indigo brokers, agents and merchants enlisted the support of the entire British commercial community in defense of the indigo planters. In opposition, Government officials and missionaries joined with Bengali merchants, landholders and intelligentsia in support of the peasantry. One effect of the controversy was to rekindle the racial antagonism which had been smouldering during the thirteen months following the brutal Sepoy Mutiny. T h e new wave of racial discord brought on by the indigo dispute climaxed a decade of bitter conflict between the Bengalis of Calcutta and the European business community. Significantly, relations between the races in the 1850's stand out in sharp contrast to those of the preceding

104

THE BLUE

MUTINY

twenty years when political, cultural and commercial harmony characterized the public life of Calcutta. From 1830 to 1846 the leading advocate of cordial relations between the Bengalis and the European commercial community was Dwarkanath Tagore. Following the lead of Rammohun Roy, he tried to synthesize the best features of Western and Indian culture. In 1830 Tagore succeeded Rammohun Roy as patron of the Brahmo Samaj, a monotheistic religious sect. A few years later he established the firm of Carr, Tagore and Company, proprietors of coal mines and silk, sugar and indigo factories—the first equal business partnership between Bengali and Englishman. Tagore was also the secretary and guiding spirit of the Union Bank. Disregarding the custom of social exclusiveness prevailing among the Brahman community, he invited to his home not only European men, but also their wives to mingle with Bengali merchants and intellectuals. He was the first high caste Hindu after Rammohun R o y to visit the British Isles where he was cordially received by leaders in Government and business. 1 Dwarkanath lost no opportunity to win friends among the Europeans. When Act X I was enacted in 1836 removing the special privileges of indigo planters and making them equally amenable with Indians to the jurisdiction of the mufassal civil courts, the European community rallied to protest the so-called "Black Act." At a mass meeting of Europeans Dwarkanath told his audience how indebted the Indian community was to the non-official Englishman for its prosperity and progressive views. He accused the Government of trying to "degrade the Europeans by lowering them to the state of the Natives." 2 At a second mass 1

See Kissory Chand Mittra, Memoir cutta, 1870). 2 Ibid., pp. 53-57.

of Dwarkanath

Tagore

(Cal-

R A C E , C O M M E R C E , A N D POLITICS

IO5

meeting he further justified his support of the Europeans by pointing out that it was the "interlopers" and not the officials who had most consistently concerned themselves with the welfare of the Indians. He cited as examples their aid in the repeal of the Press Act, their stand against the resumption of revenue-free tenures, their support of Hindu College, their help in obtaining for Indians the right to sit on juries and their opposition to the barbaric coolie trade to Mauritius and Bourbon. 3 In 1837 a group of progressive zamindars and Indian merchants organized the first purely political society in Bengal, the Zamindari Association. Its purpose was to rally the landholders against a Government proposal to resume revenue-free tenures which had been farmed out to zamindars in a more open-handed era. In 1838 Dwarkanath Tagore entered the association and soon became its leading spirit. T o further conciliate the European community the zamindars elected as Secretary W. C. Hurry, a British merchant.4 Tagore was also instrumental in rousing the youthful graduates of Hindu College in Calcutta to political activity. This group, which styled itself "Young Bengal," cherished the European connection in the realm of intellect rather than in politics or commerce. Inspired by the French Enlightenment, the writings of David Hume and Thomas Paine, and by their gifted young teacher Henry Derozio, they had accepted the West enthusiastically and wholeheartedly. In the 1830's their activities were restricted to forming debating societies and publishing liter3 Report of a Public Meeting Held at Town Hall, Calcutta, on the 24th November 1838 (London, 1839). 4 Bimanbehari Majumdar, History of Political Thought from Rammohun to Dayananda, Vol. I., Bengal (Calcutta, 1934), pp. 163 ff.; Mittra, Dwarkanath Tagore, pp. 29-34. T h e Zamindari Association was alternately referred to as the Landholders' Society.

ιο6

THE BLUE

MUTINY

ary periodicals. When Dwarkanath T a g o r e returned from his first trip to England in J a n u a r y 1843, he was accompanied by George Thompson, a leading anti-slavery and free-trade advocate. T h o m p s o n was a prominent member of the British India Society of England, an organization which united Manchester manufacturers and humanitarian Quakers to encourage the development of India as a market for British manufactures and a source of nonslave grown cotton. At Dwarkanath's request Thompson won over the intelligentsia from literary to political activity, and in April 1843 " Y o u n g B e n g a l " formed the Bengal British India Society. L i k e the Landholders' Society, the new organization included among its members a number of prominent Europeans. 5 Dwarkanath T a g o r e died during his second visit to England in 1846. Within four years a lifetime of work devoted to promoting racial harmony lay in ruins. T h e turning point came in 1849 when the Legal Member of the Governor General's Legislative Council introduced a measure designed to place European mufassal residents under the jurisdiction of mufassal criminal courts, as the earlier "Black A c t " had made them subject to the civil jurisdiction of these courts. T h e European community, particularly the indigo planters, protested vehemently. T h e measure was withdrawn, but the controversy it provoked inflicted irreparable damage to relations between the races. In response to European agitation the Bengalis disbanded their two political societies and united their wealth and talent in the exclusively native British Indian Association on October 3 1 , 1851.® Although it was the " B l a c k A c t " controversy that led to 5

Majumdar, Political Thought, p. 1 7 1 . Dharker, Macaulay's Minutes, pp. 58-59; Majumdar, Thought, pp. 174 ff. 6

Political

RACE, C O M M E R C E , AND POLITICS

IO7

the final estrangement of the two communities, the underlying causes were deep-seated. By the 1850's the alumni of "Young Bengal" had become disenchanted with European culture and increasingly appreciative of their own. T h e opposition to the Europeans was led by Ramgopal Ghose, a "Young Bengal" who had worked his way up from relative poverty to become a wealthy merchant. He wrote a widely circulated pamphlet on the "Black Acts" advocating equality of all before the law, and, as the most effective orator of his day, he incited his countrymen to action. 7 The 1850's also witnessed the birth of the Bengali novel and the revival of the Bengali theater. T h e new leader of the reform movement was Iswarchandra Vidyasagar, a learned Sanskrit pandit with a profound respect for his own heritage. He based his arguments for social reforms on the Hindu scriptures, thus freeing the reform movement from its dependence on Western thought. 8 As the work of the British missionaries became more effective, Hindus and Brahmos rallied in self-preservation. The Reverend Alexander Duff shocked Bengali society by converting a score of high-caste young Hindus to Christianity.9 In 1839 Dwarkanath's own son, Debendranath, responded to the missionary challenge by organizing the Tattvabodhini Sabha. This organization published a newspaper devoted to the defense of Hinduism, sponsored translations of Hindu classics, and opened a school to offer Hindu boys a Western education equal to that of the mission schools but free from Christian domination. 10 7

Buckland, Lieutenant Governors, II, 1025. Atulchandra Gupta, ed., Studies in the Bengal Renaissance (Jadavpur, 1958), pp. 47-55. 9 Roper Lethbridge, Ramtanu Lahiri (London, 1907), p. log; George Smith, Alexander Duff (2 Vols., London, 1879), I, 159 ff. 10 R . C. Majumdar, Glimpses of Bengal in the Nineteenth Century (Calcutta, i960), p. 47; Gupta, Bengal Renaissance, pp. 34 ff. 8

1θ8

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

Economic conditions had also changed by 1850. T h e agency houses in Calcutta, w h i c h had financed indigo p l a n t i n g and other mufassal industries with local Indian and European capital, had failed o w i n g to the financial crisis of 1830 and the crash of the U n i o n Bank in 1847. T h e i r place was taken by trading firms based in L o n d o n and L i v e r p o o l w h i c h channeled British capital directly into indigo and other industries. 1 1 T h e h a n d f u l of progressive zamindars w h o had been proprietors of indigo concerns had sold out by 185ο. 12 T h u s , with few exceptions, indigo concerns were n o w financed with European capital, and the system could be attacked by the Indians without financial risk. T h e promising partnership of Carr, T a g o r e and C o m p a n y proved to be not only the first, but also the last significant example of an equal business partnership between the races. In the 1850's a poisoned atmosphere of racial bitterness permeated the p u b l i c life of Calcutta. O n l y a small number of British officials and humanitarians joined with the Bengalis against the European merchants, planters, barristers and editors. M a n y Britishers w h o had once befriended the Indians n o w became their worst enemies. A m o n g these was W i l l i a m T h e o b a l d , a barrister w h o m " Y o u n g B e n g a l " had elected the first chairman of the Bengal British India Society. 1 3 A f t e r 1851 he devoted his f u l l energies to his work as Secretary of the Indigo Planters' Association. T h e leading Calcutta barrister, Longueville Clarke, w h o m T a g o r e had once praised for his fight 11

"Commercial

Calcutta 12

Review,

Morality LX

and

(1848),

Commercial Prospects of

A m o n g these were Prasannakumar T a g o r e and D i g a m b a r Mitra.

See R . I. C., A. 3748 ff. and Buckland, Lieutenant 13

Bengal,"

163-89. Governors,

II, 1043.

Jogesh Chandra Bagal in an unpublished paper on the British

Indian Association (deposited at the headquarters of the Association in Calcutta).

R A C E , C O M M E R C E , A N D POLITICS

109

against the coolie trade, led the Calcutta Europeans during the Mutiny in the anti-native Indian Reform League. 1 4 Another was the English journalist Alexander Forbes who in 1843 had been brought to the home of Dwarkanath Tagore as a private secretary and had later managed indigo and sugar factories for the Indian leader. 15 Now, as proprietor of the scurrilous Dacca News, and after 1860 as editor of the equally abusive Bengal Hurkaru, Forbes took every opportunity to vilify the Indians. Calcutta's T o w n Hall, where Dwarkanath Tagore had once praised the European settler, now resounded with malicious recriminations as first the Europeans, then the Indians gathered there for mass meetings. W h e n the Europeans met, "everything native was denounced in terms and with an earnestness that would be sublime were they not ridiculous. Native judges were accused of corruption, native palkee bearers were known to be refractory, even native ayahs were suspected of poisoning European babies." 16 T h e Indians replied with equal bitterness. A t a meeting held early in 1857 sober young classicist, Rajendralal Mitter, voiced the feelings of his countrymen toward the settlers: Devoid of the merits which characterise a true Englishman, and possessing all the defects of the Anglo-Saxon race, these adventurers from England have carried ruin and devastation to wherever they have gone. Ask the red Indian in the prairies of South America and he will say that the antagonism of the Anglo-Saxon adventurers has within a hundred years reduced their number from half a million to forty thousand. What is it, but the antagonism of the sweepings of England and Holland that has driven the Bosjeman and the Caffre to the in14 Public Meeting, 24th November 1838; Hindoo Patriot, September 24, 1857. 15 Pari. Papers, 1859, Session I, IV, 141. 16 Hindoo Patriot, Feb. 19, 1857 and March 11, 1858.

1 IO

THE BLUE

MUTINY

hospitable sands of Central Africa? In Australia and New Zealand the battle is still being fought, and ere long the natives of those places will be numbered with the things that were; and yet it is these adventurers who pretend to dread the antagonism of the Hindoo, these are the men who having made England too hot for their residence, come ad misericordium to complain of our rivalry. They talk of their energy, education, and high civilization. They boast of the capital that they bring to India, and the vast number of men who find employment from their wealth. Surely never was there a more consummate case of making a mountain of a molehill. . . . The country could not have a greater curse than the AngloSaxon planters, who have been by their own missionaries denounced as the greatest tyrants who have ever been permitted to fatten on the ruination of the inoffensive and helpless peasants, men whose like can be had only in the slave owners of Virginia. 17 T h e Sepoy Mutiny of 1857-58 intensified these racial animosities. News of the atrocities in the northwest and the presence of several disaffected sepoy regiments in nearby Barrackpur brought a crescendo of anxiety to Calcutta. On J u l y 13 the Governor General, after much hesitation, finally gave in to the demands of the European community and allowed it to form a Volunteer Corps which terrorized the peaceful Indian populace by parading the streets at night, searching, insulting and bullying the natives. T e r r o r reached its climax on "Panic Sunday," J u l y 14, 1857. 1 8 17 R a m Gopal Sanyal, Reminiscences and Anecdotes (2 vols., Calcutta, 1894), I. 39. Because of this speech Rajendralal Mitter was expelled from membership in the Photographic Society by the majority of its European members. T h e European minority who objected to his expulsion were all officials and included Cecil Beadon who later succeeded J . P. Grant as Lieutenant Governor. Hindoo Patriot, Oct. 15, 1857. 18 C . B. Malleson and J . Kaye, History of the Indian Mutiny (6 vols., 2d. ed., London, 1892), II, 84-85; Hindoo Patriot, July g and July 25, 1857.

RACE, C O M M E R C E ,

A N D POLITICS

111

While the rowdy European element enlisted in the Volunteer Corps, the respectable barristers and business leaders joined the Indian Reform League. T h e Bengal Chamber of Commerce united with the League in petitioning Lord Palmerston for the abolition of the East India Company and for the recall of Governor General Charles Canning, who favored clemency toward the rebels. The petitions were signed by 682 "Christian inhabitants of Calcutta." Palmerston stood fast in his support of Lord Canning, but the petition calling for the transfer of India from the Company to the Crown gave additional strength to the anti-Company forces in England. With the end of the Mutiny in August 1858 British India came under the direct rule of the Crown. 19 T h e passions of the Mutiny had hardly begun to subside when the contest over the fate of the indigo industry added fresh fuel to inter-racial bitterness. During the indigo controversy in Calcutta three interest groups stood out as protagonists—the Indigo Planters' Association, the British Indian Association, and the missionary societies. Attempts had been made to organize the indigo planters since 1816, 20 but it was not until 1851 that the able bar19 Pari. Papers, 1857-58, X L I I I , 93. According to one pro-Company periodical, "Those documents arrived in the nick of time . . . . It would be impudent to pretend that the transfer of authority to the Crown was determined upon grounds quite independent of the Calcutta Petitions." Saturday Review, May 1 , 1858, p. 437. A n editorial in the Hindoo Patriot indicates that progressive Indian opinion, which until then had favored direct rule, now changed sides. "India House, whatever may have been its other faults, has always cherished a strong phil-Indian feeling." A politically appointed Secretary for India would "have to do one thing to conciliate Manchester, another to conciliate Exeter Hall, and a third to appease Lord Ellenborough's opposition, a fourth to please the tea-pounders—and all in disregard of the feelings and interests of the people of India." Hindoo Patriot, Sept. 24, 1857. 20

Asiatic Journal,

Sept. 1816.

112

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

rister, William Theobald, created an effective organization from the disparate elements with indigo interests in Bengal. As Secretary of the Indigo Planters' Association from 1851 until his resignation in i860, Theobald organized the planters in the mufassal and united them with the proprietors of large concerns, indigo brokers, partners in mercantile houses and barristers of Calcutta. Theobald's major task was to maintain an equilibrium between the Calcutta group and the planters. But while the twelvemember Central Committee included representatives of all these groups, the planters, busy producing indigo dye, visited Calcutta and sat on the Central Committee only in December. 21 T h e planters were, for the most part, narrow in their interests and indifferent to larger political issues. The city members, on the other hand, were interested in the problems of all European settlers and anxious to broaden the organization to include all Europeans engaged in enterprise in the mufassal.22 Among its political activities the Indigo Planters' Association supported two daily newspapers, the Englishman and the Bengal Hurkaru,23 presented petitions to the Government of India and tried to win over the Cabinet and members of Parliament. Soon after John Peter Grant assumed office as Lieutenant Governor of Bengal, the Asso21

Englishman, J a n . to Dec. 1860, passim·, New Calcutta Directory, i860. 22 Hindoo Patriot, March 10, i860; Englishman, April 24, May 4 and Nov. 1, i860 and April 16, 1861. For example, the indigo planters of the mufassal remained aloof from the Indian Reform League while their Calcutta agents were the League's mainstay. See J o h n Dickinson, Reply to the Indigo Planters' Pamphlet (London, 1861). 23 T h e most influential newspaper of Bengal, the Friend of India, published weekly by the missionaries at Serampore, straddled the indigo issue during the disturbances.

RACE, C O M M E R C E ,

AND P O L I T I C S

113

ciation petitioned C a n n i n g f o r his removal. A l t h o u g h G r a n t successfully parried their charges they did cause the Secretary of State f o r India to doubt f o r a time the prudence of the L i e u t e n a n t Governor. 2 4 T h e Indigo Planters' Association supported a number of lobbyists in Britain, and in 1857 the Association sent William Theobald himself to London to plead its case during a parliamentary debate on the Indian Penal Code. While in London he testified before the Select Committee on European Colonization and Settlement in India. On his return to Calcutta he reported that the indigo planters, heretofore considered a very insignificant group of men enjoying "a certain repute," were now "justly appreciated" in England. 25 Representatives of the indigo interest in London frequently presented their grievances directly to the Secretary of State for India, Sir Charles Wood. One of these so impressed Wood, whose own sympathies were pro-ryot, that he wrote to Canning he was "not at all sure that it is wise or politic to provoke [the planters] . . . T h e y are losing money, and will lose I fear more severely yet. T h e y require all the soothing they can get, wrong and unreasonable as they may be on many points." 28 In the fall of i860 a group of influential London residents with indigo interests formed a permanent committee and engaged a member of Parliament to act on their behalf. When, in 1861, a deputation from the committee called on Lord Palmerston, the Prime Minister gave them no encouragement, and in fact, embarrassed them by mentioning the forgery of indigo 24

H. P., W o o d to Canning, Nov. 9, i860. Indigo Planters' Association, Central Committee (Calcutta, Aug. 25, 1 8 5 6 ) ; Indian Field, Nov. 27, 1858. 26 H. P., W o o d to Canning, Nov. 19, i860. 25

Proceedings

114

THE BLUE

MUTINY

contracts which had been revealed by the Indigo Commission.27 It was with great interest that the cotton manufacturers of Britain followed the indigo controversy. They were anxious to develop India as a source of raw cotton and favored, along with the indigo planters, a permanent law to make the violation of a contract by a ryot a criminal offence. 28 But all their remonstrances had little practical effect on the policies of the Secretary of State. T h e parliamentary critics of the indigo planters questioned Wood even more vigorously. When Arthur F. Kinnaird, a humanitarian connected with the Church Missionary Society and the Liberal Member for Perth, attacked the Secretary of State for his approval of a temporary criminal contract act, Wood had to defend a law which he himself opposed wholeheartedly. 29 When later questioned on the same act, Wood replied that the bill had rightly been attacked and expressed strong views against giving special privileges to the planters.30 In May 1861 Wood still expected opposition from supporters of the indigo interest in Parliament, but by July the danger had passed. "We have avoided an indigo debate here," he wrote, "as those who are for the planters are ashamed of the case." 31 27 T h e London committee, led by R . Thomas, a former Calcutta indigo broker, arranged with R . W . Crawford, M. P. for the City of London, to act on its behalf in Parliament. Englishman, Nov. 28, i860. On Palmerston's attitude see H. P., Wood to Canning, Feb. 1 1 , 1861 and Englishman, April 10, 1861. 26 C. R . O., Jud. Dept., Home Letters Sent, Orig. Drafts, March 26, 1861 and October 1861. 29 3 Hansard's Parliamentary Debates, C L V I I I , (4 May i860), 700-701. 3 0 I b i d . , C L X I I , (19 April 1 8 6 1 ) , 818-821. 31 H. P., Wood to Grant, May g, 1861 and Wood to Canning, J u l y 3, 1861.

R A C E , C O M M E R C E , AND POLITICS

1 15

Wood was concerned less about a clash with the commercial interests than he was about the possibility that John Bright would bring his oratorical powers to bear against the Government on the indigo question. Bright had a long-standing interest in Indian affairs and was chairman of the Indian Reform Society of London. T h e Society had been formed in 1853 by John Dickinson, a humanitarian, and its membership included thirty-nine Radical members of Parliament. The chief purpose of the Society was to persuade the Government to assist British enterprise in India, especially for the production of nonslave grown cotton.32 Although Dickinson had on occasion been critical of the indigo planters, they were, after all, fulfilling a major objective of the Indian Reform Society by applying British capital to the development of Indian resources. There was no guarantee that the influential Society would not take the side of the planters in London politics. In the summer of 1859 Dickinson had given the Indigo Planters' Association an opportunity to unite with the Society in a campaign to reform the Indian judicial system. T h e humanitarian leader apologized to the planters for denouncing them in the past and now invited them to join with him in supporting a plan to remove the judicial system of India from the control of the executive and to place it under independent Queen's justices nominated in London. If William Theobald subscribed to his plan and sent financial support to the Indian Reform Society, Dickinson implied that he would represent the Indigo Planters' Association in London. Theobald, however, could not bring himself to contribute money to an organization with humanitarian sympathies, nor could he agree to Dickinson's 32 Maccoby, English Radicalism, pp. 366 EE. See also Evans Bell, Last Counsels of an Unknown Counsellor ( L o n d o n , 1 8 7 7 ) .

1 16

THE BLUE

MUTINY

judicial plan which, he felt, would flood India with barristers unfamiliar with the unique Indian conditions. Behind Theobald's opposition was his fear that Dickinson's plan would bring an influx of barristers from London to compete with Theobald's colleagues for the legal business of Calcutta. Dickinson bitterly denounced Theobald and thereafter became an implacable enemy of the indigo planters. 33 T h e Report of the Indigo Commission, which reached London in November i86o, further undermined any sympathy the Radicals may have had for the planters. When, early in 1861, the indigo interest published in London an abusive pamphlet maligning the Lieutenant Governor of Bengal, J o h n Dickinson, now president of the Indian Reform Society, effectively answered its charges in a pamphlet of his own. 34 J o h n Bright and the Radicals now unequivocally supported the Secretary of State against the indigo interests. But for the obstinacy of William Theobald the outcome might have been different. Wood wrote to the new Viceroy, Lord Elgin, in August 1862: You must not suppose the [pro-settler group] are strong here. . . . The only Government suitable for such a state of things as exists in India is a despotism controlled from home. . . . Whatever may be the result, our course ought to be the same; to improve the native, reconcile him if we can to our rule, and fit him for ruling himself. 35 By the 1860's several groups of Indians were already gaining the political experience which would in time fit 33

Indian Field, March 26, 1858 and July 2 and 9, 1859. H. P., Wood to Canning, March 11, 1861. T h e two pamphlets were, Brahmins and Pariahs (London, 1861) and John Dickinson, Reply to the Indigo Planters' Pamphlet "Brahmins and Pariahs" (London, 1861). 35 H. P., Wood to Elgin, Aug. 28, 1862. 34

R A C E , C O M M E R C E , AND POLITICS

II7

them for self rule. One of these was the Hindu Bengali community of Calcutta, organized after 1851 in the British Indian Association. The objectives of the Association denoted it as an uneasy union of progressive intelligentsia and conservative landlords. In i860 half of its sixteenmember executive committee were alumni of "Young Bengal" or in sympathy with them.36 In the name of the Association these progressives petitioned for improved educational facilities, the holding of Indian Civil Service examinations in the major cities of India, and increased Indian representation on the Calcutta Municipal Commission. The landlord faction sponsored resolutions favoring an extension of the Permanent Settlement, and opposing an income tax law and the resumption of rentfree tenures. Both parties united, however, in calling on the Government to subject indigo planters to criminal jurisdiction in mufassal courts and to appoint a commission to investigate the condition of indigo cultivators. T o avoid internal dissension, the Association remained silent on the most significant law passed in 1859, the Rent Act. Like its adversary, the Indigo Planters' Association, the British Indian Association maintained agents in England, and on one occasion at least obtained the services of John Bright in presenting one of its petitions to Parliament. 37 Although a handful of Indian zamindars were involved in personal feuds with indigo planters, the majority of zamindars in the British Indian Association profited by leasing lands to indigo planters at excessive rents. Therefore, from the point of view of economic self-interest the zamindars might well have remained aloof from the indigo 36

British Indian Association, Ninth

Annual

Report

i860). 37 Ibid., see also First through Eighth Annual Reports,

(Calcutta, 1852-59.

1χ8

THE BLUE MUTINY

disturbances. 38 But two important factors account for the hostile attitude which the Association did, in fact, take toward the planters. First, the zamindars, in order to preserve the unity of the Association, were obliged to follow the lead of the intelligentsia. 39 Secondly, the zamindars were no less sensitive than were the intelligentsia to the racial bigotry kept alive by the Calcutta press. Members of the British Indian Association supported two English-language weekly newspapers whose editors engaged in verbal duels with the editors of the Englishman a n d Hurkaru.

T h e Hindoo

Patriot, the most important

Indian-published newspaper of its day, was owned and edited by Harish Chandar Mukherjee from 1856 to 1861. 4 0 Although the Hindoo Patriot was from the first hostile toward indigo planters, it did not engage in a systematic campaign against indigo until 1858. Its correspondents roved the indigo districts publicizing the incompetence and partiality of the district officials, and frequently the Lieutenant Governor acted upon abuses first brought to light in the pages of the Hindoo PatriotIn its anti38

T h e Hindoo Patriot, in an editorial lauding the zamindars for taking the side of the ryots against the planters, quotes one zamindar as saying, "Sir, we would undoubtedly benefit [by renting lands to planters] but what will become of our ryots?" Hindoo Patriot, A u g . 26, 1 8 5 8 . 39 I n professing their sympathy for the ryots the intelligentsia of 1 8 5 9 were following the precedent of R a m m o h u n R o y , Rasik Krishna M u l l i c k and Akshoy K u m a r Dutta. See Bimanbehari M a j u m d a r , Political Thought, pp. 68, 103 and 1 2 5 . 40 Manmathanath Ghosh, Lije of Grish Chunder Ghose (Calcutta, 1 9 1 1 ) , pp. 80-83. 41 A m o n g the correspondents was Sisirkumar Ghose, later to f o u n d a n d edit the Amrita Bazar Patrika. H i s letters to the Hindoo Patriot are collected in Jogesh C h a n d r a Bagal, Peasant Revolution in Bengal (Calcutta, 1 9 5 4 ) . A second correspondent was M a n m o h a n Ghose w h o later edited the Indian Mirror. His reports were influential in the appointment of the Indigo Commission. Buckland, Lieutenant Governors, II, 1087.

R A C E , C O M M E R C E , AND POLITICS

1 19

planter campaign the Hindoo Patriot followed the lead of the Indian Field, founded in March 1858. T h e Indian Field, owned by an Armenian merchant, Seth A. Apear, had a number of liberal Britishers on its editorial staff. Its political editor was Kissory Chand Mittra, a disciple of Rammohun Roy and Dwarkanath Tagore, who was intellectually interested in improving the lot of the peasantry.42 Both Harish Chandra Mukherjee and Kissory Chand Mittra were members of the Central Committee of the British Indian Association. A Bengali weekly, Som Prakash, also took an active role in campaigning against the planters. Long after the other two newspapers had lost interest in the peasantry, Dwarkanath Vidyabhusan, the editor of Som Prakash, continued to champion the peasantry and remained their ally during later disputes between ryots and zamindars.43 T h e planters, through their newspapers accused the "Anti-British Association," 44 as they called it, of instigating the ryots to combine against indigo cultivation. Undoubtedly, individual members of the British Indian Association did assist the ryots by supporting mukhtars in the mufassal courts and by sheltering those ryots who came to Calcutta to present petitions. But, as Harish Chandra Mukherjee once wrote, the actual aid afforded fell far short of the clamor which was raised about it on all sides. " T h e balance of trade in public spirit and political agitation is in favor of, not against, Calcutta." 45 T h e District Magistrate of Nadia, William James Herschel, asserted that "by common report" mukhtars pleading for the ryots were receiving salaries of 100 rupees 42 Buckland, Lieutenant Governors, II, 1077. After 1862 the Indian Field was incorporated into the Hindoo Patriot. 43 See Chapter V I I I , below. 44 Englishman, Aug. 2 and 9, i860. 45 Hindoo Patriot, March 24, i860.

