Modern History upto 1857

1757 - Battle of Plassey: The British defeat Siraj-ud-daulah

1760 - Battle of Wandiwash: The British defeat the French
1761 - Third battle of Panipat
1764 - Battle of Buxar: The British defeat Mir Kasim
1765 - The British get Diwani Rights in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa
1767 -1769 - First Mysore War
1772 - Warren Hastings appointed as Governor of Bengal
1773 - The Regulating Act passed by the British Parliament
1775 -1782 - The First Anglo-Maratha war
1780-1784 - Second Mysore War : The British defeat Hyder Ali
1784 - Pitt's India Act
1790-1792 - Third Mysore War between the British and Tipu
1793 - Permanent Settlement of Bengal
1799 - Fourth Mysore War: The British defeat Tipu
1802- Treaty of Bassein
1803-1805 - The Second Anglo-Maratha war
1814-1816 - The Anglo-Gurkha war
1817-1818 - The Pindari war
1824-1826 - The First Burmese war
1829 - Prohibition of Sati
1831 - Mysore administration taken over by East India Company
1833 - Renewal of Company's Charter
1833 - Abolition of Slavery throughout the British Empire
1838 - Tripartite treaty between Shah Shuja, Ranjit Singh and the British
1839-1842 - First Afghan war
1843 - Gwalior war
1845-1846 - First Anglo-Sikh war
1848 - Lord Dalhousie becomes the Governor-General
1848-1849 - Second Anglo-Sikh war
1852 - Second Anglo-Burmese war
1853 - Railway & Telegraph line introduced

1857 - First War of Indian Independence: The Sepoy Mutiny

1857 - Zanshichi Rani Laxmibai - Freedom struggle in 1857
1858 - British Crown takes over the Indian Government
1877 - The Queen of England proclaimed Empress of India
1878 - Vernacular Press Act
1881 - Factory Act
1885 - First meeting of the Indian National Congress
1897 - Plague in Bombay; Famine Commission
1899 - Lord Curzon becomes Governor-General and Viceroy
1905 - The First Partition of Bengal
1906 - Formation of Muslim League
1911 - Partition of Bengal modified to create the Presidency of Bengal
1912 - The Imperial capital shifted from Calcutta to Delhi
1913 - Educational Resolution of the Government of India
1915 - Defence of India Act
1916 - Home Rule League, Foundation of Women's University at Poona
1919 - Rowlatt Act evokes protests; Jalianwalla Bagh massacre;
1920 - The Khilafat Movement started, Non-co-operation Movement
1921 - Moplah (Muslim) rebellion in Malabar; Census of India
1922 - Civil Disobedience Movement, Chauri-Chaura violence
1925 - Reforms Enquiry committee Report
1927 - Indian Navy Act; Simon Commission Appointed
1928 - Simon Commission comes to India: Boycott by all parties
1929 - Lord Irwin promises Dominion Status for India; Trade Union split
1930 - Salt Satyagraha, First Round Table Conference
1931 - Second Round Table Conference; Irwin-Gandhi Pact
1932 - Third Round Table Conference, Poona Pact
1934 - Civil Disobedience Movement called off; Bihar Earthquake
1937 - Inauguration of Provincial Autonomy
1939 - Political deadlock in India as Congress ministries resign

1942 - Cripps Mission, Quit India Movement, Indian National Army

1944 - Gandhi-Jinnah Talks break down on Pakistan issue
1946 - Interim Government formed, Constituent Assembly's first meeting
1904 - 1947 - History of Indian Flag
3 June 1947 - Lord Mountbatten's plan for partition of India
15 Aug 1947 - Partition of India and Independence
Siraj Ud Daulah captures Calcutta
India's History : Medieval India : Siraj-ud-daulah captures Calcutta - 1756
The Battle of Plassey
As the East India Company grew in size so did its lust for power. The decline of
the Mughal empire and the rise of regional provinces like Bengal, presented the
Company an opportunity for political interference. In 1740, Nawab Alivardi Khan
of Bengal became practically independent. In 1756, his death led to a power str
uggle between his widow Ghasiti Begum and grandson Siraj Ud Daulah who became th
e Nawab of Bengal.
The company's support for Ghasiti Begum earned it the wrath of Siraj. The Compan
y also started fortifying the Fort William without the Nawab's permission. On 20
th June 1756, Siraj attacked and took over Fort William. Many of the English pri
soners, who were imprisoned in a tiny room, died. This is often portrayed as the
Black Hole of Calcutta. Many believe that the incident has been greatly exagger
ated to suit the purpose of the Company.
The Company Fights back
The company sent in relief troops from Fort St. George of the Madras headquarter
s. The troops led by Robert Clive and Admiral Watson retook Calcutta on 2nd Janu
ary, 1757. The treaty of Alinagar was signed between the Nawab and the Company.
However Clive's military ambitions were on the ascendancy. His troops captured t
he French settlement of Chandernagore. He tempted Siraj's uncle Mir Jafar to all
y with him in exchange for the Nawab's position. On 23rd June, 1757, the Company
troops marched against Siraj. Betrayed by his own men Siraj was defeated in the
Battle of Plassey, which is said to have lasted only a few hours. He was soon a
ssassinated in his capital Murshidabad. From being traders, the Company turned k
ingmakers in Bengal and Mir Jafar was installed as the new Nawab. Clive got his
pound of flesh from the Nawab in terms of 234,000 pounds and was awarded an annu
al salary of 30,000 pounds per year. This made him one of the richest Britons in
the world. The company also secure rights over a large area south of Calcutta.
Construction of a new Fort William was started and was completed in 16 years in
1773. These events led to the rise of Calcutta and the decline of Murshidabad.

The Battle of Wandiwash

India's History : Modern India : Battle of Wandiwash: The British defeat the F
rench - 1760
French defeated in Battle of Wandiwash
English and French had their companies in India. Madras and Pondicherry were the

chief trading centres for the English whereas the French centre was on the Coro
mandel Coast. The relations between both the companies were uncertain.
The Carnatic region was totally disturbed politically. The governor was so engro
ssed with Marathas and Northern India that he hardly had any time for the Carnat
ic. Later the Marathas killed the governor. The appointment of the new Nawab wor
sened the problems of the Carnatic region. But till this time the English and Fr
ench did not take active interest in Indian politics.
In 1740, England and France took opposite sides in the War of the Austrian Succe
ssion. This brought the two companies in India technically in the state of war.
French both by sea and land had besieged Madras. So in June 1748 to avenge the c
apture of Madras, a large army was sent under Rear Admiral Boscawen. But by Octo
ber the War of Austrian Succession had been concluded and under the treaty Madra
s was restored to English.
Then during the second Carnatic War, where Duplex, governor of Pondicherry, open
ed negotiations with the English and the treaty was concluded. The English and t
he French have decided not to the quarrels of the native princes and took posses
sion of the territories, which are actually occupied by them during the treaty.
In the third Carnatic war, the British East India Company defeated the French fo
rces at the battle of Wandiwash ending almost a century of conflict over suprema
cy in India. From 1744, the French and English fought a series of battles for su
premacy in the Carnatic region. This battle gave the British trading company a f
ar superior position in India compared to the other Europeans.
Third Battle of Panipat
India's History : Modern India : Third battle of Panipat: Ahmed Shah Abdali de
feats the Marathas; Accession of Madhava Rao Peshwa ; Rise of Hyder ali : 1761
TITLE
Prelude to Panipat
The Mughal Empire of north-western India had been in decline for some time after
Ahmad Shah's first attacks against them in 1749, eventually culminating in his
sacking of Delhi in 1757. He left them in nominial control however, which proved
to be a fateful mistake when his son, Timur Shah, proved to be utterly incapibl
e of maintaining control of the Afgan troops. Soon the local Sikh population ros
e in revolt and asked for the protection of the Marathas, who were soon in Lahor
e. Timur ran for the hills of Afganistan.
Ahmad Shah could not allow this to go unchecked, and in 1759 rose an army from t
he Pashtun tribes with help from the Baloch, and invaded India once again. By th
e end of the year they had reached Lahore, but Marathas continued to pour into t
he conflict and by 1760 had formed a huge single army of over 100,000 to block h
im.
Setting up defensive works in the excellent ground near Panipat, they blocked Ah
mad's access back to Afganistan. They then moved in almost 150 pieces of modern
long-range rifled artillery from France. With a range of several kilometres, the
se guns were some of the best in the world and a powerful force that had previou
sly made the Marathas invincible on the battlefield.
Siege
The Afgan forces arrived in late 1760 to find the Marathas in well-prepared work
s. Realizing a direct attack was hopeless, they set up for a siege. The resultin
g face-off lasted two months. During this time Ahmad continued to receive suppli
es from locals, but the Marathas own supply line was cut off.
Realizing the situation was not in their favour, the Marathas under Sadashiv Bha

u decided to break the siege. His plan was to pulverise the enemy formations wit
h cannon fire and not to employ his cavalry until the Muslims were throughly sof
tened up. With the Afgans now broken, he would move camp in a defensive formatio
n towards Delhi, where they were assured supplies.
The line would be formed up some 12km across, with the artillery in front, prote
cted by infantry, pikemen, musketeers and bowmen. The cavalry was instructed to
wait behind the artillery, ready to be thrown in when control of battlefield had
been established.
Behind this line was another ring of 30,000 young Maratha soldiers who were not
battle tested, and then the roughly 30,000 civilians entrained. Many were middle
class men, women and children on their piligrimage to the Hindu holy places and
shrines, a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to see Aryavarta (Aryan Land). The ci
vilians were supremely confident in the Maratha army, regarding it as one of the
best in the world, and definitely one of the most powerful in Asia. Behind the
civilians was yet another protective infantry line, of young inexperienced soldi
ers.
Battle opens
Before dawn on January 14, 1761 the Maratha forces emerged from the trenches, pu
shing the artillery into position on their pre-arranged lines, some 2km from the
Afgans. Seeing that the battle was on, Ahmad positioned his 60 smoothbore canno
n and opened fire. However, because of the short range of the weapons, the Marat
ha lines remained untouched. Ahmad then launched a cavalry attack to break their
lines.
The first defensive salvo of the Marathas went over the Afgan's heads and inflic
ted very little damage, but the Afgan attack was nevertheless broken by Maratha
bowmen and pikemen, along with some musketeers stationed close to the artillery
positions. The second and subsequent salvos were fired at point blank range, and
the resulting carnage sent the Afgans reeling back to their lines. The European
-style plan had worked just as envisioned.
The Marathas then started moving their formation forward, led by the artillery.
The Afgans responded with repeated cavalry attacks, all of which failed. About 1
7,000 Afgan cavalry and infantrymen lost their lives in this opening stage of th
e battle. Gaping holes were opened in their ranks, and in some places the Afgans
and their Indian Muslim allies began to run away.
The Marathas cavalry charge
At this stage it looked as though Bhausaheb would clinch victory for the Maratha
s once again. However, some of the Maratha lieutenants, jealous of the exploits
of their artillery chiefs, decided to exploit the gaps in the enemy lines ? desp
ite strict instructions not to charge or engage Afgan cavalry. They Maratha hors
emen raced through their own artillery lines and charged towards the demoralised
Afgans, intending to cut the faltering army in two.
The over-enthausiasm of the charge saw many of the Maratha horses exhausted long
before they had traveled the two kilometres to the Afgan lines, some simple col
lasped. Making matters worse was the suffocating odour of the rotting corpses of
men and animals from the fighting of the previous months.
In response, the Afgan officers stiffened their troops resistance. Abdali called
up his reserves and cavalry of musketeers, who fired an extensive salvo at the
Maratha cavalry, who were unable to withstand the rifled muskets of the Afgans.
With their own men in the firing line, the Maratha artillery could not respond,

and about 7,000 Maratha cavalry and infantry perished before the hand to hand fi
ghting began at around 2PM. By 4PM the tired Maratha infantry began to succumb t
o the onslaught of attacks from fresh Afgan reserves protected by their armoured
leather jackets.
Attack from within
The Maratha Muslim logistics infantrymen (Rohillas), who had not been trusted to
fight in the front line because their loyalty was suspect?or, rather, who were
suspected of being loyal to the Koran or fellow Muslims and not to their country
? now responded to the calls of the Afgan army for jihad and revolted. This caus
ed brought confusion and great consternation to loyal Maratha soldiers, who thou
ght that the enemy has attacked from behind.
Sadashivrao Bhau, seeing his forward lines dwindling and civilians behind, felt
he had no choice but to come down from his elephant and take a direct part in th
e battle on horseback at the head of his troops. He left instructions with his b
odyguards that, if the battle were lost, they must kill his wife Parvati bai, as
he could not abide the thought of her being dishonoured by Afgans.
Some Maratha soldiers, seeing that their general had disappeared from his elepha
nt, panicked and began to flee. Vishwasrao, the son of Prime Minister Nanasaheb,
had already fallen to Afgan sniper fire, shot in the head. Sadashivrao Bhau and
his bodyguard fought to the end, the Maratha leader having three horses shot ou
t from under him.
Rout
The Afgans pursued the fleeing Maratha army and the civilians, while the Maratha
front lines ramined largely intact, with some of their artillery units fighting
until sundown. Choosing not to launch a night attack, made good their escape th
at night. Parvati bai escaped the armageddon with her bodyguards, and eventually
returned to Pune.
The Afgan cavalry and pikemen ran wild through the streets of Panipat, killing a
ny Maratha soldiers or civilians who offered and resistance. About 6,000 women a
nd children sought shelter with Shuja (allies of Abdali) whose Hindu officers pe
rsuaded him to protect them.
Afgan officers who had lost their kin in battle were permitted to carry out mass
cres the next day, also in Panipat and the surrounding area. They arranged victo
ry mounds of severed heads outside their camps. About 10,000 Maratha civilians a
nd soldiers alike were slain this way on 15th January 1761. Many of the fleeing
Maratha women jumped into the Panipat well rather than risk rape and dishonour.
Many others did their best to hide in the streets of Panipat when the North Indi
an Hindus of the town refused to give them refuge.
Abdali's soldiers arrested about 10,000 women and another 10,000 young children
and men brought them to their camps. The women were raped, many committed suicid
e because of constant rapes perpetrated on them. All of the prisoners were excha
nged or sold as sex slaves to Afganistan or North India, transported on carts, c
amels and elephants in bamboo cages.
A conservative estimate places Maratha losses at 35,000 on the Panipat battlefie
ld itself, and another 10,000 or more in surrounding areas. The Afgans are thoug
ht to have lost some 30,000.
Following the battle

