Role of Governors-General in the Consolidation and Expansion of British Power

• Robert Clive was the Governor of Bengal from 1757-60 and 1765-67. He played a decisive role in the Battle of Plassey (1757) in Bengal, laying the foundation of British power in India.
• The Regulating Act of 1773 raised the status of Governor of Bengal to Governor-General of Bengal.
  • Warren Hastings was the last Governor of Bengal (1772-73) and the first Governor-General of Bengal from 1773 to 1785.
• By the Charter Act of 1833, the Governor General of Bengal became the Governor General of India.
  • Lord William Bentinck was the last Governor-General of Bengal and the first Governor-General of India.
• The Government of India Act 1858 gave the title of Viceroy or Crown’s representative to the Governor-General of India. Hence, from 1858 to 1947, the Governor-General of India was also called the Viceroy and Governor-General of India, commonly shortened to the Viceroy of India.
  • Lord Canning became the first Viceroy of India in 1858.

Administrative Policies of the British for the Expansion of the British Empire

• The expansion of the company’s power from 1757 to 1857 mainly occurred in two ways:
  • Annexation of Indian states by the war
  • Annexation of Indian states by diplomacy
• The East India Company (EIC) rarely launched a direct military attack on an unknown territory when annexing Indian states. Instead, it used the following political, economic, and diplomatic methods to extend its influence before annexing an Indian kingdom.
  • Warren Hastings’ ring-fence policy
  • Lord Hasting’s policy of paramountcy
  • Wellesley’s system of subsidiary alliance
  • Lord Dalhousie’s doctrine of lapse

Consolidation under Warren Hastings (1772-85)

• Warren Hastings was the Governor-General of Bengal from 1773 to 1785. During this time, the British fought two important wars in the South.
  • First Anglo-Maratha War (1775-82)
  • Second Anglo-Mysore War (1780-84)
• Although the British could not defeat the Marathas or Mysore, they had demonstrated their capacity to hold their own in India. They not only managed to survive in the South but also emerged from the recent wars as one of the three dominant powers in India.

First Anglo-Maratha War (1775-82)

• The First Anglo-Maratha War did not end in victory for either side. The Treaty of Salbai, signed in 1782, ended the war.
• The Treaty of Salbai gave the British twenty years of peace with the Marathas. The British utilised this period to consolidate their rule over the Bengal Presidency.

Second Anglo-Mysore War (1780-84)

• The Second Anglo-Mysore War did not end in victory for either side.
• It came to an end with the Treaty of Mangalore in 1783. Accordingly, all conquests were mutually restored, and the prisoners on both sides were liberated.

Rohilla War (1774)

• Ali Muhammad Khan established the Rohilkhand Kingdom in 1721 at the foothills of the Himalayas. It was situated between the Awadh and the Marathas.
• Fearing an attack by the Marathas, Hafiz Rahmat Khan (regent) signed a defensive treaty with the Nawab of Awadh in 1772. However, no Maratha attack occurred, but the Nawab demanded money.
• When Rahmat Khan avoided payment, the Nawab, with British assistance, invaded Rohilkand. Colonel Alexander Champion defeated the Rohillas under Hafiz Rahmat Ali Khan in April 1774 at the Battle of Miranpur Katra.
• Warren Hastings, who dispatched British troops against Rohilkand, was severely criticised for handling the Rohilla affair.

Warren Hasting’s Ring Fence Policy

• Warren Hasting’s Ring Fence Policy is a system designed by the company to protect their territories by defending their neighbour’s border at the neighbour’s expense.
• The basic principle of the Ring Fence Policy was to defend the Company’s territory at the expense of the neighbouring state.