120

T H E BLUE M U T I N Y

per m o n t h from the British Indian Association. 46 But the Association was quick to deny any "connection whatever with any such Mooktears, agents or emissaries. . . . and deep as is the interest which in common with others the Association feels in the question, it has felt it its duty to rigidly abstain f r o m taking a part in the present movement." 4 7 Other than presenting petitions to the Government opposing legislation designed for the exclusive benefit of the indigo planters, the Association did not officially aid the ryots. O n the other hand, members of the Association acting independently furnished the peasants with considerable aid. Of these Harish Chandra Mukherjee was the most effective, and his editorials raised the indigo disturbances f r o m the level of a labor dispute to that of a political contest. O n e of his eulogistic editorials reads: Bengal might well be proud of its peasantry. . . Wanting power, wealth, political knowledge and even leadership, the peasantry of Bengal have brought about a revolution inferior in magnitude and importance to none that has happened in the social history of any other country. . . . With the Government against them, the law against them, the tribunals against them, the Press against them, they have achieved a success of which the benefits will reach all orders and the most distant generations of our countrymen. And all this they have done by sheer force of virtue, by patience, perseverance and fortitude, without committing a single crime—almost a single act of violence.48 46 R . I. C., A . 2820-27. Herschel added that the new mukhtars " h a v e certainly not abused their position; on the contrary, I think they have done good by controlling their clients; a n d on the whole, I was glad to have them, as without them I should have been in a very disagreeable position on the b e n c h . " Ibid., A . 2828. 47 Englishman, J u l y 16 a n d A u g . 9, i860; British I n d i a n Association, Monthly General Meeting (September 6, i 8 6 0 ) . 48 Hindoo Patriot, M a y ig, 1860.

RACE, C O M M E R C E ,

A N D POLITICS

12 1

The activities of Harish Chandra are a landmark in the history of Indian political development. In addition to publishing stirring editorials, Harish Chandra freely gave advice and encouragement to the scores of peasants who came to visit him at the Hindoo Patriot office in Calcutta. He helped support mukhtars in the mufassal courts by paying them for their services as newspaper correspondents.49 Here, for the first time, an Indian of the urban middle-class was acting as a spokesman for the peasantry. The indigo disturbances mark the beginning of a contest for the political leadership of rural India between the paternalist British district officer and the middle-class urban Indian. T h e missionary bodies of Calcutta were slower to commit themselves on the indigo issue, but once they did so the planters' cause was hopeless. T h e first impulse for action came from missionaries stationed in the mufassal in daily contact with indigo cultivators. In 1853 the Reverend Frederick Schurr of the Church Missionary Society in Nadia District wrote his Society's secretary in Calcutta: "Surely it is time that the Indian Government put a stop to such inhuman and cruel proceedings. Every indigo factory deserves to be closed, yea, utterly abolished." 60 In the years before the Sepoy Mutiny Frederick Schurr tried to convince the general body of Calcutta missionaries to take a stand against the oppressions of the indigo planters. In 1855, after hearing a paper he delivered arguing that the behavior of the planters had retarded the spread of Christianity in Nadia, the General Conference of Calcutta Missionaries agreed to publish a pamphlet whose effect on public opinion would equal, they hoped, 49 R . I. C., A. 3871-86 (Harish Chandra Mukherjee); Patriot, April 21, i860. 5 ° C . M. S., Schurr to Cuthbert, April 17, 1853.

Hindoo

122

T H E BLUE

MUTINY

that of Uncle Tom's Cabin.51 But there for several years the matter rested. Schurr and the Germans in the mufassal were treated as voices in the wilderness, and were somewhat suspected of being political agitators by their less sanguine British colleagues. When in 1856 the missionaries petitioned the Legislative Council against the abuses of Indian zamindars, they evoked an angry editorial comment from the Hindoo Patriot: "not a word occurs, not an allusion is made, to the effects of the planting, mining and other industrial systems . . . upon the condition of the ryots." 62 T h e Mutiny brought with it a change in missionary attitudes. In Calcutta the missionaries found themselves allied with the zamindars against the European community with its rabid attacks on Canning and the Indians. A section of the missionary leadership in Calcutta now began to defend missionary interference in social and political issues. Of all the British missionaries the one who most vigorously championed both the ryots and the German missionaries was James Long. Since his assignment to India by the Church Missionary Society in 1840 he had divided his time between bringing vernacular education to the villagers and stimulating social consciousness among the Bengali youth of Calcutta. In 1859, a s a advocate of political action, he urged the Church Missionary Society Central Committee in London to go before the Parliamentary Committee on European Colonization in India and expose the tyrannical conduct of the indigo planters of Bengal. 53 A t a general meeting of missionaries in Calcutta in General Conference of Bengal Missionaries (Calcutta, 4-7, 1855). Hindoo Patriot, April 16, 1857. « C. M. S., Long to C. M. S. London, April 8, 1859. 51

52

RACE,

COMMERCE,

AND

POLITICS

123

April i860 a heated debate took place on the extent to which they should become involved in the indigo issue. James Long and the Reverend Alexander Duff of the Scottish Church Mission led the faction which advocated involvement. By citing such precedents as missionary struggles against the slave trade, the Jamaica planters and the settlers' treatment of the Maoris in New Zealand, they carried the majority. A committee was appointed which included Long and Duff as members to observe the indigo disturbances as they affected missionary work. 54 Until late in April i860 L o n g knew of the misery of the indigo cultivators only from the reports of others. T h e n , one morning while he was studying Sanskrit with his pandit, fifty ryots appeared at his door. T h e y had fled from Nadia and Jessore Districts to escape oppression and had brought with them a letter from the Reverend Christian Bomwetsch. L o n g immediately called a meeting of the leading missionaries of Calcutta, including the Reverend Alexander Duff. As he reported to the Church Missionary Society in L o n d o n The men, Musulmans and Hindus, gave their evidence before us and we were all struck with the straight forward and honest tone—the evidence has been taken down in Bengali. Dr. Duff will have it translated into English and copies will be sent to England. You must prepare for this question as it is assuming large dimensions.65 Soon afterwards Long called on the Lieutenant Governor and found him "most anxious to ameliorate the social conditions of the ryots." T h e y discussed plans for the Indigo Commission which was about to be appointed. 56 Once they had committed themselves, the missionaries 54

Ibid.., A p r i l g a n d J u n e

55

Ibid.., A p r i l 23, i860,

se Ibid.

18, i860.

124

T H E

B L U E MUTINY

became the most effective "interest group" in both Calcutta and London. In 1862 Wood wrote to Elgin: "In England, the feeling is on the native side. The missionaries influence large bodies—people who form aborigines protection societies and the like are always ready to press the Government." 57 The missionaries had the channels of communication and the functioning organizations in England that neither the planters nor the Indians could hope to equal. In 1861 the trial of the Reverend James Long for the translation and publication of the anti-planter Bengali drama, Nil Darpan, was to destroy the last vestige of public sympathy for the indigo planters and their supporters. 57

H. P., Wood to Elgin, Nov. 17, 1862.

VI Act XI Ν osto acar dusto riti e due jimer priti

Corrupt customs and wicked laws, these two delight the god of death.

ON M A R C H 1Ο, 1 8 6 o , J O H N P E T E R G R A N T R E T U R N E D TO C A L -

cutta from a ten-week tour of Bihar. He found his desk piled high with accumulated reports from his district officers telling of the indigo disturbances which had erupted in Nadia District during his absence. At once Grant dispatched military police to Nadia to forestall a possible outbreak of widespread violence by the ryots. But he also feared increased violence from the planters and to avert this contemplated some kind of official measure to enable them to carry out their spring sowings. 1 The matter was decided on March 13 when he was visited by a delegation from the Indigo Planters' Association led by J . P. Wise, the largest planter of east Bengal, and including F. A. Goodenough, Secretary of the Bengal Indigo Company and Alexander Forbes, editor of the Bengal Hurkaru. T h e delegates called for two measures: first, a notification from the Government to impress the ryots with their duty to fulfill their existing contracts and to belie the rumor that the Government opposed indigo planting; and second, a law to make a breach of contract 1

Buckland, Lieutenant Governors, I, 186 fif.

126

THE BLUE M U T I N Y

to cultivate indigo punishable summarily by a magistrate. Although Grant argued that the complaints of the ryots were just and that he was opposed to the "principle of special legislation," the delegates persisted, and after an hour's discussion the Lieutenant Governor yielded. 2 On the following day Grant sent a notification to the Commissioner of Nadia ordering him to impress upon the ryots their duty to fulfill their contracts. On the other hand, the officials were to explain that it was always optional for a ryot to enter into a contract or not according to his own interest. In his covering letter he cautioned the Commissioner, " I t is not intended by this Notification that the police should interfere for the purpose of enforcing any civil contract. Breaches of contract between indigo planters and ryots can be remedied only in the manner authorized by law." Following this the Lieutenant Governor assigned four detachments of military police to the Commissioner to be used to quell any disturbances by the ryots on their hearing the notification. 3 T h e notifica tion failed either to appease the planters or to restrain the ryots. T h e planters considered it too ambiguous, and the ryots seized upon those parts which emphasized the volumtary nature of the contract. 4 T o the second request of the delegation, i.e., for a criminally enforceable contract law, Grant acceded even rmore reluctantly. In his younger days he had been instrumemtal in repealing a similar law and as late as J u n e 1859 had recorded strong views against special legislation to enftorce 2

J . P. 174, March 29, i860. Ibid. Also reported in Hindoo Patriot and Indian Field, Mlarch 17, i860. 4 Letter from A. Forbes to Grant, March 2 1 , i860 in Selecctions from the Records of the Government of Bengal, (Calcutta, 11860), Part II, pp. 349 ff. See also R . I. C., A. 2 1 5 9 ( R . T . Larmour)) and A. 3068 (A. T . Maclean, Assis. Mag.). 3

A C T XI

127

indigo contracts. 5 A l l existing British contract laws which treated breach of contract as a misdemeanor related to contracts between w o r k m e n and capitalists,® whereas in Grant's opinion ryots and planters were both capitalists. 7 Undoubtedly, however, G r a n t realized that if he did not do so C a n n i n g himself w o u l d take the initiative and sponsor a criminal contract bill, one w h i c h would, perhaps, take less care to safeguard the rights of the indigo cultivators. In theory the indigo contract was an agreement entered into by a ryot with a factory to (1) permit factory servants to measure his lands, (2) p l o u g h the land measured, (3) purchase the seeds f r o m the factory, (4) sow the seeds, (5) weed the g r o w i n g crop, (6) cut the crop, and (7) cart the plant to the factory at his o w n expense. 8 Contracts for the spring sowing were made in October, the season w h e n the ryots needed cash f o r rent and pujas or religious celebrations, and in return for his agreement the ryot was nominally given an advance of a b o u t t w o rupees per bigah. T h o u g h there were cases of single engagements covering as l o n g as twenty years, the usual duration of a contract was f r o m one to five years, w i t h advances renewed each year. If the a m o u n t of plant delivered was valued in excess of the original advance, the ryot w o u l d receive fazil or money paid in excess of the advance. In practice the system was m u c h abused. Initially the ryot accepted an advance o u t of dire necessity or was forced to take it either by the planter, if he were the ryot's landlord, o r by the head ryot w h o usually kept all or part of the advance for himself. O n one p r e t e x t or another the 5 6 7 8

C. R. J. R.

R. I. P. I.

O., Jud. and Legis. Des. Reed, from India, June 1859. C., Pt. I, Report, p. 42. 232-39, Sept. i860. C., App. X gives sample contracts.

128

THE BLUE

MUTINY

cash advance was seldom repeated, though occasiona ly a planter paid an installment to placate his ryots. Usially only be-ilaka ryots were obliged to sign contracts, vhich consisted merely of the signature of the ryot affixed to blank, stamped paper. T h e planter would fill in o n h the contracts of head ryots who controlled village cultivation or of those ryots suspected of being dishonest. T h e stamp, a G o v e r n m e n t tax of two annas, was paid annually bv the ryot; b u t in the case of contracts covering more than one year it was customary for the factory to take the ryot's money without bothering to purchase a new stamp. T h e planter held the blank paper as a threat over the ryot, but seldom took a ryot into the civil court on the basis of the contract, which, because it did not specify precisely which fields were to be cultivated, had n o legal validity. Contracts were usually witnessed only by lower-caste factory servants, since the more respectable servants were apprehensive of being required to take an oath in court at some future date. T h e factory kept account of the advances paid to and the amount cultivated by each ryot, b u t the ryot seldom knew how he stood in the factory books. W h e n the indigo was delivered, its value would be deducted from the ryot's balance and usually, after a year of cultivation, it was the ryot who owed the factory money for seed, stamps, rent and advances. T h e s e balances mounted until most of them were considered unrecoverable; and the ryots, even if they had the cash, were n o t allowed to pay off their balances and free themselves from debt. T h e ryots believed that the balances and the contracts were heritable from generation to generation, though this was, of course, legally unenforcible. Seldom did more than one-third of the ryots receive fazil, and on receiving it, a ryot was usually m u l c t e d of it by the factory servants and head ryots. T h e o p e r a t i o n

A C T XI

129

of the indigo contract system was revealed in all its starkness by the evidence of the I n d i g o C o m m i s s i o n later in the year, but enough was suspected to hold those responsible l'or the enactment of an indigo contract e n f o r c e m e n t law guilty of gross injustice. When the Governor General's Legislative Council met on March 24, A . Sconce, the member for Bengal, introduced Grant's bill "to enforce the fulfilment of Indigo Contracts." As judge of Nadia in 1854 Sconce had boldly attacked the indigo system in a letter to Halliday. Now he argued that "it was incumbant on the Government to pass a law to meet the emergency which had arisen." Following his introduction he read a message from the Lieutenant Governor stating that if the ryots had "desired to break off their connexion with that system, they should have done so before receiving the season's advances." In the future "it will be monstrous if they are not allowed . . . to exercise their legal and moral rights" to refuse advances. But at this time they have no moral or legal right "to turn suddenly round upon the planters, and, with nothing to complain of now more than they had before, to refuse to do what, up to this moment, they have led the planters to expect that they would do according to custom and agreement." For the purpose of saving " a great commercial interest" a law to inflict penal damages on the party, who, after a fair trial is found to have wilfully broken engagements is "both justifiable and proper." But the law should expire after six months and during that time there must be "a thorough enquiry into the whole system," and the future enactment of a law which will afford "equal and complete protection to the ryot as well as the planter." 9 Grant was asking the ryots for six months of grace, and 9 Proceedings of the Legislative Council of India (7 Vols., Calcutta, 1856-62), Vol. V I , proceedings of March 24, i860.

13O

THE BLUE

MUTINY

though they were bitterly disappointed, the majority responded to the wishes of the Government. What nobody foresaw was that the contract bill, amended by the Legislative Council into an instrument of oppression and administered by highly incompetent magistrates, would end forever any hope of reconciling the ryots to indigo. T h e Legislative Council which now considered the bill was dominated by two men, Sir Barnes Peacock and James Wilson. Peacock, was Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and, as Vice-President of the Council, was in the chair during Canning's absence in Simla. He was a proficient jurist who had been appointed to the Legislative Council in 1852 after twenty years of experience at the English bar. 1 0 In Calcutta he had joined with those who favored giving special privileges to the European merchants and settlers. James Wilson, a man of far different disposition, had arrived in India in November 1859 to take up the n.ewly created post of "finance minister" on the Council after establishing a reputation in England as one of the foremost economists of his day. He had served as Joint Secretary to the Board of Control, then as Financial Secretary to the Treasury and Vice-President of the Board of Tirade. He was founder and editor of the Economist and a le;ader of the free-trade movement. In accepting the job oif reorganizing Indian finances he had given up a promiising parliamentary career. A believer in the development of Indian resources by the encouragement of private capital, his arrival was hailed by both Indian and European (commercial groups in Calcutta. His income tax bill ;later alienated the Indians, but he remained a favorite off the European community and was considered by the merchants as their chief advocate in official circles suppossedly 10

C. E. Buckland, Dictionary of Indian Biography (London, 11906),

P· 33'·

A C T XI

131

dominated by bureaucrats who held merchants in disdain. Though in the prime of life, he died of dysentery only nine months after his arrival in Calcutta. 11 Perhaps, if Wilson had been thoroughly familiar with the true character of the indigo system, he may not have taken the side of Sir Barnes Peacock in subsequent debate on the contract bill. Another prominent member of the Council was Bartle Frere who later admitted that at the time he "had much sympathy with the planters." 12 Other members of the Council included General James Outram, an indolent legislator, 13 not particularly interested in civilian matters, and Charles Jackson, a Calcutta barrister and racial bigot who believed that no Indian could be trusted with arms or public office. 14 Henry B. Harington, an experienced civilian representing the North-Western Provinces, was the only Council member who opposed the contract bill. As introduced by Sconce, the bill was quite moderate. T h e preamble called for the appointment of a commission of enquiry into the practice of indigo planting after the close of the present season. T h e bill provided that, if after March 24, i860 a ryot wilfully delayed or omitted to cultivate indigo according to his agreement for which a cash advance was made, the magistrate, on the oath of a planter or agent, could summon the ryot to appear before him and investigate the complaint. On sufficient evidence the ryot could be made to pay damages amounting to five times the advance or to suffer imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months. Another section provided for the fine 11 Richard Temple, Men and Events of My Time in India (London, 1882), pp. 186 ff. 12 John Martineau, Life of Sir Bartle Frere (2 Vols., London, 1895), I» 36 1 · 13 H. P., Canning to Wood, June 18, i860. 14 Indian Field, Sept. 3, 1859.

132

THE BLUE

MUTINY

and imprisonment of any person attempting to intimidate a ryot to break off an agreement or for conspiring vith others to cause a breach of contract. Other provisions included penalties for wilful destruction or damage to indigo crops, the denial of an appeal from the decision of the magistrate and the expiration of the act within six mor.ths. Peacock, in arguing that he saw no reason for enforcing only agreements for which cash advances had been given, at once attacked the fundamental safeguard of Sconce's bill. Even an advance of seed appeared to him sufficient grounds for prosecution, since the planter would be injured in any case by non-fulfilment of the contract. Wilson disagreed with Peacock, stating that if a cash advance were received under false pretences it "assumed rather a criminal character," but if no cash advance was received, non-fulfilment would be a purely civil act. He supported the bill as read believing that it would induce the "disaffected ryots to return to their loyalty." Wilson believed that the interests of the ryots would suffer if the indigo industry were driven from Bengal and hoped that, if the system were corrected, the law of supply and demand would make its operation satisfactory to all parties. Along with passing the bill he felt that "we ought to be extremely anxious to impress upon the minds of the ryots that we were as much their friends as we were of their employers." 15 T h e Council then adjourned for one week during which the Lieutenant Governor appointed six special magistrates for the indigo districts and instructed all magistrates to carry out the provisions of the bill as introduced. During this same week an inexplicable change occurred in the opinions held by James Wilson. One can only conjecture that Wilson was persuaded by Peacock and some of his 15

Proc. of Legis.

Council,

M a r c h 24, i860.

ACT XI

133

mercantile associates to reverse his position on the cash advance. At the Council meeting of March 31 Wilson moved that the cash advance should not be considered the essential ingredient of the contract and that the ryot should be obliged to cultivate the entire plot of land contracted for, not only the part for which he had received a cash advance. He even included in his amendment land cultivated to pay off old debts owed to the factory. Sconce and Harington objected strongly to the amendment, but Frere and Peacock supported Wilson, and the amendment carried. Wilson then suggested another amendment which proved to be only slightly less detrimental to the ryots. He moved to omit the clause limiting the damages to five times the amount of the advance and to substitute the words damages "sustained by reason of the breach of contract." Wilson contended that if the maximum penalty were stipulated in the law the magistrates would be inclined to inflict damages to the maximum permissible limit, and that under his amendment they would fine the ryots less heavily. But in actual practice the magistrates used their additional authority to inflict fines far in excess of five times the amount of the advance. Peacock in turn added two amendments which were to place additional burdens on the ryots. One permitted the magistrate to attach the ryot's crops in default of payment; the other permitted him to decree specific performance of the agreement. 16 Altogether the bill as passed was far more stringent than the original proposed by Grant and Sconce. On April 4 the Lieutenant Governor, obviously displeased with the amendments of Wilson and Peacock, notified the Commissioners of Nadia and Rajshahi of the changes in the bill and cautioned them that "these changes add materially to the responsibilities of the Officers vested with 16

Ibid., March 3 1 , i860.

IG4

T H E

BLUE

MUTINY

magisterial powers under the A c t . " G r a n t urged them to be equitable in their application of the Act, to give careful attention to the facts in each case and to be certain that a contract actually existed. T h e Commissioners were to keep themselves well informed on the activities of their district officers. H e concluded: These powers, and the opportunity of acting upon them, must not be retained for a day in the hands of any Officer who may show himself not competent to exercise them in such a manner as to do full and substantial justice to all parties. 17 O n A p r i l 9 the G o v e r n o r General gave his assent to A c t X I of i860, " A n A c t to enforce the f u l f i l m e n t of Indigo contracts, and to provide for the a p p o i n t m e n t of a Commission of E n q u i r y . " L o r d C a n n i n g wrote to W o o d that W i l s o n "did not quite know what he was about. I should have disallowed it if I had been on the spot, b u t the w h o l e bill came u p for my assent w h e n I was at Simla, and a veto w o u l d h a v e been so sure to be mischievously interpreted, and have delayed action so long, that against my will I let it pass." 1 8 W h e n W o o d read the account of Wilson's role in f r a m i n g the act he wrote to C a n n i n g : I am afraid that Wilson has been run away with his English notions, and by the English community in Calcutta, and the support of the English press in India. . . . Other Indians say that he has overpowered his colleagues, is supposed to possess some undefined authority from home and that they dare not gainsay him. So he is said to have overruled Grant. . . . I meed not tell you how untrue the authority from home is. 19 T h e provision for a commission of e n q u i r y made the law, in part at least, acceptable to the Indian c o m m u n i t y 17

J. P. 380, A p r i l i860.

18

H . P., C a n n i n g to W o o d , J u n e 4,

19

H . P., W o o d to C a n n i n g , M a y

i860.

18, i860.

A C T XI

135

of Calcutta. The Hindoo Patriot commented that the Government took the only course possible under the circumstances and that in calling for an enquiry Grant had acted in a statesmanlike and vigorous manner.20 T h e Indian Field editorialized that any hardship Act X I would inflict upon the cultivators would be offset by the great benefit to them of a commission of enquiry. Commenting on the roles played by Grant and Sconce the editorial observed, "the names of those who drafted and introduced it are sufficient security of the good and honest intentions with which it was laid before the council." 21 In the mufassal the ryots did not understand that the act was temporary.22 After seeing a ray of hope for a brief period, they now felt betrayed by the Government. They were more determined than ever not to sow indigo,28 and Wilson's belief that it would induce the "disaffected ryots to return to their loyalty" was a miscalculation. T h e "ryot coercion act," as it was called by the Indian newspapers, only served to intensify the disturbances. James Long later testified that because of the law the ryots had become exceedingly embittered and exasperated. Even in Calcutta feeling was "stronger against certain classes of English than I have seen even during the Mutiny." 24 T h e British Indian Association and the missionaries both petitioned the Government against the act. On March 22 the British Indian Association wrote the Lieutenant Governor: Much as your Petitioners value British enterprise in Indiamuch as they hope for the introduction of British capital, 20

Hindoo Patriot, April 28, i860. Indian Field, March 31, i860. 22 R . I. C., A. 165g (James Long). 23 Hindoo Patriot, April 14 and June 2, i860. 24 R. I. C., A. 1645 a n d A · l 6 6 1 · 21

136

THE BLUE

MUTINY

energy, and skill into this land as the pioneer of progress— much as they look to European science and its application for the development of the inexaustible resources of this country— they would yet reckon it as humiliating and discreditable to British Settlers, and unfortunate for the people, if those excellent advantages, which cannot be undervalued without gross positive injustice, could not be obtained without the aid of "special legislation." 25 When on March 30 they petitioned the Legislative Council against specific sections of the bill, the Indian Field commented: " I t affords us sincere pleasure to see the native nobility and gentry come forward as the champions of the rights and privileges of the peasantry." 2 6 On A p r i l 21 the Calcutta Missionary Conference wrote a letter to the Bengal Government giving its opinion that the contract law was one-sided. T h e missionaries were especially critical of the Government's holding the ryots to old debts many of which were supported by forged contracts. 27 Nor were the planters entirely enthusiastic about the proceedings of the Government. T h e y objected to Grant's instructions to the Commissioners of Nadia and Rajshahi on the administration of the act, calling it executive interference with the judiciary. 2 8 T h e y were dissatisfied with the provision for the expiration of the act at the end of six months, 29 and were apprehensive about the effect of the commission of enquiry, though now they could hardly object to one. 30 A t a planters' meeting at Nischintipur on -''British I n d i a n Association, Monthly General i860). 26 Indian Field, March 3 1 , i860. 27 J. P. 538, M a y i860. 28 Indian Field, A p r i l 14, i860. 29 Englishman, A p r i l 24, i860. 30 H . P., C a n n i n g to W o o d , March 3 1 , i860.

Meeting

(June: 13,

A C T XI

137

April 26 they proposed postponement of the e n q u i r y until a more t r a n q u i l time. 3 1 T h e principal adversary of Act X I was Sir Charles Wood. Writing to Canning that he was "uneasy" about the legislation which gave "criminal jurisdiction to Magistrates in civil cases of breach of contract," he warned that, since "Indigo Cultivation is practically forced labour, we cannot pass strong enactments to enforce its performance." 32 T o Wilson he wrote: " I must warn you that you were supposed to take too English and planter-like a view. . . . You must beware of a danger . . . of attempting to govern too much on English principles and ideas." 33 In his official despatch on the act Wood objected to a civil contract being made the ground for a criminal prosecution, but allowed the act to stand because it was limited to six months and was intended to meet an emergency. 34 As the Hindoo Patriot pointed out, it was not the law itself but its administration that was crucial. 36 T h e responsibility for its administration devolved upon the magistrates, who now were armed with extraordinary powers. T h e operation of Act X I in the mufassal was an acid test of British district administration. H o w this responsibility was performed will be reviewed in the next chapter. Section X I I of Act X I provided for the appointment of a commission of enquiry and thereby fulfilled a need which had been recognized by the Court of Directors as early as 1832, but had been postponed for fear of precipitating disturbances. 36 Even before signing the bill Canning 31

Englishman, May 7, i860. H. P., Wood to Canning, May 3, i860. 33 H. P., Wood to Wilson, May 10, i860. 34 C. R. O., Jud. and Legis. Des. to India, Orig. Drafts, Vol. 3, Jud. No. 84, July 24, i860. 35 Hindoo Patriot, April 28, i860. 36 R. I. C., App. X V I . 32

138

THE BLUE

MUTINY

wrote to Wood that the result of the enquiry would be "very damaging to the planters, and that it will disclose an amount of coercion, if not of oppression of the Ryots which as yet is only suspected." 37 The Lieutenant Governor intended that every interest be represented on the commission, and on May 2 the Government of Bengal requested both the Indigo Planters' Association and the British Indian Association to nominate representatives. The planters had wanted to nominate James Forlong, the planter most highly regarded by all sections of society, but evidently he pleaded lack of time.38 Alexander Forbes may have been their second choice, but according to the Indian Field, he preferred to remain an "irresponsible editor" rather than become a "responsible commissioner." 39 The planters finally nominated W. F. Fergusson, who was well qualified by position, ability and sympathy to represent them.40 Wood was apprehensive about arousing the zamindars, since the enquiry could hardly fail to touch upon their rights, and he recommended that Canning pledge noninterference with zamindari rights.41 But Canning disagreed and replied that the zamindars welcomed the commission, were well represented, and therefore not uneasy about their rights.42 T h e British Indian Association nominated Chunder Mohun Chatterjee, a nephew of Dwarkanath Tagore, who had once accompanied his uncle to Europe, had managed his uncle's indigo factory, and in 1849 had been the only Indian who had joined the Euro37 38 39 40 41 42

H . P., Friend Indian Hindoo H . P., H . P.,

C a n n i n g to Wood, March 3 1 , i860. of India, M a y 10, i860. Field, M a y 6, 18Ö0. Patriot, M a y 12, i860. AVood to C a n n i n g , J u n e 1 1 , i860. C a n n i n g to Wood, J u l y 27, i860.