To save their kingdom, the Mughals once again changed sides and welcomed the Afg
ans to Delhi. However the news soon rose that Marathas in the south had organise
d another 100,000 men to avenge their loss and rescue the prisoners. He left Del
hi two months after the battle, heading for Afganistan with his loot of 500 elep
hants, 1500 camels, 50,000 horses and about 22,000 women and children.
The Mughals remained in nominal control over small areas of India, but were neve
r a force again. The empire officially ended in 1857 when its last emperor was a
ccused of being involved in the Sepoy Mutiny and exiled.
The Marathas expansion was stopped in the battle, and soon broke into infighting
within their empire. They never regained any unity, and were soon under increas
ing pressure from the British. Their claims to empire were officially ended in 1
818.
Meanwhile the Sihks, the original reason Ahmad invaded, were left largely untouc
hed by the battle. They soon re-took Lahore. When Ahmad returned in March 1764 h
e was forced to break off his siege after only two weeks due to rebellion in Afg
anistan. He returned again in 1767, but was unable to win any decisive battle. W
ith his own troops arguing over a lack of pay, he eventually adbandoned the dist
rict to the Sihks, who reamained in control until 1849.
The Battle of Buxar
India's History : Modern India : Battle of Buxar: The British defeat Mir Kasim
- 1764
Battle of Buxar
The company sent in relief troops from Fort St. George of the Madras headquarter
s. The troops led by Robert Clive and Admiral Watson retook Calcutta on 2nd Janu
ary, 1757. The treaty of Alinagar was signed between the Nawab and the Company.
However Clive's military ambitions were on the ascendancy. His troops captured t
he French settlement of Chandernagore. He tempted Siraj's uncle Mir Jafar to all
y with him in exchange for the Nawab's position. On 23rd June, 1757, the Company
troops marched against Siraj. Betrayed by his own men Siraj was defeated in the
Battle of Plassey, which is said to have lasted only a few hours. He was soon a
ssassinated in his capital Murshidabad. From being traders, the Company turned k
ingmakers in Bengal and Mir Jafar was installed as the new Nawab. Clive got his
pound of flesh from the Nawab in terms of 234,000 pounds and was awarded an annu
al salary of 30,000 pounds per year. This made him one of the richest Britons in
the world. The company also secures rights over a large area south of Calcutta.
Construction of a new Fort William was started and was completed in 16 years in
1773. These events led to the rise of Calcutta and the decline of Murshidabad.
It is said that the origins of Calcutta's most famous public festival - the Durg
a Puja can be traced to the victory of the British in Plassey. Raja Naba Kissen
Deb, a financial backer of the Company, threw a party in honor of Robert Clive d
uring the occasion of Durga Puja.
In 1760, Mir Jafar was succeeded by his son-in-law Mir Kasim. He handed over the
districts of Chittagong, Midnapore and Burdwan to the Company. Robert Clive ret
urned to England in the same year. Mir Kasim (reign:1760 to 1763), made an attem
pt to recover Bengal from the hands of British. In 1764, he enlisted the help of
Mughal Emperor Shah Alam II and Nawab Shuja Ud Daulah of Oudh. But their troops
were defeated in the Battle of Buxar by the company troops led by Major Hector
Munro.
The armies of Mir Kasim and his allies Emperor Shah Alam II and Shuja-ud-daula,
Nawab of Avadh, out-matched the British in number. To Mir Kasim's force of 40,00
0 Robert Clive's army commanded by Major Hector Munro had about 18,000 men. Earl
y on, East India Company forces had to retreat across the river. But they were a

llowed to get away; the forces retreat across the river. But they were allowed t
o get away; the forces regrouped and through a naval force attacked through the
river route. Mir Jafar also had trained Afghan cavalry and modern cannon manned
by European mercenaries and led a charge on the Company's forces. However, the C
ompany relied on its strength of sequenced shooting-its musketeers put up volley
of gunfire. This coordinated gun shooting became very much a trademark of the B
ritish way of war over the next few decades. The sheer power of gunfire ensured
that attacking cavalry scattered. The establishment of British paramountcy along
with the diwani(revenue administration) of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa was the maj
or significance of The battle of Buxar.
Diwani Rights
India's History : Modern India : The British get Diwani Rights in Bengal, Biha
r and Orissa ; Conquest of Orissa : 1765
Battle of Buxar
Battle of Buxar, was a decisive battle fought between British and Indian forces
at Buxar, a town on the Ganges River. Mir Kasim, the nawab (governor) of Bengal,
wanted to rid his territory of British control. He formed an alliance with the
Nawab of Oudh and Shah Alam II, the Mughal emperor. The combined Indian armies i
nvaded Bengal and clashed with British troops, led by Major Hector Munro, in Oct
ober 1764. A hotly contested battle resulted in victory for the British. As a re
sult of this triumph, in 1765, Robert Clive signed the Treaty of Allahabad with
the Nawab of Oudh and Shah Alam II. The treaty effectively legalized the British
East India Company's control over the whole of Bengal.
Diwani rights
Shuja was restored to Awadh, with a subsidiary force and guarantee of defence, t
he emperor Shah Alam solaced with Allahabad and a tribute and the frontier drawn
at the boundary of Bihar. In Bengal itself he took a decisive step. In return f
or restoring Shah Alam to Allahabad he received the imperial grant of the diwani
or revenue authority in Bengal and Bihar to the Company. This had hitherto been
enjoyed by the nawab, so that now there was a double government, the nawab reta
ining judicial and police functions, the Company exercising the revenue power. T
he Company was acclimatized, as it were, into the Indian scene by becoming the M
ughal revenue agent for Bengal and Bihar. There was as yet no thought of direct
administration, and the revenue was collected by a Company-appointed deputy-nawa
b, one Muhammad Reza Khan.
But this arrangement made the Company the virtual ruler of Bengal since it alrea
dy possessed decisive military power. All that was left to the nawab was the con
trol of the judicial administration. But he was later persuaded to hand this ove
r to the Company's deputy-nawab, so that its control was virtually complete.
Inspite of all this the East India Company was again in the verge of bankruptcy
which stirred them to a fresh effort at reform. On the one hand Warren Hastings
was appointed with a mandate for reform, on the other an appeal was made to the
State for a loan. The result was the beginnings of state control of the Company
and the thirteen-year governorship of Warren Hastings.
Hastings's first important work was that of an organizer. In the two and a half
years before the Regulating Act came into force he put in order the whole Bengal
administration. The Indian deputies who had collected the revenue on behalf of
the Company were deposed and their places taken by a Board of Revenue in Calcutt
a and English collectors in the districts. This was the real beginning of Britis
h administration in India.
First Mysore War
India's History : Modern India : First Mysore War: The British conclude a humil
iating peace pact with Hyder Ali - 1767 -1769

The First Battle

The second half of the eighteenth century was a period of great confusion in Ind
ian history which witnessed the rise of a colonial power. The only state which o
ffered stiff resistance to their expansion was Mysore, which fought not one but
four wars. Tipu participated in all those four Mysore wars, in two of which he i
nflicted serious blows on the English. In fact Tipu?s rule starts in the midst o
f a war against the English and ends in the midst of war against them. His short
but stormy rule was eventful for his several engagements with his neighbours, t
he Marathas and the Nizam, as well, whose shortsighted policy prompted them to j
oin the colonials against Mysore.
In the First Mysore war Tipu, a lad of 17 years, suddenly surprised the English
when he appeared at the gates of Madras in September 1767. He caused great const
ernation to the Governor of Madras, to the Nawab of Carnatic, Muhammed Ali, and
to almost all Councilors who very narrowly escaped being taken in the country-ho
use in the Company's garden. Happily for them a small vessel that by accident wa
s opposite the garden furnished them with the means of escaping. Thus, it was a
providential escape of the entire Madras government, which were about to be capt
ured by Tipu, who had been in independent command of a body of troops in the Fir
st Mysore war.
Warren Hastings
India's History : Modern India : Death of Madhava Rao Peshwa; Warren Hastings
appointed as Governor of Bengal : 1772
Warren Hastings
Hastings, Warren (1732-1818) Governor (1772-1774) and Governor General (1774-178
5) of the fort william in Bengal. Warren Hastings abandoned the policy of hesita
tion of his predecessors about the question of establishing political dominance
in India, and bringing about a series of reforms and waging wars against the cha
llengers to his expansionist plan and conquering new lands. He laid the foundati
on of British power in India. But his contributions did not refrain parliament f
rom impeaching him under manifold charges including corruption, oppression and u
nauthorised wars. He was recalled in 1785 and tried in parliament, but ultimatel
y acquitted.
Warren Hastings was born at Churchill in Oxfordshire on 6 December 1732. His fam
ily was in reduced circumstances so he was brought up by an uncle, who took him
to London and in 1743 sent him to school at Westminster, where he proved to be a
n excellent scholar. On leaving school he obtained a junior appointment in the e
ast india company's Bengal service. He arrived at Calcutta in September 1750.
Hastings's first appointment was at kasimbazar, a major centre for procuring sil
k. He was at Kasimbazar in 1756 when Nawab sirajuddaula was provoked to attack a
nd storm Calcutta, rounding up the British at Kasimbazar in the process. On his
release Hastings joined the British refugees from Calcutta. He married one of th
em, Mary, widow of an officer who had been killed at Calcutta. Neither the first
Mrs Hastings nor the two children that she bore her husband were to live long.
From 1758 Hastings served as the company's Resident at murshidabad with the new
nawab, mir jafar, in whose favour the British had intervened at Palashi. In 1760
a coup engineered by the British brought down Mir Jafar and replaced him with a
nother nawab, mir qasim. Shortly afterwards, Hastings went down to Calcutta and
succeeded to the council that managed the company's affairs under a new governor
, henry vansittart. Hastings allied with the governor in disputes that split the
council about the extent to which the nawab should be permitted to regulate the
private trade of British merchants. Hastings and Vansittart favoured conciliati
on. Tensions with the nawab, however, erupted into armed conflict and Mir Qasim

was driven out of Bengal. Vansittart resigned his governorship and returned to B
ritain. In January 1765 Hastings followed him.
In Britain Hastings sought to influence future Indian policy and to secure his r
eturn with a prestigious position. In 1768 he was appointed second in the counci
l of the settlement at Fort St George, Madras.
Hastings spent two successful years at Madras. His management of the company's c
ommercial concerns was particularly commended. In 1771 the directors of the East
India Company, looking for a new governor of Bengal, chose Hastings. He returne
d to Calcutta on 17 February 1772.
Appointment as a Governer
Hastings saw himself in 1772 as governor of what he regarded as a province now f
ully part of the British empire. He dismissed formal acknowledgements of Mughal
authority over Bengal as harmful fictions. He had orders to assert the company's
direct authority over a government that had been largely delegated to Indian of
ficials. He complied with alacrity. He had no qualms about making further incurs
ions into areas of government allocated to the nawabs. He believed that sovereig
nty, a concept that he frequently invoked, was vested in the 'British nation' an
d that there must be no equivocation about that.
Hastings shared the view, universal among contemporary Europeans, that Bengal wa
s a naturally rich province with a highly productive agriculture and skilled man
ufacturers that had suffered from misgovernment under its later Indian rulers an
d during the British take-over. It had been afflicted in 1770 by a very severe f
amine. The new regime's task was to enable recovery to take place. In the years
after 1772 Hastings developed a distinctive point of view on how this should be
done. He believed that Bengal must be governed in ways to which its people were
presumed to be accustomed. Indian methods of government and Indian law must be p
reserved. The British should aim 'to rule this people with ease and moderation a
ccording to their own ideas, manners, and prejudices'.
Revenue was the central issue of early British government in India. The British
were uncertain as to how much they could extract from the province without infli
cting damage on it. In 1772 Hastings decided that the best way of finding out wh
at Bengal could afford to pay was to invite competition for the right to collect
revenue for a period of five years. Where the existing zamindars or hereditary
revenue managers, did not make adequate offers, higher bids would be accepted. T
his so-called 'farming' system was adjudged even by Hastings to have been a fail
ure. For the rest of Hastings's administration the company negotiated revenue as
sessments year by year, usually with the zamindars.
As diwan of Bengal after 1765, the company acquired responsibility for administe
ring civil justice, cases of property and inheritance being closely involved wit
h the payment of revenue. Criminal justice was the concern of the nawab, who enf
orced the Islamic criminal law. Hastings believed that the British must interven
e to restore a decayed system of indigenous justice. He created new hierarchies
of courts, both civil and criminal, under British supervision. The law administe
red by the courts was to be the law already in force in Bengal. Hastings set abo
ut obtaining translations that would make this law accessible to those Europeans
who had to administer it.
As governor of Bengal, Hastings had not only to direct the internal administrati
on of a huge province, but he had to conduct complex diplomacy with Indian state
s and on occasions with other European powers. By the 1770s it was impossible fo
r the British in Bengal or in their other settlements at Madras and Bombay to is
olate themselves from the new order of states that was replacing the Mughal empi
re. Hastings had no ambition to make new conquests, but he was strongly in favou
r of seeking influence by alliances. His ideal of peaceful influence over allies

bore little relation, however, to the way events were to unfold. The company wa
s to be repeatedly drawn into war, beginning with a war against the Rohillas in
1774 fought to strengthen the company's major ally in northern India, the nawabwazir of Oudh in whose territory British troops were maintained.
In 1773 the national government in Britain intervened to impose reforms on the E
ast India Company. Authority in Bengal was to be concentrated in a governor gene
ral and a new Supreme Council of five. A Supreme Court, staffed by royal judges,
was also to be established in Calcutta. Hastings was chosen as the first govern
or general, but three men, John Clavering, George Monson and philip francis, wer
e sent out to join the council directly from Britain.
The three new councillors from Britain began an unremitting opposition to Hastin
gs immediately after their arrival in Calcutta on 19 October 1774. Acting togeth
er, they constituted a majority. They quickly professed to find corruption behin
d every policy of the old government and to believe that Hastings was allowing t
he resources of Bengal to be plundered and wasted. Francis, an intellectual of a
calibre to match Hastings, was a particularly formidable opponent of the govern
or general.
The new councillors began by denouncing the war against the Rohillas. Hastings's
revenue policy was also condemned and Indians were encouraged to bring accusati
ons of personal corruption against him. The leading accuser was maharaja nanda k
umar, who evidently calculated that he stood to gain ample rewards were the new
councillors to displace Hastings. His accusations of bribe-taking were probably
much exaggerated, but it is likely that Hastings had received some irregular pay
ments. Before anything could be proved, charges of forgery were brought against
Nanda Kumar in the new Supreme Court. He was found guilty, sentenced to death an
d executed on 5 August 1775. Critics of Hastings from his own time onwards have
drawn the not unreasonable inference that he promoted the prosecution and may ha
ve influenced the verdict. What can be established is that the prosecution again
st Nanda Kumar was promoted by his Indian enemies with the encouragement of Hast
ings's friends.
Hastings recovered control over the government as two of his opponents, Monson a
nd Clavering, died, leaving Francis alone to carry on the opposition against Has
tings. After fighting a duel against Hastings on 17 August 1780, in which he was
slightly wounded, Francis finally left India.
Hastings remained in office until 1785. War was the main source of the difficult
ies that he faced in his last years. From 1778 the British were fighting the Mar
athas. In 1780 the formidable armies of Mysore invaded the Carnatic territory wh
ich was under the protection of the British. In January 1781 the first French ex
peditionary force arrived in India to support Mysore.
Hastings took credit for the diplomacy that broke up the formidable Indian coali
tion opposing him and for sending money, supplies and troops on a very large sca
le from Bengal to Madras, thus enabling the Mysore forces to be pushed back and
the French to be contained. With some justification, Hastings saw himself as the
saviour of the British empire in India. Nevertheless, the scale of the wars did
Hastings great damage with opinion in Britain. He was accused of being a warmon
ger with a lust for conquest that had landed the company in ruinously expensive
wars.
The needs of the war were the cause of some very contentious dealings by Hasting
s with the company's dependants and allies in northern India. Chait Singh, the r
aja of Benares, was required to pay an increased subsidy to the company. On the
pretext that he was evading legitimate demands, Hastings proposed to exact a lar
ge fine from him on a personal visit in 1781. The raja's retainers resisted and
forced Hastings to flee from the city.