Defend Bengal from the Maratha by protecting Awadh:

• In 1772, the possessions of the Company were confined to:
  • A few scattered settlements along the Coast.
  • The Northern Circars (acquired on lease from the Nizam)
  • The provinces of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa.
• North India, except Punjab, was under Maratha rule, which posed a threat to Bengal. However, the Company was not powerful enough to fight against the Marathas, and hence, it prevented any direct confrontation.
• Instead, the company allied with the Nawab of Awadh to defend Awadh against any aggression. The Company assured the Nawab of military assistance against external aggression but at Nawab’s own expense. Thus, by protecting the Nawab’s border, the company was also defending its territory in Bengal.

The Dark Period of British Power in India

• The 1770s were a dark period for the British power in India. This was because:
  • The major southern Indian powers declared war against the Company. Thus, the British faced the powerful combination of the Marathas, Mysore, and Hyderabad.
  • The British were waging a losing war in their colonies in America, where the people had rebelled in 1776.
  • The British had to counter the French threat in Europe.
• However, The British in India were led at this time by their brilliant, energetic, and experienced Govern General, Warren Hastings. He retrieved the vanishing British power and prestige with firm resolve and determination.
• In 1782, Warren Hastings signed the Treaty of Salbai, which saved the British from the combined
  opposition of Indian powers. It also gave the British twenty years of peace with the Marathas.
• During the Second Anglo-Mysore War, he bribed the Nizam with the cession of the Guntur district and gained his withdrawal from the anti-British alliance.

Trial of Warren Hastings

• When Warren Hastings returned to England in 1785, Edmund Burke (a British Member of Parliament) accused him of being personally responsible for the misgovernment of Bengal. This led to an impeachment proceeding in the British Parliament in 1787.
• The trial lasted for seven years, and in 1795, he was acquitted.

Consolidation under Lord Cornwallis (1786-93)

• Lord Cornwallis was the Governor-General of Bengal from 1786 to 1793.
• Lord Cornwallis defeated Tipu Sultan in the Third Anglo-Mysore War (1789-92) and concluded the Treaty of Seringapatam (1792).
  • The Third Anglo-Mysore War destroyed Tipu’s dominant position in the South and firmly established British supremacy there.

Expansion under Richard Wellesley (1798-1805)

• During Lord Wellesley’s reign as Governor-General, the British fought two important wars in the south:
  • Fourth Anglo-Mysore War (1798-99)
  • Second Anglo-Maratha War (1803-05)
• Lord Wellesley reversed the non-intervention policy of his predecessor, Sir John Shore. He expanded British territory by using a subsidiary alliance system.

Fourth Anglo-Mysore War (1798-99)

• In the Battle of Seringapatam, the British defeated and killed the Tipu. After the victory, Mysore was placed under the former ruling dynasty of Wodeyars.
• A subsidiary alliance was imposed on the new Raja, which made Mysore a complete dependency of the Company.

Second Anglo-Maratha War

• The Second Anglo-Maratha War was fought on different fronts. The British defeated the Bhosale and Scindia, but Holkar remained undefeated.
• In the end, the British gained complete control over the Orissa coast and the territories between the Ganga and the Yamuna. The Peshwa became a disgruntled puppet in their hands.

Condition before Lord Wellesley

• Till 1797, the British followed a policy of consolidating their gains and resources in India. They made territorial gains only when they could do it safely without provoking major Indian powers.
• The trading and industrial classes of Britain favoured a policy of peace, believing that war was injurious to trade.

Arrival of Lord Wellesley

• Richard Wellesley (Lord Wellesley) was the Governor-General of Bengal from 1798-1805.
• By the time of his arrival, the two strongest Indian powers, Mysore and the Marathas, had declined in power. Hence, the political conditions in India were favourable for a policy of expansion.
  • The Third Anglo-Mysore War had reduced Mysore to a shadow of its recent greatness.
  • The Marathas were weakening themselves by engaging in internal conflicts and warfare.
• Lord Wellesley decided to follow the policy of expansion and bring as many Indian states as possible under British control. The expansion of the British Empire took place at a faster pace after his arrival.
• To achieve his political aims, Wellesley relied on three methods:
  1. The system of Subsidiary Alliances
  2. Outright wars
  3. Assumption of the territories of previously subordinated rulers.