A C T XI

139

pean community in opposing Bethune's "Black Acts." T h e Hindoo Patriot wrote: "Race antagonism, an element not entirely out of the question here, is utterly absent in him." 43 T h e problem of representing the ryots was more difficult. Canning first thought that the responsibility would fall upon the Government itself, 44 but later he wrote that the missionary representative on the commission, the Reverend J. Sale, "is, or is supposed to be, the nearest approach to a champion of the Ryot interest." He reassured Wood that the Baptist missionary was a sensible, quiet and inoffensive man, 45 and a Calcutta Missionary Conference in April declared that Sale's membership would raise the question from that of mere rupees to hearings on the social, intellectual and religious elevation of the downtrodden ryot. 48 T h e two officiai nominees were W . S. Seton-Karr, who served as President, and Richard T e m p l e . In 1847 Seton-Karr had written an article for the Calcutta Review somewhat critical of the planters, especially of their violent affrays. 47 T e m p l e was Chief Assistant to James Wilson and shared many of the economist's views on the value of indigo enterprise. T o all appearances, the Commission was dominated by men sympathetic to the planting interest. T h e Englishman considered it "fair"; however, the Hurkaru called it "packed," with two officials, a zamindar, and a missionary pitted against Fergusson. 48 T h e Indigo Commission was officially appointed 43

Hindoo

44

H . P., C a n n i n g to W o o d , M a r c h 31, i860.

Patriot,

M a y 12, i860.

45

H . P., C a n n i n g to W o o d , J u l y

46

Indian

47

Vol. VII,

48

Englishman,

Field,

J a n . 5, 1861.

1847. M a y 17,

i860.

17, i860.

on

140

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

May 10 and held its first p u b l i c meetings in Calcutta on May 18. From July 6 to 19 the Commission held hearings at Krishnagar, then returned to Calcutta and held the last hearing on A u g u s t 4. T h e p u b l i c hearings were "daily crowded to excess." O u t of a total of 134 witnesses examined there were fifteen officials, twenty-one planters or former planters, eight missionaries, thirteen zamindars and talukdars, and seventy-seven ryots. Hundreds of ryots came to Calcutta from Jessore, Nadia, Barasat and Pabna, believing the Commission to be a court of appeals. T h e i r testimony was translated by Seton-Karr, Sale, and C h u n d e r M o h u n Chatterjee. In Krishnagar the Commission visited the jail and heard the testimonies of sixty ryots imprisoned under Act X I . T h e commissioners covered every point connected with indigo planting as practiced in Bengal, Bihar and the U n i t e d Provinces. T h e y investigated the relations of the planters toward zamindars and ryots, the economic aspects of the cultivation, the conduct of the police and authorities, the w o r k i n g of the laws, land tenures, and the "general condition, advancement, and social prosperity of the country." O p i u m cultivation was examined for comparative purposes. 49 W h e n published in N o v e m b e r i860 the c o m b i n e d volume, including the Report, Minutes of Evidence and Appendices, contained 762 pages of valuable information on conditions in rural Bengal in i860. T h e testimonies of the ryots are perhaps the only authentic words extant of that class of people. Forlong, Larmour, Meares and other planters disclosed details of their operations; numerous zamindars told the Commission how they reacted to the favored treatment given their European rivals; the R e v e r e n d James L o n g reported on vernacular publications and the dissemination of political informa49

R. I. C., Pt. I, Report,

passim.

A C T XI

141

tion among the peasants; and Ashley Eden gave his account of the origin of the disturbances in Barasat. 50 Excerpts from the open proceedings appeared in all the Calcutta and in many British newspapers. A l t h o u g h the findings of the commissioners surprised no one, the judicious moderation of their language gave their judgments an aura of conclusiveness. Fundamentally, the commissioners found that " A l l the defects of the system . . . may be traced originally to one bare fact, the want of adequate remuneration." T h e conclusions and recommendations of the majority were signed by Seton-Karr, Sale, C h u n d e r M o h u n , and, with certain reservations, by Temple. W i t h regard to planter-zamindar relations the majority wrote: " W e cannot subscribe to the o p i n i o n that there is a n y t h i n g in the conduct of native zamindars w h i c h evinces hostility to the cultivation of indigo, o r w h i c h places a bar to the investment of E u r o p e a n capital." T h i s conclusion was based on the testimonies of the h a n d f u l of zamindars w h o appeared before the Commission. B u t there is e n o u g h evidence in the records to indicate that, although only a few zamindars took overt action against planters, feeling against the planters ran high. A closer investigation of the relations between zamindars and planters m i g h t have proven that they were far f r o m satisfactory. B u t the C o m mission assumed that, if the planters improved their relations with the ryots, their settlement in the countryside w o u l d benefit all classes. T o deny this w o u l d have been to rule o u t the ability of British and Indian landlords to coexist in peace, and thus to deny any secure f u t u r e to British enterprise in the mufassal. Secondly, the relations between planter a n d ryot, wrote the commissioners, "are not satisfactory, and require conso R. I. C., Pts. V-VII, Minutes

of Evidence,

passim.

142

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

siderable changes." T h e Commission reported that cases of kidnapping, carrying off cattle and rooting up gardens of disobedient ryots are "numerous" and "well authenticated" and that imprisonment of individuals in factory godowns was of "common occurrence." Of the system of advances they report: "It matters little whether the ryot took his original advances with reluctance or cheerfulness, the result in either case is the same; he is never afterwards a free man." N o mention was made of forged contracts. Referring to the indigo system itself, the Commission reported "violent individuals can only work such a system by oppression and ill-usage. . . ." T h e commissioners opposed the compulsory registration of contracts as well as any special laws, such as Act X I , to enforce contracts. In discussing the treatment of planters by local officiais the Commission reported: " T h e r e has been no general bias exerted against planters by either the Magistrates or the Police." In fact, the commissioners found that the reverse was true, and they urged a multiplication of subdivisions presided over jointly by well-paid Indian and European officers. T h e y opposed the appointment of a special commissioner or special magistrates to investigate and settle indigo disputes, since this would result in overlapping jurisdictions. T h e y did, however, recommend an increase in the number of officers appointed to try rent cases, because Act X of 1859 had impeded the collection of rents by some of the zamindars and planters. Of the role taken by missionaries in the disturbances they wrote: " T h e conduct of the Missionaries, as a body, during the late controversy and crisis, is not blameworthy, and that of many has been straightforward, manly, and considerate. . . ." T h e Report concluded " T h e residence of Europeans in the interior, and their embarking on mercantile pursuits is to be encouraged by all legitimate

ACT XI

143

means, for political a n d social reasons, consistent w i t h the welfare of the mass of the p o p u l a t i o n . " 5 1 A l t h o u g h T e m p l e a g r e e d w i t h the r e m a i n d e r of the Report, he wrote a separate M i n u t e , c o n t e n d i n g , astonishingly e n o u g h , that if the i n d i g o industry w e r e to be driven f r o m L o w e r B e n g a l , the p r o d u c t i o n of rice w o u l d increase b e y o n d the capacity f o r its c o n s u m p t i o n a n d rice w o u l d consequently fall in price. A n y m a j o r r e f o r m s in the indigo system he w o u l d leave to the planters w h o w o u l d "consult their o w n interests as w e l l as benefit their ryots." T h e G o v e r n m e n t ' s r e m e d y s h o u l d be to r e f o r m the police, w h i c h he considered the " r o o t of the m a t t e r . " H e d i d not t h i n k it necessary to s u b j e c t the planters to the same mufassai law as the Indians, a n d he w o u l d disarm all the Indians b u t n o t the E u r o p e a n s , " o f c o u r s e . " H e recomm e n d e d that A c t X I of 1860 b e m a d e p e r m a n e n t , that contracts be registered a n d , if v i o l a t e d , c r i m i n a l l y e n f o r c e d . H e b e l i e v e d that A c t X of 1859 h a d d e p r i v e d the landholders of too m u c h p o w e r a n d r e c o m m e n d e d that "adeq u a t e m a c h i n e r y m a y b e a v a i l a b l e f o r e n s u r i n g the e x p e d i t i o u s r e c o v e r y of rent. . . ." A n d finally, he recomm e n d e d special officers b e d e p u t e d to the t r o u b l e spots a n d that a special i n d i g o c o m m i s s i o n e r b e a p p o i n t e d to inspect conditions. Fergusson c o n c u r r e d in T e m p l e ' s M i n u t e a n d w r o t e an a d d i t i o n a l o n e of his o w n w h o l l y dissenting f r o m the Rep o r t of the m a j o r i t y . H e f e a r e d t h a t the R e p o r t w o u l d " o p e r a t e o n the m i n d s of an i g n o r a n t p e a s a n t r y " to the d e t r i m e n t of the planters. A l t h o u g h h e a d m i t t e d that the planters s h o u l d h a v e p a i d a t t e n t i o n to p r e v a i l i n g e c o n o m i c conditions a n d " m e t the r y o t w i t h a m o r e p r o p o r t i o n a t e r e m u n e r a t i o n , . . . e v e n as to those points the truth of w h i c h I d o n o t d i s p u t e . . . I . . . dissent f r o m the l a n g u a g e 51

R . I. C., Pt. I, Report,

pp. 46-47.

144

T H E

BLUE

MUTINY

and tone of the Report . . . [which] . . . tend to give a coloring, and to lead to conclusions not proved from the facts." 5 2 Although T e m p l e and Fergusson had found it necessary to write dissenting opinions, the conclusions reached by the majority were certainly not excessive in condemnation. In the judgment of the British Indian Association the Indigo Commission had been fair, but the "moderation of its tone has been mild to a fault." 5 3 It was not the conclusions of the commissioners which gave the Report its force, but the Minutes of Evidence, which spoke for themselves. T h e most eloquent analysis of the evidence and lucid critique of the Report was written by the Lieutenant Governor in a Minute dated December 17, i860. 54 Grant opened his discussion with a statement that from its inception the system of indigo production in Lo\ver Bengal had been unsound. "Whilst in all other trades all parties concerned have been bound together by the usual commercial ties of mutual interest, in this one trade, in this one Province, the indigo manufacture has always been a remarkable exception to this natural and healthy state of things." T o maintain this unsound system the planters had turned to coercion. Not only had the ryots suffered under it, but the system had prevented the spread of a genuine plantation cultivation. Raiyati cultivation practiced under coercion had harmed nijabad cultivation just as bad money drives out good. He found that the ryots objected more to the harassment than to the loss of money entailed by indigo cultivation. For the long history of this harassment he blamed not the individual planters, but the sys52 R . I. C „ Pt. I, Report, passim. 53 British Indian Association, Ninth Annual Report i860). 54 Buckland, Lieutenant Governors, I, 238-71.

(Dec.

29,

ACT XI

145

tem and, in particular, the biased administration which upheld it. " A country where . . . these offences are committed habitually and for the most part with impunity, is a country in which the law affords the weak no protection. T h e fact is a disgrace to the Administration." " The root of the whole question," wrote Grant, "is the struggle to make raiyats grow indigo plant, without paying them the price of it." T h e ryot must be free to sell at his own price, and if the planter could not afford to pay, "it cannot be helped" and the industry must move to another part of India. T o attempt to do otherwise is "to waste the resources of the country and to fight against nature." Grant concluded his Minute with recommendations for the improvement of local administration and with a compliment to the commissioners for the "careful impartiality with which they conducted their inquiries . . . at a moment of passionate excitement." Thus, Grant opposed the indigo system of Lower Bengal because it violated a fundamental law of free enterprise, the right of the seller to determine the price of his goods. "These raiyats are not Carolina slaves," he wrote, "but the free yeomanry of this country . . . and the virtual owners of the greater part of the land." After reading the Minute W o o d wrote to Grant: It is a most able document, and completely establishes the case as between Planter and Ryot. I am very sorry for the individual planters who will suffer by the change of system; but that such a system should go on is quite impossible.55 T h e scope of the Indigo Commission extended far beyond its stated purpose of inquiring into and reporting on the system and practice of indigo planting. It proved the adage that to define a problem is partly to solve it. T h e s5 H. P., Wood to Grant, Feb. 4, 1861.

146

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

simple ryots were not mistaken in t h i n k i n g of the Commission as a court of last resort; in effect, the powers of the Commission exceeded even those of a high court. Its operation modified the very system which it was appointed to investigate.

VII The Magistrates Rokkhoke

bhokkhon

ke tare rakhte

kore

pare1

If the man protector

appointed devours,

who is able to shield

the

people?

THE "SENSE OF APPROACHING FREEDOM" WHICH HAD SWEPT

the indigo districts earlier in the year gave way, with the enforcement of Act XI, to bitterness and despair.2 Heavy rain in the second week of April made sowing necessary at once, and when ryots scattered throughout Nadia District refused to sow, the planters were forced to take action. At first most of the planters were reluctant to test the new law. For one reason, to jail their own ryots would have precluded the sowing of any indigo; for another, they feared that the magistrates would not accept their questionable contracts as legal evidence. Instead, they tried such direct methods of coercion as evicting ryot-tenants and withholding from them grain collected as rent.8 But the planters soon discovered that the magistrates had little interest in legal veracity. Toward the end of April, following the example of James Forlong the plant1 Sushil Kumar De, ed., Bangla Probad p. 694. 2R. I. C„ A. 2819 (Herschel). 3 J. P. 386-92, 396-97, April i860.

(2nd. ed., Calcutta, 1952),

148

THE BLUE

MUTINY

ers began to institute hundreds of contract violation suits. T h e magistrates themselves joined the planters in terrorizing ignorant ryots into planting indigo and even into signing new contracts. It was common practice for them to arrest the village headmen and sentence any who refused to sow indigo to a stiff fine and three months imprisonment. In jail the ryots were brutally treated by the guards until they agreed to sow. T h r o u g h o u t the district rumors were spread that the "cavalry would cut down and the Gurkhas shoot down every man who will be found plowing his [rice] land unless with a magistrate's order and the bullocks will furnish beef to the sahibs." In spite of their fears the majority of ryots at first stubbornly refused to sow indigo. 4 By April 25, 279 men had been imprisoned in Nadia District, two-thirds for breach of contract, the balance for acts of violence, destruction of indigo plant, cattle trespass and intimidation of other ryots. T h e Commissioner of Nadia Division, Arthur Grote, suspected that the number of convictions was too high, reasoning that if a man were really under contract to sow he would hardly refuse and suffer a jail sentence. Many ryots went to prison because the law was unprecedented and the illiterate populace could not be taught without numerous examples the change in their legal status. Others refused to sow because they were not aware that Act X I was temporary and decided that a few months in jail was preferable to a lifetime of indigo cultivation. 5 Most of the ryots whom the Indigo Commission interviewed in the Krishnagar jail were respectable villagers who claimed that they had not been aware they were under contract to sow and had been willing to go to court 4 6

Hindoo Patriot, April 28, i860. J . P. 396-97, April i860.

THE MAGISTRATES

149

because they believed in the justice of the Government. They were convicted on false evidence and ruined with huge fines.® T o console these ryots the Lieutenant Governor issued a proclamation assuring them that the act would remain in force only until October 4 and that on the report of the Indigo Commission the Government would frame rules for the benefit of all parties.7 The administration of Act X I provided a tangible test of the integrity of the district officers of Lower Bengal. In February i860 Harish Chandra Mukherjee had editorialized: "These civil servants are about the best specimen of things we impost [sic], quick or dead." 8 Less than four months later he was informing his readers about the "dozen corrupt, bribe eating magistrates . . . who have prostituted themselves . . ." in executing Act XI.® By March 1860 conditions were favorable for effective administration because, for the first time since the British assumed responsibility for their government, the districts of Lower Bengal were provided with an adequate complement of officials. T h e District of Nadia, for example, had been divided into four subdivisions with officers posted at the head of each. William James Herschel, the District Magistrate, was assisted by A. T . Maclean, C. Betts, M. G. Taylor, F. Platts and D. J . McNeile. Of these magistrates, and, in fact, of all the magistrates stationed in Lower Bengal in i860, only Herschel measured up to the high standards usually associated with the Indian Civil Service. 10 6 See testimonies of various ryots in R. I. C., A. 1414, 3043, 3196, 3206, 3208, and 3218 ff. ? J . P. 234, Sept. i860. * Hindoo Patriot, Feb. 4, i860. fl Hindoo Patriot, May 26, i860. 10 William James Herschel (1832-1917) was appointed Officiating Magistrate of Nadia District on February 20, i860. Both his father and grandfather were distinguished British astronomers. Herschel

150

THE BLUE

MUTINY

Within one month after taking up his assignment in Nadia, Herschel came into direct conflict with James Forlong. T h e magistrate went in person to one of Forlong's villages to read the peasants the Lieutenant Governor's notification of March 14. Forlong and his gumashta were present, and Herschel ordered them to leave at once. Forlong later complained to Arthur Grote, the Commissioner of Nadia Division, who criticized Herschel for giving way before the mob. In answer the magistrate argued he had wanted to dissociate himself from the planter and thereby prevent the notification from assuming pro-planter connotations. 11 Herschel again clashed with Grote when he supported a group of villagers in a claim against George Meares of the Lokenathpur Concern. Meares had deliberately burnt down the villagers' houses and refused to pay adequate damages in view of their "poor behavior" in not sowing indigo. Herschel ruled in favor of the ryots, but Grote reversed the decision asserting that the magistrate had too readily accepted the villagers' estimate of their losses.12 On the other hand Herschel firmly insisted that the ryots remain orderly, and by persuasion and authority restrained them from acts of mischief and violence. While himself was a pioneer in the science of dactylography. T h e common occurrence of forgery and fraud in indigo contracts first prompted him to put his knowledge of fingerprinting to practical use. In 1859 he required his ryots in Hugli District to affix their prints to deeds of contract, and thus demonstrated the individuality and persistence of fingerprints. In his testimony before the Indigo Commission he recommended the use of fingerprints in the registration of indigo contracts, but his suggestion was ignored and it was not until 1892 that fingerprinting was first given official trial by the police in India. Henry Cotton, Indian and Home Memories (London, 1 9 1 1 ) , p. 68; Times (London), Oct. 25, 1917. 1 1 R . I. C., A. 3507 (Forlong); J . P. 223-25, March 29, i860. 12 J . P. 386-92, April i860.

T H E MAGISTRATES

151

agreeing to hear specific complaints, he refused to accept the large number of vague and irrelevant petitions brought to his kachahri. He arrested those leaders whom he considered dangerous to the peace, and forbade the ryots to visit other villages in groups of larger than five.13 In Bangaon Subdivision at the end of March he punished the ryots who had attacked Larmour's assistant, J . S. Campbell of the Mulnath Concern. While assuring the ryots, in the presence of Larmour, that he would never permit a planter to cut the crops on a ryot's land without the cultivator's consent, he strongly advised them to fulfil their contracts and warned them that he would send for the military police if there were any further violence. His visits brought quiet to Bangaon for a short time. 14 T h e peace at Bangaon was broken on April 8 when the darogha went to Narianpur Village to read the proclamation explaining Act X I . T h e ryots greeted him with laughter and said "they would obey no such order." When he arrested four of their leaders, the darogha was attacked by two hundred ryots from a neighboring village and his prisoners were rescued. D. J . McNeile, the Joint Magistrate, arrived on the following day. With the help of a factory jamadar he entered the homes of the villagers, arrested nineteen who were pointed out as leading enemies of the factory, fined them and sentenced them to six months imprisonment. He dismissed the village chaukidars (watchmen) who had refused to cooperate with the darogha and reported that the resistance which Herschel had suppressed in March was now widespread. Grote blamed the darogha for the revival of ill-feeling, calling his arrest of the four 13

R . I. C., A. 2836-40 (Herschel); J . P. 223-25 and 259, March 29, i860. 14 R. I. C., A. 3486 (D. J . McNeile) and 3 5 1 2 (Herschel).

152

THE BLUE

MUTINY

men "arbitrary and injudicious." 1 5 A few months later Grote censured McNeile himself for attempting to arrest some village leaders at night without warrants and with only a small body of police. T h e villagers had forced him to retreat and had rescued their leaders. 16 Another of Herschel's assistants, C. Betts, Deputy Magistrate of Damurhuda, also displayed a lack of discretion. On April g, through information furnished by James Forlong, Betts arrested T i t u Chakravarty, a mukhtar of the ryots, on a charge that he was instigating the cultivators to break their agreements. Under Act X I he sentenced the mukhtar to six months imprisonment and a two-hundred rupee fine. Grote strongly disapproved of the proceedings because it had deprived the ryots of legal advice, and at the end of May he transferred Betts to another district. T h e Lieutenant Governor called for a closer supervision by Grote to prevent similar occurrences in the future, and the affair became a cause célèbre in the Calcutta press. 17 On April 17, Deputy Magistrate A . T . Maclean, at the instigation of planter George Meares, issued a parwana prohibiting rice from being sown on lands which were claimed by the factory to have been sown in previous years with indigo. Maclean sent his head darogha, Girish Chandra Bose, on a tour of Meares' factories and wherever Meares' gumashta demanded land for indigo, the darogha prohibited the cultivation of rice. Before the rice crops could be damaged Herschel countermanded the order and on April 19 issued his own parwana, applicable throughout Nadia District, declaring that no ryot could be forced 15

J . P. 393 95, April i860; Hindoo Patriot, A p r i l 28, i860. ' « R . I. C., A. 3488 (McNeile); C. R . O., J u d . and Leg. Des. Reed., No. 29, May 15 and No. 52, Aug. 7, i860. 17 Hindoo Patriot, M a y 5, i860; J . P. 386-92, A p r i l i860; C. R . O., J u d . and Leg. Des. Reed., No. 38, J u n e 15, i860.

T H E MAGISTRATES

1 53 18

to sow indigo where rice was already growing. The planters were enraged by Herschel's parwana, which the darogha mistakenly, or perhaps intentionally, published in its entirety. A l t h o u g h it encouraged some ryots to cultivate rice on indigo lands, it undoubtedly saved many families from starvation. T h e planters now met at Forlong's home and, in vain, petitioned the Lieutenant Governor to remove Herschel f r o m their district. 19 In Jessore District the sowing season of i860 took a somewhat different turn. Herschel's parwana of April 19 had no application there, and if a planter claimed that land under rice belonged under indigo, the magistrate supported him. In the absence of a single sympathetic officer, whatever freedom the ryots achieved was accomplished entirely through their own efforts. T h e Officiating Magistrate of Jessore, E. W . Molony, had received his assignment because he had been considered one of the most intelligent, active and successful magistrates, but his conduct during the indigo disturbances was according to a Government report, "objectionable"—a strong reprimand coming from an officialdom given to understatement.20 His assistant, C. B. Skinner, the Joint Magistrate of Jessore, was the most reprehensible of all the magistrates of i860. On March 17 Skinner went to Thana Kalopole in the northwest part of Jessore where the ryots were refusing to sow to read them the notification of the Lieutenant Governor. Almost 10,000 men gathered to hear the magistrate. When, after hearing the notification, the ryots still refused 18

R. I. C „ A. 3462 (Girish Chandra Bose); J . P. 396-97, April 7, i860. 19 R . I. C., A. 2781 (R. Chardon, planter), 1297 (Rev. C. H. Blumhardt), 3 1 2 6 (A. Hills, planter), 3191 (Forlong) ; Hindoo Patriot, March 19, i860; C. R. O., Jud. and Leg. Des. Reed., No. 38, June 15, i860. 20 C. R. O., Jud. and Leg. Des. Reed., No. 60, Nov. 23, i860.

154

T H E

BLUE

MUTINY

to sow, Skinner decided to arrest their leaders. T h e next day his darogha went to select a mandai from every village on the pretext that they were needed to confer with the magistrate. Forty-nine were selected and sent to Jessore for confinement. Forty-five of them agreed to sow and were released; four did not and Avere ordered imprisoned for six months. T h e y petitioned the Lieutenant Governor on March 28, accusing Skinner of frequently visiting Meares and of issuing orders from Meares' factory. 2 1 Meanwhile, the mob had tried to rescue the prisoners, but, discouraged by the boldness of the magistrate and the prudent counsel of their leaders, the crowd finally dispersed without violence. Skinner directed the darogha to identify the ringleaders of the attempted rescue and four days later the darogha appeared with seventeen men and four others who were witnesses to their deeds. T h e seventeen were committed, but in J u n e all except one were released by Belli, the Judge of Jessore. 22 Skinner's conduct in a dispute at the end of March proved to be his downfall. One of the servants of George Meares, who had intruded into the company of some ryots while they were discussing whether or not to sow, charged that the ryots had used abusive language toward him and attempted to assault him, though he had not been injured. On this petty charge Skinner ordered eighteen villagers apprehended. T h e y were kept in close confinement until their trials one to two weeks later. When brought before Skinner he did not allow them to confront their accuser and, instead of indicating the actual charge, told them they were charged with illegal assemblage and " f o r not sowing indigo." After they still refused to sow he sentenced them each to 20 rupees fine, and three weeks im21 J . P. 264-66, March 29, i860. 22 Hindoo Patriot, May 26 and July 4, i860.