Although British authority was quickly restored, the episode left a strong impre
ssion that Hastings had acted tyrannically as well as subjecting himself to need
less risks. From Benares Hastings went on to try to raise extra funds from the c
ompany's ally the nawab of Oudh by forcing him to resume alienation of land reve
nue and to confiscate a large hoard of treasure in the possession of his mother
and grandmother, the Begums of Oudh. Again, Hastings appeared to have acted with
a ruthless high-handedness.
Throughout his governorship, Hastings was a generous patron of the arts and of l
earning. He took a particular pride in the translation of the Bhagavat Gita made
by charles wilkins, for which he wrote a memorable preface. His interests laid
the foundations for the creation of the Bengal Asiatick Society (now asiatic soc
iety) of 1784.
In February 1785, in failing health, Hastings resigned his office. He landed in
England on 13 June 1785, after an absence of over sixteen years. He had not unre
asonable expectations of acclaim and honours on his return, but he was in fact t
o meet attacks that culminated with his being put on trial. The trial began in 1
788 and lasted until he was acquitted in 1795.
Unfortunately for Hastings, Edmund Burke, whose revulsion against what he saw as
gross misgovernment in British India had focused on Hastings, was not prepared
to let him go. Burke had undoubtedly fallen under the influence of Philip Franci
s after his return to Britain in 1780, but he had formed his own views about Ind
ia and he was driven by a passionate concern for justice. He believed that the E
ast India Company was laying India waste by rapacious policies within its own pr
ovinces, by the exploitation of its allies and by its wars. He held Hastings to
be responsible for all this. In 1786 Burke produced charges for an impeachment t
o be voted by the House of Commons and then to be heard by the House of Lords. T
he first charge, which related to the Rohilla war, was thrown out by the Commons
, but the second, on Hastings's dealings with the raja of Benares, was passed, a
s were others introduced in the 1787 session of Parliament. On 10 May 1787 Hasti
ngs was formally impeached.
Huge crowds attended the early sessions of the trial that was regarded as a grea
t public spectacle. But by 30 May 1791, when the prosecution closed their case,
few could doubt that the tide was running in Hastings's favour. In a new climate
of opinion with a more assertive British nationalism in reaction to the French
Revolution, empire came increasingly to be seen as part of Britain's greatness r
ather than as a cause of shame. Hastings's claims to have been the saviour of em
pire were therefore viewed sympathetically. In 1795, when the Lords gave judgeme
nt, in every case a large majority voted 'not guilty'.
The stark legal alternatives of 'guilty' or 'not guilty' are an inappropriate ba
sis for any assessment of a career as complex as Hastings's. It is impossible to
endorse Burke's extravagantly vituperative abuse of him. Few would now believe
that he deserved impeachment let alone being found guilty. On the other hand, th
e argument that he had no significant case to answer, beyond some minor blemishe
s committed in a good cause and was the victim of Francis's envy and Burke's mal
ice is not sustainable. Strictly within the terms argued out in the impeachment,
Hastings was vulnerable to accusations of high-handedness in Benares and Oudh a
nd he had accumulated a fortune by methods that the new official morality of the
late eighteenth century did not sanction.
Any assessment of him on terms that go beyond those of the Impeachment must reco
gnise Hastings's exceptional qualities of mind, he brought a creative intelligen
ce of a very high order to Indian government. He also showed an appreciation of
Indian culture and a regard for individual Indian people most unusual in any Bri
tish official in high office at any time. Partly in reaction to him, future Brit

ish administration in India would be more closely bound by rules and more distan
t from Indians.
After his acquittal in 1795, Hastings lived for another 23 years. His life was t
hat of a country gentleman, engaged in local affairs and farming the ancestral f
amily estate that he had been able to recover. Public employment never came agai
n, but at least in the last years of his life, he was treated with much respect
and received some public recognition. He died on 22 August 1818 in his 85th year
.
Death of Madhava Rao Peshwa
1737 saw the death of the Peshwa brothers, Baji Rao and Chimaji.Baji Rao's son,
Balaji Bajirao (Nanasaheb) succeeded as the Peshwa. The three brothers Nanasaheb
, Sadashivrao and Raghunathrao continued the able rule of Peshwa for the next 25
years. The 1761 Panipat battle, between Marathas and Ahmad Shah Abdalli, destro
yed both Abdalli and Peshwas. Though Marathas won the war, they had to face a ha
rd blow when they lost Sadashivrao and Nanasaheb Peshwa's eldest son. Nanasaheb
died grief-striken in the same year. His second son Thorale Madhav Rao assumed t
he title. And his uncle Raghunath Rao acted as his care taker.
Madhavrao Peshwa defeated Haider Ali of Mysore and Nizam of Hyderabad. In 1769,
Marathas lead by Mahadaji Shinde, headed the North India campaign. They defeated
the Jats and took hold of Agra and Mathura. They reinstated the Mughal Emperor
on the throne, who was living on the East India Company Pension.
After Madhav Rao Peshwa's death in 1772, Raghunathrao's attempts to be the Peshw
a were foiled by the ministers. Hurt, he joined the British. The state came unde
r the rule of ministers headed by Nana Phadnavis and Mahadaji Shinde.
The Regulating Act - 1773
India's History : Modern India : The Regulating Act passed by the British Parli
ament - 1773
Regulating Act
By 1773 the East India Company was in dire financial straits. The Company was im
portant to Britain because it was a monopoly trading company in India and in the
east and many influential people were shareholders. The Company paid ?400,000 a
nnually to the government to maintain the monopoly but had been unable to meet i
ts commitments because of the loss of tea sales to America since 1768. About 85%
of all the tea in America was smuggled Dutch tea. The East India Company owed m
oney to both the Bank of England and the government; it had 15 million lbs of te
a rotting in British warehouses and more en route from India.
Lord North decided to overhaul the management of the East India Company with the
Regulating Act. This was the first step along the road to government control of
India. The Act set up a system whereby it supervised (regulated) the work of th
e East India Company but did not take power for itself.
The East India Company had taken over large areas of India for trading purposes
but also had an army to protect its interests. Company men were not trained to g
overn so North's government began moves towards government control. India was of
national importance and shareholders in the Company opposed the Act. The East I
ndia Company was a very powerful lobby group in parliament in spite of the finan
cial problems of the Company.
The Act said that:
That, for the government of the presidency of fort William in Bengal, there shal
l be a Governor General, and a Council consisting of four councillors with the d
emocratic provision that the decision of the majority in the Council shall be bi

nding on the Governor General.

That Warren Hastings shall be the first Governor General and that Lt. General Jo
hn Clavering, George Monson, Richard Barwell and Philip Francis shall be four fi
rst Councillors.
That His Majesty shall establish a supreme court of judicature consisting of a C
hief Justice and three other judges at Fort William, and that the Court's jurisd
iction shall extend to all British subjects residing in Bengal and their native
servants.
That the company shall pay out of its revenue salaries to the designated persons
in the following rate: to the Governor General 25000 sterling, to the Councillo
rs 10,000 sterling, to the Chief Justice 8000 sterling and the Judges 6000 sterl
ing a year.
That the Governor General, Councillors and Judges are prohibited from receiving
any gifts, presents, pecuniary advantages from the Indian princes, zamindars and
other people.
That no person in the civil and military establishments can receive any gift, re
ward, present and any pecuniary advantages from the Indians.
That it is unlawful for collectors and other district officials to receive any g
ift, present, reward or pecuniary advantages from zamindars and other people.
The provisions of the Act clearly indicate that it was directed mainly to the ma
lpractice and corruption of the company officials. The Act, however, failed to s
top corruption and it was practised rampantly by all from the Governor General a
t the top to the lowest district officials. Major charges brought against Hastin
gs in his impeachment trial were those on corruption. Corruption divided the Cou
ncil into two mutually hostile factions- the Hastings group and Francis group. T
he issues of their fighting were corruption charges against each other. Conseque
ntly, Pitt's India act, 1784 had to be enacted to fight corruption and to do tha
t an incorruptible person, lord Cornwallis, was appointed with specific referenc
es to bring order in the corruption ridden polity established by the company.
Anglo-Maratha War
India's History : Modern India : The First Anglo-Maratha war - 1775 - 1782
The First Anglo-Maratha War
First Anglo-Maratha War, the result of the Bombay government's alliance with the
would-be Maratha peshwa, Raghoba. Hastings sent an expedition across the penins
ula from Calcutta to Surat (1778, arrived 1779) and broke the coalition between
the Marathas, Haidar Ali, and the nizam. The company had already showed its migh
t by defeating the combined forces of Mughal Shah Alam and Bengal's Nawab Sirajud-Daulah at the Battle of Plassey. Soon hostilities broke out between the Compa
ny and the Marathas. The first Anglo-Maratha war took place between 1775-82 and
resulted in a humiliating defeat of the Company's forces, which in turn resulted
in the treaty of Salbai. Soon the Maratha Empire was in a position to regain it
s lost glory and it had found a genius in Madhaji Schindia. But his death in 179
4 dashed all hopes of Maratha revivalism. Soon they followed the Mughals into di
ssolution. The Treaty of Salbai (1782) obtained for Bombay 20 years' peace with
the Marathas and the cession of Salsette and Elephanta.
Second Mysore War
India's History : Modern India : Second Mysore War : The British defeat Hyder
Ali - 1780-1784
Second Mysore War - The British wins over Hyder Ali
Hyder Ali used to work as a general in the army of the King of Mysore before ove
rthrowing him and establishing his own kingdom, he is famous for his epic battle
s with the British. He is best known for his invasions of the Malabar coast regi
on between 1766 until his death and the historic defeat of the British in the fi
rst Mysore war in 1767-69. Warren Hastings sent from Bengal Sir Eyre Coote, who,
though repulsed at Chidambaram, defeated Hyder thrice successively in the battl

es of Porto Novo, Pollilur and Sholingarh, while Tippoo was forced to raise the
siege of Wandiwash, and Vellore was provisioned. On the arrival of Lord Macartne
y as governor of Madras, the British fleet captured Negapatam, and forced Hyder
Ali to confess that he could never ruin a power, which had command of the sea. H
e had sent his son Tippoo to the west coast, to seek the assistance of the Frenc
h fleet, when his death took place suddenly at Chittur in December 1782. Tipu to
ok over as ruler of Mysore after the death of his father around 1782.
The Pitt's Act
India's History : Modern India : Pitt's India Act - 1784
The Pitt's Act
After the Regulating Act of 1773 to regulate the affairs of the Company in India
, the second important step taken by the British Parliament was the appointment
of a Board of Control under Pitt's India Bill of 1784. It provided for a joint g
overnment of the Company (represented by the Directors), and the Crown (represen
ted by the Board of Control).
A Board of six members was constituted with two members of the British Cabinet a
nd four of the Privy Council. One of who was the President and who soon became,
in effect, the minister for the affairs of the East India Company. The Board had
all the powers and control over all the acts and operations, which related to t
he civil, military and revenues of the Company.
The Council was reduced to three members and the Governor-General was empowered
to overrule the majority. The Governors of Bombay and Madras were also deprived
of their independent powers. Calcutta was given greater powers in matters of war
, revenue, and diplomacy, thus becoming in effect the capital of Company possess
ions in India.
By a supplementary the Bill passed in 1786, Lord Cornwallis was appointed as the
first Governor-General, and he then became the effective ruler of British India
under the authority of the Board of Control and the Court of Directors. The con
stitution set up by the Pitt's India Act did not undergo any major changes durin
g the existence of the Company's rule in India.
The Charter Act of 1813 abolished the trading activities of the Company and henc
eforth became purely an administrative body under the Crown. Thereafter, with fe
w exceptions, the Governor-General and the Council could make all the laws and r
egulations for people (Indians and British).
The salient features relating to the governance of the kingdom of Bengal were:
There shall be a Board of Control consisting of maximum six parliamentarians hea
ded by a senior cabinet member to direct, superintend and control the affairs of
the company's territorial possessions in the East Indies.
The Court of Directors shall establish a Secret Committee to work as a link betw
een the Board and the Court.
The Governor General's council shall consist of three members one of whom shall
be the commander-in-chief of the King's army in India. In case the members prese
nt in a meeting of the council shall any time be equally divided in opinion, the
Governor General shall have two votes (one his own and another casting vote).
The government must stop further experiments in the revenue administration and p
roceed to make a permanent settlement with zamindars at moderate rate of revenue
demand. The government must establish permanent judicial and administrative sys
tems for the governance of the new kingdom.
All civilians and military officers must provide the Court of Directors a full i

nventory of their property in India and in Britain within two months of their jo
ining their posts.
Severe punishment including confiscation of property, dismissal and jail, shall
be inflicted on any civilian or military officer found guilty of corruption.
Receiving gifts, rewards, presents in kind or cash from the rajas, zamindars and
other Indians are strictly prohibited and people found guilty of these offences
shall be tried charged with corruption.
Parliament directly appointed Lord charles cornwallis to implement the Act. Imme
diately after his joining as Governor General in 1786, Cornwallis embarked upon
the responsibility of reform works reposed on him by parliament. In 1793 he comp
leted his mission. He introduced permanent settlement, announced a judicial code
, established administrative and police systems and then left for home in the sa
me year.

The Third Mysore War

India's History : Modern India : Third Mysore War between the British and Tipu
- 1790-1792
The Two Rivals-Marathas & The Nizam
The Treaty of Mangalore carried the seeds of strife with the Marathas, because t
hey were disappointed in their expectation of acting as the mediators and of rec
overing their losses in the North of Mysore. Tipu had emerged with enhanced pres
tige whom even the mighty English could not humble. This excited the jealousy of
both the Martha's and the Nizam who fought a war with him for two years from 17
85 to 1787. The Nizam was also not friendly towards Mysore ever since he had com
e to power in 1761. He regarded himself as the overlord of the entire south, and
expected Haidar and Tipu to be his tributaries. As he was military imbecile he
allied himself either with the Marathas or the English to distress the Mysore ru
lers. There was always a pro-British party at Hyderabad which dissuaded the Niza
m from begin cordial to Tipu. In the war that followed Tipu had the upper hand d
espite the alliance of his two neighbors. The war came to an end in April 1787 b
y the Treaty of Gajendragadh by which he ceded Badami to the Marathas hoping to
win their support against the English or at least to prevent them from joining t
he English.
Tipu was disappointed in his expectations. Far from joining him to remove the En
glish from India, both of them, the Marathas and the Nizam joined the English in
a powerful confederacy against Tipu in the Third Mysore war.
The Defeat
The allies struggled hard for nearly two years from 1790 to 1792. Lord Cornwalli
s who had surrendered to the Americans at Saratoga in the new world assumed the
command, and with great difficulty he was successful in a surprise night attack
to enter into the island of Srirangapatna on 6th Feb. 1792. Tipu was made to mak
e peace by surrendering half of his kingdom, and paying three crores has indemni
ty, apart from sending two of his sons as hostages to Madras. This was a serious
blow to Tipu.
Permanant Settlement of Bengal
India's History : Modern India : Permanent Settlement of Bengal - 1793
Permanant Settlement
Permanent Settlement Concluded by the Cornwallis administration in 1793, Permane
nt Settlement was a grand contract between the east india company government and
the Bengal landholders (zamindars and independent talukdars of all denomination

s). Under the contract, the landholders or zamindars were admitted into the colo
nial state system as the absolute proprietors of landed property. Besides being
turned into proprietors of land, the zamindars were endowed with the privilege o
f holding their proprietary right at a rate which was to continue unchanged for
ever. Under the contract the government was barred from enhancing its revenue de
mand on the zamindars.
Objectives and effects of Permanent Settlement The conclusion of the permanent s
ettlement with zamindars had some immediate objectives in view. These may be cla
ssified as:
placing revenue paying on a definite footing and making revenue collection sure
and certain;
ensuring a minimum revenue;
relieving officials of revenue matter and engaging them to other spheres of admi
nistration; and finally,
forging an alliance between the zamindar class and the colonial rulers.
Though not entirely but largely, government succeeded in achieving these short-t
erm goals. The revenue-paying agency was put on a definite footing in the person
of zamindar. The government now knew how much was to be its annual inflow from
land and the zamindars also knew for certain their contractual obligation to gov
ernment. Formerly, neither the government nor the revenue payers knew exactly wh
ere did they stand as regards revenue collection and payment.
Tipu Sultan : Fourth Battle of Mysore
India's History : Modern India : Fourth Mysore War: The British defeat Tipu; D
eath of Tipu; Partition of Mysore ; Tipu's history - 1799
Tipu Sultan
The second half of the eighteenth century was a period of great confusion in Ind
ian history, which witnessed the rise of a colonial power. The only state that o
ffered stiff resistance to their expansion was Mysore, which fought not one but
four wars. Tipu participated in all those four Mysore wars, in two of which he i
nflicted serious blows on the English. In fact Tipu?s rule starts in the midst o
f a war against the English and ends in the midst of war against them. His short
but stormy rule was eventful for his several engagements with his neighbours, t
he Marathas and the Nizam, as well, whose shortsighted policy prompted them to j
oin the colonials against Mysore. Tipu remained fully involved in warfare from h
is youth until his fall in the fourth Mysore war. From 1760 when Haidar Ali alli
ed himself with the French against the English to 1799 when Wellesly destroyed T
ipu, Mysore had become ?the terror of Leadenhall Street?, the headquarters of th
e East India Company. These forty years of Tipu both as a prince and a ruler wit
nessed continuous warfare.
Having learnt the western technique of warfare, Tipu was not slow in making use
of it. He was himself bold, dashing, and a person of undaunted adventurous spiri
t. Under his leadership Mysore army? proved a school of military science? to Ind
ian princes. The dread of an European army no longer wrought any magic on him. T
ipu?s infliction of serious blows on the English in the first and second Mysore
wars damaged their reputation as an invincible power. Grant wrote to Shelburne,
?An English army much superior to one which under a Lawrence, or a Clive, five a
nd twenty ago made Hindoostan, nay some of the powers of Europe tremble at the b
are recital of its victories, now for the first time was retreating in the face
of an Indian army.? This was a reference to colonel Bailey?s capture and general
Munro?s flight in the second Mysore war. Alexander Dow wrote his history, ?We w
ere alarmed, as if his horses had wings to fly over our walls.?

Tipu was a far-sighted ruler, who discerned the danger to the freedom of the lan
d by the colonial expansion, which necessitated continuous warfare. Apart from t
his he had his own agenda to assert his own authority over the neighbours, the M
arathas and the Nizam, who were not reconciled to the rise and growth of Mysore
as an independent powerful state. This weakness of the neighbours was fully expl
oited by the English whose shrewd political sense involved them as allies agains
t Mysore. In all four Mysore wars the Marathas and the Nizam were willing to sup
port the English rather than either Haider or Tipu. In the third Mysore war all
three formed a powerful confederacy against Tipu, and in the fourth Mysore war t
he Nizam was an ally of the English. The third cause for the continuous warfare
was the need to suppress the far too many units of independent power, the feudat
ories and small principalities, whose mutual rivalries and ambition had caused g
reat confusion in Karnataka. It was Tipu?s policy to establish a strong central
authority which would serve the people better.
Thus the English, the Marathas, the Nizam and the feudatories were the principal
causes for Tipu?s wars. The most serious wars were against the English, who had
never been confronted with a more formidable foe. In the first Mysore War Tipu,
a lad of 17 years, suddenly surprised the English when he appeared at the gates
of Madras in September 1767. He caused great consternation to the governor of M
adras, to the Nawab of Carnatic, Muhammad Ali, and to almost all the councillors
who ?very narrowly escaped being taken in the country house in the company?s ga
rden. Happily for them a small vessel that by accident was opposite the garden f
urnished them with the means of escaping. ? Thus, it was a providential escape o
f the entire Madras government, which were about to be captured by Tipu, who had
been placed in independent command of a body of troops in the first Mysore war.
Tipu?s training in the art of war started as early as 1763, when he was hardly 1
3 years old, in Haidar?s attack on Malabar where Tipu displayed great dash and c
ourage. That was his first experience of war. He was present in Haidar?s negotia
tions with the Nizam in the first Mysore war when the tact and resourcefulness o
f the young prince impressed the Nizam and won him over to Haidar?s side. It was
Tipu who obtained the ratification of the treaty of Alliance between the Nizam
and Haidar in 1767. Tipu had gone to the Nizam?s camp at the head of 6000 troops
and successfully concluded the treaty. This was the first diplomatic assignment
of Tipu, who was well received by the Nizam, who conferred on him the title of
?Nasib-ud-daula? (fortune of the state) and also ?Fateh Ali Khan.?
Tipu had taken great interest in the Mysore-Maratha war of 1769-72. After the de
ath of Peshwa Madhava Rao in 1772, he was sent to the northern part of the Mysor
e to recover the territories which the Marathas had occupied. By the time of sec
ond Mysore war he had gained great experience both of warfare and diplomacy. In
September 1780 he inflicted a crushing defeat on Colonel Baillie near Polilur. T
his was the first and the most serious blow the English had suffered in India. T
he whole detachment was either cut or taken prisoners. Of the 86 European office
rs 36 were killed, and 3820 were taken prisoners of whom 508 were Europeans. The
English had lost the flower of their army. Baillie himself was taken prisoner.
This defeat caused so much consternation in Madras that half of its Black Town w
as deserted. Sir Hector Munroe, the hero of Buxar, who had defeated three rulers
of India (Mughal Emperor Shah Alam, Oudh Nawab Shuja-ud-daulah, and the Bengal
Nawab Mir Qasim) in a single battle, would not face Tipu. He ran for his life to
Madras throwing all his cannons in the tank of conjeevaram.
Likewise, Tipu inflicted a serious defeat on Colonel Braithwaite at Annagudi nea
r Tanjore on 18 February 1782. This army consisted of 100 Europeans, 300 cavalry
, 1400 sepoys and 10 field pieces. Tipu seized all the guns and took the entire
detachment prisoners. One should remember that the total force of a few hundred
Europeans was the standard size of the colonial armies that had caused havoc in
India prior to Haidar and Tipu. In December 1781 Tipu had successfully seized Ch

ittur from British hands. Thus Tipu had gained sufficient military experience by
the time Haidar died in December 1782.
The second Mysore war came to an end by the treaty of Mangalore. It is an import
ant document in the history of India. It was the last occasion when an Indian po
wer dictated terms to the English, who were made to play the role of humble supp
licants for peace. Warren Hastings called it a humiliating pacification, and app
ealed to the king and parliament to punish the Madras government for ?the faith
and honour of the British nation have been equally violated.? The English would
not reconcile to this humiliation, and worked hard from that day, 11 March 1784,
to subvert Tipu?s power. The treaty redounds great credit to the diplomatic ski
ll of Tipu. He had honourably concluded a long-drawn war. He frustrated the Mara
tha designs to seize his northern possessions. The great advantage was psycholog
ical, the mode of conclusion was highly satisfactory to him. The march of the co
mmissioners all the way from Madras to Mangalore seeking peace made Munro remark
that such indignities were throughout poured upon the British?, that united eff
orts seemed necessary to repudiate the treaty at the earliest time.? Such public
opinion in the country highly gratified Tipu who felt it was his great triumph
over the English. That was the only bright spot in his contest with the English,
the only proud event which had humbled a mighty power.
The treaty of Mangalore carried the seeds of strife with the Marathas, because t
hey were disappointed in their expectation of acting as the mediators and of rec
overing their losses in the north of Mysore. Tipu had emerged with enhanced pres
tige whom even the mighty English could not humble. This excited the jealousy of
both the Marathas and the Nizam who fought a war with him for two years from 17
85 to 1787. The Nizam was also not friendly towards Mysore ever since he had com
e to power in 1761. He regarded himself as the overlord of the entire south, and
expected Haidar and Tipu to be his tributaries. As he was militarily imbecile h
e allied himself either with the Marathas or the English to distress the Mysore
rulers. There was always a pro-British party at Hyderabad which dissuaded the Ni
zam from being cordial to Tipu. In the war that followed Tipu had the upper hand
despite the alliance of his two neighbours. The war came to an end in April 178
7 by the treaty of Gajendragadh by which he ceded Badami to the Marathas hoping
to win their support against the English or at least to prevent them from joinin
g the English.
Tipu was disappointed in his expectations. Far from joining him to remove the En
glish from India, both of them, the Marathas and the Nizam, joined the English i
n a powerful confederacy against Tipu in the third Mysore war. The allies strugg
led hard for nearly two years from 1790 to 1792. Lord Cornwallis who had surrend
ered to the Americans at Saratoga in the new world assumed the command and with
great difficulty he was successful in a surprise night attack to enter into the
island of Srirangapatana on 6 February 1792. Tipu was made to make peace by surr
endering half of his kingdom, and paying three crores as indemnity, apart from s
ending two of his sons as hostages to Madras. This was a serious blow to Tipu.
Very soon Tipu was able to build up his power again, paid the indemnity, and got
his sons back. He intensified his contacts with the French, the Turks and the A
fghans. The Nizam was also made friendly, who was made to recruit a contingent o
f 14000 troops under a French, Raymond, who was friendly to Tipu. Napoleon was a
lso on the way to India to help Tipu, who had invited Zaman Shah of Afghanistan
as well to help him remove the English from India. When all these plans were abo
ut to mature, destiny willed otherwise. Napoleon was defeated at Accre in Syria
and forced back to France. Zaman Shah was made to beat a hasty retreat to Kabul
because of British machinations that brought about a rear action from Iran on Af
ghanistan. Wellesley forced the Nizam to disband Raymond and accept a British de
tachment under subsidiary system. Having finished this task he declared war on T

ipu, sending the largest English army ever assembled in India. The fourth Mysore
war was a short affair. Keeping Tipu in false hopes, he suddenly surprised him
by unacceptable demands. When Tipu refused to accept them, the English breached
the fort and in a bloody encounter, fighting against heavy odds he was killed on
4 May 1799. The last hope for the freedom of the land was thus extinguished. He
died a solider?s death for the defence of the cherished values of his land unde
r a spontaneous combustion of hostile forces.
Treaty of Bassein
India's History : Modern India : Treaty of Bassein - 1802
Treaty of Bassein
After being victorious over the Nizam at Kharda, Nana Phadnavis' influence in Po
ona was enhanced. But soon the Marathas indulged in internal quarrels. Tired of
Nana Phadnavis' dictatorship, Peshwa Madhavrao Narayan committed suicide on Octo
ber 25, 1795. After various plots and counter-plots on December 4, 1796, Baji Ra
o II, son of Raghoba, became the Peshwa and Nana Phadnavis as his chief minister
. Taking advantage of the instable situation among the Marathas, the Nizam recov
ered the territories which were taken by the Marathas after his defeat at Kharda
.
Lord Wellesley
When Lord Wellesley arrived as a Governor-General on April 26, 1798, he engineer
ed the policy of Subsidiary Alliance. He was of the firm conviction that the bes
t way of safeguarding the interest of England was to reduce the whole country in
to a military dependence on the East India Company. Though there was no conflict
between the English and the Marathas, the English began to gain more strength.
The English prospects were brightened after the death of Nana Phadnavis on March
13, 1800. Thus the last chance of keeping the Marathas in order was wiped out.
This has been nicely said in the words of Colonel Palmer, the British resident a
t Poona: "With him departed all the wisdom and moderation of the Maratha governm
ent." It was Nana who could forsee the danger of Subsidiary Alliance. Nana's dea
th meant the removal of the barrier that had checked to a great extent the disru
ptive activities of the Maratha chiefs.
Both Daulat Rao Sindhia and Jaswant Rao Holkar entered into a fierce struggle wi
th each other for supremacy at Poona. The Peshwa favoured Sindhia and finally be
came a puppet in his hand. On April 12, 1800 Wellesley advised the Poona Residen
ts to manage the secret treaty with Poona for turning out Sindhia. But the Peshw
a remained unmoved and the Resident suggested that only immediate destruction wi
ll make the Peshwa bow.
Treaty of Bassein signed
Matters among the Marathas were becoming worse by the Peshwa's own intrigues. It
worsened more when the Peshwa murdered Vithuji Holkar, brother of Jaswant Rao H
olkar in April 1801. This made Holkar rise in rebellion with a huge army and on
October 23, he defeated the combined armies of Sindhias and the Peshwas at Poona
and captured the city. Jaswant Rao Holkar made Amrit Rao's son Vinayak Rao the
Peshwa and on the other hand Baji Rao took refuge in Bassein. And in this helple
ss situation, Baji Rao had no hesitation to accept the Subsidiary Alliance and s
igned with the East India Company the Treaty of Bassein on December 31, 1802.
The treaty provided for an English force of 6,000 to be permanently stationed wi
th the Peshwa, and for its maintenance the districts yielding twenty six lakh ru
pees were to be given to the Company. It also stated that the Peshwa could not e
nter into any treaty or declare war without consulting the Company and that the

Peshwa's claim upon the Nizam and Gaekwar would be subject to the arbitration of
the Company. The Peshwa also renounced his claim over Surat.
On May 13, 1803 Baji Rao II was restored to Peshwarship under the protection of
the East India Company. This treaty of Bassein was an important landmark in the
history of British supremacy in India. This led to expansion of the sway and inf
luence of the East India Company over the Indian subcontinent. However, the trea
ty was not acceptable to both the Marathas chieftains - the Shindes nd Bhosales.
This directly resulted in the Second Anglo-Maratha war in 1803.
The Second Anglo Maratha War
India's History : Modern India : The Second Anglo-Maratha war: The British def
eat the Marathas at Assaye: Treaty of Amritsar : 1803 - 1805
The Second Battle
AIthough the defeat of Tipu left the Marathas as the chief rivals to Britain, th
e Second Maratha War arose initially from internal conflict within the Maratha C
onfederacy. The Peshwa, Baji Rao II, was still the offiicial head of the Maratha
s, but the most powerful were Doulut Rao Sindhia of Gwalior, and Jaswant Rao Hol
kar of Indore; lesser powers were the Gaekwar of Baroda and Ragogee Bhonsla, Raj
a of Berar. Marquess Wellesley's attempts to bring these states into his `subsid
iary' system were unsuccessful, and civil war among the Marathas resulted in the
utter defeat of the Peshwa's forces by Holkar at the battle of Poona (25 Octobe
r 1802). Baji Rao II fled to British protection, and by the Treaty of Bassein fo
rmed an alliance with the British, ceding territory for the maintenance of a sub
sidiary force, and agreeing to treat with no other power. This considerably exte
nded British influence in western India, but Wellesley was still concerned over
possible French interference, given the French influence in the Maratha forces,
notably from Perron.
Marquess Wellesley determined to support the Peshwa, and Arthur Wellesley led a
force, which re-installed Baji Rao in Poona, without opposition, on 13 May 1803.
By early August, negotiations with Sindhia having failed, the governor-general
moved against the two principal Maratha forces: a combined army of Sindhia and t
he Raja of Berar in the Deccan, about 50,000 strong, including 10,500 regular in
fantry; and further north, Sindhia's main army, about 35,000 strong, commanded b
y Perron. Marquess Wellesley formed two armies, the northern under General Gerar
d Lake, and the southern under Arthur Wellesley. Collaborating with the latter w
as the Hyderabad Contingent, some 9,400 strong, and in addition to Wellesley's o
wn army, more than 11,000 strong were some 5,000-allied Mysore and Maratha light
horse.
The British defeats the Marathas
On 6 August 1803 Arthur Wellesley received news of the failure of negotiations,
and marched immediately upon the fortification of Ahmednagar. On 8 August he sto
rmed and took the city, laid siege to Ahmednagar fort, and accepted its surrende
r on 12 August. This success had a profound effect upon the Maratha chieftain Go
khale, one of the Peshwa's supporters whose forces were present with Wellesley;
he wrote that `These English are a strange people and their General a wonderful
man. They came here in the morning, looked at the pettah-wall, walked over it, k
illed all the garrison, and returned to breakfast.'
Wellesley encountered the army of Sindhia and Ragojee Bhonsla at Assaye on 23 Se
ptember. The latter numbered between 40,000 and 50,000 men, including three brig
ades of regular infantry, the largest under the command of the ex-Hanoverian ser
geant, Pohlmann. Despite the numbers, Wellesley determined to attack; as Colonel
Stevenson's Hyderabad force was not within range of support, Wellesley had only
some 7,000 men, of whom perhaps 500 had to guard his baggage, and of the remain
der, he had only three European regiments (l9th Light Dragoons, 74th Foot and 78

th Foot). The Mysore and Maratha light horse, some believed to be of dubious loy
alty, could not be used in the main action. Despite sustaining heavy casualties
in their frontal attack, the small British and Company force won a considerable
victory; it was Wellesley's first major success, and one which he always held in
the highest estimation, even when compared to his later triumphant career. His
losses, however, were severe, numbering nearly 650 Europeans and more than 900 I
ndian troops; from a strength of about 500 rank and file, the 74th lost ten offi
cers and one volunteer killed and seven wounded, and 124 other ranks killed and
270 wounded, a casualty-rate of about three-quarters of those engaged. Having su
stained such casualties, and having fought the battle after a 24-mile march, Wel
lesley was unable immediately to pursue his defeated enemy, who had left 98 guns
on the field, which they had bravely attempted to defend.
Wellesley pressed on in due course, until the Raja of Berar's army, with large n
umbers of Sindhia's cavalry made a stand at Argaum on 29 November 1803. They num
bered probably between 30,000 and 40,000, Wellesley's army about 10-11,000, the
European part being only the remains of those who had fought at Assaye, plus the
94th Scotch Brigade from Stevenson's force. The European infantry outpaced the
rest as Wellesley ordered a frontal attack; the Marathas broke, abandoning 38 gu
ns and Wellesley's cavalry did severe execution in the pursuit. Wellesley suffer
ed barely 360 casualties in all. On 15 December 1803 a ferocious British assault
captured the fortress of Gawilghur; the Raja of Berar sued for peace next day,
and on 17 December ceded the province of Cuttack to the Company, and other terri
tory to its allies.