T H E MAGISTRATES

155

prisonment with labor. At the end of two weeks half the prisoners agreed to sow on the planter's terms and they were set free. Molony then took over the case and continued in the line of his predecessor. The Lieutenant Governor, informed of these events through the Indian Field and Hindoo Patriot?3 called upon Skinner and Molony for an explanation. Molony pleaded that prompt measures had been necessary to preserve the peace of the district during a time of emergency. The Lieutenant Governor did not accept his explanation but excused him in view of his excellent record and because he had entered the case when it was almost over. Skinner was held "blameworthy," and the Lieutenant Governor wrote, "This case throws a strong light on the habitual action of the Magisterial Courts in the Indigo Districts . . ." in condoning injustice.24 T h e correspondent of the Hindoo Patriot in Jessore, Sisir Kumar Ghose, closely followed the proceedings of Skinner, while the joint magistrate tried desperately to discover the author of the damaging reports. Sisir wrote of Skinner's frequent social visits with various planters and of his exonerating planters who had committed outrages. In one case Skinner tried to conceal an affray with murder involving a planter, John Driver, of the Mirganj Concern. The commissioner reprimanded Skinner and committed the case to Judge Belli who found five of the factory servants guilty of affray, but could not prove that the planter, who was represented by the venerable barrister Longueville Clarke, was present during the murder. 25 23

C. R . O., J u d . and Leg. Des. Reed., N o . 43, J u l y 2, i860. Letter f r o m Seton-Karr, Secy, to Govt, of Bengal, to Lushington, Sept. 22, i860, published in Hindoo Patriot, Oct. 10, i860. 25 Bagal, Peasant Revolution in Bengal, passim.; Hindoo Patriot, N o v . s8, i860. 24

156

THE BLUE

MUTINY

Molony was similarly denounced. One ryot called Molony the "Boro Patramara" and Skinner the "Choto Patramara," a "patramara" being one who lives on the bounty of another. In one case Sisir accused Molony of holding five villagers accused of cattle trespass in a godown for one month before the trial, and during the trial itself of permitting the planter to sit beside him on the bench. 26 Another correspondent of the Hindoo Patriot wrote that he had been in hiding for twenty days to avoid execution of a warrant for his arrest by Molony. He described Molony holding court in a tent under a pipai tree surrounded by a bodyguard of the Lahore Light Horse. As a jail, he employed a small brick factory godown which could hold only fifteen men comfortably. T h e ryots, not realizing they would be imprisoned there instead of in the station civil jail, refused his order to sow. Packed into the godown where they could barely move, they finally agreed to cultivate indigo. 27 Another officer denounced by Sisir K u m a r was M. G. Taylor, who had been stationed at Kurimpur in Nadia until his transfer to Magura Subdivision in Jessore at the end of April for awarding double damages to planters. A f t e r his transfer T a y l o r began to exercise greater care in deciding cases. But toward the end of August he was invited to a meeting at Robert Savi's Nohata Concern where a number of planters counseled him, and from that time on, according to the writer, he reverted to his old habits. 28 Along with Nadia and Jessore the area now known as Kushtia, which in i860 was that part of Pabna District south of the Ganges, was the scene of considerable unrest during the indigo disturbances. T h e ryots of Kushtia were 26 27 28

Bagal, Peasant Revolution, p. 13. Hindoo Patriot, May 5, i860. Bagal, Peasant Revolution, p. 43.

THE

MAGISTRATES

Ιό?

well organized, many of them were trained lathiyals, and behind their strong stand was the patronage of Ramrutton Roy and his agent, Mohesh Chandra Chatterjee. H. Muspratt, the Officiating Magistrate of Pabna, proved, like Molony of Jessore, to be inadequate to the situation. Early in the year Muspratt asked for fifty military police in case the disturbances should spread to Pabna from neighboring Nadia, and in traveling about the area advised the ryots to obey the planters and not follow the bad example of the ryots of Nadia. He arrested one ryot for contempt of court for refusing to sow indigo; pointed out to other ryots that the Government favored indigo planting, and called the ryots' complaints greatly exaggerated. 29 The Lieutenant Governor wrote the Commissioner of Rajshahi, Muspratt's superior, that the magistrate's jailing a man for contempt of court was "unwarranted and absurd" since he was not holding court at the time. "It is not the way, in reasoning with people, to put them in jail when they can't be convinced. Mr. Muspratt's conduct to a man who had actually done nothing wrong was arbitrary and irritating, and the man should be immediately released from custody." Muspratt's report, continued the Lieutenant Governor, "is not so narrated as to give the impression that either the Ryot, the Planter, or the Magistrate was aware that Ryots are, in the theory of the Law, free agents." 30 Nor was Muspratt more fortunate in his assistant than Malony had been in Skinner. In April Muspratt dispatched the Deputy Magistrate of Kumarkhali, E. F. Lingham, to investigate a charge by Durand, a planter of southeast Pabna, that the ryots of Jungal Village were destroying indigo plant. Lingham spent his first night at Durand's factory, ignored the ryots' counter-petitions and 28

J . P. 425-33, April i860. 30 Ibid.

158

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

on the next morning rode out with 24 police to chastise 1200 ryots. Meeting resistance, he tried to retreat, but his men were surrounded and showered with spears, clods and bamboos. He refused to allow his police to fire in selfprotection, running back and forth before them and turning their muskets into the air. As a ryot was about to strike him he was rescued by one of his men, and the intrepid police escaped with only two wounded. From the safety of an indigo factory Lingham wrote that Ramrutton Roy's agent was responsible for the attack, that Bengalis were untrustworthy and underhanded people, and that, since irregular troops could not be depended upon for defense, British troops should be utilized to protect persons and authority. In reply the Lieutenant Governor strongly reprimanded Lingham as incompetent, and was particularly displeased with his remarks blaming the military police, who had shown great courage under the circumstances, for his own absurd behavior under fire. Lingham was deprived of his police powers and transferred to Shahabad to try petty revenue and criminal cases. 31 T h e magistrates were as incompetent on the bench as they were in the field. Of all the officers administering Act X I in April and May, only Herschel took care to weigh the evidence carefully and decide cases justly. T h e fault was not entirely that of the magistrates who had correctly assessed that the intention of the law was to coerce the ryots into sowing indigo, and that as a summary law, Act X I called for hurried and superficial judgments. On a number of important points the law was vague, and the magistrates were puzzled by such questions as whether or not they could decide on the validity of agreements made in previous years but not referring specifically to i860. 31

J · P· 434-4 6 . A p r i l i860.

THE

MAGISTRATES

159

T h e Advocate General increased the severity of the law by ruling on April 21 that by "agreement" the law meant "the custom of the concern," and that an agreement could be valid which only "implied" that a cash advance had been given for 1860.32 Another difficulty was the lack of uniform rules of evidence. In April the Lieutenant Governor warned the magistrates that absolute proof was necessary to convict a ryot, and that if a ryot denied a contract, the magistrate must seek independent evidence. His warning went unheeded. As evidence of an advance the magistrates accepted the sworn testimony of the planter and his servants supported by the untrustworthy account books of the factory. Although the ryots usually denied the contracts, the testimony and evidence against them were accepted without question. 33 M. G. Taylor told ryots in need of witnesses to bring their wives into court to testify, but this only served to discourage the ryots from appearing in court at all. 34 T h i s flagrant negligence led to many cases of glaring injustice. Maclean convicted a ryot sued by the Khalbolia Concern who had been dead for thirteen years. In spite of a provision in the act for prosecution of a false plaint, Maclean let the case drop after the error was discovered. 88 Platts tried two cases under Section V of the act in which the defendants were accused of "intimidating" ryots who, it was later discovered, had never entered into contracts. T h i s legal blunder was rectified by the Lieutenant Governor. 86 A ryot of the Khalbolia Concern testified that at his 32

Selections from Records,

Part III, pp. 379-90.

33 J. p. 386-92, April i860; R . I. C., A . 3502 (A. T a y l o r , planter), 3505 (Forlong) and 3435 (G. Clarke, planter). 34

Hindoo

35

R . I. C., A. 3078 and 3083 (A. T . Maclean).

Patriot, M a y 12, i860.

36 C. R . O., Jud. and Leg. Des. Reed., N o . 36, June 1, i860.

ι6ο

THE BLUE

MUTINY

trial the signature which he signed before Maclean differed from the one he was alleged to have signed on the contract used as evidence against him. 37 Maclean fined a ryot on evidence given by factory servants hired long after the contract they claimed to have witnessed had been signed. 38 In another case agreements purporting to be four years old were written on stamped paper purchased only one year before. Finally the Indigo Commission found two ryots in the Nadia jail convicted of contract violations who were "stone blind." 3 9 T h e damages awarded by these magistrates were equally unjust. Although the planters had no reason to claim more than the customary 10 rupees per bigah damages, they were often awarded 20. In J u n e Herschel framed rules for determining the amount of damages to be awarded. Henceforth the magistrates of Nadia were to examine the factory account books for the past three to five years, ascertain the number of bundles with which each ryot was credited, calculate the average number of bundles per year, and after deducting the expense of the ryots, decree the actual profit which would have accrued to the planter, who was in any case to receive no more than 10 rupees per

bigah.40

Although there was no provision for an appeal, both the commissioners and the Lieutenant Governor frequently intervened for the sake of justice. Grote's successor, E. H. Lushington, released forty prisoners who were jailed for contract and cattle trespass cases. Grant remanded some sentences of a deputy magistrate who had decided seventynine cases in four days and awarded exorbitant damages in 17

R. I. C., A. 3043 (Mandari Biswas, ryot). R. I. C., A. 3050 (Buddun Mandai, ryot). 39 J . P. 232-39, Sept. i860. 40 R. I. C„ A. 3178 (Forlong); Hindoo Patriot, June 16, i860. 3ä

THE

MAGISTRATES

l6l

all of them. H e remitted sentences which he considered had been decided on insufficient evidence, misconceptions of the law, or in which the fines were excessive. 41 Another expedient used by the Lieutenant Governor was to censure and reassign magistrates. A l t h o u g h Grant denied tampering with the administration of justice, by the middle of June he had effected many refreshing personnel changes. Grote himself was replaced by Ε. H . Lushington, who had served as Secretary to the Government of Bengal, and whose views were more in accord with those of the Lieutenant Governor. A c t X I cases in D a m u r h u d a were taken out of the hands of Maclean and turned over to J. S. Bell and A . Davidson, Principal Sadr Amins, and Maclean was transferred to Krishnagar on June 11. T a y l o r was transferred to Magura Subdivision; Mackenzie was removed to Narial and not allowed to try indigo contract cases, and Molony and Skinner of Jessore were later censured and after June 21 their cases taken over by Belli, the Judge of Jessore. Herschel alone won the approval of his superiors. W h e n , on May 10, the Indigo Planters' Association complained to the Government against Herschel, the Lieutenant Governor investigated his proceedings. Herschel was exonerated and praised for his judicious conduct. T h e Secretary of State commented: " T h e result of the investigation is highly creditable to Mr. Herschel and such as entitled him to the cordial support of the Local Government in conducting the duties of his difficult position." 42 In June the planters of Damurhuda became exasperated 4 1 C . R . O., Jud. and Leg. Des. to India, Orig. Drafts, Vol. 3, No. 120, Sept. 20, i860; Jud. and Leg. Des. Reed., No. 36, June 1 and No. 38, June 15, i860; J. P. 386-92, April i860; Hindoo Patriot, June 23, i860. 42 C. R. O., Jud. and Leg. Des. to India, Orig. Drafts, Vol. 3, No. 120, Sept. 20, i860.

I62

T H E BLUE M U T I N Y

with the activities of Bell and Davidson. On his first day in office Bell dismissed twenty-one of Maclean's cases. T h e two sadr amins required as proof of contract violation more than the planter's word or the factory accounts. T h e y rigidly cross-examined witnesses and took down depositions for the defense, a hitherto unknown proceeding. 43 One planter complained that the sadr arnins had cross examined some of his factory servants after he had left the court and that because their statements varied slightly from his the cases had been dismissed. T h e same planter had won every suit brought before Maclean and Betts and lost every one brought before Bell and Davidson.44 Other planters complained that the sadr amins raised numerous petty objections never thought of before by a magistrate, nominated their own witnesses, often enemies of the concern, dismissed hundreds of cases, and awarded insufficient damages. 45 James Forlong, George Meares and other planters of Damurhuda withdrew their cases before the sadr amins, considering the law as now administered to be "a mockery." 4 ® Herschel, J u d g e Belli of Jessore, and Bell and Davidson made fewer judicial errors than the other officers, not because they sided invariably with the ryots—for they did not —but because they spent long hours patiently trying to ascertain the facts in each case. T h e younger and less experienced magistrate took an easier course. He heard the planter present his case in English supported by documents and the sworn testimony of numerous factory assistants. Even before the trial the planter had won over the 43

Hindoo Patriot, J u l y 4 and J u n e 23, i860. R . I. C., 3498 ff. (A. Taylor, planter). 45 R . I. C., A. 3368 and 3378 (G. Meares, planter), 3437 (G. Clark, planter), 3418 (M. Tweedie, planter). 40 R . I. C., A. 3182 83 (Forlong). 44

T H E MAGISTRATES

163

y o u n g magistrate by offering h i m a fine dinner and an evening of pleasant conversation. In court the magistrate first met the defendant, an inarticulate ryot w h o gave emphasis to his argument by exaggeration. T o understand his language and to disentangle the truths from the half-truths required u n c o m m o n patience and sympathy. If the ryot was represented by a mukhtar, the "impertinent b a b u " may have annoyed the magistrate more than the ryot himself. U n d e r the pressure of personal sentiment, overwhelmed by the hundreds of cases on his agenda a n d oppressed by the heat of a Bengal summer, the magistrate took the easier course. In all this the magistrates knew that they were b e i n g true to the spirit of the law as drafted by the Legislative Council. B u t by violating the orders and intentions of their administrative superior, the L i e u t e n a n t Governor of Bengal, they were jeopardizing their o w n careers. Harish Chandra M u k h a r j e e understood this when, at the end of May, he wrote: T h e wretched officials who have prostituted themselves on this occasion will find that long after ryots and planters shall have settled their accounts, salary bills will wait the fiat of sterner enquirers than those who are now teaching honesty to the planters. 47 A l t h o u g h once A c t X I had expired the animosities it had generated jeopardized the indigo industry of L o w e r Bengal for years to come, the law did succeed in saving three-quarters of the i860 crop. 48 Most ryots fulfilled their contracts under protest, and successful resistance was limited to certain villages cultivating for a few concerns. 49 47 48

Hindoo Patriot, M a y 26, i860. R . I. C . , A . 2819 ( H e r s c h e l ) .

4 9 See R . I. C . , A . 3335-43. 2780, 34°6, S ' 9 1 . 2°3!-34> 3427- 3286-88 a n d 2985 f o r statistics o n s o w i n g g i v e n by v a r i o u s l e a d i n g p l a n t e r s w h o e x p e r i e n c e d difficulties.

164

T H E BLUE MUTINY

Since almost all ryots had equal reason to renounce the cultivation of indigo, the concentration of the resistance must be explained by other factors. Among these Avas the proximity of Herschel and the ryots' confidence in his protection. Another was the vitality of local leadership. A third, but less important factor, was the nature of the cultivation. Where the concern was also the landholder, in ilaka cultivation, or where the concern hired the laborers directly, in nijabad, cultivation, there was less difficulty in getting indigo sown. Even so, Herschel noted that, though defiance was more common in be-ilaka villages, "the planters appeared to stand upon very tender ground in their own zemindarys."60 At the end of May the Government reported that the number of Act X I cases in Nadia was increasing, one thousand more were pending and another thousand anticicipated. 51 In Jessore, on the other hand, there was little resort to Act XI. Only six cases were filed in Jessore by May 10 and only eighteen men had been imprisoned as compared to eight hundred in Nadia. 52 In Barasat there were still fewer cases.53 Why did the planters of Nadia make greater use of Act X I than those of Jessore and other districts? In the Damurhuda Subdivision of Nadia District James Forlong had led the planters in instituting cases. Forlong, as a comparatively honest planter, must have assumed that his advances had been received by the ryots and that his contracts were legitimate. But as manager of all the concerns of James Hills and Company he could not supervise every factory gumashta, and the ryots undoubtedly received very little. Apparently in Jessore, where 5 ° R . I. C., A. 2820. 51 C. R. O., Jud. and Leg. Des. Reed., No. 36, June 1, i860. 52 Englishman, May 14, i860. " C. R. O., Jud. and Leg. Des. Reed., No. 36, June 1, i860.

THE MAGISTRATES

1 65

there was no sympathetic magistrate, the ryots sowed out of desperation, or in those cases where oppression was unbearable, resorted to acts of violence, making them liable to prosecution under other laws. Because of the indifference of Molony and Skinner, the planters themselves were more disposed to resort to force. T h e planters of Nadia relied more on legal coercion, those of Jessore, on violence. T h e police were an additional factor in restraining the violence of the Nadia planters, while encouraging that of the Jessore planters. Herschel, who as magistrate headed the police establishment, infused his police with higher standards of conduct; or, more accurately, the police attempted to win his favor by a show of impartiality. Only a strong magistrate, exercising close supervision, could prevent the police from yielding entirely to the bribes of the planters. T h e corruption of the police was admitted by everyone. According to Ghirish Chunder Bose, First Class Darogha of Nadia, out of the sixteen daroghas in his district, only six did not take bribes under any circumstances. On the lower echelons the police were all corrupt. T h e money paid to the daroghas and other police officers was authorized by the factory manager and entered in his accounts under " L a w Suits," but the items and the names of the receivers were not mentioned. 54 T h e bribes were relatively large; Meares admitted bribing one darogha with 200 rupees so that he would favor the factory, but because of Herschel he still did not receive "fair play" and his money was wasted. Generally, in Nadia the police followed the example of the magistrate immediately superior to them. Until Herschel took close charge, they joined Maclean, Taylor, Betts and McNeile in encouraging the ryots to sow. On the other hand, the chaukidars, as watchmen employed by the villagers, usually sided with the 54

R. I. C., A. 3388 (G. Meares).

1 66

THE BLUE

MUTINY

ryots.58 In Jessore the police had no reason to oppose the planters and thereby forfeit their bribes. A letter from a Krishnagar planter published in the Englishman complained of the new class of daroghas who "combine with their English education all the vices of Europeans" and who "hate Englishmen as they do poison." It gave some examples, among them a darogha styled "Grease Booze" (Ghirish Bose) who, the writer says, deliberately misconstrued the parwana of April 19 which Herschel intended to be his private instructions, by riding around the villages and telling the ryots to sow paddy under the magistrate's orders. " H e has been mainly the cause of the bitter feeling now existing between the Ryots and Planters in this Thannah." 5 ® As one planter testified, if Molony had been in Nadia and Herschel in Jessore, the situation would have been reversed.67 With the end of the sowing season, the planters grew apprehensive for the care, harvest and delivery of the crop. T h e Lieutenant Governor, who, according to Canning, made "the worst of anything out of the common course," 58 expected a renewal of the disturbances and increased his military police forces.59 Though not as intense as sowing disputes, weeding, cutting and delivery disputes occurred throughout Lower Bengal. 60 The disturbances also affected the buna coolies, the tribals who were employed each season by the planters for the manufacturing process. One planter of Jessore wrote that the coolies were now asking for a 5-rupee advance and M R . I. C., A. 3461-62 (Ghirish Chandra Bose). 56 Englishman, June 13, 1860. 57 R. I. C., A. 3015 (James Tissendie). 58 H. P., Canning to Wood, June 13, i860. 58 H. P., Canning to Wood, May 30, i860. 60 C. R. O., Jud. and Leg. Des. Reed, No. 52, Aug. 7, Englishman, July 13, i860; Hindoo Patriot, Aug. 22, i860.

i860;

T H E MAGISTRATES

1 67

5 rupees per month pay as against their former advance of 2 rupees and correspondingly low monthly wage. In the previous year less than two-thirds of his usual contingent, many of them boys, had reported for work. Complaining that the coolies were ungrateful, he continued, " I believe I am thought of well by these coolies who know every Planter as a shoemaker knows his last, for I pay them from the day they leave their homes till the day they return to them, and feed them every Sunday (that the day may remain more strongly fixed than the others on their memory) with fish." Because of the shortage of coolies he could not work his full complement of vats and lost a considerable proportion of his crop. 81 T o w a r d the end of J u l y the Central Committee of the Indigo Planters' Association petitioned the Governor General to restrain Grant from interfering with the operation of Act X I . T h e y accused him of trying to throw the indigo districts, especially Nadia, into lawless confusion and said that his misrule would ruin the planters. 82 At Canning's request Grant answered their charges with one of his customarily incisive minutes. He denied that the indigo districts were in a state of confusion. In Nadia, for the first time in years, the Government was preventing affrays, forcible entries, the unlawful carrying off of crops and cattle, the plowing up of other men's lands, destruction of trees and homes and confinement in godowns. Everywhere in Nadia law and justice now prevailed, and if the planters had advanced money for crops they now have the legal means of obtaining either possession of the crop or compensation. " T h i s healthy state of things is new indeed and if Government is accused, because it is new I will not defend Government on that charge. And I cannot admit that 61

82

Englishman, June 7, i860.

J. P. 232-39, Sept. i860.

168

T H E B L U E MUTINY

this practical introduction of the supremacy of the Law into the Indigo Districts is evidence of 'confusion.' " He could not be blamed if Act X I was not working out to the benefit of the planters, since it was not his fault that the majority of claims had broken down when suits were tried in a thorough manner. Those sentences which he had teen forced to remand were in cases which "shook the confidence of the people in our just intentions." He noted that the crisis had been long expected and that not ' the most sanguine of those who expected the sudden and violent break-up of a false system, ever expected that the crisis would pass over so peacefully as it has done, and on the whole with so little injury to the great interest at stake." He denied that the struggle was between capital and labor, for the ryots were also capitalists and their aggregate capital is greater than that of the planters. T h e i r well-being "must be ranked second to none, in an agricultural country like India."®3 At the end of August J . P. Grant left Calcutta for an inspection tour of the railway works at Sirajganj in northeast Pabna. On his way up the Kumar and Kaliganga rivers through the heart of Kushtia, "numerous crowds of raiyats appeared at various places, whose whole prayer was for an order of Government that they should not cultivate indigo." 64 At one place, as he was passing the Salgamudia factory of Thomas Kenny, two hundred ryots assembled on either side of the river, joined hands and called out for justice with a loud, lamentable groan. Grant directed his steamer to anchor and some headmen were taken on board. All the petitions taken were referred to the local authorities, but many ryots were not satisfied and followed the ship to Pabna. 65 63 64 05

Ibid. Buckland, Lieutenant Governors, Hindoo Patriot, Sept. 19, i860.

I, 192.

T H E MAGISTRATES

1 6Q

A few days later Grant steamed back through Kushtia and was astonished to find the banks lined with thousands of men, women, and children calling for justice. He was impressed by their earnest though respectful and orderly demeanor and by their "organization and capacity for combined and simultaneous action." ββ Canning wrote Wood that the demonstration had . . . caused me more anxiety than I have had since the days of Delhi. . . . A people who can do this, and do it soberly and intelligently, may be weak and unresistful individually, but as a mass they cannot be dealt with too carefully. . . . From that day I felt that a shot fired in anger or fear by one foolish planter might put every factory in Lower Bengal in flames. . . 67 On his return from Sirajganj the Lieutenant Governor recommended that Canning issue a notification that would "calm the minds of the masses, now wound up to a state of intense excitement." He argued that the season for offering new advances was approaching, and should any new attempts be made to force the ryots to sow, they would, "from the observed temper of the people . . . be violently resisted." Grant drafted a notification informing the ryots that all disputes must be settled by legal means and that ryots would never be compelled to sow indigo.88 But Canning, after agreeing to issue a notification, amended the one suggested by Grant by adding "the Government hopes that the cultivation of Indigo will be continued . . ." and by including a strong warning to the ryots against intimidating anyone who wished to sow indigo.69 This was the first indication of a difference of attitude on the indigo question between Canning and Grant. Can66

J . P. 237, Sept. i860. H. P., Canning to Wood, Oct. 30, i860. e8 J . P. 237-38, Sept. i860. 69 J . P. 409-16, Nov. i860. 67

170

THE BLUE

MUTINY

ning felt that Grant kept too much to himself and die not make sufficient use of his personal influence to restrair the indigo planters. He wrote Wood: "Grant has been ge.ting a little off his balance. He has a biting pen and does not take pains to conceal his anti-Planter convictions." 70 Grant differed with Canning on two fundamental is>ues. First, the Lieutenant Governor recognized that a chinge in temper had occurred among the ryots. They would never agree to sow indigo, and if the Government were to support the planters, it would have a full scale revolt on its hands. Canning felt that, by the end of October i860 the danger of insurrection was past and the ryots would sow again if the planters gave them adequate remuneration. Second, the Governor General was concerned with the survival of the indigo industry. He felt that the "vicious system" practised in Bengal was not necessary to its cultivation and he cited as proof the more lenient Madras system. 71 Canning believed that the better planters would weather the crisis and that a reformed indigo system would emerge, drawing British capital to India for the benefit of all its people. Grant, on the other hand, believed that the indigo industry was finished in Lower Bengal. It had come into conflict with a far greater interest, and to him there was no question as to which was the more important. T h e period of the operation of Act X I now drew to a close. By invoking the act, the planters managed to get a large percentage of their normal crop sown. But instead of using the opportunity for any long term reforms to conciliate the ryots, the planters took advantage of the law to coerce the ryots with claims far in excess of their actual profits and to impoverish respectable ryots who had to sell their land and cattle to pay off their fines or remain in 70 71

H . P., C a n n i n g to W o o d , Oct. 1, i860. H . P., Canning to W o o d , Oct. 30, i860.

THE MAGISTRATES

171

72

prison. Wood wrote: "The system was thoroughly rotten. The planters would not take timely measures to meet the change of circumstances and are suffering the consequences." 73 On October 5, the day following the expiration of Act XI, the Lieutenant Governor reviewed the administrative reforms made necessary by the disturbances and by the findings of the Indigo Commission. Among these reforms were the further multiplication of subdivisions, police reform, the establishment of additional courts in the countryside, and the registration of contracts. Arrangements were being made to place magisterial courts at points not over thirty miles apart throughout Lower Bengal. Below these Grant recommended an increase in the number of munsif courts, presided over by Indian judges, which would make justice available to every ryot.74 With the expiration of Act X I the planters resorted to new forms of coercion. Those who were landholders relied increasingly on their power to raise rents and expel the ryots from the land. The indigo disturbances now continued along a new course and evolved into the kind of agrarian disputes which were to plague Bengal and jeopardize the Permanent Settlement for many decades to come. 72 7S 71

Hindoo Patriot, June 2, i860. H. P., Wood to Grant, Jan. 9, 1861. J . P. 409-16, Nov. i860.

Vili " K i Hookum?" Learning brings knowledge, through knowledge comes salvation.

Bidyae gaen ane gaene ase mukti

"KI

HOOKUM?"

"WHAT

ORDER?

GIVE

US AN

ORDER."

THUS,

early in 1861, the ryots of Faridpur District sought guidance from L. R. Tottenham, their District Magistrate. Act X I of 1860 had expired, and the magistrates had been given strict orders by the Lieutenant Governor that they were under no circumstances to browbeat the villagers into sowing indigo. T h e y could only warn the ryots that if they were under contract and refused to sow, they could be sued by the planters in the civil courts. "This I told them in public and private, in Cutcherry, and in the fields, wherever I met and spoke to a Ryot. T h e y never seemed to understand that I could give no order on the subject. T h e y always asked me 'ki hookum?' 1,1 N o wonder the ryots were puzzled. Never before had they experienced such independence. Heretofore they had considered the magistrate's word to be the law; now they were confronted with an officer who could not command, who could not order, who could only advise, who was bound by the same rule of law as his subjects. I n the months that followed ryots throughout the indigo districts 1

J. P. 165, M a r c h

1861.

"ΚΙ HOOKUM?"

173

began to grasp the import of the new policy and to use the courts with ever increasing skill. T h e planters, who could no longer count on the support of the district officers, the police, or a summary contract law now unsheathed a new weapon of coercion, their zamindari powers. In point of occurrence the rent disturbances overlapped the indigo disturbances. As early as March i860 indigocultivating tenants of the Joradah Concern in northwestern Jessore refused to pay rent demanded by a planter-zamindar. By June rent disturbances had spread to Kenny's Salgamudia Concern in southern Pabna, and from there through northern Pabna, Jessore, Nadia and western Faridpur. 2 T h e term "rent disturbances" referred generally to the refusal of the ryots who were tenants of indigo planters to pay the rent demanded, and the refusal of ryots who were tenants-at-will to submit to eviction from lands claimed by planters. By the spring of i860 the be-ilaka cultivation of indigo had been virtually wiped out; that is, ryots whose only connection with the indigo planter had been to receive an advance and agree to a contract were now in open revolt against cultivating indigo, usually with the support of their Indian landlords. But when ryots as tenants of planter-zamindars tried to resist indigo cultivation, they were threatened with rent enhancement or eviction. By October i860 the payment of rent had become the central issue between ryot and planter. In an effort to win public sympathy the planters claimed that the peasants, by attacking property rights, were threatening the very foundations of society. Playing on their fear of a general repudiation of rents, the planters tried to enlist as allies the Indian zamindars whom only one year 2 Morris, Report ofthe Special Rent Commissioner, part 2, July 31, 1861; Hindoo Patriot, Aug. 1, i860; H. P., Wood to Canning, Nov. 9, 1860.