Treaty of Amritsar
After the Treaty of Amritsar with British which simply stated that the Internati
onal boundry of line between the Sarkar Khalsa and British India is Satluj. Ranj
it singh was virtually made master of all the territory to the west of Satluj. B
ut.. there was several small kingdoms, like Peshawar, Rawalpindi, Kashmir, Multa
n, Sialkote which were ruled by Afghani or local chiefs.
Thus, Ranjit singh first turned towards North towards Kangra valley which was ta
ken over from Raja Sansar Chand by Gurkhas. Ranjit Singh's forces fought with Gu
rkhas in Kangra Valley in the end the Gurkha leader Amar Singh thapa fled leavin
g the field to the Sikhs. Ranjit singh entered the fort of Kangra and held a roy
al Darbar which was attended by the hill chiefs of Chamba, nurpur, Kotla, Shahpu
r, Guler, Kahlur, Mandi, Suket and Kulu. Desa Singh Majithia was appointed gover
nor of Kangra.
Then Ranjit singh sent a force under the command of Hukma Singh Chimmi to Jammu
and himself marched on to Khushab. The fort of Khushab was held by Jaffar Khan,
a Baluch chief. He gave up the city and defended the fort stoutly. Ranjit singh
invited him to vacate the fort and accept a jagir. In few months, Jaffar Khan ac
cepted Ranjit singh's terms and gave up the fort. He was given a jagir and allow
ed to remain in Khushab with his family.
Anglo-Gurkha War, Anglo-French struggles
India's History : Modern India : The Anglo-Gurkha war ; Anglo-French struggles
- 1814-1816
In 1768, the Gurkhas - a tribe of the Western Himalayas, conquered the Nepal val
ley. Slowly they built up a powerful State with considerable military strength a
nd desire to expand. On the northern side they were checked by the Chinese Empir
e and on the southern side the Gurkhas extended their dominion as far as River T
ista on the east and Sutlej on the west. The Gurkhas got in possessions the whol
e of strong country which skirts the northern frontier of Hindustan.

Gurkha-English Conflicts
In 1801, the East India Company occupied the Gorakpur district with which the Gu
rkhas in Tarai became conterminous with the uncertain and ill-defined northern f
rontier of the British dominions. At the times of Lord Minto, the Gurkhas conque
red Bhutwal lying north. However the Company again regained Bhutwal. Thus the co
nflicting interest between the Gurkhas and the English continued sowing the seed
s of the war.
In May 1814, the Gurkhas attacked the three police stations in Bhutwal. Then in
October, Governor-General Lord Hastings declared a war against the Gurkhas. Lord
Hastings himself took the charge of the war and decided to attack the Gurkhas a
t the four points along the entire line of Sutlej to the Kosi. The British even
tried to bribe the Nepalese Government. But to vanquish the Nepalese was not an
easy task for Lord Hastings. Again it was very difficult for the British soldier
s to go through the mountainous region.
Treaty of Sagauli - 1815
In 1814-1815, the British had to accept defeats. Major-Generals Marley and John
Wood, who were to advance towards Nepal capital, retreated after some unsuccessf
ul attempts. General Gillespie lost his life in Kalanga. Major-General Martindel
l was defeated at Jaitak. However all these defeats were again retrieved when in
April 1815, Colonel Nicolls and Gardener captured Almora in Kumaon and on May 1
5, 1815, General Ochterlony compelled the Gurkha leader Amar Singh Thapa, to sur
render the fort of Malaon. And finally on November 28 1815, the Gurkhas signed a
treaty of Sagauli. The Nepal Government hesitated to ratify the treaty and the
hostilities began again. General Ochterlony advanced towards the Nepal capital a
nd defeated the Nepalese at Makwanpur on February 28, 1816. This compelled the N
epal Government to ratify the treaty. As per the treaty the Nepalese gave up the
ir claims to places in the lowlands along the southern frontier, gave away Garhw
al and Kumaon on the west of Nepal to the British and also withdrew from Sikkim.
They also agreed to receive a British Resident at Katmandu. The Nepal Governmen
t ever since remained true to its alliance with the English.
Third Anglo-Maratha Battle: Pindari
India's History : Modern India : The Pindari war - 1817-1818
Pindari
Of uncertain origin, the term `Pindari' described a type of irregular light hors
e-cum-bandit which flourished in central India in the late l8th and early l9th c
enturies, originating with the break-up of the Mogul armies. Of no one race, tri
be or religion, they included any to whom the prospect of lawlessness appealed,
including Marathas, Afghans and Jats; generally organised in loose bands led by
chieftains, they sometimes served the Maratha states, receiving no wage but even
paying for the prospect of loot and plunder. They congregated in Malwa, with th
e tacit approval of Sindhia and Holkar, from where they set out, usually in Nove
mber, to plunder throughout Hindustan, into British territory and even to the Co
romandel coast. The most powerful chieftain, Amir Khan, had regularly organised
regiments, estimated at 12,000 light horse, 10,000 infantry and an estimated art
illery train of between 80 and 200 guns; to which other Pindari bands added a fu
rther 15,000 cavalry, 1,500 infantry and 20 guns.
By 1817 the ravages of these bandits had become intolerable, so the Governor Gen
eral (and Commander in-Chief), the Earl of Moira (later Marquess HASTINGS) deter
mined to crush them; but the renewed hostility of the Maratha powers turned what

began as a drive against freebooters into a war against the peshwa, Indore, and
the Bhonsla raja of Nagpore. (Jaswant Rao Holkar of Indore had died in 1811, an
d in the minority of his successor, his favourite mistress became regent; she wa
s murdered by the Indore military commanders in 1817 who committed their forces
to the peshwa when hostilities began). To combat this menace, the Governor Gener
al formed two armies, taking personal command of the Grand Army which assembled
at Cawnpore in four divisions, each of two infantry and a cavalry brigade; and G
eneral Sir Thomas Hislop's Army of the Deccan, seven divisions strong. Troops fr
om all three presidencies were involved.
Two of the possible foes provided little opposition; Sindhia was pressured into
neutrality, and by signing the Treaty of Gwalior agreed to take action against t
he Pindaris, whom he had been protecting; and the Pindaris themselves did not po
se the predicted threat. Amir Khan accepted conditions imposed by the British an
d disbanded his forces, in return for a territorial settlement which became the
state of Tonk in Rajputana; the remaining Pindari forces were attacked and dispe
rsed, one of their principal leaders, Karim, surrenderirig, and another, Chitu,
fled to the jungles where he was killed by a tiger.
Marathas finally crushed
More serious was the reaction of the other Marathas, whose simmering discontent
turned into open war in November 1817. As Peshwa Baji Rao II assembled his force
s, the commander of the British units at Poona, Colonel C. B. BURR, withdrew fro
m the cantonments with the Resident, and concentrated on a ridge at Kirkee. The
residency at Poona was burned, and on 5 November 1817 the Peshwa's army moved to
attack the position at Kirkee; their strength was estimated as up to 18,000 cav
alry, 8,000 infantry and fourteen guns, against which Burr had five Bombay sepoy
battalions and an auxiliary battalion, about 2,000 strong, and 800 Europeans (B
ombay Europeans and a detachment of 65th Foot). Burr attacked immediately and th
e Marathas bolted, the Peshwa's entire force being routed for the loss of ninete
en dead and 67 wounded, only two of these casualties falling upon BURR's Europea
n troops. General Lionel SMITH arrived to reinforce BURR on the l3th, and on 17
November another action was fought at Poona, which completed the defeat of the P
eshwa's army.
At Nagpore the Bhonsla mustered his forces, ostensibly for a drive against the P
indaris, but turned against the British when news was received of the Peshwa's r
evolt. The British force at Nagpore was only about 1,300 strong, comprising thre
e troops of 6th Bengal Cavalry, the 1/20th and 1/24th Madras Native Infantry, an
d some auxiliaries, commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel H. S. SCOTT. Like BURR, Scot
t withdrew from the cantonments to a defensible position; at Seetabuldee on 26 N
ovember 18,000 men of the Nagpore army, including some 3,000 Arabs employed by t
he Bhonsla, attacked him. After a fight of some eighteen hours the Nagpore army
withdrew, Scott's force having sustained 367 casualties, testimony to the determ
ination with which sepoy units could fight, even without European support. On 12
December relief arrived in the form of Brigadier-General J. DOVETON's 2nd Divis
ion of the Army of the Deccan, which assaulted Nagpore on 16 December. After sev
eral hours' fighting the 21,000-strong Nagpore army was routed, some thousands w
ithdrawing into the city, where they capitulated on 24 December after several da
ys of bombardment.
Despite the defeat at Poona, the Peshwa's army was still in being and, about 28,
000 strong on New Years Day 1818 fell upon a British detachment at Coiygaum. Com
manded by Captain STAUNTON of the 21st Bombay Native Infantry, this comprised on
ly about 600 of his own battalion, two Madras Artillery 6pdrs and 300 auxiliary
horse. Staunton occupied that part of Corygaum village not held by the enemy, an
d a house-to-house fight raged from noon until 9 p.m. This remarkable defence, i
n which only Staunton and two other officers remained unscathed, resisted all ef
forts of the Peshwa's army, which retired and broke up upon news of the approach

of General Lionel Smith. Concerning the exertions of the British officers (even
two assistant-surgeons, one of whom was killed, had led bayonet-charges through
out the day), Smith described their efforts as `almost unparalleled ... in such
a struggle the presence of a single European was of the utmost consequence, and
seemed to inspire the native soldiers with the usual confidence of success'; but
this action, coming at the end of a 28-mile march, reflected equal credit upon
the sepoys as upon their leaders.
After vainly attempting to negotiate to prevent the state becoming hostile, Sir
Thomas HISLOP engaged the army of Indore at Mahidpore on 23 December 1817. The I
ndore forces mustered some 30,000 light horse, 5,000 infantry and 100 guns; Hisl
op's 5,500-strong 1st and 3rd Divisions of the Army of the Deccan included few E
uropeans, only the flank companies of the lst Foot and Madras Europeans. Because
of the disparity in numbers, Hislop attacked immediately; the Maratha horse fle
d, but the infantry and gunners (trained in European style) made a gallant stand
until they were overthrown. Hislop lost 174 killed, 614 wounded and three missi
ng. Mahidpore virtually ended the war, as peace was concluded with Indore shortl
y after. Following a chase, Baji Rao II surrendered to Sir John MALCOLM in May 1
818, and was sent as a state pensioner to Bithur, near Cawnpore, devoid of power
or influence; his heir, Nana Sahib, would become infamous forty years later. An
infant was recognised as raja of Nagpore, under British guardianship, and when
the Bhonsla died without direct heirs in 1853, his territory was annexed. The wa
r finally ended the power of the Maratha states, although Gwalior was still not
completely negated as an opponent.
Modern India : The First Burmese War
India's History : Modern India : The First Burmese War - 1824-1826
Burmese War
On September 23, 1823 an armed party of Burmese attacked a British guard on Shap
ura, an island close to the Chittagong side, killing and wounding six of the gua
rd. Two Burmese armies, one from Mariipur and another from Assam, also entered C
achar, which was under British protection, in January 1824. War with Burma was f
ormally declared on the March 5, 1824. On May 17 a Burmese force invaded Chittag
ong and drove a mixed sepoy and police detachment from its position at Ramu, but
did not follow up its success.
The British rulers in India, however, had resolved to carry the war into the ene
mys country; an armament, under Commodore Charles Grant and Sir Archibald Campbe
ll, entered the Rangoon river, and anchored off the town on May 10, 1824. After
a feeble resistance the place, then little more than a large stockaded village,
was surrendered, and the troops were landed. The place was entirely deserted by
its inhabitants, the provisions were carried off or destroyed, and the invading
force took possession of a complete solitude. On May 28 Sir A. Campbell ordered
an attack on some of the nearest posts, which were all carried after a steadily
weakening defence. Another attack was made on the June 10 on the stockades at th
e village of Kemmendine. Some of these were battered by artillery from the war v
essels in the river, and the shot and shells had such effect on the Burmese that
they evacuated them, after a very unequal resistance.
It soon, however, became apparent that the expedition had been undertaken with v
ery imperfect knowledge of the country, and without adequate provision. The deva
station of the country, which was part of the defensive system of the Burmese, w
as carried out with unrelenting rigour, and the invaders were soon reduced to gr
eat difficulties. The health of the men declined, and their ranks were fearfully
thinned. The monarch of Ava sent large reinforcements to his dispirited and bea
ten army; and early in June an attack was commenced on the British line, but pro
ved unsuccessful. On June 8 the British assaulted. The enemy were beaten at all
points; and their strongest stockaded works, battered to pieces by a powerful ar
tillery, were in general abandoned.

With the exception of an attack by the prince of Tharrawaddy in the end of Augus
t, the enemy allowed the British to remain unmolested during the months of July
and August. This interval was employed by Sir A. Campbell in subduing the Burmes
e provinces of Tavoy and Mergui, and the whole coast of Tenasserim. This was an
important conquest, as the country was salubrious and afforded convalescent stat
ions to the sick, who were now so numerous in the British army that there were s
carcely 3,000 soldiers fit for duty. An expedition was about this time sent agai
nst the old Portuguese fort and factory of Syriam, at the mouth of the Pegu rive
r, which was taken; and in October the province of Martaban was reduced under th
e authority of the British.
The rainy season terminated about the end of October; and the court of Ava, alar
med by the discomfiture of its armies, recalled the veteran legions which were e
mployed in Arakan, under their renowned leader Maha Bandula. Bandula hastened by
forced marches to the defence of his country; and by the end of November an arm
y of 60,000 men had surrounded the British position at Rangoon and Kemmendine, f
or the defence of which Sir Archibald Campbell had only 5,000 efficient troops.
The enemy in great force made repeated attacks on Kemmendine without success, an
d on December 7, Bandula was defeated in a counter attack made by Sir A. Campbel
l. The fugitives retired to a strong position on the river, which they again ent
renched; and here they were attacked by the British on the 15th, and driven in c
omplete confusion from the field.
Sir Archibald Campbell now resolved to advance on Prome; about 100 m. higher up
the Irrawaddy river. He moved with his force on February 13, 1825 in two divisio
ns, one proceeding by land, and the other, under General Willoughby Cotton, dest
ined for the reduction of Danubyu, being embarked on the flotilla. Taking the co
mmand of the land force, he continued his advance till March 11, when intelligen
ce reached him of the failure of the attack upon Danubyu. He instantly commenced
a retrograde march; on the 27th he effected a junction with General Cottons for
ce, and on April 2 entered the entrenchments at Danubyu without resistance, Band
ula having been killed by the explosion of a bomb. The English general entered P
rome on the 25th, and remained there during the rainy season. On September 17, a
n armistice was concluded for one month. In the course of the summer General Jos
eph Morrison had conquered the province of Arakan; in the north the Burmese were
expelled from Assam; and the British had made some progress in Cachar, though t
heir advance was finally impeded by the thick forests and jungle.
The armistice having expired on November 3, the army of Ava, amounting to 60,000
men, advanced in three divisions against the British position at Prome, which w
as defended by 3,000 Europeans and 2,000 native troops. But the British still tr
iumphed, and after several actions, in which the Burmese were the assailants and
were partially successful, Sir A. Campbell, on December 1, attacked the differe
nt divisions of their army, and successively drove them from all their positions
, and dispersed them in every direction. The Burmese retired on Malun, along the
course of the Irrawaddy, where they occupied, with 10,000 or 12,000 men, a seri
es of strongly fortified heights and a formidable stockade. On the 26th they sen
t a flag of truce to the British camp; and negotiations having commenced, peace
was proposed to them on the following conditions:
The cession of Arakan, together with the provinces of Mergui, Tavoy and Ye the r
enunciation by the Burmese sovereign of all claims upon Assam and the contiguous
petty states the Company to be paid a crore of rupees as an indemnification for
the expenses of the war residents from each court to be allowed, with an escort
of fifty men it was also stipulated that British ships should no longer be obli
ged to unship their rudders and land their guns as formerly in the Burmese ports
This treaty was agreed to and signed, but the ratification of the king was still
wanting; and it was soon apparent that the Burmese had no intention to sign it,