174

T H E

BLUE MUTINY

earlier they had accused of instigating the ryots. In this they were rather successful, and in 1861 a good many zamindars used their influence to restore harmony between planters and ryots. 3 T o gain official support the planters denied any connection between the indigo and rent disturbances. But the district officials found the two issues inseparable. When Ε. H. Lushington, the Commissioner of Nadia Division, visited factories belonging to the two largest indigo firms in Nadia District, James Hills and Company and the Bengal Indigo Company, he found that the ryots were willing to pay their rents but were afraid of presenting themselves at the planters' kachahris where they could be forced to take indigo advances. Instead, the ryots offered to pay rents to an official collector for transfer to the planters. T h e planters also contended that the ryots were engaged in a vast conspiracy to drive all Europeans from the countryside, but Lushington found no general hostility toward Europeans. Both the railway and ferry engineers were able to find workers, and when pressed, most planters admitted that even during the height of the indigo disturbances the ryots had been respectful. Of the 184 cases which the planters of Nadia Division brought against ryots for assault during the first few months of 1861, not one was for a personal attack on a European. Most were for trespass or for petty assaults on factory servants, and the majority of these cases were stricken off by the magistrates. 4 Until the end of January 1861 it appeared that bothi the rent and indigo disturbances were beginning to subside. T h e ryots were still amenable to persuasion by the magistrates and spoke of indigo without the bitterness of the past year. Herschel quoted one as telling him: " L e t the 3 4

J. P. 32-34 and 79-81, Jan. 1861. J. P. 422-29, April 1861.

"K.I HOOK.UM?"

175

Sahib sit at home and hold Zemindary Cutcherry, or do Mahajunee [moneylending], and we'll keep him comfortable, but we don't want any advances."5 At the end of January the conflict revived. James Hills, after failing to distribute enough advances to make cultivation economically feasible, gave up indigo sowing entirely for 1861 and vigorously carried out his threats of rent enhancement and mass eviction under Act X of 1859.® The original intention of Act X had been to protect the ryot from the Indian zamindar and improve his position by clearly defining his rights and placing restrictions on zamindari powers. It limited the zamindar's right of distraint and abolished his power to compel attendance of ryots at his kachahri. In addition, Act X adopted the principle in vogue in the North-Western Provinces where the collectors, who were better acquainted with revenue matters than were judicial officers, were given extended powers to try rent suits. Act X recognized three classes of tenants. First, tenants who rented lands at a rate that had not changed in twenty years were entitled to a permanent settlement at that rate. Second, those who had rented lands for from twelve to twenty years were entitled to occupancy rights as long as they paid their rents on time. Rents could be enhanced only if the current rates were below the rate of rent prevailing in adjacent areas, if the value of the land had been improved by other than the ryots, or if the original measurement had been inaccurate. All enhancements were subject to approval by the collectors' courts. Third, ryots who occupied land for less than twelve years were designated utbandi ryots or tenants-at-will and could be evicted at any 5 6

J . P. 244, Jan. 1861. J. P. 33-35, March 1861.

176

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

time. Some ryots simultaneously held lands under all three classes of tenure. 7 Until 1861 A c t X of 185g was rarely invoked because neither zamindar nor ryot realized its full implications. It placed a p r e m i u m on written proof of tenure, and those ryots fortunate enough to have records had a status guaranteed by law. B u t those ryots w h o had been protected in their customary tenures by the traditional vague laws and had no proof of their length of tenure were left unprotected, and A c t X contained no provision protecting customary rights. In clarifying the rules for enhancement it implied the right of zamindars to enhance rents which had hitherto been fixed by custom. T h u s , in certain respects A c t X favored the ryots, in others the zamindars. James Hills supported his action of raising the rents of his occupancy ryots on the rationale that the land had been improved by his indigo concern and not by the ryots. Although many of the improvements he cited were due to natural causes, the G o v e r n m e n t replied that his proceedings were lawful and that it could not interfere. 8 Following the example of Hills, the planters deluged their tenants with notices of enhancement which irritated the ryots and made conciliation on indigo less likely. T h e ryots' previous refusal to pay rents had been caused by their fear of attending the planters' kachahris and because, after rejecting indigo advances, they had been left without the cash or credit customarily applied to their rents. N o w the ryots were u n w i l l i n g to pay new rates which they considered unreasonable and exorbitant, and were determined to test their rights under A c t X in the courts. 9 T h e planters proved to be surprisingly inept at prose7 8 9

Baden-Powell, Land p·

Systems,

J· 33-35· March 1861. J. P. 241, April 1861.

I, 641 ff.

" K I HOOK.UM?"

177

cuting their cases. When his ryots had cultivated indigo, the planter had been careless in rent assessments and had paid his taxes from indigo profits. Old rates had been allowed to stand for years; measurements had been carelessly made; and, in some cases, arrears had not been collected so long as the ryots cultivated indigo. As the planters had often pointed out, one of the advantages to the ilaka ryot of cultivating indigo was a small rent. In presenting their cases many planters either demanded rents so unreasonably excessive that the courts could not uphold them or included illegal cesses which prejudiced their legitimate claims. Even when the planters won decrees they usually failed to execute them. Of the 1147 decrees awarded in Nadia District between December i860 and February 1861 only 125 were executed. One reason for the planters' lack of vigor was that rent enhancement was not their serious objective. T h e y were interested in using their decrees to force their ryots to cultivate indigo. 10 In contrast to the incompetence of the planters, the ryots showed considerable determination and resourcefulness. T h e y had been inspired by their victory in the indigo struggle and said that the "Maharani howa" or "spirit of the great Queen" had blown over their country. 11 One planter wrote his agent that many of his ryots had gone to Calcutta and returned with "grand reports" of the favorable disposition of the Lieutenant Governor, using this news to encourage villagers to subscribe more money to support lawsuits. He continued: I believe this general union was a thing never before known in Bengal. In fact it was a common remark, which I have heard repeated hundreds of times, how remarkably disunited the people were; but now, whenever a European is concerned if 10 11

J. P. 67 68, March 1861; 98-106 and 422-29, A p r i l 1861. J. P. 67-68, March 1861.

THE BLUE

MUTINY

the R y o t s of one village m a k e a L a w s u i t , c o m m i t a breach of the peace, or otherwise, those of the s u r r o u n d i n g villages join in paying u p the expenses. It matters not w h a t the case may be, each man pays his a n n a or pice r e a d i l y . 1 2

Herschel also reported that large sums were being subscribed to defend criminal cases and wrote of the "unanimity" of the ryots which made it impossible for the planters to obtain witnesses for any type of suit. He attributed their new independence in part to prosperity resulting from the current high prices paid for agricultural pro duce. 18 In addition to legal tactics the ryots attacked the planters with means beyond the reach of the courts. Ryots frequently coerced a factory servant into leaving his employer by stopping all the services which an Indian needed. T h e barbers refused to serve him; the villagers refused to share their hookahs with him; the bazar sellers cut off his supply of food and clothing; he was not invited to weddings or funerals; the marriage arrangers would not serve him; and he might even be put out of caste by his caste elders. Many were thereby forced into deserting their factories, a n d the planters complained of the shortage of staff. Other factory servants, finding indigo no longer a profitable business, used the social persecution of the villagers as an excuse to leave their employers. Villagers also cooperated in refusing to bid at auction for decreed property. 14 In one concern the farmers who collected rents for the planters now sided with the villagers and gave tenants-at-will receipts falsely showing them as having occupancy rights. 15 H i n d u and Muslim ryots united in the struggle, and members of both 12

J. J. "J. 15 J. 13

P. P. P. P.

173-78, March 1861. 98-106 and 422 2g, April 1861. 79-81, Jan. 1861. 303-08, May 1862.

"ΚΙ

HOOKUM?"

179

communities are listed side by side as leaders of combinations against the factories. 16 While in the mufassal each planter fought alone, in Calcutta the Indigo Planters' Association and the agents of the various concerns joined to urge the Government to protect British lives and property. T h e Government deferred to their requests, and after years of refusal Grant agreed to appoint Small Causes Court judges for the mufassal.1'' When Hills suggested that in cattle trespass cases the villagers be held collectively responsible, the Lieutenant Governor thought the proposal worthy enough to send to the legislative member for Bengal for an opinion. 1 8 A f t e r a complaint from Jardine, Skinner and Company that ryots were misinterpreting the Government's written orders on ryots' petitions and that agitators were using the orders to mislead the people, the Government agreed to confine itself to the issuance of verbal orders through the district magistrates. 19 Finally, the Government offered planters who were having rent difficulties a few months' grace on their revenue payments and even agreed to lend money directly to needy planters. 20 On March 4, 1861 the Indigo Planters' Association asked the Governor General to appoint special rent commissioners with the power to compel ryots to pay their rents. 21 10

For example, see J . P. 1 1 - 1 4 , March 1 8 6 1 . J . P. 195-98, March 1 8 6 1 . G r a n t had opposed increasing the number of these courts in the mufassal because they were expensive, they administered English law, and they were designed for centers of trade. Instead he favored more munsif courts which were cheaper, used Indian judges, and were more accessible to ryots. J . P. 409-16, N o v . i860. 18 J . P. 204-06, A p r i l 1 8 6 1 . 19 J . P. 391-92, April 1 8 6 1 . 20 C. R . O., J u d . and Leg. Des. Reed., N o . 30, Sept. 1861; H . P., W o o d to Canning, Nov. 8, 1 8 6 1 . 21 J . P. 3 1 - 3 3 · A p r i l 1861. 17

ι8ο

THE BLUE

MUTINY

After a week of consideration, Canning suggested to Grant that the Lieutenant Governor appoint the special rent commissioners. But rather than empowering them to compel ryots to pay rent, Canning suggested that, accompanied by a strong body of police and deputy collectors, the commissioners visit villages where ryots were most resistant, warn them to pay their rents, and investigate their grounds for non-payment. T h e commissioners were to explain to the ryots that their visits had no connection whatever with indigo. If the special rent commissioners should fail to induce the ryots to pay their rents they were to encourage the planter to file suit. T h e commissioners were also to enquire into the existence of combinations, whether they were directed also against native zamindars, and whether the ryots, in truth, desired to drive Europeans from the country. Finally, they were to recommend any necessary revisions in Act X of 1859 an< ^ t o suggest a law to punish the social proscription of factory adherents. 22 On March 14 the Lieutenant Governor appointed C. F. Montressor as the Special R e n t Commissioner with powers of magistrate and collector in Barasat and Nadia Districts. He was assigned forty sowars and two companies of military police. On March 23 Grant appointed G. G. Morris as Special Commissioner with identical powers in Jessore. 23 For three months the Special R e n t Commissioners worked in their respective districts. Montressor, who submitted his report on J u n e 22, was cautious and temperate, but more critical of the planters than was Morris. Concluding that indigo was at the root of the rent disturbances, Montressor felt that the ryots were within their rights in legally disputing what they considered unreasonable enhancements. 24 22 23 24

J . P. 100, March 1861. J . P. 321-22, March 1861. H. P., Canning to Wood, June 23, 1861.

'κι hookum?'

181

Morris, on the other hand, asserted that the ryots were not justified in withholding rents, and supported his conclusion by the fact that in rent cases the courts almost always favored the planters, that the "claims of the ryots have been tried and found wanting . . . as opposed to the just demands of their European landlords." T h e planters, in his opinion, had been too lenient with their tenants by hesitating to take recourse to law. In contrast to Europeans, Indian zamindars who enhanced their rents had encountered little trouble. T h e i r greater prestige, their knowledge of their estates and their lack of connection with indigo helped them avoid trouble. Even planters who had given up indigo entirely had rent difficulties because the ryots did not trust the sincerity of their sudden renunciation. In trying to collect rent himself he had only partial success. On his arrival the villagers often promised to pay, or paid an installment, but, when he left, they relapsed into passive resistance. Under these conditions the Europeans had either to carry on almost unlimited litigation or leave the countryside. He concluded that between Europeans and ryots "a state of chronic warfare is being established, and the breach is daily widening." 28 T h e activities of the Special Rent Commissioners satisfied no one. Lushington charged that the planters were taking advantage of the military police who accompanied Montressor, using their presence to threaten the credulous ryots. The Secretary of State agreed that their employment had been "a measure of doubtful expediency" and ordered them withdrawn at once.26 In September and again December 1861 the Landholders and Commercial Associa25

Morris, Report. J . P. 422-29, April 1861; C. R . O., J u d . and Leg. Des. to India, Orig. Drafts, Vol. 4, No. 110, 25 J u l y 1861. 26

I82

THE BLUE

MUTINY

tion, successor to the Indigo Planters' Association, 27 requested Canning to appoint new special commissioners and to arm them with powers to compel the payment of rents. W. F. Fergusson, the Secretary of the Association, listed twenty-one concerns, including all the important ones of Nadia and Jessore, with large balances of uncollected rents. 28 T h e Lieutenant Governor, anticipating Canning's instructions, called on his district officers to report on why the ryots of these concerns were withholding rents. T h e reasons given were further proof of the peasantry's recent awareness of legal niceties. T h e ryots demanded receipts signed by European factory employees which would indicate the nature of their tenure. Some protested that the factories continued to collect rent on lands that had been washed away when rivers changed course, and others claimed they were called on to pay arrears of eight to ten years standing. At one factory the ryots held out because after paying their rents they would be obliged to borrow from the mahajan at interest rates of 50 to 75 per cent, while by law the court could award the planter only 12 per cent damages. If the ryots were to wait until the end of the year, they could sell their crops and dispense with the services of the mahajan. Other ryots withheld rentts be27 After Theobald's resignation as Secretary of the Indigo Plamters' Association in March i860 an internal struggle took place to control the organization. W . F. Fergusson and J . P. Wise led the "city" faction which wanted to broaden the association to inclucde all British with mufassal interests—tea planters, mine operators, river navigators, silk manufacturers, etc. A. Forbes led the narrow "imdigo" interest. T h e "city" group finally triumphed in August i860, e:lected Fergusson as Secretary and changed the name to "Landholdeirs and Commercial Association." But the leadership and membershiip remained essentially unchanged. See Englishman, April 24, M a y 4 and Nov. 1, i860 and April 16, 1861. 2S

J . P. 39, Feb. 1862.

"ΚΙ HOOKUM?"

183

cause they needed the money for litigation. In cases where rent and indigo accounts were not kept separately, they filed cross claims for unpaid indigo. T o procrastinate on payment of decrees they appealed every judicial decision.29 T h e official who was most disappointed with the work of the special rent commissioners and most concerned with the continued deterioration of the planters' position was Lord Canning. On January 8, 1862 he wrote Grant that both the Lieutenant Governor and the Special Rent Commissioners had misunderstood the purpose for which the Commissioners had been appointed. He had intended that the commissioners would tell the ryots that the Government would not tolerate the withholding of just rents and would not hesitate to institute summary proceedings if necessary. The commissioners should have insisted that the aggrieved planters file suit and that their deputies decide the suits at once and carry out the decrees immediately. Instead of trying to remove the existing difficulties, the rent commissioners had spent their time investigating them. Canning believed that the differences between ryots and planters were as much due to "feelings" as to "substantial grievances" and that the role of the Government was to conciliate the parties and bring about a "final adjustment of their differences." He concluded by recommending that Grant appoint a new special rent commissioner whose job it would be to restore mutual confidence and effect a peaceable adjustment of differences. If the new commissioner were to fail, the Government would promulgate a summary law to enforce rent payments. The Governer General sent a copy of this letter to the Landholders and Commercial Association which promptly released it to the newspapers for publication. 30 29 30

J . P. 45 and 397-98, Feb. 1862; 123-24 and 163-74, March 1862. J . P. 37-45, Feb. 1862.

184

THE BLUE

MUTINY

Grant interpreted Canning's letter as a strong censure. Apparently Canning had deliberately intended to provoke the Lieutenant Governor, and soon after sending it he wrote Wood, " I fear he is a little chafed—at last." 31 By nature impassive, Grant was now infuriated and defended himself in a minute heavy with sarcasm. He expressed his regret that the Government thought the special commissioners had not understood their mission. Their final reports had been received on June 22, and August 13, 1861 respectively, and only now, five months later, did the Governor General discover that they had misunderstood their orders. He demonstrated that Canning's description of the original orders in his letter of January 8 was quite different from the original orders themselves, and in parallel columns he compared the original orders to the reports of the commissioners. He pointed to the absurdity of the notion that the commissioners could effect a permanent settlement of the dispute when they were expressly instructed to avoid any question relating to indigo. Even the important problem of eviction could not be taken up because the commissioners were sent to settle only questions of rent. T h e commissioners would have remained longer at their duties, but the planters declined to avail themselves of their assistance.32 Canning considered Grant's defense "disrespectful in tone." In his final minute before leaving office, J . P. Grant apologized for any wording in his letter which appeared disrespectful. But he had felt "disappointment and distress" when, five months after the commissioners had reported, the Governor General charged that they and he had misconstrued their orders. He felt that Canning had also been wrong in sending a copy of the censure to the 31 32

H. P., Canning to Wood, Jan. 10, 1862. J . P. 37-45, Feb. 1862.

"ΚΙ H O O K U M ? "

185

Landholders and Commercial Association for publication in the press. 33 In a separate c o m m u n i c a t i o n to C a n n i n g , G r a n t refuted the substance of the G o v e r n o r General's recommendation—the appointment of a special officer w h o w o u l d use his influence to conciliate the planters and ryots. G r a n t supported his argument against this with a report he had just received from Herschel, the most penetrating analysis of the rent disturbances made by any official, and one which had more influence on subsequent policy than did the reports of the Special R e n t Commissioners or the pleas of the planters. His phrases w o u l d echo in the communications of his superiors until the end of the rent controversies. Herschel wrote to V . H . Schalch, the Commissioner of Nadia Division, that Nadia District had, in his opinion, experienced a "tremendous r e f o r m . " Legal rights had overridden customary rights. T h e peasants were well aware of this change, were anxious to have their legal rights precisely defined, and wanted every notice of rent enhancement tested in the courts. In the last eighteen days the planters had served their ryots with 25,000 notices of rent enhancement and at least 80,000 more were expected! T h r e e thousand tenants-at-will had been evicted f r o m land on which they had squatted for a generation a n d w h i c h they had believed to be their own. A complete resettlement of land tenure was taking place in L o w e r Bengal, not through executive action, b u t through the judicial system. A n d the judicial system was incapable of m a n a g i n g this extraordinary work. Cases were heavily in arrears. T h e authority of the courts of both original and appelate jurisdiction was vague and ill-defined. Inexperienced collectors recently appointed were unfamiliar with decisions already made and raised doubts on settled points. T h e n e w munsif 33 J. p. 679-81, A p r i l

1862.

186

THE BLUE

MUTINY

courts brought additional confusion, and the special rent commissioners, with their weak powers limited to advice and exhortation, had undermined the authority and influence of the Government. A t first the ryots had been awed by their apparent authority, but finding them powerless, the final reaction was worse than the original evil. Herschel urged that the voice of conciliation be abandoned and that the voice of authority be adopted as the only one which could meet the difficulties. T o act as district authority he recommended the appointment of an official who would head all the collectors and decide all the appeals. T h e official would have the powers of judge and collector and would be entitled to arrange the order of the appeals to combine the strictness of decision in individual suits with the force of executive orders. He would receive reports from the collectors and be given the power to institute suits for the purpose of establishing precedent. A l l attempts by other district officials to arbitrate a question before pronouncing a judicial decision would be forbidden. T h e judge-collector w o u l d raise only general issues and refuse to consider trivial cases as well as reforms which could be postponed. H e was to exercise his power without any pretense of amLcable settlement; his major job would be to stem the tide of mass litigation. Herschel also recommended some legislative reiforms which could be taken up immediately. One of these was a law making the wilful withholding of rent a penal offiense; another was a measurement law, stipulating the stamdard of measurement. He would impose a fine of 25 per ce no substitute for an officer to adjust general differences. Since the Landholders and Commercial Association had agreed to the new plan, Canning did not insist upon the reappointment of special rent commissioners to promote reconciliation. But he did insist that the local officers continue to exhort the ryots to pay at least a part of their rents, and that an additional officer would be appoin.ed by the Lieutenant Governor to accomplish this if the local officers failed to achieve results. Under the compromise plan now adopted, Nadia and Jessore each received an additional judge with authority over lower courts, and the regular magistrates were instructed to continue to exhort the ryots to pay their rents. On March 18 Grant appointed Elphinstone Jackson as an additional officer in Nadia with powers of collector and commissioner of revenue to try all Act X suits, to take over all pending appeals from the Sadr Court, the Board of Revenue, and the Commissioner of Nadia, and to supervise all the deputy collectors in Act X cases. In Jessore Grant appointed C. H. Campbell to a corresponding position. 35 T h e courts now plunged into what was, in fact, a rigorous revenue settlement of the indigo zamindaris in Nadia and Jessore Districts. In contrast to the thorough villageby-village revenue survey that later took place in the Madras Presidency, Bengal, under the Permanent Settlement of 1793, had been settled in a superficial manner. Relations between zamindars and tenants had been left to the exigencies of paternalism, custom (in the parganna rates), good will between parties; in short, to the system of "indirect rule" in revenue matters. Act X of 1859 pro35 Ibid.

"κι

HOOKUM?"

1 89

vided the statutory framework for a change in the tenancy system from one of custom to one of rents based on legal rights enforceable in the collectors' courts. The change had been postponed for two years, from 1859 to 1861, because of a general unfamiliarity with the new law. For almost a decade longer Indian zamindars were loath to upset the existing customary rentals, and their ryots did not challenge their customary authority. But in the case of the European zamindars indigo worked as a catalyst. Both planters and ryots had become accustomed to government arbitration, and the old "good will" and paternalism had broken down with regard to indigo. It was natural for rents to follow in order. Reports now trickled in from the district officers who were attempting, under the compromise plan, to dissuade the ryots from turning en masse to the courts. D. J . McNeile, the Officiating Collector of Jessore, wrote to Commissioner Schalch on January 24, 1862 that the ryots would listen to no exhortations, but wanted to test their rights in the courts. He wrote that the ryots had suddenly discovered "the personal and social rights vested in them by law" and had acquired a fondness for litigation. 38 Another officer, Η. M. Reily, Deputy Magistrate of Kumarkhali Subdivision, reported that most ryots considered his orders pure threats. The poorer classes had been forced to take indigo advances in order to pay their rents, but the wealthy ryots, who could easily afford to pay, preferred litigation. 37 Another wrote that right had replaced might in the countryside and that in villages where the ryots had the greatest trust in the executive their fear of the landlord was less and rent disputes more numerous.38 H. Beveridge, Deputy Collector of Jenidah, warned that the ryots had acquired 3e

J . P. 148-50, Feb. 1862. J . P. 412-15, Feb. 1862. 38 J . P. 45, March 1862. 37

îgo

THE BLUE

MUTINY

the habit of paying their rents through Government officers and were no longer ignorant of the law. 39 All these reports were summarized by Schalch on March 27: I would strongly deprecate the continued or renewed intervention of the Government in its executive capacity. . . . Each repetition of such interference becomes less and less efficacious and lessens the influence of the Government. The people have already discovered that, until the law is altered, the Government is powerless to enforce obedience to its remonstrances. The ryots say, "Why are we again called together? How often is this to recur? You told us a year ago a penalty would be inflicted for the wilful withholding of rent, but nothing has been done."40 T h o u g h Canning had been proven wrong, he stubbornly continued to defer to the wishes of the European mercantile community in Calcutta on indigo questions. Bartle Frere's biographer suggests that a gradual change came over Canning from the time of Frere's appointment to the Supreme Council in December 1859. T h e Governor General admired Frere's tolerant and genial manners, and he began to improve his social relations with his subordinates, "and still more with the non-official Calcutta Europeans, some of whom had not long before petitioned for his recall. He had become, it was said, another man." 4 1 L a d y Canning's death in November 1861 may have further increased his dependence on Calcutta's European society. When, in i860, Wood laid down the principle that there was to be no special legislation in favor of the planters, Canning seemed to agree. 42 But in March 1861 a new 3» J . P. 163-74, March 1862. J . P. 363-67, March 1862. 41 Martineau, Bartle Frere, I, 385. 42 H . P., W o o d to Canning, Sept. 2, i860 and C a n n i n g t o W o o d , Oct. 30, i860. 40

"ΚΙ HOOKUM?"

191

criminal contract bill was introduced in the Governor General's Legislative Council, and Canning defended it on grounds that the indigo contract forgery system had been exposed and the planters were now keeping a close watch on their native servants who had been the actual perpetrators of fraudulent contracts.43 On being informed of the new bill Wood requested that it be withdrawn, writing to Canning, " I do not understand . . . how you could agree to introducing the Contract Bill. It is so contrary to everything which has been said and avowed." 44 Almost at once a second criminal contract bill was introduced. Unlike the previous one which dealt only with agricultural contracts, this bill covered contracts of every type.45 On receiving the bill in March Wood wrote: "Shall be very glad to see a good general Contract Bill. It is much more according to principle to have it general and if Grant approves it probably will be as it should be." 46 But a few days later he began to express some reservations: " I am afraid of all legislation which, however framed, is substantially for the English capitalist against the native land occupier or native producer in some shape or other." 47 With each passing week he cooled more and more, writing on April 3, " T h e Legislative Council . . . gave the look of a special Indigo tint in the proceeding." 48 Finally, after it 43 Proc. of Leg. Council of India, March 2-20, 1 8 6 1 ; H . P., Canning to Wood, March 18, 1861. 44 C . R . O., J u d . and Leg. Des. to India, Orig. Drafts, Vol. 4, No. 7 1 of 18 April 1 8 6 1 ; H . P., W o o d to Canning, April 24, 1861. 45 Proc. of Leg. Council of India, J a n . 29 to Feb. 12, 1862. 46 H . P., Wood to Laing, March 19, 1862. A t this time the cotton manufacturers of England strongly pressed W o o d for a contract law to protect their investment in advances on the Indian cotton crop now much enlarged because the American Civil W a r had cut off the supply of Southern cotton. 47 H . P., Wood to Laing, March 26, 1862. 48 Ibid., April 3, 1862.

ig2

THE BLUE

MUTINY

had been amended, he refused to allow it, calling it monstrous." 49 While the Legislative Council was considering coatract laws, the newly instituted Bengal Legislative Council passed Act V I (Bengal Council) of 1862, an act to amend the law relating to the recovery of rent. It raised the damages on rent awarded to the plaintiff from 12 to 25 per cent, but stipulated that if the suit had been improperly initiated, the defendant would be entitled to an award of 25 per cent of the amount for which he was sued. It also provided that rent could be paid to the collector if the zamindar refused to accept it, that land could be measured without the presence of the ryot, and that all tenures be registered. 50 On balance, Act V I favored the planter and zamindar over the ryot, and for the first time since the indigo disturbances had begun the British Indian Association, by supporting the bill, took the side of the planters. 51 A n even more fundamental change occurred in the statutory relationship of ryot and zamindar through the judicial interpretation of Act X of 1859. In 1862 Sir Barnes Peacock, Chief Justice of the Calcutta Supreme Court, heard the case of James Hills v. Issur Ghose. Peacock, who considered rent to be "economic" in the Malthusian sense, ruled that a landlord could enhance his rents at will. Fortunately for the ryots, this ruling was reversed in 1865 in the "Great R e n t Case" decided by the full court which ruled that the landlord, under the Permanent Settlement, had not been given absolute control of his estate and that certain customary rights were re49

H . P., Wood to Elgin, May 10, 1862. In 1863 a new law of contracts was passed, but the penal clauses drawn into the bill were abandoned due to a powerful memorial circulated in Parliament by T o r y humanitarians. See L . H. Jenks, Migration of British Capital to 1875 (Ν. Y., 1927), p. 2 1 8 n. so Pari. Papers, 1863, X L I , 276. 51 Som Prakash, May 26, 1862.

" Κ Ι HOOKUM?"

193

served for the tenants. Rent could only be increased in proportion to the increase in the value of the product.82 By the middle of 1863 peace had been restored to the indigo districts. While the contest over enhancements was continuing through the courts in a "quiet and chronic sort of way," 53 many of the ryots returned to a "sullen allegiance" on the understanding that they were not to be sued and not to be forced to give up their best lands for indigo.54 Some planters, like James Hills, resumed indigo cultivation by paying the ryots twice the old rate for indigo plant.55 With a view to forestalling any disturbances in Bihar, Gisbourne and Company wrote its managers there: " Ά fair day's wage for a fair day's labor' is the only way of establishing satisfactory relations between employers and employed, and we wish you to act on this principle." 5 · T . J . Kenny offered his ryots low rents if they cultivated indigo.67 Other planters gave up indigo entirely and either turned to other forms of business or left the area. They placed the responsibility for their failure on the Government James Tissendie wrote his agent, "I very much regret that I accepted the management of this concern. . . . When I accepted it, I was under the impression that Government would have supported us in all that is lawful, but it is now quite evident that they have no such intentions. . . . I am thoroughly disgusted with it. I shall be glad when I can 82 K. C. Chaudhuri, History and Economics of the Land System in Bengal (Calcutta, 1927), pp. 84-85; Baden-Powell, Land Systems, I, 645. 53 H . P., Elgin to Wood, July 13, 1863. " H . P., W . Grey to Wood, June 23, 1863. 6B Frazer"s Magazine (London), May 1862, p. 618; C. R. O., Jud. and Leg. Des. Reed., No. 37, 30 Sept. 1861; J . P. 141-44, March 1862. Ββ H . P., Letter from Gisbourne and Co., July 12, 1861, enclosed in Canning to Wood, July 22, 1861. 57 J . P. 303-08, May 1862.

194

THE BLUE MUTINY 58

resign." Of the larger planters, Robert T . Larmour surpassed all in his sullen resentment. He refused to permit a deputy collector to try his rent cases, believing that if his situation became bad enough the Government would extricate him. T o one official he wrote: "Whatever estrangement has taken place between the people and myself has been the act of Government alone, generated and fostered by Government with the premeditated intention of driving me out of the District." 58 T o the officials and to the Calcutta press, both British and Indian, the indigo and rent disturbances had ended. But one Bengali editor persisted in his untiring campaign for peasant welfare. T h i s was Dwarkanath Vidyabhusan, editor of the vernacular Som Prakash. "Where has the correspondent of the Hindoo Patriot from the indigo areas gone?" he asked in September, 1862. "Everyone should know that oppression is gradually increasing again." 60 Although he conceded that conditions had improved, the ryots had now "learned to consider oppression as oppression." He compared their new awareness of evil to the awakening of Adam after eating from the tree of knowledge. 61 T h e editor called for a permanent settlement of rents with all ryots. T h e peasants' money had been spent for litigation, his crops were neglected, and disputed land lay fallow. All the work of Grant, Eden, and Long, wrote Dwarkanath, had been in vain. 62 58

J . P. 296-300, A p r i l 1 8 6 1 . H . P., C a n n i n g to W o o d , M a r c h 18, 1 8 6 1 ; J . P. 364-65, F e b . 1 8 6 2 . W a t s o n a n d C o m p a n y ordered steam plows from E n g l a n d f o r use in sowing wasteland after ejecting utbandi ryots. Morris, Report. See also " S t e a m Cultivation in I n d i a " by an Assistant Indigo P l a n t e r in J. Agri, and Horticultur. Soc. of India, V o l . X I I , Pt. I, 1 8 6 1 . 59

60

Som Prakash, Sept. 8, 1862. Ibid., M a y 26, 1 8 6 2 . r '- Ibid., J u n e 30, 1862.

61

'κι HOOK.UM?'

1

95

The other side of the story of the indigo disturbances occurred in Calcutta. During the rent controversies, the indigo interest was given an opportunity to vent its anger against the Government of Bengal. This opportunity they found in the publication and distribution of a Bengali drama, Nil Darpan.

XI Nil Darpan Maegh bina hoe na jhoro haoa taeg bina hoe na boro paoa

There can be no storm without a cloud; there can be no achievement without sacrifice.

"AS LONG AS I LIVE, HAVE A BRAIN TO T H I N K AND A PEN TO

write, [I hope] to advocate the social elevation of the masses. . . . It may be called too political a course . . . but Christianity itself is political in the extended sense." 1 Although J a m e s L o n g directed these words to the bench during his trial before the Calcutta H i g h Court, his defense statement was, in fact, aimed at his superiors, the officials of the Church Missionary Society. T h e Society had been receiving complaints that L o n g was devoting himself to political agitation unbecoming and inappropriate to a missionary. In Long's opinion the "masses" could be won to Christianity only if they were better educated and economically 1 Address of Rev. James Long to the Court, before the Full Bench, 24 July 1861 in Dinabandhu Mitra, Nil Durpan (3d. Indian ed., edit, by S. Pradhan and S. S. Gupta, Calcutta 1958t?]), p. 176. This edition contains, in addition to the play, a full report of the trial of James Long.

NIL DARPAN

1 97

independent. Like some of his fellow missionaries, Long worked to establish vernacular schools in the villages and spoke out against oppression by indigo planters and zamindars. But unlike the other missionaries he considered it no less his duty to prod the Bengali urban intelligentsia into taking an interest in rural conditions. At every opportunity Long lectured the Calcutta intelligentsia on their social responsibilities. "Mr. Long does not go to a meeting where social questions are discussed in order to smuggle in some wishywashy talk on religion," wrote the Reverend Christian Bomwetsch to the Church Missionary Society.2 Long found the intelligentsia "intensely selfish" and "indifferent if not hostile to the welfare of the common people whom they despise as much as ever one of the old French noblesse did any of the canille." 3 The Calcutta intelligentsia accepted his criticism with good humor, and, in fact, the more he scolded, the more he endeared himself to them. After one such meeting a well-educated Bengali told Bomwetsch that Long had done more for the Christian religion than all the other missionaries combined. " T h e sympathy he shows to us in every way and the help he lends to every improvement, etc. makes a much more favorable impression than if he was going about merely

preaching."* James Long had still another characteristic not shared by his fellow missionaries. While they confined themselves to preaching doctrines of salvation, he was as interested in hearing the views of the Bengalis as he was in expounding his own. On the one hand Long was among the first Europeans to collect and analyze peasant proverbs to illustrate 2

C. M. S., Bomwetsch to C. M. S„ July 6, 1861. 3 C. M. S., Long to C. M. S., Oct. 22, 1857. 4 C. M. S., Bomwetsch to C. M. S., July 6, 1861.

THE BLUE

MUTINY

social conditions in the mufassal.5 On the other, he became the foremost authority of his day on the vernacular literature which poured forth from the presses of Calcutta. Realizing how important it was for the Government to know its subjects, Long advocated the appointment of a permanent official to review Indian publications and to keep the Government informed of Indian political views and intellectual trends.® In the absence of such an official James Long took this responsibility upon himself. In the autumn of i860 he brought to the attention of the Government a new Bengali drama, Nil Darpan (The Mirror of Indigo) which he felt demonstrated Indian feelings toward the indigo planters. The author of Nil Darpan, Dinabandhu Mitra, worked as an inspector for the Post Office Department and during i860 traveled through the heart of the indigo districts. His first dramatic work, Nil Darpan, was to place him among the leading Bengali dramatists of the nineteenth century. 7 In the course of the play two planters, J . J . Wood and P. P. Rogue, commit every conceivable outrage ever attributed to the planters of Lower Bengal. They force the ryots to plant indigo without remuneration. They confine, beat, and corrupt the villagers as well as their own Indian servants, violate Indian maidens8 and encourage prostitu· 5

See such works by Long as Oriental Proverbs (2d. ed., edit, by M. P. Saha, Calcutta, 1956); Probad Mala, or the Wit of Bengali Ryots (Calcutta, 1869); Popular Bengali Proverbs (Calcutta, 1868); On the Importance and Best Mode of Making a Collection of Oriental Proverbs (Bristol, 1883); etc. 6 C. M. S„ Long to C. M. S., Feb. 22, 1858. 7 P. Guha-Thakurta, The Bengali Drama (London, 1930), p. 109 8 T h e Indigo Commission reported: " A s to outrages on women . . we are happy to declare that our most rigid inquiries could bring to light only one case of the kind . . . and when we came to examine into its foundation . . . we discovered that there were very reasonable grounds for supposing that no outrage . . . had ever taken place!'

NIL DARPAN

199

tion and violence. Their oppressions result in either the madness or death of almost every one of the principal Indian characters in the drama. Not only do the planters ruin the ryots, but they also corrupt the judicial officers of the Government. In one court scene the magistrate is portrayed as more interested in the favors of the planter's wife than in the pleas of the ryot defendant. Although crudely written and overdrawn, the play is significant as an example of an awakening among the intelligentsia of deep sympathy toward the peasantry. It also throws light on certain aspects of the indigo disturbances not dealt with in the official reports. One of these is the rise to leadership of a Western-educated rural middleclass, illustrated by the Basu family around which the action of the play centers. The family head, Goluk Chunder Basu, is an elderly patriarch who, to preserve the peace, is willing to compromise and pay the planters huge sums to be free of indigo. In contrast, his eldest son, Nobin Madhab, prefers to risk his life and fortune to drive out the planters. When, in the first act, Goluk tells his son, "We have no chance in a dispute with the Sahebs . . . We are consequently obliged to work." Nobin answers: " I shall do as you order, Sir; but my design is for once to bring an action into Court." One of the planters describes Nobin as "well versed in the affairs of the Court," and the Indian factory servant complains that Nobin prepared R . I. C., Pt. I, Report, p. 24. On the other hand, both the Rev. Lincke (R. I. C., A . 894-96) and the Rev. Long ( A . 1663-64) testified to having heard of such outrages, and it is part of the popular tradition among the Bengalis that such outrages occurred. T h e reason given that no charges of this kind were made to the officials was that the publicity would have deprived the victim of her caste and disgraced her family. See R . C. Majundar, ed., History and Culture of the Indian People (9 Vols., Bombay, 1951-63), I X , Pt. I, 922.

200

THE BLUE

MUTINY

drafts of petitions for ryots and helped them to win one court case after another against the planters. " T h a t braggart is become like a Christian Missionary; and I cannot say what preparations he is making this time." In one of the final episodes N o b i n Madhab, after striking down a planter, receives a fatal blow on the skull f r o m a lathi. T h e old patriarch, brought into court and imprisoned by the biased judge under A c t X I of i860, is so disgraced that he hangs himself in his cell. G o l u k ' s younger son, B i n d u Madhab, returns from Calcutta where he has been attending college, to find his family ruined. Nil Darpan portrays the officials as seen through the eyes of the common people. O n e ryot describes Halliday touring the indigo factories and " b e i n g feasted like a bridegroom just before the celebration of the marriage." O f Herschel another ryot speaks: " H e did not go to dine in the factory. T h e y prepared a dinner for the Magistrate in order to get him within their power, b u t the Magistrate concealed himself like a stolen cow. . . . H e is a person of good family. W h y should he go to the Indigo Planters . . . the low people" of England? In addition to their oppression and violence, the European planters offended the social sensibilities of the Bengalis. A peasant woman is scandalized because the planter's wife welcomes the attentions of the Magistrate: I saw the lady; she has no shame at all. W h e n the Magistrate of the Zilla (whose name occasions great terror) goes riding about through the village, the lady also rides on horseback with him—The bou riding about on a horse! Because the aunt of Kasi once laughed before the elder brother of her husband, all people ridiculed her; while this was the Magistrate of the Zilla. 8 9 Excerpts taken from 2d. Indian edition, Indigo Planters and All About Them, compiled by Kumud Behari Bose (Calcutta, 1903)

N I L DARPAN

201

The Bengali play was first published in Dacca in September i860. About six weeks later Long brought the play to the notice of W. S. Seton-Karr, Secretary to the Government of Bengal. After Seton-Karr read the play in Bengali, he sanctioned Long to employ a translator to put the play into English because some officials, including the Lieutenant Governor, had asked to read it. According to tradition, Long employed the foremost Bengali poet of the day, Michael Madhusudan Dutt, to translate the work. The Lieutenant Governor authorized Seton-Karr to print a few copies at private expense and circulate them among his friends in official and private positions. Grant soon left Calcutta for a short tour in the mufassal, and Seton-Karr, on his own responsibility, had five hundred copies printed at Government expense, with Long acting as intermediary between him and the printer, C. H. Manuel. Without Grant's knowledge Seton-Karr distributed two hundred and two copies of the play under official frank to prominent members of Parliament, philanthropists, retired Indian officials, and newspaper editors in both England and India. 10 On May 25 Walter Brett, editor of the Englishman, sent the Secretary of the Landholders and Commercial Association a copy of the translation which he had received from the editor of the Lahore Chronicle. The Secretary, W. F. Fergusson, immediately wrote to the Government of Bengal asking if it was officially responsible for the distribution of this "foul and malicious libel." On June 3 the Government of Bengal replied that the Lieutenant Governor had been absent from Calcutta when the book was 10

C. M. S., Long to Lord Statement of Seton-Karr, dated man and found in Nil Durpan, Govt, of India, June 19, 1861 I, 197 ff.

Bishop of Calcutta, Aug. 24, 1861; July 27, 1861, printed in the Englishpp. 177 ff.; Minute of J . P. Grant to in Buckland, Lieutenant Governors,

202

THE BLUE

MUTINY

published and circulated; and, although it did not consider the work libelous, it regretted the alleged offense and pointed out that it would not have occurred but for "some inadvertance or mistake." Being advised by their counsel that the pamphlet was libelous, the Landholders and Commercial Association resolved to institute legal proceedings to ascertain the author, publisher and translator of Nil Darpan.11 Only the name of C. H. Manuel, the printer, appeared on the title page. He was indicted, but before being tried was authorized by Long to reveal that the missionary was responsible for the publication, and the charge against Manuel was dropped. At this point in the proceedings the Government of Bengal, in the persons of Grant and Seton-Karr, were duty-bound to step in and declare their responsibility for the printing and distribution of Nil Darpan at Government expense. Long had not even been aware that Seton-Karr had intended to print the translation: in fact, he had kept a duplicate copy of the translation for himself.12 But the Government remained silent and to save itself from embarrassment allowed Long to become the scapegoat. On June 19 Grant sent a minute to the Government of India explaining the facts concerning the publication, including Seton-Karr's responsibility for its translation and printing under Government expense and distribution by official frank. Grant explained that Seton-Karr had been under the impression that the Lieutenant Governor had authorized its translation as an official act, to be paid for by the Government. "The occurrence," wrote Grant, "is extremely unfortunate and has distressed me beyond measure." 13 11 12 13

Englishman, M a y 27, 28 and J u n e 6, 1861. C. M. S., Long to Lord Bishop of Calcutta, Aug. 24, 1 8 6 1 . Buckland, Lieutenant Governors, I, 197 ff.

N I L DARPAN

203

Long was indicted, and on July 19, 1861 was tried for libel before the Calcutta Supreme Court. The courtroom was crowded with officials of every rank as well as European bankers, merchants, missionaries, and indigo planters interspersed with "the stout figures of influential Natives." 14 The presiding judge was Sir Mordaunt Wells, who a few years earlier had stated from the bench that the entire Indian people were a nation of forgers and perjurers. The lawyers for the prosecution, A. T . T . Peterson and David Cowie, were engaged by Walter Brett of the Englishman. Peterson was "the weightiest advocate in any jury case" and Cowie "perhaps the best lawyer at the [Calcutta] Bar." The defense attorneys were Messrs. Eglinton and Newmarch. At the trial Eglinton showed "a marked want of that nerve and presence of mind" necessary in jury trials. Newmarch was a "worn out old man said to be very agreeable up to 12 o'clock but apt to be muddled by intemperance when most wanted." 15 In his opening remarks Peterson declared that the "Government of the country were on trial"; the Hindoo Patriot in an editorial on Peterson's statement went even further: "Nay more than that, the defendants were more numerous than the Court could accommodate, and a far more important body than even the Government. They were the [British] nation which has always sympathized with the ryot's wrongs, which has assisted him in his deliverance."16 After stating that Long was responsible for the translation and publication of Nil Darpan, the prosecution charged, first, that the preface to the play slandered the editors of the two great pro-planter newspapers, the Englishman and the Hurkaru; and, second, that the text of the 14 15 16

Account of the trial taken from Nil Durpan H. P., Frere to Wood, Dec. 4, 1861. Hindoo Patriot, July 25, 1861.

(3d. Indian ed.).

204

THE BLUE

MUTINY

play slandered the planters as a group. In his preface the author had written: What surprising power of attraction silver has? The detestable Judas gave the great Preacher of the Christian religion, Jesus, into the hands of odious Pilate for the sake of thirty rupees; what wonder then, if the proprietors of two newspapers, becoming enslaved by the hope of gaining one thousand rupees, throw the poor helpless of this land into the terrible grasp of your mouths. Peterson contended that the text of the play implied that the planters as a group had committed rape, arson, m u r d e r and corporal punishment. T h e play also slandered English womanhood represented by the person of the planter's wife, who, it implied was involved in intimacies with the magistrate. Peterson, with the appearance of profound indignation, appealed to the emotions of the jury by attributing sinister motives to those responsible for the play's publication and distribution. H e stirred the racial sensibilities of the Europeans on the jury: The planter's wife!—and here he felt that he was no longer the mere Counsel—he was the Englishman pursuing with a righteous indignation the libeller who had dared to cast the deepest stain upon the fair fame of his country women, whom before the world he had assiduously represented as the means of satisfying the lust of the Justice, for the purpose of making him the tool of the planter. And he played upon their deepest fears as an minority:

alien

Had we not seen by what a tender thread we hang? Have not the late mutinies taught us how unsafe is our position? . . . If that reckless slander had been promulgated among the warlike tribes of the North-West, it must have inevitably led to the extermination of the Europeans.

NIL DARPAN

205

T h e defense retorted that it was common knowledge that the editors of Englishman and Hurkaru did write for profit and did represent the planting interest; that the publication under consideration, being in English, could not possibly incite the uneducated peasantry against the Europeans; and that the indigo planters had no corporate existence and therefore no more right to sue for libel than had the slave owners of America to sue Harriet Beecher Stowe. Under the law of libel then existing in India, Long was not permitted to state his own case unless the plaintiff applied for "criminal information," an obsolete procedure which had been dropped from British legal practice almost twenty years previously. A t the conclusion of the trial Sir Mordaunt Wells instructed the jury at great length. He read to them the preface of the play and asked whether it did not mean that the "respectable gentlemen who conduct newspapers in Calcutta . . . would sacrifice the welfare of society to the promotion for a corrupt purpose of private interests? If it meant that would it not be a libel?" Newspaper editors, continued Wells, even when they condemned classes of people, did so for the public good, or what they believed to be the public good. "But what public good would it subserve to publish these filthy allusions to the prostitution of the Native women to the planters?" T o prove that a class of men could be libeled, Wells cited eight different precedents in English law where, in his opinion, the courts had so ruled. He then read aloud to the jury various passages from the play which he thought slandered the planters and "English womanhood," commenting, "It was impossible to speak of them otherwise than as filthy insinuations against a society of helpless ladies who, under the mask of a general type, were cruelly stabbed in the dark." T h e judge imputed that Long was actuated by

2o6

THE

BLUE

MUTINY

"other than pure motives" in publishing and distributing the book anonymously. If the jury believed that "the defendant had been actuated by a feeling of animosity towards the planters of Lower Bengal, with a view of degrading, injuring, and bringing this class into contempt and ridicule . . . the verdict must be 'guilty.' " Swayed by these strong words of advice from the bench, the jury, consisting of twelve Englishmen, a Portuguese, an Armenian, and a Parsi, brought in a verdict of "guilty" on both counts. 17 Long's attorneys moved for "arrest of judgment," and on July 24 the case was re-argued before the Full Bench, presided over by the Chief Justice, Sir Barnes Peacock. Before the Full Bench Long was allowed to defend his publication. He argued that it was his duty to inform the authorities of Indian opinion and that if the Government had known the sentiments of the people in 1857, much bloodshed would have been avoided. After discourteously interrupting his statement, Peacock sentenced him to a fine of 1,000 rupees and one month in the Common Jail. T h e imprisonment of the missionary shocked public opinion in Calcutta and England and aroused the sympathy of the humanitarian and anti-indigo party. Wood wrote that "in the present state of feeling it was a piece of inexcusable folly to give the planters such a handle as this." 18 But he failed to observe that it had also given the anti-planter forces a rallying point to which they swarmed with enthusiasm. During his month in jail, Long perhaps saw and spoke to more people than he had in any previous 17 T h e Armenian was S. Apear, one of the proprietors of the Indian Field. T h e Parsi was Manikjee Rustomjee, a distinguished leader of the Parsi community in Calcutta who had lost his fortune in the failure of the Union Bank. 18 H. P., Wood to Canning, Aug. 3, 1861.

NIL DARPAN

2θη

month of his life. T h e visitors included chaplains, missionaries, liberal non-officials, civilians and Indians of all classes. Among the officials were Bartle Frere, Seton-Karr, Lord Ulick Brown, Registrar of the Sadr Court, J. C. Erskine of the Legislative Council and Calcutta Judge McLeod Wylie. 1 9 Dr. Key of the Bishop's College told Long ". . . how much he was struck with the tone of the native newspapers who were astonished at the fact of a Christian missionary cheerfully going to jail in the cause of the oppressed. T h e editor of one Bengali paper wrote, 'If this be Christianity then we wish Christianity would spread all over the country.' " 20 T h e editor of Som Prakash who was not ordinarily friendly to missionary activity, wrote: Amongst the benefits that India and the English Government has received, the coining of the missionary to this country is the highest. . . . It is through them that the fame of the English nation and the righteousness of the British Government has been saved.21 Long's fine was paid by Kali Prasanna Sinha, a wealthy Calcutta zamindar, author, and patron of literature. Raja Radha Kanta Deb led the wealthy orthodox Hindu community in presenting Long with an address expressing its gratitude for his work in advancing the cause of vernacular literature and disseminating the views and feelings of the natives. Another address was signed by 30,000 Indians of all classes. T h e leaders of the Hindu community wanted to petition the Government for a remission of Long's imprisonment, but the missionary discouraged them on grounds that it would embarrass the Government. 22 Englishman, Aug. 24, 1861. 2» C. M. S., Long to C. M. S„ Aug. 8, 1861. 21 Som Prakash, June 17, 1861, enclosed in a letter from Bomwetsch to Venn, C. M. S., July 5, 1861. 22 Sanyal, Reminiscences and Anecdotes, I, 59. 19

2O8

T H E BLUE

MUTINY

Long was most concerned with the opinions of his colleagues and superiors in the missionary societies of Calcutta and London. Before the trial the Church Missionary Society in Calcutta had considered expelling him. When he heard of the threat to expel Long, Canning himself wrote to the Bishop of Calcutta, Dr. George Cotton, begging him "to try to stave off any such hasty and exaggerated proceeding," 23 and ultimately Long received Cotton's full approval. 24 From jail Long wrote to the Church Missionary Society in London that he had acted throughout on the advice of Duff and Wylie and with the sanction of the Bengal Government, and insisted that he had committed no moral offense in throwing light on Indian opinion. 26 There were rumors of dissension in the Committee of the Church Missionary Society, the Englishman prematurely reporting that the Society "entirely disapproves" of Long's connection with the publication of Nil Darpan and that he would not be supported by the Society. 26 But the decision, which came soon afterwards, proved the Englishman guilty of wishful thinking. His superiors supported Long wholeheartedly, and wrote him of their "prayerful sympathy" and of their continued confidence in his "Missionary character and principles." T h e y further expressed the hope that "his efforts on behalf of the masses of Bengal . . . will be unabated." 27 T h e officials were severely critical of the conduct of the trial. Bartle Frere had "never before felt so ashamed of our Supreme Court Judges on the Bench," and admitted that his own sympathy for the planters had been "corrected by H. P., Canning to Wood, June 23, 1861. Indian Field, Sept. 28, 1861. 25 C. M. S., L o n g to C. M. S., A u g . 8, 1861. 26 Englishman, Sept. 12, 1861. 27 C. M. S., Minute of the C. M . S. on the Conviction and Imprisonment of the Rev. James L o n g for Libel, Sept. 24, 1861. 23 24

NIL D A R P A N

20g

their un-English hatred of free discussion." Although such vindictive behavior could be expected from the Calcutta press and the planters, wrote Frere, "the sight of English Judges behaving as [Peacock] and [Wells] have done, throws everything else into the shade." 28 Canning called Well's demeanor "indecent" and Peacock's interruption of Long's defense statement, "a discreditable exhibition." 28 Wood agreed that the judges were unfair; however, when the British newspapers asked him for an official comment on the conduct of Wells and Peacock, he replied that it was unwise for an executive to interfere with the judiciary. Lord Stanley considered the verdict a "serious inroad on the liberty of the press." Both Wood and Stanley were grateful that Parliament was not in session, because undoubtedly there would have been severe comments on Wells and Peacock which would have embarrassed the Government, and especially Lord Stanley who had selected Wells for the Calcutta Bench. 30 In February 1862 James Long left for a three-year stay in England. Frere gave him a letter of introduction to Wood and informed the Secretary of State that Long was the foremost living authority on Bengali vernacular literature. Though sincere and honest, wrote Frere, Long was a rather narrow-minded partisan who had seen little of the world and that "entirely from an ultra Irish Protestant point of view." He could do much harm if "dropped into the midst of May meetings, with strong feelings, and much information on a class of Indian grievances which are stock subjects for an Exeter House platform." Frere advised Wood to forestall Long's exploitation as a "stalking horse for partisan purposes" by encouraging the missionary to 28 29 30

H . P., Frere to Wood, Aug. 9, 1861; Martineau, I, 361. H . P., Canning to Wood, July 3 1 , 1861. H. P., Wood to Canning, Aug. 3, Oct. 2, 18 and 25, 1861.

2IO

THE BLUE

MUTINY

expound his views on vernacular education and by cautioning him to leave politics to secular people. Long would be inclined to conform "if he knew the hint came from the author of the Education Despatch of 1854." 31 Frere's insensitive and condescending letter indicates that the meaning of the Nil Darpan affair was lost on the officials. It was not lost on the Bengali intelligentsia, who were strongly impressed by the example of a European suffering imprisonment for the sake of Indian peasants. Thereafter the problems of the rural populace were seldom excluded from the political remonstrances of the urban intelligentsia. While Long was vindicated, Sir Mordaunt Wells was denounced by every group with the exception of the European extremists. These presented him with a petition of confidence; which, in the words of the Governor General, he had been "wanting enough in self-respect and good sense to accept." 32 Wells had been at enmity with the Bengali community for some time. His statement of August 24, 1859 calling the entire nation of Bengalis forgers and perjurers was followed by his request for leniency in the case of a European convicted of beating to death an old Indian servant. On that occasion the Indian Field had appealed for a public meeting to have Wells recalled. 33 It was only after Long's trial, on August 26, 1861, however, that the Calcutta populace held a public meeting organ31 H. P., Frere to Wood, Feb. 18, 1862. Long wrote a pamphlet in his own defense called Strike, But Hear! (Calcutta, 1861) containing selections from the Pari. Papers on the indigo system. He decided that rather than speak continuously in his own defense in England, he would distribute this pamphlet. C. M. S., Long to C. M. S., Aug. 10, 1861. 32 H . P., Canning to Wood, Sept. 23, 1861. Among the signers was one Indian, the Maharajah of Burdwan. Englishman, Sept. 5, 1861. 33 Indian Field, Dec. 10, 1859.