but were preparing to renew the contest. On January 19, accordingly, Sir A. Cam
pbell attacked and carried the enemys position at Malun. Another offer of peace
was here made by the Burmese, but it was found to be insincere; and the fugitive
army made at the ancient city of Pagan a final stand in defence of the capital.
They were attacked and overthrown on February 9, 1826; and the invading force b
eing now within four days march of Ava, Dr Price, an American missionary, who wi
th other Europeans had been thrown into prison when the war commenced, was sent
to the British camp with the treaty (known as the treaty of Yandaboo) ratified,
the prisoners of war released, and an instalment of 25 lakhs of rupees. The war
was thus brought to a successful termination, and the British army evacuated the
country.
Abolition of Sati
India's History : Modern India : Prohibition of Sati - 1829
Sati Stigma
Within the Indian culture, the highest ideal for a woman are virtue, purity, and
allegiance to her husband. From this tradition stems the custom in which a wife
immolates herself on the funeral pyre of her deceased husband as proof of her l
oyalty. This custom in which a woman burns herself either on the funeral pyre of
her deceased husband or by herself with a momento after his death is now referr
ed to as sati or, in England, as suttee. In the original meaning, "Sati" was def
ined as a woman who was "true to her ideals". A pious and virtuous woman would r
eceive the title of "Sati." Sati was derived from the ancient Indic language ter
m, sat, which means truth. Sati has come to signify both the act of immolation o
f a widow and the victim herself, rather than its original meaning of "a virtuou
s woman".
The term"sati" is associated with the Hindu goddess Sati. In the Hindu mythology
, Sati who was the wife of Lord Shiva, consumed herself in a holy pyre. She did
this in response to her father's refusal to invite Shiva to the assembly of the
Gods. She was so mortified that she invoked a yogic fire and was reduced to ashe
s. Self-sacrifice, like that of the original Sati, became a "divine example of w
ifely devotion". The act of Sati propagated the belief that if a widow gives up
her life for her husband, she will be honored. Socially, the act of sati played
a major role in determining the true nature of a woman. Self-sacrifice is consid
ered the best measure of judging the woman's virtue as well as her loyalty to he
r husband. The following applies to the ideal wife: "if her husband is happy, sh
e should be happy; if he is sad, she should be sad, and if he is dead, she shoul
d also die. Such a wife is called a Patrivrata". The upbringing of many Indian g
irls emphasized the concept of Patrivrata as the only way for a woman to merit h
eaven.
This concept of meriting heaven through self-sacrifice became embedded within th
e minds of many as the only assurance for a female to gain salvation. A female's
life must be lived in full devotion to her husband; otherwise she will be doome
d for eternity and will live a cruel existence as a widow. According to Ananda C
oomaraswamy: "Women were socially dead after the death of their husbands and wer
e thought to be polluting". Only a woman who is sexually and legally possessed b
y a husband is respected within the Indian society.
By sacrificing herself a widow saves herself from the cruel existence of widowho
od and ends the threat she possesses for society. She is considered a member of
society who has unrestrained sexual vigor, and thus may harm society with immora
l acts. A widow was seen as having irrepressible sexual powers and could be a da
nger to her society. Remarriage in India was not favored. A widow was not allowe
d to remarry, nor was she able to turn to religious learning, and hence lived a

bleak and barren life. The pain that a sati endures on the pyre was less painful
of an experience than the torture she must endure physically and emotionally as
a widow. If a widow decided not to join her husband, she was separated from the
social world of the living and considered to be a "cold sati". She was only all
owed to wear rags and was treated by her family and members of society as an imp
ure, polluted being. The prohibition, in which she is unable to adorn herself, w
as considered justifiable, done for the widow's "own interest".
The British government in 1829 prohibited the custom of sati. British India decl
ared the practice of sati as illegal and punishable by criminal courts. Such a l
aw revealed much about the British thought and opinion of India and its customs.
East India Company takes over the Administration
India's History : Modern India : Raja of Mysore deposed and its administration
taken over by East India Company : 1831
Mysore
The old province of Mysore comprised the areas of Mysore, Talakad, Kodagu and Sr
irangapatnam. The Wodeyar dynasty, which was founded by Yaduraya in 1399 AD, has
dominated most of Mysore history. Chikkadevara Wodeyar was the man who expanded
the Mysore Empire while Kantareeva Narasimha Raja Wodeyar recaptured Mysore fro
m the Dalavayis. The interim period saw the rise to power of two of India's most
famous personalities-Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan. Tipu Sultan was the first to bu
ild an army on scientific lines and took on the might of the British. Known as t
he Tiger of Mysore, his acts of courage, bravery are renowned. This brave heart
died at Srirangapatna fighting till the last.
The modern phase of Mysore began from 1800 with the ascent to the throne of Kris
hnaraja Wodeyar III. Governor William Bentick took over Mysore in 1831 and in 18
81 restored it back to Chamaraja Wodeyar.
Company's Charter renewed
India's History : Modern India : Renewal of Company's Charter; Abolition of com
pany's trading rights : 1833
Renewal of Charter
After the separation of the Company?s commercial and political financial account
s, tracking charges to Indian territorial revenues became somewhat easier. Compa
ny accounts distinguished a class of territorial expenses incurred in Britain th
at were chargeable to the Indian revenues. After the 1833 Charter Renewal that a
bolished the Company?s commercial operations, calculating what were called Home
Charges become straightforward anything spent by the Company in Britain was an e
xpense for the Indian treasury. Whether all these charges represented a transfer
of wealth from India as a drain or tribute or whether some or all should be con
sidered payments for services rendered is a difficult question and one that this
paper cannot really answer. However, the impact of the Home Charges upon Indian
budgets between 1815 and 1859 is clear.
It was only after passage of the Charter Act of 1833 had closed India Company tr
ading operations that a shift occurred. After that date, the regime began a syst
ematic policy of building and improving public works. For example, the regime in
vested 2.2 million sterling in improving three grand trunk roads: Peshawar-Delhi
-Calcutta; Calcutta to Bombay; and Bombay to Agra. In the 1850?s the state began
work for the first time on new irrigation projects. The Ganges Canal that tappe
d into the perennial water flow of the Himalayan river sources, finished in 1854
, cost 1.4 million sterling. The Kaveri, Godavari and Krishna river systems in t
he south were also completed.
These long-term East India Company fiscal data reveal several characteristic fea

tures of the Company?s fiscal approach: First, decision-makers at home and in In

dia were bent on creating a usable revenue surplus each year suitable for commer
cial investment (until 1833) and paying dividends to the holders of East India C
ompany stock. To do so, they raised their revenue demands in each territory acqu
ired to levels equal to the highest assessments made by previous Indian regimes.
Second, those surpluses produced were never adequate to meet the combined admin
istrative, military and commercial expenses of the Company. Third, the Company r
esorted to borrowing on interest-bearing bonds in India and at home in steadily
rising amounts to meet its obligations. Fourth, the escalating cost of the East
India Company armies and of incessant warfare formed the greatest single fiscal
burden for the new regime. Finally, the Company allocated negligible funds for p
ublic works, for cultural patronage, for charitable relief, or for any form of e
ducation. The Company confined its generosity to paying extremely high salaries
to its civil servants and military officers. Otherwise parsimony ruled. These ch
aracteristics marked the East India Company fiscal system from its inception to
its demise in 1859.
Abolition of Slavery
India's History : Modern India : Abolition of Slavery throughout the British E
mpire - 1833
Slavery Act
The common law of England did not recognize anyone as a slave (although in Scotl
and, which does not have the common law, bondage still existed until the late ei
ghteenth century, when it was abolished by legislation). Slavery, however, exist
ed in a number of British colonies, principally in the West Indies.
The Slavery Abolition Bill 1833 was passed by the House of Commons and by the Ho
use of Lords.
It received the Royal Assent (which means it became law) on 29 August 1833 and c
ame into force on 1 August 1834. On that date slavery was abolished throughout t
he vast British Empire.
The Act automatically applied as new possessions (principally in Africa) subsequ
ently became part of the British Empire.
There were a number of exceptions.
First, its application to the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope (now the Cape Prov
ince of the Republic of South Africa) was delayed for 4 months and its applicati
on to the Colony of Mauritius (now the Republic of Mauritius) was delayed for 6
months.
Secondly, section 64 excluded Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), St Helena and the territor
ies in the possession of The Honourable East India Company, namely in British In
dia, but the section was subsequently repealed. The Honourable East India Compan
y, in theory, administered large parts of India as an agent for the Mogul Empero
r in Delhi.
Subsequently, section 1 of 5 & 6 Vict c 101 was enacted which prohibited certain
officers of The Honourable East India Company from being involved in the purcha
se of slaves, but it did not actually abolish slavery in India. It was the provi
sions of the Indian Penal Code 1860 which effectively abolished slavery in India
by making the enslavement of human beings a criminal offence.
Purposes of the Act
The purposes of the Slavery Abolition Act 1833 were described in the preamble to
the Bill as:

?the abolition of slavery throughout the British colonies?;

?for promoting the industry of the manumitted slaves?; and
?for compensating the persons hitherto entitled to the services of such slaves?.
The second purpose was achieved by providing for a period of apprenticeship.
The third purpose was achieved by appropriating ?20 million ? a huge sum in thos
e days ? to compensate slave owners.
Tripartite Treaty
India's History : Modern India : Tripartite treaty between Shah Shuja, Ranjit S
ingh and the British : 1838
The Treaty
The debacle of the Afghan civil war left a vacuum in the Hindu Kush area that co
ncerned the British, who were well aware of the many times in history it had bee
n employed as the invasion route to India. In the early decades of the nineteent
h century, it became clear to the British that the major threat totheir interest
s in India would not come from the fragmented Afghan empire, the Iranians, or th
e French, but from the Russians, who had already begun a steady advance southwar
d from the Caucasus.
At the same time, the Russians feared permanent British occupation in Central As
ia as the British encroached northward, taking the Punjab, Sindh, and Kashmir. T
he British viewed Russia's absorption of the Caucasus, the Kirghiz and Turkmenla
nds, and the Khanates of Khiva and Bukhara with equal suspicion as a threat to t
heir interests in the Indian subcontinent.
In addition to this rivalry between Britain and Russia, there were two specific
reasons for British concern over Russia's intentions. First was the Russian infl
uence at the Iranian court, which prompted the Russians to support Iran in its a
ttempt to take Herat, historically the western gateway to Afghanistan and northe
rn India. In 1837 Iran advanced on Herat with the support and advice of Russian
officers. The second immediate reason was the presence in Kabul in 1837 of a Rus
sian agent, Captain P. Vitkevich, who was ostensibly there, as was the British a
gent Alexander Burnes, for commercial discussions.
The British demanded that Dost Mohammad sever all contact with the Iranians and
Russians, remove Vitkevich from Kabul, and surrender all claims to Peshawar, and
respect Peshawar's independence as well as that of Qandahar, which was under th
e control of his brothers at the time. In return, the British government intimat
ed that it would ask Ranjit Singh to reconcile with the Afghans. When Auckland r
efused to put the agreement in writing, Dost Mohammad turned his back on the Bri
tish and began negotiations with Vitkevich.
In 1838 Auckland, Ranjit Singh, and Shuja signed an agreement stating that Shuja
would regain control of Kabul and Qandahar with the help of the British and Sik
hs; he would accept Sikh rule of the former Afghan provinces already controlled
by Ranjit Singh, and that Herat would remain independent. In practice, the plan
replaced Dost Mohammad with a British figurehead whose autonomy would be as limi
ted as that of other Indian princes.
It soon became apparent to the British that Sikh participation?advancing toward
Kabul through the Khyber Pass while Shuja and the British advanced through Qanda
har--would not be forthcoming. Auckland's plan in the spring of1838 was for the
Sikhs--with British support--to place Shuja on the Afghan throne. By summer's en
d, however, the plan had changed; now the British alone would impose the pliant
Shuja.
The First Afghan War, 1839-1842
India's History : Modern India : The First Afghan War : 1839 - 1842
First Afghan War

With the failure of the Burnes mission (1837), the governor general of India, Lo
rd Auckland, ordered an invasion of Afghanistan, with the object of restoring sh
ah Shuja (also Shoja), who had ruled Afghanistan from 1803 to 1809. From the poi
nt of the view of the British, the First Anglo-Afghan War (often called "Aucklan
d's Folly") was an unmitigated disaster. The war demonstrated the ease of overru
nning Afghanistan and the difficulty of holding it.
An army of British and Indian troops set out from the Punjab in December 1838 an
d by late March 1839 had reached Quetta. By the end of April the British had tak
en Qandahar without a battle. In July, after a two-month delay in Qandahar, the
British attacked the fortress of Ghazni, overlooking a plain that leads to India
, and achieved a decisive victory over the troops of Dost Mohammad, which were l
ed by one of his sons. The Afghans were amazed at the taking of fortified Ghazni
, and Dost Mohammad found his support melting away. The Afghan ruler took his fe
w loyal followers and fled across the passes to Bamian, and ultimately to Bukhar
a, where he was arrested, and in August 1839 Shuja was enthroned again in Kabul
after a hiatus of almost 30 years. Some British troops returned to India, but it
soon became clear that Shuja's rule could only be maintained by the presence of
British forces. Garrisons were established in Jalalabad, Ghazni, Kalat-iGhilzai
(Qalat), Qandahar, and at the passes to Bamian.
Omens of disaster for the British abounded. Opposition to the British-imposed ru
le of Shuja began as soon as he assumed the throne, and the power of his governm
ent did not extend beyond the areas controlled by the force of British arms.
Dost Mohammad escaped from prison in Bukhara and returned to Afghanistan to lead
his followers against the British and their Afghan protege. In a battle at Parw
an on November 2, 1840, Dost Mohammad had the upper hand, but the next day he su
rrendered to the British in Kabul. He was deported to India with the greater par
t of his family. Sir William Macnaghten, one of the principal architects of the
British invasion, wrote to Auckland two months later, urging good treatment for
the deposed Afghan leader.
Shuja did not succeed in garnering the support of the Afghan chiefs on his own,
and the British could not or would not sustain their subsidies. When the cash pa
yments to tribal chiefs were curtailed in 1841, there was a major revolt by the
Ghilzai.
By October 1841 disaffected Afghan tribes were flocking to the support of Dost M
ohammad's son, Muhammad Akbar, in Bamian. Barnes was murdered in November 1841,
and a few days later the commissariat fell into the hands of the Afghans. Macnag
hten, having tried first to bribe and then to negotiate with the tribal leaders,
was killed at a meeting with the tribal chiefs in December. On January 1, 1842,
the British in Kabul and a number of Afghan chiefs reached an agreement that pr
ovided for the safe exodus of the entire British garrison and its dependents fro
m Afghanistan. Unfortunately, the British would not wait for an Afghan escort to
be assembled, and the Ghilzai and allied tribes had not been among the 18 chief
s who had signed the agreement. On January 6 the precipitate retreat by some 4,5
00 British and Indian troops with 12,000 camp followers began and, as they strug
gled through the snowbound passes, Ghilzai warriors attacked the British. Althou
gh a Dr. W. Brydon is usually cited as the only survivor of the march to Jalalab
ad (out of more than 15,000 who undertook the retreat), in fact a few more survi
ved as prisoners and hostages. Shuja remained in power only a few months and was
assassinated in April 1842.
The destruction of the British garrison prompted brutal retaliation by the Briti
sh against the Afghans and touched off yet another power struggle among potentia
l rulers of Afghanistan. In the fall of 1842 British forces from Qandahar and Pe
shawar entered Kabul long enough to rescue the British prisoners and burn the gr