NIL DARPAN

211

ized by the British Indian Association, and petitioned for the recall of Wells for his "repeated and indiscreet exhibition of strong political bias and race prejudices which are not compatible with the impartial administration of justice." A memorial, printed clandestinely and circulated for a month, was signed by over 20,000 people. Although the editors of the Englishman and Hurkaru offered 500 rupees for a copy of the petition "such was the unity of the Bengali community that they could not get hold of a single copy." 34 T h e Englishman commented on the meeting as being one of the ". . . admirable results which are being developed by the governmental policy of political education and elevation for the Natives, and repression and 'Black Acts' for the Anglo-Indian." 35 T h e excitement of the Indian community failed to move Canning. He considered the petition "a poor production" on grounds that Wells had been justified in charging that perjury and forgery were rife among the Indian community. Wells' conduct in the Long trial deserved censure, but this should come not from the executive but from the Lord Chancellor. The Governor General wrote Wood: "This man is not a bad man, whatever he may be as a judge, but eaten up with conceit and love of vulgar applause, and (according to the native phrase) with his head full of wind." 38 On December 24, 1861 Canning replied to the petition in a letter to Jotendra Mohun Tagore, Honorary Secretary of the British Indian Association. He expressed his regret that Wells' language had conveyed "general imputations on the moral character of the whole native inhabitants of Bengal," but pointed out 31

Sanyal, Reminiscences and Anecdotes, I, 60; Som Prakash, April 14, 1862. 35 Englishman, Aug. 29, 1861. 36 H. P., Canning to Wood, Sept. 23, 1861.

212

THE BLUE

MUTINY

that Wells had only meant to condemn in strong terms his feelings against certain frequent and serious criminal practices. Finally he rejected the petition outright hoping that the emotions of the Bengalis would subside with "time and reflexion" and that judges would be more careful of their language in the future. 37 The real purpose of the indigo interest in prosecuting James Long had been to strike at Grant and Seton-Karr. Grant had proven to the satisfaction of the Government that he had not been responsible for the distribution of Nil Darpan. But the important role of Seton-Karr in the affair had been brought out in the trial and it now appeared that he would be next in line for indictment by the planters. This would have greatly embarrassed the Government, and Canning hoped to avoid another trial at any cost. At the same time Canning considered Seton-Karr the "chief offender and deserves to be so treated. It was an unpardonable act of inconsiderateness to identify his office with the authors or distributors of a party squib on so sore a subject."38 Immediately after Long's trial Seton-Karr had offered his resignation to the Lieutenant Governor, but Grant demonstrated his contempt for the indigo interests by refusing to accept it.39 Although Canning believed that the Landholders and Commercial Association would proceed to indict SetonKarr, the Governor General was aware of dissension within the Association. He wrote Wood that "some of the most respectable of the Landholders and Commercial Association are shocked at the spirit which the proceedings against Long have evoked from the Bench and are opposed to giving their countenance and money to bring 37 33 39

Sanyal, Reminiscences and Anecdotes, II, 38. H. P., Canning to Wood, J u n e 3, 1861. Buckland, Lieutenant Governors, I, 19g ff.

NIL DARPAN

213

about a repetition of them." 4 0 W h i l e L o n g was still in jail, a small group of moderates in the Association supported a motion to ask the Government to remit Long's sentence, but when C o w i e and Peterson vehemently opposed the motion, it was unanimously defeated. O n e of the die-hard members complained about this moderate faction in a letter to the Englishman and warned that if Seton-Karr were not brought to trial thousands of rupees would be withdrawn from the Association. 4 1 O n A u g u s t 8, none too soon as it turned out, C a n n i n g issued a resolution apprehending Grant for not searching o u t the particulars of the case and not condemning SetonK a r r " i n such a manner as to mark unmistakably" his displeasure. Such a censure by Grant w o u l d have made it impossible to implicate the Bengal G o v e r n m e n t " i n acts w h i c h are not only unauthorized b u t quite unjustifiable." C a n n i n g next reproved Seton-Karr for neglecting to send the Government of India a copy of the pamphlet, which so vitally affected its interests, and for m a k i n g n o explanation of his negligence to the G o v e r n m e n t of India. " H e is therefore chargeable, not only with an unwarrantable assumption and indiscreet exercise of an authority which did not belong to him, b u t with a neglect of duty which it is difficult to reconcile with the motives that led h i m to such an assumption." H e censured Grant for not taking note of these errors " w i t h the gravity which they deserve," and considered it Grant's duty to accept Seton-Karr's resignation from the office of Secretary to the G o v e r n m e n t of Bengal. 4 2 T h e Governor General had to defend his severe censures and wrote to W o o d , that, though the Secretary of State 40

H . P., Canning to Wood, July 31, 1861. Aug. 5, 1861. Buckland, Lieutenant Governors, I, 202 ff.

41Englishman, 42

214

T H E BLUE

MUTINY

might disagree, he must not reverse the censures or change the wording. T h e censures were deliberately strong, he explained, to forestall an attack on the two men by the planters' party. Grant took his own censure with good h u m o r but was not convinced that it was justified. " N o d o u b t , " wrote Grant, " I ought to be scolded for not scolding and yet I don't know that any good would have come from my swearing at the post-boy after he had upset me in the m u d . " C a n n i n g disagreed and wrote that if Grant had administered a timely and strong rebuke to Seton-Karr for authorizing the distribution of Nil Darpan, the planters would not have prosecuted James Long. 4 3 A s C a n n i n g had anticipated, W o o d was not pleased with the censure. O n September 22 he wrote, " Y o u are short I think on Seton Karr, b u t I won't disturb it." A g a i n he wrote, " I think your m i n u t e and publication sharp." C a n n i n g replied, "I cannot admit that Seton-Karr was treated more sharply than he himself deserved . . . ;" 44 and then Canning, and two days later Frere, informed W o o d of the background events which had led the Governor General to issue and publish his strong censure. C a n n i n g had been determined not to allow Seton-Karr to go on trial. O n e reason was that Peacock, it was learned, had felt that Wells' sentence of L o n g had been too light. H e had preempted the place of Jackson, a good-humored judge, w h o was next in line to try a case in sessions, in order to try Seton-Karr himself and pronounce a heavy sentence. Another source of Canning's qualms a b o u t a trial was that some "traitor" in the Secretary's office had carefully saved the pencil slips and office memoranda perH. P., Canning to Wood, Aug. 9 and 22, 1861. H. P., Wood to Canning, Sept. 26 and Oct. 18, 1861; Canning to Wood, Dec. 2, 1861. 43

44

NIL DARPAN

215

taining to the publication of Nil Darpan, which were meant to be destroyed. The planters had intended to rely on them for evidence and they were liable to a dangerous misinterpretation. A further disadvantage was the lack of competent counsel since Ritchie, the Advocate General and the best available man, had declined on grounds of professional etiquette from taking sides in the matter. Conviction was therefore almost certain and would have brought the Government of India into conflict with the Supreme Court and brought Exeter Hall and Parliament into the question. Canning wanted to bolster the position of the small moderate party in the Landholders and Commercial Association which always had opposed the activities of the extremist majority. 45 At a meeting of the Association called during the week before the Supreme Court was to commence its sessions, the extremist party already had pledged the Association to the prosecution. The minority group favored appealing first to the Governor General, but were becoming impatient with the Government which, they believed, would never condemn one of its own officials for an offense against the non-official European community. T h e Governor General's resolution was published on the morning of August 10, the day set for a final decision in the Landholders and Commercial Association. One of the members of the Association described the result: " I t came on the violent party like a thunder clap, they found the ground cut from under their feet and there was such a row of blank faces, when they found themselves baulked of their expected revenge. . . ." Frere wrote: " T h e moderate 45 T h e "moderates" included W . S. Fitzwilliam, Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce, George Brown of Jardine, Skinner and Co., and W . Maitland. H. P., Canning to Wood, Dec. 2, 1861.

2I6

T H E BLUE MUTINY

party plucked up courage and aided by a large number who had felt sincerely aggrieved but were not satisfied, carried a resolution that all further proceedings should be dropped, and so the matter ended." If the Governor General had not published his resolution on that very day, it would have meant a disastrous trial for Seton-Karr.4® Wood accepted Canning's explanation of the censure on political grounds alone, comparing it to saving a suspect from a lynching mob by imprisonment. 47 On August 12 Seton-Karr submitted a full apology to the Government of India for his failure to furnish it with a copy of Nil Darpan. Considered by Wood as well as by Canning an able man, Seton-Karr was subsequently appointed a Judge of the High Court and later Secretary to the Government of India in the Foreign Department. T h e "vendetta" of the extremist party did not end with the closing of the Nil Darpan episode. Their ultimate target was J . P. Grant upon whom the two planter newspapers continued to heap criticism, jibes and insults. One example is this verse from the Englishman·. John Peterl John Peter! Beware of the day, When the friends of the planters shall all have their say, • · · · · Ha! laugh'st thou John Peter my vision to scorn! Base bird of the dunghill, thy plume shall be torn; Down, down must thou stoop from thy perch upon high; Ah! hence must thou speed, for the spoiler is nigh.48 " T h e spoiler" appeared in August in the person of John McArthur, an assistant in the Luckiparra indigo factory of 46

H. P., Frere to Wood, Dec. 4, 1861. H . P., Wood to Frere, J a n . 17, 1862; Wood to Canning, Feb. 10, 1862. 48 Englishman, March 15, 1861. 47

NIL DARPAN

2 17

the Mirganj Concern. In an affray on June 18, i860, the servants of McArthur and Driver, the manager of the concern, had attacked the followers of Hurnath Roy which resulted in the murder of one of the zamindar's people. T h o u g h both planters were absent from the scene, Lushington, as Commissioner of Nadia, reported that they must have known of or assented to the attack. His report was published in the Selections from the Records of the Government of Bengal relating to the Cultivation of Indigo McArthur, supported by the extremist party, brought a libel suit against Grant for authorizing the official publication of Lushington's letter. By a legal oversight the relatively new office of Lieutenant Governor had not been included in a law exempting public officers in their official acts from the law of libel. Ritchie, the Advocate General, advised Grant to base his defense upon proving the allegations. For his defense Grant had Ritchie as his counsel and the entire machinery of the Bengal Government at his disposal. T h e district officials were instructed to collect witnesses and to help in every way possible; the Bengal Government paid the entire expense of the defense. But no definite proof of McArthur's implication was uncovered, and in court Ritchie was forced to plead that the publication fell within the realm of privileged communications. Peacock presided, found Grant guilty, and fined him a nominal sum of one rupee. 60 John Peter Grant left India in April 1862 triumphantly bearing the Order of Knight Commander of the Bath awarded by Canning and an enthusiastic commendation presented by the British Indian Association. He departed with the knowledge that during his short tenure in office 49

Selections,

roJ.

N o . 33, Part III.

P. 651 60, A p r i l 1862 and 277-79, June

1862.

218

THE

RI.UE

MUTINY

the rule of law had been diffused throughout the countryside and a vicious system of exploitation had been uprooted. Grant's sense of justice, Herschel's integrity, and Long's devotion have left a lasting imprint upon the history of modern Bengal.

χ Conclusion THE

INDIGO

INDUSTRY

OF

LOWER

BENGAL

HAD

BEEN

AN

anachronism long before its final destruction in 1862. It was a child of eighteenth-century mercantilism, originally nurtured by the East India Company to furnish a raw material suitable for the remittance trade. Out of necessity the Government continued to support this relic of mercantilism in the subsequent era of free trade. T h e indigo system, which provided one of the few colonial products marketable in Britain, was much too important to the Indian economy to be hindered by scrupulous regulations. Official patrons, like Lord William Bentinck, overlooked the industry's violation of the principles of laissez faire and condoned its shameful dependence on forced labor. By the mid-1850's, however, the indigo industry had lost its central position in the export trade of Bengal. At the same time the Government began to enact long overdue measures to reform the neglected administration of Lower Bengal, the most important of which was the creation of the office of Lieutenant Governor of Bengal. John Peter Grant, the second Lieutenant Governor, not only held strong Liberal opinions but was accustomed to carrying his ideas to their logical conclusion. With relentless consistency he applied the doctrine of free trade to the indigo system. T h e peasant, Grant reasoned, was no less a capi-

220

THE BLUE

MUTINY

talist than the planter and must be allowed to sell his product on a free market. It was this change in government policy that encouraged the ryots to take a determined stand against indigo planting. In effect, the tenets of midVictorian Liberalism, as upheld by John Peter Grant in Bengal and Charles Wood in London, became an instrument for peasant emancipation and a barrier to unrestricted colonial exploitation. T h e limits that Liberalism set on economic oppression were mild enough, but they were specific: Economic relations between individuals must be free and voluntary. By enforcing another principle of Liberalism, judicial supremacy, the Lieutenant Governor further contributed to the freedom of the indigo cultivator. In his insistence on the supremacy of the judicial over the executive branch in district administration, J o h n Peter Grant was carrying on the tradition of the "Bengal School," itself grounded in the Whiggish doctrines of Lord Cornwallis. In Lower Bengal the principle of judicial supremacy had to wait over fifty years to be given a fair trial and was fully implemented only when J o h n Peter Grant increased the number and accessibility of courts in the mufassal. When this occurred, the peasantry, ever alert to subtle changes in power relationships, recognized that authority had shifted from the indigo planters to the judiciary. Between the spring of i860, when the ryots were first summoned into court for contract violations, and the spring of 1861, when they themselves initiated lawsuits to challenge every demand of the planters, a momentous change took place. T h e peasantry grasped the concept of lawful rights. T h e y became enthusiastic supporters of the legal process and forced judicial solutions to issues previously determined by executive fiat. T h u s the peasantry vindicated the long-held opinion of the Lieutenant Governor that the system of authori-

221

CONCLUSION

tarian paternalism was not suited to the "wealthy

and

civilised" province of Bengal. Unfortunately, the advantages which accrued to the ryots f r o m the application of the rule of law were short-lived. T h e peasants had received aid in their struggle from a group which was just beginning to emerge into a position of dominance in the mufassal—the rural middle class. T h e rise of this class had ominous consequences for the peasantry: Many of its members—from patnidars

to village head-

men—were engaged in moneylending. T h e y supported the ryots only for the sake of undermining the economic power of their archrivals, the indigo planters. Ultimately they snatched the fruits of victory from the peasants, and the indigo

disturbances mark

the transfer of

power

from

planter to moneylender in L o w e r Bengal. T h e decade following the indigo disturbances, when the cultivators had freed themselves f r o m the planter but had not yet fallen into the grip of the moneylender, may have been the happiest period in the Bengal countryside. T h e r e a f t e r the legal system, which supplanted customary law at the village level, upheld the usurer and worked against, not in favor of, the small peasant. Calcutta, rather than the mufassal, was the scene of the most significant developments in the contest over indigo planting. T h e struggle tested the power of the British mercantile community which had been growing in respectability and influence as the vanguard of private enterprise in India. T h o u g h relatively f e w in numbers, the Europeans were energetic and vocal, and they expected the Government to recognize their claims to preferential treatment. T h e Indian subjects, especially those who had acquired an English education and a knowledge of British political forms, challenged the notion that the Europeans had an exclusive monopoly of the rights of Englishmen.

222

THE BLUE

MUTINY

After mid-century, when the public life of Calcutta divided along racial lines, the Hindu political community united in the British Indian Association and applied the techniques of political agitation they had learned from the British example. Among these were newspaper campaigns, mass meetings, petitions and deputations to officials, and the employment of agents to plead their cause in Britain. India's first political leaders cut their teeth in this conflict against the British mercantile and professional community of Calcutta. In later years they would find a worthy adversary in the Government of India itself. T h e precursor of all modern Indian political campaigns was launched in Calcutta to support a popular uprising against economic injustice. An idealistic cause thus helped to shape the character of nationalism in Bengal. T h i s in turn was to influence the political goals of all India in which the attainment of self-government was considered inseparable from the realization of social and economic justice. Although compassion for the weak and poor had strong roots in Indian thought, the quest for justice was first introduced into modern Indian politics by the European missionary and humanitarian. If a foreigner like James Long could sacrifice himself for the peasantry, how could a native-born Bengali remain indifferent? Similarly, the romantic movement, transplanted to Calcutta through English education, gave rise among the intelligentsia to an idealization of the rustics. During the indigo disturbances this sentiment was popularized in the editorials of Harish Chandra Mukherjee of the Hindoo Patriot. A decade later it would enter the mainstream of Indian political thought through the writings of the renowned Bengali novelist and patriot, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee. Finally, the indigo disturbances mark a new direction in Government policy toward the peasantry. If, after the

CONCLUSION

223

Indian Mutiny, Government concern with peasant welfare was motivated by political considerations, it was also inspired by a recognition of the broader responsibilities of rulers toward their subjects. T h e latter nineteenth century would witness a growing competition between the Government and the Indian urban elite for leadership of the rural masses. T h i s concern with rural welfare was revolutionary in Indian history. In the past the peasant of India carried the burden of his afflictions alone. Each new government brought in its wake new revenue assessments and a new set of tax collectors. Each period of war and chaos brought its destruction of crops, uprooting of villages, and famine. T h e peasants were always the victims, always the givers, never the receivers. Today politicians go among the villagers soliciting votes; planning commissions concern themselves with rural development projects; government agencies work to increase crop yields, extend cheap agricultural credit, improve village sanitation, and encourage education. This official concern with rural welfare had its beginnings in the nineteenth century. It was foreshadowed by the sympathy shown the peasants by both the Government of Bengal and the educated Indian middle class during the indigo disturbances of 1859 to 1862.

Bibliography A R C H I V A L SOURCES

T h e Government Record Office of the Government of West Bengal, Calcutta, contains the original Proceedings and Consultations of the Government of Bengal in the Judicial Department from 1841 to 1908, all of them indexed. For this study the Proceedings indexed under " I n d i g o " and associated headings from 1854 through 1863 were consulted. Information concerning each incident during the indigo disturbances was assembled and sent as a report from the Government of Bengal to the Governor General; this dossier included reports and documents received from the commissioners of divisions, district magistrates, and subordinate officials. T h e Government of India collected and digested these Proceedings of the Government of Bengal, and sent summaries of them to the India Office in London (now the Commonwealth Relations Office) where they were collected in volumes and entitled: Judicial a?id Legislative Letters Received from India (23 Vols. 1858-1879). During the indigo disturbances, special Judicial and Legislative Despatches relating to indigo were sent to the India Office. In addition to the Judicial Proceedings of the Government of Bengal, two items collected in the Proceedings of the Government of Bengal in the General Department were also consulted: a Report of W . Jackson on a T o u r of

226

BIBLIOGRAPHY

N a d i a District, N o . 69 of 16 March 1854; and a R e p o r t of J. D u n b a r on a T o u r of Jessore District, No. 164, of 29 A p r i l 1854. T h e replies of the Secretary of State for India are contained in b o u n d volumes in the Record Department of the C o m m o n w e a l t h Relations Office. From this set the Judicial and Legislative Despatches to India, Original drafts, were consulted. Semi-official letters to and from the Secretary of State for India during the period of the indigo disturbances, Sir Charles W o o d (Lord Halifax), are also housed in the C o m m o n w e a l t h Relations Office library. T h e s e are cited as the Halifax Papers and contain the letter books of Sir Charles W o o d and miscellaneous u n b o u n d letters received by him from officials in India. T h e Archives of the C h u r c h Missionary Society, L o n d o n , houses the Reports, Journals and Letters from Missionaries, North India. T h e s e intimate accounts were sent by the missionaries in India to the Committee of the C h u r c h Missionary Society in London.

PRIMARY

SOURCES

Bengal Commercial Reports. Calcutta, 1851-52 to 1857-58. Bengal District Records: Dinajpur, Vol. I, 1787-89. Shillong, 1914. Bengal, Government of. Selections from the Records of the Government of Bengal, No. Parts I-III. Papers Relating to Indigo Cultivation in Bengal. Calcutta, i860. Bengal Missionaries. The Case of the Cultivators of Bengal. A Petition to the Legislative Council of India by Protestant Missionaries residing in or near Calcutta, ι8β6. Calcutta, 1856.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

227

Brahmins and Pariahs. An Appeal by the Indigo Manufacturers of Bengal to the British Government, Parliament, and People, for Protection against the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal. London, 1861. British Indian Association. Reports (Monthly and Annual, 1851-62). Calcutta, 1852-63. Calcutta Missionary Conference. Calcutta, 1852. Church Missionary Society. Proceedings for Africa and the East, 1858-59. London, i860. De, Sushil Kumar, ed. Bangla Probad. 2d. ed. Calcutta, 1 95 2 ·

Dickinson, John. A Reply to the Indigo Planters' Pamphlet, "Brahmins and Pariahs." London, 1861. East India Company. Reports and Documents Connected with the Proceedings of the East-India Company in regard to the Culture and Manufacture of Cottonwool, Raw Silk, and Indigo in India. London, 1836. Foster, William, ed. The English Factories in India, 1618i66p. 13 vols. Oxford, 1906-27. . Early Travels in India, 158y 161 p. London, 1921. General Conference of Bengal Missionaries, September 4-y, 1855. Calcutta, 1855. Ghosh, Manmathanath, ed. Selections from the Writings of Grish Chunder Ghose. Calcutta, 1911. [Grant, Colesworthy], Rural Life in Bengal. London, i860. Great Britain. Hansard's Parliamentary Debates, T h i r d Series, 356 vols. London, 1831-91. . Parliamentary Papers. (The Sessional Papers of the House of Commons). India, Government of. Proceedings of the Legislative Council of India. 7 vols. Calcutta, 1856-62. Indigo Planters' Association. Central Committee Proceedings. Calcutta, 1856.

228

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Long, Rev. James. Strike, But Hear! Calcutta, 1861. Mitra, Dinabandhu. Nil Durpan. 3d Indian edition, edited by Sidhi Pradhan and Sailesh Sen Gupta. Calcutta, "«»[Ρ]. Morris, G. G. Report of the Special Rent Commissioner. Part 2. Calcutta, 1861. Pratt, Hodgson. Articles and Letters on Indian Questions. London, 1857. Reilly, John G. Journal of a Wanderer. London, 1844. Report of a Public Meeting Held at the Town Hall, Calcutta, on the 24th November 1838. London, 1839. Report of the Indigo Commission Appointed under Act XI of i860, with the Minutes of Evidence and Appendix. Calcutta, i860. SECONDARY

WORKS

Ahmad, Nafis. An Economic Geography of East Pakistan. London, 1958. Baden-Powell, B. H. Land-Systems of British India. 3 vols. Oxford, 1892. Bagal, Jogesh Chandra. "Introduction" to a history of the British Indian Association. Unpublished. Deposited in library of British Indian Association, Calcutta, 1956 [?]· . Peasant Revolution in Bengal. Calcutta, 1954. Bell, Major Evans, ed. Last Counsels of an Unknown Counsellor [John Dickinson], London, 1877. Bengal District Gazetteers. Jessore. Compiled by L. S. S. O'Malley. Calcutta, 1912. . Murshidabad. Compiled by L. S. S. O'Malley. Calcutta, 1914. . Muzaffarpur. Compiled by L. S. S. O'Malley. Calcutta, 1907.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

229

. Nadia. Compiled by J . H. E. Garrett. Calcutta, 1910. . Pabna. Compiled by L. S. S. O'Malley. Calcutta, !923· Bhattacharya, Jogendra Nath. Hindu Castes and Sects. Calcutta, 1896. Buchanan, Daniel Houston. The Development of Capitalist Enterprise in India. New York, 1934. Buckland, C. E. Bengal Under the Lieutenant-Governors. 2 vols. 2d. ed. Calcutta, 1902. . Dictionary of Indian Biography. London, 1906. "Calcutta Petitions," Saturday Review (London), May 1, 1858, p. 437. Chatterjee, S. P. Bengal in Maps. Calcutta, 1949. Chaudhuri, K. C. History and Economics of the Land System in Bengal. Calcutta, 1927. Chaudhuri, Sashi Bhusan. Civil Disturbances during the British Rule in India Calcutta, 1955. Cooke, Charles Northcote. The Rise, Progress, and Present Condition of Banking in India. Calcutta, 1863. Cotton, Sir Henry. Indian and Home Memories. London, 1911. Datta, Kalikinkar. The Santal Insurrection of 1855-57. Calcutta, 1940. Day, Lai Behari. Bengal Peasant Life. London, 1909. Dharker, C. D. Lord Macaulay's Legislative Minutes. Madras, 1946. Eastern Bengal District Gazetteers. Dacca. Compiled by B. C. Allen. Allahabad, 1912. Embree, Ainslee. Charles Grant and British India. New York, 1962. "Faraidi Sect." Encyclopedia of Islam, II, 57-59. London, 1927.

2gO

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Field, C. D. Introduction to the Regulations of the Bengal Code. Calcutta, 1897. Furber, Holden. John Company at Work. Cambridge, Mass., 1951. Gastreil, J. E. Geographical and Statistical Report of the Districts of Jessore, Fureedpore, and Backergunge. Calcutta, 1868. Ghosal, H. R . Economic Transition in the Bengal Presidency (1J93-1833). Patna, 1950. Ghosh, Manmathanath. The Life of Grish Chunder Ghose. Calcutta, 1911. Guha-Thakurta, P. The Bengali Drama: Its Origin and Development. L o n d o n , 1930. G u p t a , Atulchandra, ed. Studies in the Bengal Renaissance. Jadavpur, 1958. Gupta, M . N . Analytical Survey of Bengal Regulations. Calcutta, 1943. " H i l l s ' Notice." Fraser"s Magazine, May 1862, p. 618. Hunter, W i l l i a m Wilson. Annals of Rural Bengal. 7th ed. London, 1897. . Statistical Account of Bengal. 20 vols. L o n d o n , 1875. "Indigo in Nadia." Bharatbarsha, Magh, 1326 B. S. (January-February 1920). Calcutta, 1920. Jenks, Leland H . Migration of British Capital to 1875. N e w York, 1927. Lethbridge, Sir Roper. Ramtanu Lahiri, Brahman and Reformer. London, 1907. Maccoby, S. English Radicalism, 1853-1886. L o n d o n , 1938. Macpherson, David. The History of the European Commerce with India. L o n d o n , 1812. Majumdar, B. History of Political Thought from Rammohun to Dayananda (1821-1884)• Vol. I. Calcutta, 1934·

BIBLIOGRAPHY

231

M a j u m d a r , R . C. Glimpses of Bengal in the Nineteenth Century. Calcutta, i960. , ed. The History and Culture of the Indian People. Vol. I X , Part I, British Paramountcy and Indian Renaissance. Bombay, 1963. Malleson, C. B. and Kaye, John. History of the Indian Mutiny of 1857-58. 6 vols. 2d. ed. London, 1892. Martineau, J. Life

of Sir Barile

Fr ere. 2 vols. London,

!895M i l b u r n , W i l l i a m . Oriental Commerce. 2 vols. London, 1813. Mitra, A . Tribes and Castes of West Bengal. Alipore, 1953. Mitra, L a l i t Chandra. History of the Indigo Disturbances in Bengal, with a Full Report of the Nil Darpan Case. Calcutta, 1903. Mittra, Kissory Chand. Memoir of Dwarkanath Tagore. Calcutta, 1870. M o m e n , M . A . Final Report on the Survey and Settlement Operations in the District of Jessore, 1920-1924. Calcutta, 1925. Mullick, Kissen M o h u n . Brief History of Bengal Commerce from the Year 1814 to i8yo. Calcutta, 1871. Reid, W . M . The Culture and Manufacture of Indigo. Calcutta, 1887. Richter, Julius. A History of Missions in India. N e w York, 1908. Risley, H . H . The Tribes and Castes of Bengal. 2 vols. Calcutta, 1891. Sanyal, R a m Gopal. Reminiscences and Anecdotes of Great Men of India, Both Official and Non-Official for the Last One Hundred Years. 2 vols. Calcutta, 1894. Seton-Karr, W . S. Grant of Rothiemurchus. London, 1899. . " I n d i g o in L o w e r Bengal." Calcutta Review, Vol. V I I , January-June 1847.

232

BIBLIOGRAPHY

. A

Short

Mutiny

Account

of 1857-58

of Events

During

in the Districts

the

of Belgaum

Sepoy and of

J essore. London, 1894. Sinha, J. C. Economic

Annals

of Bengal.

Calcutta, 1927.

Sinha, Ν. K. Economic

History

of Bengal.

Vol. I. Calcutta,

1956. Sketch

of the

Eden,

Official

Career

of the

Honorable

Ashley

C. S. I. Calcutta, 1877.

Smith, George. Life

of

William

Carey.

Everyman ed.,

London, n.d. "Steam

Cultivation

in

India"

by an Assistant

Planter. Journal

of the Agricultural

Society

Vol. XII, Pt. I, 1861.

of India,

Stokes, Eric. The

English

Utilitarians

and

Indigo

Horticultural

and India.

Oxford,

1959· Temple, Sir Richard. Men India.

Tripathti, Amales. Trade dency

and Events

of My

Time

in

London, 1882. 1793-1833.

and Finance

in the Bengal

Presi-

Calcutta, 1956.

Watt, George. The Commercial

Products

of India.

London,

1908. . Pamphlet

on Indigo.

Westland, J. A Report tiquities,

Calcutta, 1890.

on the District

Its History,

of Jessore:

and Its Commerce.

Its

An-

2d. ed. re-

vised. Calcutta, 1874. Wilson, Minden. History

of the Behar

Indigo

Factories.

Calcutta, 1908. NEWSPAPERS, PERIODICALS, A N D J O U R N A L S

Asiatic

Journal

and

and Monthly

its Dependencies.

Register

for British

India

London:

1816-1845.

(Semi-

annual to 1829; 3 times a year, 1830—). Bengal

Hurkaru.

(Daily.) Calcutta: 1798-1866.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

233

Calcutta Review. (Monthly.) Calcutta: 1844—. Economist. (Weekly.) London: 1843—. Englishman. (Daily.) Calcutta: 1833-1934. Friend of India. (Weekly.) Serampore: 1835-1922. Hindoo Patriot. (Weekly.) Calcutta: 1854-1923. Indian Field. (Weekly.) Calcutta: 1858-1862. New Calcutta Directory for the Town of Calcutta, Bengal, the North-West Provinces, Punjab, Arracan, Assam, Pegu, Tenasserim, etc. (Annual.) Calcutta: A. G. Roussac, 1856-1863. Som Prakash. (Bengali weekly.) Calcutta: 1858-?.

Index Acts Reg. 23 of 1795, 39; Charter A c t of 1813, 40; R e g . V of 1830, 42, 66; Charter A c t of 1833, 44; Act X I of 1836, 45, 104; A c t IV of 1837, 47η., 53; A c t I V of 1840, 54; Sale Laws of 1841 and 1845, 57; Charter A c t of 1853, 62; Act X V of 1856, 63; Act X of 1859. 5 6 - 57- 6 4n., 117. Ha. 1 43' 175-7(>, 180, 187, 188, 192; A c t X I of 1859, 58; Act X I of i860, 91, 131ÍE., 143, 1478., 158, 163, 164, 170-71; A c t V I (BC) of 1862, 192; "Black Acts", 104, 106, 107, 139, 211; Indian Penal Code, US Advocate General, 159 Affrays, 40, 54, 139 Agency houses, 20, 23, 24, 42 Agra and O u d h , 17, 18 U n i t e d Provinces of, 140 A g u r i caste, 85 America Revolutionary War, 17, 39 C i v i l W a r , 191η. slavery in, 110, 145, 205 Amherst, Lord, 41 Andrews, David, 91, 93, 94 Aniline dyes, 16

Apear, Seth Α., ι ig, 206η. Auckland, Lord, 69 A u r a n g a b a d concern, 91 Authoritarian paternalism, P u n j a b system

see

Bainbridge, A . J., 82 Bakrabad factory, 93 Balabhpur Mission, 99, 101 Balabhpur village, 102 Banami (holding lands in n a m e of another person), 53, 57η. Bangaon subdivision, 151 Bansbaria concern, 76, 77, g s Barasat district, 26, 678., 140, 141, 164, 180 Beadon, Cecil, n o n . Beaufort, William, 79, 80 Be-ilaka (indigo land not o w n e d by planter), 29, 53, 54, 128, •64, 173 Bell, J. S„ 161, 162 Belli, C . S., 154, 155, 161, 162 Bengal district administration, 74-75 L o w e r Bengal defined, 7η. exports of, 25 number of indigo planters in, 26 weather of, 24 Bengal British India Society, 106, 108

236

INDEX

Bengal Chamber of Commerce, 111, 215η. Bengal Hurkaru, 109, 112, 118, 125, 139, 203, 205, 211 Bengal Indigo Company, 26, 27, 29, 60, 90, 125, 174 Bengal Legislative Council, 192 Bentinck, Lord W m , 41, 48, 53, 219 Berhampur, 61, 76, 95 Betts, C., 149, 152, 162, 165 Beveridge, H., i8g Bhobayparah village, 101 Bigah (one-third of an acre), 34η. Bihar, 63, 75, 125, 140, 193 Bird, Robert, 47 Birkistapur factory, 96 Biswas, Bishnu Charan, 95 Biswas, Digambar, 95, 96 Biswas, Kutub, 94 Biswas, Morad, 91, 92, 94 Biswas, Nobin, 90 Biswas, Okhil Chandra, 77 Biswas, Sauhaus, 91, 92 Blumhardt, Rev. Henry, 99 Board of Revenue, Bengal, 80 Board of Trade, Bengal, 49 Bomwetsch, Rev. Christian, 98, 99, 100, ι ο ί , 102, 123, 197 Bose, Girish Chandra, 152, 165, 166 Brahman caste, 28, 84 Brahmo Samaj, 104 Brett, Walter, 201, 203 Bright, John, 115, 116, 117 British India Society, 46, 66, 106 British Indian Association, 106, 111, 117-19, 135, 138, 144, 192, a n , 217 Brown, George, 215η. Brown, Lord Ulick, 207 Buna (forest) coolies, 29, 33, 166167 Burdwan, Maharaja of, 210η.

Calcutta, 103S. social changes in, 60 university, 63 mukhtars from, 86, 86n. T o w n Hall, 109 bar, 116 press, 118-19 Campbell, C. H„ 188 Campbell, J. S., 151 Canning, Lord, 40, 62, 74, 110, 111, 113, 122, 127, 167, 169, 179, 180, 188, 190, 212, 217 on Act X I of i860, 134, 137-38 differences with J. P. Grant, 169-70, 183-84, 214 Lady Canning's death, 190 on criminal contract laws, 190192 on James Long, 208 on Wells and Peacock, 209, 211-12 Carey, Rev. Wm., 49η. Carr, Tagore and Co., 104, 108 Chakravarty, Titu, 152 Champaran district, 60 Chandal caste, 86 Char (sand bank), 29, 30, 56 Chatterjee, Bankim Chandra, 222 Chatterjee, Chunder Mohun, 138, 140, 141 Chatterjee, Mohesh Chandra, 8789. 157 Chatterji, Gopi, 97 Chaudhari, Sham Chandra Pal, 89, 90 Chaudhari, Srigopal Pal, 89, 96 Chaukidar (watchman), 151, 165 Church Missionary Society, 98, 101, 114, 121, 122, 123, 196, 197, 208 Clarke, Longueville, 108, 155 Cockerell, F. E., 77, 95 Cornwallis, Lord, 39, 220

INDEX Cotton, Dr. Geo., 208 Courts mujassal, 50, 52, 64, 73, 86, 8g, 106, 121, 155, 1585., 171, 175 Supreme Court of Calcutta, 39, 41, 45, 192, 202ff. small causes courts, 179, 179η. Additional Judge to supervise rent cases, 188 Cowie, David, 203, 213 Crawford, R. W., 114η. Creighton, Henry, 49, 59 Crimean War, 24 Dacca district, 26, 59, 61 Dacca News, 109 Dalhousie, Lord, 47, 62, 64, 74 Damurhuda subdivision, 152, 161, 164 Darogha (superintendent of police), see police Davidson, Α., i 6 i , 162 Day, Lai Behari, 85 Deb, Radha Kanta, 207 Derozio, Henry L. V., 105 Dey, Dwarkanath, 77 Dickenson, John, 115, 116 District officers, 147ÍI., 172 as magistrates, 1580. indigo planters and, 50, 142 Diwan (financial manager), 28, 85, 96 Driver, John, 155, 217 Duff, Rev. Alexander, 107, 123, 208 Durand, P., 157 Dutch, 16 Dutt, Jaggobandha, 80, 81 Dutt, Michael Madhusudan, 201 Dutta, Akshoy Kumar, 118η. Dyes, 15-16 East India Company, 16, 17, 19, 26, 38, 100, 111, 137, 219

237

East India Co. (cont.) Directors of, 18, 43, 66 commercial residents, 48, 49 attitude of Indians toward, 11 in. Eden, Ashley, 68ff., 76, 78, 141, '94 Edmonstone, Neil Benjamin, 4344 Education Despatch of 1854, 63, 210 Eglinton, 203 Elgin, Lord, 116, 124 Ellenborough, Lord, 41 Englishman, 98, 112, 118, 139, 166, 201, 203, 205, Î08, 211, 213, 216 Erskine, J. C., 207 European colonization and settlement in India government policy toward, 388. Select Committee on, 47, 50, 54- " 3 . »22 British Indian Association's attitude on, 135-36 Indigo Commission on, 142-43 Ewart, W m , 46, 47 Farazi disturbances, 61, 68, 78 Faridpur district, 28, 32, 87, 172, '73 Fergusson, W . F., 68, 138, 143-44, 182, 182η., 201 Ferry funds, 65 Fitzwilliam, W . S., 215η. Forbes, Alexander, 109, 125, 138, 182η. Forlong, James, 27, 59-60, 67, 86, 100, 138, 140, 147, 150, 152, 162, 164 Frere, Bartle, 131, 133, 190, 207, 208-209, 210, 214, 215 Friends of India, 112η. Furrell, J. W., 81

238 Ghose, Ghose, Ghose, Ghose, Ghose,

INDEX Dwarkanath, 91, 93, 94 Jadbandhu, 91, 94 M a n m o h a n , 118η. Ramgopal, 107 Sisir Kumar, 95η., i i 8 n . ,

>55- >56 G i s b o u r n e and Co., 193 G o o d e n o u g h , F. Α., 125 G o p a l g a n j , 81, 82 Gouldsbury, F., 79, 80 G o v i n d a p u r village, 96 G r a n t , Charles, 49η. G r a n t , John Peter, 36, 72, 73, 84, ι ο ί , 112, 113, 118, 125, 126, 127, 132, 134, 135, 136, 138, 149' >52- >55. >59- l 6 ° . >72' 182, 191, 194, 201, 212, 219220 early career, 74-75 views o n indigo planters, 76, 83 critical of district officers, 77, 79, 157, 158, 161 tour of Pabna, 88, 168-69 a n d James Long, 123 M i n u t e on R e p o r t of Indigo Commission, 144-45 a n d Herschel, 161, 185, 187 and Canning, 166, 169-70, 183184 attacked by Indigo Planters' Association, 167-68 views o n ryots as capitalists, 168 administrative reforms, 171 a n d special rent commissioners, 180, 185 a n d Nil Darpan case, 202, 214 trial of, 216-17 awarded K. C. B., 217 eulogized by British Indian Association, 217 " G r e n t R e n t Case," ig2 Grote, Arthur, 70, 71, 72, 76, 148, 150, 152, 160, 161

Gumashta (steward), 28, 84, 90, 96, 152 Halliday, Frederick, 62, 63, 64η., 76, 78, ι ο ί , 129, 2 0 0 policy toward indigo planter;, 64ff., 74 Hanskhali, 76, 96 Harrington, Henry B., 131, 133 Hatch, George, 49 H a u d e a h thanna, 76 Heaven, Robert, 18η. Herschel, W m . J., 97, 119, 120η., 150, 152-53, 158, i6o, 161, 164, 165, 166, 174, 200 biographical note on, 149η. analysis of rent p r o b l e m by, 185-87 Hills, Archibald, 88 Hills, James, 26, 27, 54, 60, 88, 98, 164, 174, 175, 176, 193 vs. Issur Ghose, 192 Hills and White, 59 Hindoo Patriot, 6411., 65, 83, 88, 97, 100, 118-21, 122, 135, 136, >37- >39- >55- >56, 194. 203. 222 H i n d u College, 105 H o b r a concern, 70 H u g l i district, 88 H u g l i River, 79 Hurry, W . C „ 105 Hussein, M i r T u f a z i l , 91, 92 Ilaka

(indigo land o w n e d by planter), 53, 57, 164, 177 Indian Civil Serivce, see district officers Indian Field, 67, 78, 100, 119, >35' 136, 138, >55' 210 Indian L a w Commission, 45 Indian R e f o r m League, 109, 111, 112η.

INDEX I n d i a n R e f o r m Society, 46, 115, 116 Indigo commerce history of, 15-17 fluctuations in, ígff. effect of w e a t h e r on, 24 r e l a t i v e i m p o r t a n c e of in Bengal e c o n o m y , 25 I n d i g o C o m m i s s i o n , 35, 51, 68, 89, 90, 97, 114, 118η., 129, 134s., 148, 160, 171 r e p o r t of, 116, 140®. I n d i g o concerns o w n e r s h i p of, 26, 27 m a n a g e m e n t of, 27 I n i d a n e m p l o y e e s of, 28 I n d i g o contract, 42, 43, 113-14, 127ÉE. c r i m i n a l e n f o r c e m e n t o f , 66, 114, 1255., 1478., 160, 190-92 I n d i g o c u l t i v a t i o n , 29-31 seed for, 30, 35η. I n d i g o disturbances o r i g i n of, 72 spread of, 78 I n d i g o dye p r i c e of, 24, 25 m a n u f a c t u r i n g process of, 3234 I n d i g o factory, »7 capital i n v e s t e d in, 32 Indigo planters relations w i t h I n d i a n l a n d h o l d ers, 19, 52-55, 78, 141 failures of, 24 n u m b e r of in 185g, 26 I n d i a n planters, 26, 27η., 53, 8g, 108η. role in m a n u f a c t u r i n g process, 34 legal j u r i s d i c t i o n over, 39-41 relations w i t h district officers, 50, 142 l a n d h o l d i n g by, 53, 55-58, 181

239

I n d i g o planters (cont.) relations w i t h ryots, 58, 141-42, 200 charitable works of, 59-60 as h o n o r a r y magistrates, 66, 67, . 78 ineptness at court, 176-77 reaction to defeat, 193-94 accused of outrages against Ind i a n w o m e n , 198η. I n d i g o Planters' Association, 50, 54, 57, 108, 1 1 1 , 112, 113, 115, 117, 125, 138, i 6 i , 167, '79 c h a n g e to L a n d h o l d e r s a n d C o m m e r c i a l Assoc., 182η. I n d i g o p r o d u c t i o n , 16, 25 i n d i g e n o u s m a n u f a c t u r e , 16η. history of, 16-18 in C a r o l i n a , 17 in G u a t e m a l a , 17 in S a n t o D o m i n g o , 17, 19 finance of, 20, 22, 23 labor, 28-29 river-course shift as f a c t o r d e c l i n e of, 31 cost of, 34-36

in

Jackson, Charles, 131 Jackson, E l p h i n s t o n e , 188, 2 1 4 Jamadar (head servant), 151 J a n g i p u r subdivision, 80 Jardine, S k i n n e r a n d C o . , 179, 215η. J a y r a m p u r village, 96 J e n i d a h subdivision, 189 Jessore district, 25, 26, 32, 59, 61, 73. 79- 87, 88, 97, 123, 140, 153, 156, 167, 180, 182, 188, 189 planters of c o m p a r e d to those of N a d i a , 164-65 r e n t disturbances in, 173®. Jingergattcha concern, 59, 68

240

INDEX

J o r a d a h concern, 173 J u d i c i a l Department, Bengal, 49 J u n g a l village, 157 Jute, 24, 68 Kachahri (business office), 151, 1 74> >75- ! 7 6 Kaibarta caste, 84, 85η. Kalinagar village, 79 Kalopole thanna, 153 Kar, Hem Chandra, 73 Katchikatta concern, 88 Kayastha caste, 28, 84, 85η. Kean, H., 79 Kenny, T . J., 59, 168, 173, 193 Key, Dr., 207 Khalbolia concern, 159 Khartouli lease (sublease from a ryot), 56 Kinnaird, Arthur P., 1 1 4 Krishnagar, 61, 73, 76, 78, 79, 97, 140, 148, 161 Kudumsar concern, 80 Kumarkhali subdivision, 157, 189 Kurimpur, 15G Kushtia, 156, 168-69 Lahore Chronicle, 201 Lahore Light Horse, 156 Lakiraj (revenue-exempt land), 76 Lancashire textile interests, 46, 106, 114, 1 9 1 η . Landholders and Commercial Association, 181-82, 182η., 185, 1 88, 201, 202, 2 12-16 Landholders' Society, 105η., io6 Larmour, Robert T . , 27, 70, 7 1 , 90, 140, 1 5 1 , 194 Lathiyals (professional warriors armed with lathis or sticks), 28, 52, 54, 86, 87, go, 92, 96, 101, 102, 157 Latif, Abdul, 68-6g

Lawrence, John, 47 Lieutenant Governor of Bengal, 219 first appointment to, 62 responsibilities of, 63 not exempt from law of libel, 217 Lincke, R e v . J . G., 98, 99, 101 Lingham, E. F., 157, 158 Lokanathpur concern, 96, 150 Long, R e v . James, 122, 123, 124, 135, 140, 194, 196g., 222 trial of, 203S. jury in trial of, 206, 206η. imprisonment of, 206-207 Luckiparra factory, 217 Lushington, Ε. H., 160, 1 6 1 , 174, 181, 217 Lyons, Thomas, 94 Macaulay, Thomas Babingtori, 45, 46, 48 Mackenzie (Dep. Mag. of Sirajganj), 161 Mackenzie, H., 59, 68 Maclean, A. T., 149, 152, 159, 160, 1 6 1 , 162, 165 Magura subdivision, 59, 156, 161 M ahajan (moneylender), 175, 182, 221 Maitland, W., 2 1 5 η . Malda district, 4gn., 93 Mandai, Rutton, 95 Mandais (village headmen), 97, 98, gg, 148, 154 Mangles, J . H., 6g Manuel, C. H., 201, 202 Maseyk, Charles, B., 80, 81 Mauritius, 70, 105 McArthur, Campbell, 81, 82, 83 McArthur, John, 216-17 McLeod, A. D., g ì , gg McNeile, D. J., 14g, 1 5 1 , 152, 165, 18g

INDEX Meares, George, 96, 97, 140, 150, 152, 154, 162 Meherpur thanna, 76 Minto, Lord, 40 M i r g a n j concern, 81, 155, 217 Missionaries in mufassal, 86, 98, 142 German Lutheran, 98, 122 societies, n i , 121-24, 135 in Calcutta Missionary Conference, 136, 139 Mitra, Digambar, 108η. Mitra, Dinabandhu, ig8 Mitter, Ranjendralal, 109, n o n . Mittra, Kissory Chand, 119 Molony, E. W „ 97, 153, 155, 156, 157, 161, 164, 165, 166 Moneylenders, see mahajan Montressor, C . F., 180 Morris, G. G., 180-81 Mufassal (countryside, as distinct from Calcutta), 39 colleges in, 61 reforms in under Halliday, 6364. political consciousness in, 65 classes in, 84 Calcutta-educated mukhtars and journalists in, 86 courts, see courts missionaries in, 988F. planters organized in, 112, n 2 n . , 179 Mukherjee, Harish Chandra, 118-21, 149, 163, 222 Mukherji, Narayan Chandra, 88 Mukhtars (attorneys), 51, 52, 65, 76, 86, 87, 88, 97, 119, i 2 o n „ 121, 152, 163 Mullick, Girish, 96, 97 Mullick, Rammohun, 96 Mullick, Ramrutton, 96, 97 Mullick, Rasik Krishna, 118η. Mulnath factory, 59-60, 90

241

M u l n a t h concern, 151 Murshidabad district, 26, 61, 91 Murshidabad, 78, 79 Muslims, 61, 86, 93, 94, 123, 178179 Muspratt, H.,

157

Nadia district, 25, 26, 32, 61, 65, 78, 87, 98, 121, 123, 125, 140, 147, 148, 149, 152, 157, 167, 173, 174, 177, 180, 182, 188 planters of compared to those of Jessore, 164-65 Nadia division, 133, 136, 148, 174 Narail family, 87 Narianpur village, 151 Newmarch, John, 203 Nijabad (factory land), 29, 56, 144, 164 Nil Darpan, 85η., 124, 195, ig8ff. Nischintipur factory, 26, 136 Nischintipur concern, 60, 100, 101 Nohata concern, 156 North-Western Provinces, 47, 131 O m a n , T . E., 82 O p i u m , 25, 140 Outram, General James, 131 Pabna district, 26, 28, 59, 78, 87, 88, 140, 156, 157, 168, 173 Palmerston, Lord, 111, 113 Parliament, 112, 114, 114η., 115, 201 Patni lease (lease of land with zamindari rights), 56, 65, 88 Peacock, Barnes, 130, 131, 132, 133, 192, 206, 209, 214, 217 Permanent Settlement of 1793, 5». 56» 57. 1 7 1 · i 8 8 · »92 Peterson, A . T . T . , 203, 204, 213 Platts, F., 149, 159

242

INDEX

Pod subcaste, 86 Pogose, Ν., 59 Police, 68, 72, 97, 126, 142, 143, 1 5 1 , 152, 154, 165-66 military, 63-64, 125, 126, 158, 166, 180, 181 Poragaccha village, 95 Portuguese, 16 Presidency College, 75, see also Hindu College Prestwich and Warner, 70 Prinsep, John, 17η. Punjab system, 47-48, 64, 74-75, 220-21 Purno Bibi, 91 Railway Eastern Bengal, 24 construction, 68 labor, 174 Raiyati (owned or managed by a ryot), 29, 144 Rajshahi district, 26, 76 Rajshahi division, 133, 136, 157 Ranaghat, 89 Ratnapur factory, 99, 101, 102 R e i d (Commissioner of Nadia division), 77, 100 Reily, Η. M „ 189 Remittance trade, 19-22, 39, 43 Rent disturbances, i73ff. Rice, Mr., 91, 92 Ritchie, W., 215, 217 Roman Catholic, gg Ross, Alexander, 74 Roy, Hurnath, 217 Roy, Rammohun, 104, 118η., 1 1 g Roy, Ramrutton, 87, 88, 8g, 157, 158 Rustomjee, Manikjee, 206η. Ryots relations with planters, 58-60, 141-42

Ryots (cont.) cost to of producing indigo, 3536 taking initiative in disturbances, giff., g7, 98 and missionaries, looff. in battle, 102 reaction to Act X I of i860, 135. 163-64 views of J . P. Grant on, 144145, 168-69 in court, 159-60, 177-78 reasons for differential in resistance to indigo, 164 withholding of rents by, )73ff. unity of, 177-78 awareness of legal rights, 182, 189 Sage, R . P., 35η. Saha, Lallchand, 91, 92, 95 Sale, Rev. J., 13g, 140, 141 Salgamudia factory, 168, 173 Santal rebellion, Gi, 63, 70 Sarkar, Brindaban Chandra Pal, 9° Savi, Robert, 156 Savi, Thomas, 59 Schalch, V. H „ 185, 189, 190 Schurr, Rev. Frederick, 98, gg, 1 2 1 , 122 Sconce, Α., 129, 1 3 1 , 133, 135 Scottish Church Mission, 123 Sepoy Mutiny, 24, 48, 61, 63, 66, 67, 110, 1 1 1 , 122, 135, 16g, 223 Serampore, 88 Seton-Karr, W. S., 81, 82, 139, 140, 141, 201, 202, 207, 212-16 Shore, John, 18 Sibnibas, 90 Sinduri concern, 82 Sinha, Kali Prasanna, 207 Sirajganj, 78, 168

INDEX Skinner, C. B., 81, 82, 97, 153, 154. 155' !56> 157. l 6 l > l 6 4165 Smith, Gow, 101 Som Prakash, 119, 194, 207 Special Rent Commissioners, i79ff· Canning's criticism of, 183 Stanley, Lord, 209 Tagore, Debendranath, 107 Tagore, Dwarkanath, 104, 105, 106, 109, 138 Tagore, Jotendra Mohun, 211 Tagore, Prasannakumar, io8n. Talukdar (holder of an heritable estate at fixed rent), 97 Tarafdar, Situi, 77 Tattvabodhini Sabha, 107 Taylor, M. G., 149, 156, 159, 161, 165 T e m p l e , Richard, 139, 141, 143 Theobald, Wm., 50, 108, 112, 113, 115, 116, 182η. Thomas, R., 114η. Thomason, James, 47 Thompson, George, 106 Tissendie, James, 88 Tottenham, L. R., g6, 172 Udny, George, 49η. Uncle Tom's Cabin, 122 Union Bank of Calcutta, 22, 23, 24, 104 Utbandi ryots (tenants-at-will), 175, 194η. Vakils (pleaders), 51, 65, 76, 87 Victoria, Queen, 100, 177 Vidyabhusan, Dwarkanath, 119, 194

243

Vidyasagar, Iswarchandra, 107 Village headmen, see mandais Volunteer Corps, 110, 111 Watson and Co., 26, 78, 79, 80, 194η. Watt, George, 15 Wells, Mordaunt, 203, 205, 209, 210, 214 West Indies, 17 White, John, g5 White, Wm., 76, 95, 96 Wilson, James, 130, 132 ,133, 134, 137. 139 Wise, J. P., 26, 125, 182η. W o a d dye, 15, 16 Wood, Browne, 93, 95 Wood, Charles (Lord Halifax), 113, 114, 116, 124, 171, 209, 214, 216, Γ20 on Act X I of i860, 134, 137, 138 on Herschel, 161 on Special R e n t Commissioners, 181 on criminal contract laws, 190192 Wylie, McLeod, 207, 208 " Y o u n g Bengal," 105, 106, 107, 108, 117 Zamindari Association, 105 and see Landholders' Society Zamindars, 66, 67, 108, 122, 138 relations with indigo planters, 52-55, 78, 141, 173-74, 192 relations with ryots, 58, 181 aid and instigate ryots, 878. in British Indian Association, 117-18