eat bazaar. All that remained of the British occupation of Afghanistan was a rui
ned market and thousands of dead (one estimate puts the total killed at 20,000).
Although the foreign invasion did give the Afghan tribes a temporary sense of u
nity they had lacked before, the accompanying loss of life (one estimate puts th
e total killed at 25,000) and property was followed by a bitterness and resentme
nt of foreign influence that lasted well into the twentieth century and may have
accounted for much of the backlash against the modernization attempts of later
Afghan monarchs.
The Gwalior War
India's History : Modern India : The Gwalior War - 1843
The Gwalior War
Years of turbulence and intrigue in Gwailor culminated in 1843 in the adoption o
f the child-heir Jayavi Rao Sinhia to the vacant throne. With the country's geog
raphical position so strategically significant to British interests, especially
regarding the Punjab and Sind, and the fact that Gwailor possessed significant m
ilitary forces, the British naturally wanted certain re-assurances from the Gwai
lor council of regency. The council refused even to discuss the situation with L
ord Ellenborough and, in 1843, war was declared.
The British formed two armies: one at Agra under Sir Hugh Gough; and one at Jans
i under Major-General John Grey. Opposing them was an army, which included Europ
ean-trained "regulars" and a formidable force of artillery.
On 29th December 1843, Gough's force of two cavalry and three infantry brigades
encountered about 17,000 Marathas in a strong position at Maharajpore. Naturally
Gough attacked immediately and, despite strong resistance, the Mahrathas were r
outed and 56 guns captured. Gough suffered almost 800 casualties.
On the same day, Grey's column encountered a second Maratha force some 12,000 st
rong at Punniar, about 20 miles away from Gough. Again the British attacked, and
again the Marathas were routed and their artillery captured.
Under these twin blows, the Gwalior regency capitulated and on 31st December 184
3 a treaty was signed that effectively gave control of the country to the Britis
h.
First Anglo-Sikh War
India's History : Modern India : First Anglo-Sikh war - 1845-1846
Anglo-Sikh War
ANGLO-SIKH WAR 1, 1845-46, resulting in partial subjugation of the Sikh kingdom,
as the outcome of British expansionism. It was near-anarchical conditions that
overtook the Lahore court after the death of Maharaja Ranjit Singh in June 1839.
The English, by then firmly installed in Firozpur the Sikh frontier, about 70 k
m from Lahore, the Sikh capital, were watching the happenings across the border
with more than neighbour's interest The disorder that revealed there promised th
em a good opportunity for direct intervention.
Up to 1838, the British troops on the Sikh frontier had amounted to one regiment
at Sabathu in the hills and two at Ludhiana with six pieces of artillery, equal
ing in all about 2,500 men. The total rose to 8,000 during the time of Lord Auck
land (1836 42) who increased the number of troops at Ludhiana and created a new
military post at Firozpur, which was actually Past of Sikh kingdom's dominion so
uth of the Sutlej. British preparations for a war with the Sikhs began seriously
in 1843 when the new governor-general, Lord Ellenborough (1842-44), discussed w
ith the Home government the possibilities of a military occupation of the Punjab

. English and Indian infantry reinforcement began arriving at each of the fronti
er posts of Firozpur and Ludhiana. Cavalry and artillery regiments moved up to A
mbala and Kasauli. Works were in the process of erection around the magazine at
Firozpur, and the fort at Ludhiana began to he fortified. Plans for the construc
tion of bridges over the rivers Markanda and Ghaggar were prepared, and a new ro
ad link to join Meerut and Ambala was taken in hand. Exclusive of the newly cons
tructed cantonments of Kasauli and Shimla, Ellenborough had been able to collect
a force of 11,639 men and 48 guns at Ambala, Ludhiana and Firozpur. Everywhere,
" wrote Lord Ellenborough, we are trying to get things in order and especially t
o strengthen and equip the artillery with which the fight will be."
Seventy boats of thirty-five tons each, with the necessary equipments to bridge
the Sutlej at any point, were under construction; fifty-six pontoons were on the
ir way from Bombay for use in Sindh, and two steamers were being constructed to
ply on the River Sutlej. in November 1845," he informed the Duke of Wellington,
"the army will be equal to any operation. I should be sorry to have it called to
the field sooner." In July 1844, Lord Ellenborough was replaced by Lord Harding
e (1844-48), a Peninsula veteran, as governor-general of India. Hardinge further
accelerated the process of strengthening the Sutlej frontier for a war with the
Sikhs. The abrasive and belligerent Major George Broadfoot as the political age
nt on the Punjab frontier replaced the affable Colonel Richmond. Lord Cough, the
commander-in-chief, established his headquarters at Ambala. In October 1844, th
e British military force on the frontier was 17,000 infantry and 60 guns. Anothe
r 10,000 troops were to be ready by the end of November. Firozpur's garrison str
ength under the command of Sir John Littler was raised to 7,000; by January 1845
, the total British force amounted to 20,000 men and 60 guns. We can collect," H
ardinge reported to the Home government, 33,000 infantry, 6,000 cavalry and 100
guns in six weeks." In March additional British and Indian regiments were quietl
y moved to Flrozpur, Ludhiana and Ambala. Field batteries of 9 pounders with hor
ses or bullocks to draw them, and 24 additional pieces of heavy ordnance were on
their way to the frontier. In addition, 600 elephants to draw the battering tra
in of 24-pounder batteries had reached Agra, and 7,000 camels between Kanpur and
the Sutlej were to move up in the summer to Firozpur, which was to be the conce
ntration point for a forward offensive movement.
Lord Hardinge, blamed unnecessarily by the Home government for inadequate milita
ry preparations for the first Sikh war, had, during the seventeen months between
Ellen borough's departure and the commencement of hostilities with the Sikhs, i
ncreased the garrison strength at Ferozpur from 4,596 men and 12 guns to 10,472
men and 24 guns; at Ambala from 4,113 men and 24 guns to 12, 972 men and 32 guns
; at Ludhiana from 3,030 men and 12 guns to 7,235 men and 12 guns, and at Meerut
from 5,573 men and 18 guns to 9,844 men and 24 guns. The relevant strength of t
he advanced armies, including those at the hill stations of Sabathu and Kasauli,
was raised from 24,000 men and 66 guns to 45,500 men and 98 guns. These figures
are based on official British papers, particularly Hardinge's private correspon
dence on Punjab affairs with his predecessor, Lord Ellenborough. Thus Total numb
er of British troops around Punjab was 86,023 men and 116 guns. In addition to t
he concentration of troops on the border, an elaborate supply depot was set up b
y the British at Basslan, near Raikot, in Ludhiana district. The Lahore Darbar's
vamps or representatives and news writers in the cis-Sutlej region sent alarmin
g reports of these large-scale British military movements across the border. The
Sikhs were deeply wrought upon by these war preparations, especially by Broad f
oot?s acts of hostility. The rapid march in November 1845 of the governor-genera
l towards the frontier and a report of Sir Charles Napier's speech in the Delhi
Gazette saying that the British were going to war with the Sikhs filled Lahore w
ith rumors of invasion. The Sikh ranks, alerted to the danger of a British offen
sive, started their own preparations. Yet the army pinches or regimental represe
ntatives, who had taken over the affairs of the Lahore forces into their own han
ds after the death of Wazir Jawahar Singh, were at this time maintaining, accord

ing to George Campbell, a British civilian employed in the cis-Sutlej territory,

Memoirs of My Indian Career , "Wonderful order at Lahore.. and almost puritanic
al discipline in the military republic."
However, the emergence of the army Panchayats as a new centre of power greatly p
erturbed the British authority that termed it as "unholy alliance between the re
publican army and the Darbar." In this process Sikh army had indeed been transfo
rmed. It had now assumed the role of the Khalsa. It worked through elected regim
ental committees declaring that Guru Gobind Singh's ideal of the Sikh commonweal
th had been revived, with the Sarbatt Khalsa or the Sikh as a whole assuming all
executive, military and civil authority in the State. The British decried this
as "the dangerous military democracy of the panchayat system," in which soldiers
were in a state of success mutiny. " When the British agent made a reference th
e Lahore Darbar about military preparations in the Punjab, it replied that there
only defensive measures to counter the signs of the British. The Darbar, on oth
er hand, asked for the return of the estimated at over seventeen lakh of the Lah
ore grandee Suchet Singh had left buried in Firozpur, the restoration of the vil
lage of Mauran granted by Maharaja Ranjit Singh to one of his generals Hukam Sin
gh Malvai, but subsequently resumed by the ruler of Nabha with the active conniv
ance of the British, and free passage of Punjabi armed constabulary ? a right th
at had been acknowledged by the British on paper but more often than not in prac
tice. The British government rejected the Darbar's claims and severed diplomatic
relations with it. The armies under Hugh Gough and Lord Hardinge began proceedi
ng towards Firozpur. To forestall their joining those at Firozpur, the Sikh army
began to cross the Sutlej on 11 December near Harike Pattan into its own territ
ory on the other side of the river. The crossing over the Sutlej by Sikhs was ma
de a pretext by the British for opening hostilities and on 13 December GovernorGeneral Lord Hardinge issued a proclamation announcing war on the Sikhs. The dec
laration charged the State of Lahore with violation of the treaty of friendship
of 1809 and justified British preparations as merely precautionary measures for
the protection of the Sutlej frontier. The British simultaneously declared Sikh
possessions on the left bank of the Sutlej forfeit.
Hesitation and indecision marred Sikh military operations. Having crossed the Su
tlej with five divisions, each 8,000 - 12,000 strong, an obvious strategy for th
em would have been to move forward. They did in a bold sweeping movement first e
ncircle Firozpur, then held by Sir John Littler with only 7,000 men, but withdre
w without driving the advantage home and dispersed their armies in a wide semici
rcle from Harike to Mudki and thence to Ferozeshah, 16 km southeast of Firozpur.
The abandonment of Firozpur as a first target was the result of the treachery o
f the Sikh Prime Minister, Lal Singh, who was in treasonable communication with
Captain Peter Nicholson, the assistant political agent of the British. He asked
the latter's advice and was told not to attack Firozpur. This instruction he fol
lowed seducing the Sikhs with an ingenious excuse that, instead of falling upon
an easy prey, the Khalsa should exalt their fame by captivity or the death of th
e Lat Sahib (the governor general) himself A division precipitately moved toward
s Ludhiana also remained inactive long enough to lose the benefit of the initiat
ive The Khalsa army had crossed the Sutlej borne on a wave of popular enthusiasm
, it was equally matched (60000 Sikh soldiers vs. 86,000 British soldiers) if no
t superior to the British force. Its soldiers had the will and determination to
fight or die, but not its commanders. There was no unique among them, and each o
f them seemed to act as he thought best. Drift was the policy deliberately adopt
ed by them. On 18 December, the Sikhs came in touch with British army, which arr
ived under Sir Hugh Gough, the commander-in-chief, from Ludhiana. A battle took
place at Mudki, 32 km from Flrozpur. Lal Singh, who headed the Sikh attack, dese
rted his army and fled the field when the Sikhs stood firm in their order, fight
ing in a resolute and determined manner. The leaderless Sikhs fought a grim hand
-to-hand battle against the more numerous enemy led by the most experienced comm
anders in the world. The battle continued with unabated fury till midnight (and
came thereafter to be known as "Midnight Mudki"). The Sikhs retired with a loss

of 17 guns while the British suffered heavy causalities amounting to 872 killed
and wounded, including Quartermaster-General Sir Robert Sale, Sir John McCaskill
and Brigadier Boulton. Reinforcements were sent for from Ambala, Meerut and Del
hi. Lord Hardinge, unmindful of his superior position of governor-general, offer
ed to become second-in-command to his commander-in-chief.
The second action was fought three days later, on 21 December at Ferozeshah, 16
km both from Mudki and Firozpur. The governor-general and the commander-in-chief
, assisted by reinforcements led by General Littler from Firozpur, made an attac
k upon the Sikhs who were awaiting them behind strong entrenchments. The British
? 16,700 men and 69 guns?tried to overrun the Sikhs in one massive cavalry, inf
antry and artillery onslaught, but the assault was stubbornly resisted. Sikhs' b
atteries fired with rapidity and precision. There was confusion in the ranks of
the English and their position became increasingly critical. The growing darknes
s of the frosty winter night reduced them to sore straits. The battle of Ferozes
hah is regarded as one of the most fiercely contested battles fought by the Brit
ish in India. During that "night of horrors," the commander-in-chief acknowledge
d, "We were in a critical and perilous state." Counsels of retreat and surrender
were raised and despair struck the British camp. In the words of General Sir IS
ope Grant, Sir Henry Hardinge thought it was all up and gave his sword?a present
from the Duke of Wellington and which once belonged to Napoleon?and his Star of
the ISath to his son, with directions to proceed to Firozpur, remarking that "i
f the day were lost, he must fall. "
Lal Singh and Tej Singh again came to the rescue of the English. The former sudd
enly deserted the Khalsa army during the night and the latter the next morning (
22 December), which enabled the British to turn defeat into victory. The British
loss was again heavy, 1,560 killed and 1,721 wounded. The number of causalities
among officers was comparatively higller. The Sikhs lost about 2,000 men and 73
pieces of artillery.
A temporary cessation of hostilities followed the battle of Ferozeshah. The Engl
ish were not in a position to assume the offensive and waited for heavy guns and
reinforcements to arrive from Delhi. Lal Singh and Tej Singh allowed them the m
uch-needed respite in as much as they kept the Sikhs from recrossing the Sutlej.
To induce desertions, Lord Hardinge issued a proclamation on the Christmas day
inviting all natives of Hindustan to quit the service of the Sikh State on pain
of forfeiting their property and to claim protection from the British government
. The deserters were also offered liberal rewards and pensions.
A Sikh sardar, Ranjodh Singh Majlthia, crossed the Sutlej in force and was joine
d by Ajit Singh, of Ladva, from the other side of the river. They marched toward
s Ludhiana and burnt a portion of the cantonment. Sir Harry Smith (afterwards Go
vernor of Cape Colony), who was sent to relieve Ludhlana, marched eastwards from
Firozpur, keeping a few miles away from the Sutlej. Ranjodh Singh Majithia harr
ied Smith's column and, when Smith tried to make a detour at Baddoval, attacked
his rear with great vigor and captured his baggage train and stores (21 January)
. But Harry Smith retrieved his position a week later by inflicting a defeat on
Ranjodh Singh Majithia and Ajlt Singh, of Ladva, (28January).
The last battle of the campaign took place on 10 February. To check the enemy ad
vance on Lahore, a large portion of the Sikh army was entrenched in a horseshoe
curve on the Sutlej near the village of Sabhraon, under the command of Tej Singh
while the cavalry battalions and the dreaded ghorcharas under Lal Singh were a
little higher up the river. Entrenchments at Sabhraon were on the left bank of t
he Sutlej with a pontoon bridge connecting them with their base camp. Their big
guns were placed behind high embankments and consequently immobilized for offens
ive action. The infantry was also posted behind earthworks and could not, theref
ore, be deployed to harass the opponents.

Early in February, the British received ample stores of ammunition from Delhi. L
al Singh had already passed on to the English officers the required clues for an
effective assault. Gough and Hardinge now decided to make a frontal attack on S
abhraon and destroy the Darbar army at one blow. A heavy mist hung over the batt
lefield, enveloping both contending armies. As the sun broke through the mist, t
he Sikhs found themselves encircled between two horseshoes: facing them were the
British and behind them was the Sutlej, now in spate. After a preliminary artil
lery duel, British cavalry made a feint to check on the exact location of the Si
kh guns. The cannonade was resumed, and in two hours British guns put the Darbar
artillery out of action. Then the British charged Sikh entrenchments from three
sides. Tej Singh fled across the pontoon bridge as soon as the contest started
and had it destroyed making reinforcement or return of Sikh soldiers impossible.
Gulab Singh Dogra stopped sending supplies and rations from Lahore. Lal Singh's
ghorcharas did not put in their appearance at Sabhraon. In the midst of these t
reacheries, a Sikh warrior, Sham Singh Attarivala, symbolizing the unflinching w
ill of the Khalsa, vowed to fight unto the last and fall in battle rather than r
etire in defeat. He rallied the ranks depleted by desertions. His courage inspir
ed the Sikhs to make a determined bid to save the day, but the odds were against
them. Sham Singh fell fighting in the foremost ranks along with his dauntless c
omrades. The British casualties at Sabhraon were 2,403 killed; the Sikhs lost 3,
125 men in the action and all their guns were either captured or abandoned in th
e river. Captain J.D. Cunningham, who was present as an additional aide-de-camp
to the governor-general, describes the last scene of the battle vividly in his A
History of the Sikhs: "...although assailed on either side by squadrons of hors
e and battalions of foot, no Sikh offered to submit, and no disciple of Guru Gob
ind Singh asked for quarter. They everywhere showed a front to the victors, and
stalked slowly and sullenly away, while many rushed singly forth to meet assured
death by contending with a multitude. The victors looked with stolid wonderment
upon the indomitable courage of the vanquished.... "
Lord Hugh Gough, the British commander-in-chief, under whose leadership the two
Anglo-Sikh wars were fought, described Sabhraon as the Waterloo of India. Paying
tribute to the gallantry of the Sikhs, he said: "Policy precluded me publicly r
ecording my sentiments on the splendid gallantry of our fallen foe, or to record
the acts of heroism displayed, not only individually, but almost collectively,
by the Sikh sardars and the army; and I declare were it not from a deep convicti
on that my country's good required the sacrifice, I could have wept to have witn
essed the fearful slaughter of so devoted a body of men."
Lord Hardinge, who saw the action, wrote: " Few escaped; none, it may be said, s
urrendered. The Sikhs met their fate with the resignation, which distinguishes t
heir race.
Two days after their victory at Sabhraon, British forces crossed the Sutlej and
occupied Kasur. The Lahore Darbar empowered Gulab Singh Dogra, who had earlier c
ome down to Lahore with regiments of hillmen, to negotiate a treaty of peace. Th
e wily Gulab Singh first obtained assurances from the army Parishes that they wo
uld agree to the terms he made and then tendered the submission of the darbar to
Lord Hardinge. The governor-general, realizing that the Sikhs were far from van
quished, forbore from immediate occupation of the country. By the terms imposed
by the victorious British through the peace treaty of 9 March, the Lahore Darbar
was compelled to give up Jalandhar Doab, pay a war indemnity amounting to a mil
lion and a half sterling, reduce its army to 20,000 infantry and 12,000 cavalry,
hand over all the guns used in the war and relinquish control of both banks of
the Sutlej to the British. A further condition was added two days later on 11 Ma
rch: the posting of a British unit in Lahore till the end of the year on payment
of expenses. The Darbar was unable to pay the full war indemnity and ceded in l
ieu thereof the hill territories between the Beas and the Indus. Kashmir was sol
d to Gulab Singh Dogra for 75 lakh rupees. A week later, on 16 March, another tr
eaty was signed at Amritsar recognizing him as Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir, af

firming the suspicion that Gulab Singh Dogra indeed was involved in sedition aga
inst Khalsa Sarkar. Although Maharani Jind Kaur continued to act as the regent a
nd Raja Lal Singh as water of the minor Maharaja Duleep Singh, effective power h
ad passed into the hands of the British resident, Colonel Henry Lawrence. And th
us end the First Anglo-Sikh war..
Lord Dalhousie
India's History : Modern India : Lord Dalhousie becomes the Governor-General 1848
Lord Dalhousie
Lord Dalhousie was born in 1812 in Scotland Castle. His original name was James
Andrew Broun Ramsay. Lord Dalhousie was educated at Christ Church and Harrow, Ox
ford. Lord Dalhousie was the start behind the city derivative its name.
At the age of 25 elected in the British parliament. Lord Dalhousie was a View Co
uncilor and president for the Board of Trade. On 12th January 1848, Lord Dalhous
ie was appointed as Governor General of India. He ruled India about eight years
from 1848 to 1856 and it was one of the greatest periods for British rule. His r
ule to different reform was brought to develop the situations of India.
The annexation policy was a deadly weapon for conquest which increased the East
India Company rule to the elevation of glory. The annexation policy was known as
the Doctrine of Lapse. The Doctrine of Lapse was based on the forfeiture for th
e right rule in the non-appearance for a natural successor. By Doctrine Lapse po
licy the province of Satara was annexed in 1848, the state of Sambhalpur in 1849
, the state of Jhansi in 1853 and the state of Nagpur in 1954 was also annexed.
Additional system of annexation brought victory. The state of Punjab was annexed
in 1849 after the Second Anglo Sikh war. The state of Burma also known as Pegu
in 1852 was annexed. In 1853, the territory of Berar and in 1856, Oudh was also
annexed.
Lord Dalhousie was one of the major personalities. Because of the Mutiny of 1857
took place. Although beginning by the Sepoys for the Indian Army. It gave a cha
nce for the discontent Indian rulers to express their dissatisfied. The Sepoy mu
tiny, the mutiny for peons was dismissed by Lord Dalhousie and the British. Lord
Dalhousie was also known as a successful administrator. In India, many places h
ave been named after Dalhousie to mark his great achievements.
In 1857, the revolt was followed with many changes to include the shift of India
n administration as of East India Company to the dignity, honor, crown and terri
torial control of the local princes. In 1857, many revolts preceded reflecting t
he Indian opposition to the British domination. Include the chuar and Ho rebelli
on of Midnapur in 1768, 1820-22, 1831 and the Sanyasi revolt of 1770. Rajmahal h
ills of the Santhals rebelled in 1855.
Lord Dalhousie proved in the administration matters with the demarcation of diff
erent sections for the administrative machinery and appointment for Lieutenant G
overnor of Bengal. Lord Dalhousie was introduced the non-regulation system. The
non-regulation states were under a Chief Commissioner responsible to the Governo
r General in council. Oudh, Punjab, Burma was non-regulating states.
Lord Dalhousie was one of the founded Telegraph and Postal systems. He was devel
oped railway and roads services. He was contributed to the unity and modernizati
on of India. He was great achievement for the creation of central, modernized st
ates. Lord Dalhousie changes law, legalized re-marriage and abolished the disabi
lity for a transfer to Christianity to inherit paternal property.

The field of educational, Lord Dalhousie improves such as the vernacular educati
on system was appreciated worthy. Lord Dalhousie was established Anglo Vernacula
r Schools. The free trade policy was started with announcing free ports. By now
Indian trade was dominated with the English. The reforms of military Lord Dalhou
sie included the transfer of the Bengal Artillery as of Calcutta to Meerut.
Lord Dalhousie retired on 29th February 1856 and died during 1860 at Scotland fo
r misery for 4 years as of physical distress and pain. A hill station Chamba Dis
trict for Himachal Pradesh has been named behind Lord Dalhousie.
The Second Anglo-Sikh War
India's History : Modern India : Second Anglo-Sikh war : (Rise of Sikh Power) B
ritish annex Punjab as Sikhs are defeated : 1848-1849
The Second Anglo-Sikh War
ANGLO-SIKH WAR II, 1848-49, which resulted in the abrogation of the Sikh kingdom
of the Punjab, was virtually a campaign by the victors of the first Anglo-Sikh
war (1945-46) and since then the de facto rulers of the State finally to overcom
e the resistance of some of the sardars who chafed at the defeat in the earlier
war which, they believed, had been lost owing to the treachery on the part of th
e commanders at the top and not to any lack of fighting strength of the Sikh arm
y. It marked also the fulfillment of the imperialist ambition of the new governo
r-general, Lord Dalhousie (184856), to carry forward the British flag up to the
natural boundary of India on the northwest. According to the peace settlement of
March 1846, at the end of Anglo-Sikh war I, the British force in Lahore was to
be withdrawn at the end of the year, but a severer treaty was imposed on the Sik
hs before the expiry of that date.
Sir Henry Hardinge, the then governor-general, had his Agent, Frederick Currie,
persuade the Lahore Darbar to request the British for the continuance of the tro
ops in Lahore. According to the treaty, which was consequently signed at Bharova
l on 16 December 1846, Henry Lawrence was appointed Resident with "full authorit
y to direct and control all matters in every department of the State." The Counc
il of Regency, consisting of the nominees of the Resident and headed by Tej Sing
h, was appointed. The power to make changes in its personnel vested in the resid
ent. Under another clause the British could maintain as many troops in the Punja
b as they thought necessary for the preservation of peace and order. This treaty
was to remain in operation until the minor Maharaja Duleep Singh attained the a
ge of 16. By a proclamation issued in July 1847, the governor-general further en
hanced the powers of the Resident. On 23 October 1847, Sir Henry Hardinge wrote
to Henry Lawrence: "In all our measures taken during the minority we must bear i
n mind that by the treaty of Lahore, March 1846, the Punjab never was intended t
o be an independent State. By the clause I added the chief of the State could ne
ither make war or peace, or exchange or sell an acre of territory or admit a Eur
opean officer, or refuse us a thoroughfare through his territories, or, in fact,
perform any act without our permission. In fact the native Prince is in fetters
, and under our protection and must do our bidding."
In the words of British historian John Clark Marshman, "an officer of the Compan
y's artillery became, in fact, the successor to Ranjit Singh." The Sikhs resente
d this gradual liquidation of their authority in the Punjab. The new government
at Lahore became totally unpopular. The abolition of tigers in the Jalandhar Doa
b and changes introduced in the system of land revenue and its collection angere
d the landed classes. Maharani Jind Kaur, who was described by Lord Dalhousie as
the only woman it the Punjab with manly understanding and in whom the British R
esident foresaw a rallying point for the well-wishers of the Sikh dynasty, was k
ept under close surveillance. Henry Lawrence laid down that she could not receiv
e in audience more than five or six sardars in a month and that she remains in p

urdah like the ladies of the royal families of Nepal, Jodhpur and Jaipur.
In January 1848, Henry Lawrence took leave of absence and traveled back home wit
h Lord Hardinge, who had completed his term in India. The former was replaced by
Frederick Currie and the latter by the Earl of Dalhousie. The new regime confro
nted a rebellion in the Sikh province of Multan, which it utilized as an excuse
for the annexation of the Punjab. The British Resident at Lahore increased the l
evy payable by the Multan governor, Diwan Mul Raj , who, finding himself unable
to comply, resigned his office. Frederick Currie appointed General Kahn Singh Ma
n in his place and sent him to Multan along with two British officers P.A. Vans
Agnew and William Anderson, to take charge from Mul Raj The party arrived at Mul
tan on 18 April 1848, and the Diwan vacated the Fort and made over the keys to t
he representatives of the Lahore Darbar But his soldiers rebelled and the Britis
h officers were set upon in their camp and killed This was the beginning of the
Multan outbreak.
Some soldiers of the Lahore escort deserted their officers and joined Mul Raj's
army. Currie received the news at Lahore on 21 April, but delayed action Lord Da
lhousie allowed the Multan rebellion to spread for five months. The interval was
utilized by the British further to provoke Sikh opinion. The Resident did his b
est to fan the flames of rebellion. Maharani Jind Kaur, then under detention in
the Fort of Sheikupura, was exiled from the Punjab She was taken to Firozpur and
thence to Banaras, in the British dominions. Her annual allowance, which accord
ing to the treaty of Bharoval had been fixed at one and a half lakh of rupees, w
as reduced to twelve thousand. Her jewellery worth fifty thousand of rupees was
forfeited; so was her cash amounting to a lakh and a half. The humiliating treat
ment of the Maharani caused deep resentment among the people of the Punjab Even
the Muslim ruler of Afghanistan, Amir Dost Muhammad, protested to the British, s
aying that such treatment is objectionable to all creeds."

Modern India : The Second Anglo-Burmese War

India's History : Modern India : Second Anglo-Burmese war - 1852
The Second Anglo-Burmese War
Causes of the Second Anglo-Burmese War
After the treaty of Yandaboo 1826 (After first Anglo-Burmese War), a large numbe
r of British merchants had settled on the southern coast of Burma and Rangoon. T
harrawady, the new king of Burma (1837-1845), refused to consider the treaty of
Yandaboo, binding on him. The British Residents also did not get proper treatmen
t at the court and so finally the Residency had to be withdrawn in 1840.
The British merchants often complained of ill treatment at the hands of the Gove
rnor of Rangoon. They sent a petition to Lord Dalhousie. Dalhousie was determine
d to maintained British prestige and dignity at all the costs and so deputed Com
modore Lambert to Rangoon to negotiate the redress of grievances and demand comp
ensation.
Declaration of War
At first the King of Burma was inclined to avoid war and so removed the old Gove
rnor and appointed the new one. But when a deputation of some naval officers was
refused admission, Lambert adopted a very provocative line of action. He captur
ed one of the Burmese King's ships. With this incident, the Burmese did not resi
st and the war was declared.
On April 1, 1852, British forces reached Rangoon. The famous Pagoda of Rangoon w
as stormed on April 14, 1852. A month later Bassein, situated at Irrawaddy Delta
was captured. Prome was occupied in October and Pegu in November. Dalhousie wan
ted the Burmese king to recognise the conquest of the Lower Burma. On the refusa
l of the king to conclude the treaty, Dalhousie annexed Pegu by issuing a procla

mation on December 20, 1852.

End of the War
By the annexation of Pegu the eastern frontier of the British Indian Empire was
extended upto the banks of Salween. Major Arthur Phayre was appointed Commission
er of the newly acquired British province extending as far as Myede.
Introduction of Railways and Telegraph System
India's History : Modern India : Railway opened from Bombay to Thane; Telegrap
h line from Calcutta to Agra : 1853
Anglo-Indians
In 1833 the Charter of the East India Company was renewed. Influenced no doubt s
omewhat by the Anglo-Indians' petition, Section 87 of the said Act stated that `No native of the said territories, nor any natural born subject of His Majesty
resident therein, shall, by reason of his religion, place of birth, descent, col
our, or any of them, be disabled from holding any place, office, or employment u
nder the said Company. In theory all posts were thrown open to people of any rac
e in India, but in practice only the subordinate trades were bestowed upon India
ns and Anglo-Indians, since higher services could be filled only by recruitment
in England. Fortunately for Anglo-Indians, about this same time (1833), English
took the place of Persian as the official language of the Courts and Government
offices. In future English was to be the only medium of correspondence in commer
cial houses. English being their mother-tongue, the Anglo-Indians had an advanta
ge in this direction and very soon many of the community found employment under
Government and in commercial firms as clerks, though in subordinate positions. T
his advantage, however, was only temporary because Lord Bentinck, who was Govern
or-General from 1828 to 1836, with the cooperation of Lord Macaulay who drew up
his famous Minute on Education in 1835, determined that `The linguistic disadvan
tage of Indians should be removed, and accordingly instruction in English was or
dered to be imparted in Indian schools. Very soon the graduates from Indian Univ
ersities and educated young men from the Government High Schools were rapidly el
bowing Anglo-Indians out of the clerical posts which they had filled efficiently
.
Fortune once again came to the rescue of Anglo-Indians for soon new avenues of e
mployment were opening up for them. In 1825 the first railway had run in England
. In 1845 the East India Railway was projected in India. Simultaneously railway
schemes were set on foot in Madras and Bombay. The first train in India ran from
Bombay to Thana in 1853. In 1851 the Telegraph system was inaugurated. During t
he latter half of the 19th century (1850-1900) Anglo-Indians found ample employm
ent on the railways, and in the telegraph and custom services. These departments
needed men of adventurous stock who were willing to endure the hardships, risks
, and perils of pioneers. The Anglo-Indians had in them the spirit of their fore
fathers and so the community furnished - `The Navigation Companies with captains
, second officers, engineers and mechanics. From them were recruited telegraph o
perators, artisans and electricians. They supplied the railways with station sta
ffs, engine-drivers, permanent way-inspectors, guards, auditors - in fact every
higher grade of railway servant. The Mutiny of 1857 too had proved beyond doubt
the absolute loyalty of the Anglo-Indians and removed the suspicion which had be
en responsible for the repressive measures of the latter part of the 18th centur
y and the first half of the 19th century. The latter part of the 19th century an
d the first decade of the 20th century were once again a period of prosperity an
d contentment for Anglo-Indians.