Reasons for the Policy of Expansion

• By the end of the 18th century:
  1. The British traders and industrialists believed that British goods would be sold in India on a large scale only when the entire country had come under British control.
  2. The company favoured a policy of expansion as long as it didn’t harm profits.
  3. The British in India aimed to prevent French influence from entering India and, therefore, suppressed any Indian state that tried to establish relations with France.
  4. The British were determined to crush the threat of invasion by Zaman Shah, ruler of Kabul.

System of Subsidiary Alliances

• The Subsidiary Alliance was a system of helping an Indian ruler with a paid British force. Under this system, the British promised Indian rulers to protect them from domestic and foreign enemies. Though the system was quite old, Lord Wellesley gave it a definite shape.
• Under the System of Subsidiary Alliances, the ruler of the allying Indian state was compelled to accept the permanent stationing of a British force within his territory and to pay a subsidy for its maintenance. The ruler, unable to pay the expenses, had to cede a part of his kingdom to the British.
• The British agreed to defend the ruler from his enemies. They also controlled the defence and foreign relations of the protected ally. In return:
  • Indian ruler of the protected state should keep a British Resident at his court and disband his own army.
  • Indian rulers should not employ Europeans in their service without the approval of the British.
  • Indian rulers should not negotiate with any other Indian ruler without consulting the Governor General.
• The British also promised non-interference in the internal affairs of the allied states. However, the British Resident interfered in the day-to-day administration of the state. All this was done allegedly for the ruler’s protection, but in fact, it was a form of tribute paid by the Indian ruler to the Company.

Defects of Subsidiary System

• Indian states became subordinate to the Company and subservient to the British Resident.
• Indian rules lost their independence. They lost the:
  • Right of self-defence
  • Right to maintain diplomatic relations
  • Right to employ foreign experts
  • Right to settle disputes with its neighbours
• The Indian ruler lost all the sovereignty in external matters.
• The cost of the subsidiary force provided by the British was very high and, in fact, much beyond the paying capacity of the state. Sometimes, the ruler ceded part of his territory instead of paying an annual subsidy. Example: In 1800, the Nizam gave up part of his territories to the Company instead of paying cash.

Adverse Effects on the People

1. Unemployment of Soldiers: The system of Subsidiary Alliances led to the disbandment of armies of protected states, depriving lakhs of soldiers and officers of their hereditary livelihoods. Many of the deprived soldiers and officers joined the roaming bands of Pindarees, which ravaged central India during the first two decades of the 19th century.
2. Misgovernment: The rulers of the protected states neglected their administration and the interests of their people as they no longer feared them, being fully protected by the British.

Benefits to the British

• The system of Subsidiary Alliances increased the military strength of the Company in India at the expense of the protected states.
• It allowed the British to wage wars on distant lands while their own territories remained safe from the ravages of war.
• Through the British force and a British Resident, the British could overthrow the ruler and annex his territories by declaring him inefficient.
• The British received tribute from the Indian rulers in exchange for the subsidiary force.
• It made the British the paramount power in India.
• The expansion of British power became easy.

Enforcement of the Subsidiary System

• Hyderabad was the first state to sign the Treaty of Subsidiary Alliance. Later, the treaty was signed by Mysore, Awadh, Surat, Tanjore, Carnatic, Maratha, and other states.

Nizam of Hyderabad

• Lord Wellesley signed his first Subsidiary Treaty with the Nizam of Hyderabad in 1798. By the treaty:
  • All the French troops in Hyderabad were disbanded and replaced by a subsidiary British force.
  • Nizam had to pay 24 lakh rupees yearly to maintain a subsidiary force of six battalions.
• In return, the British guaranteed the state of Hyderabad against Maratha encroachments.
• The treaty concluded in 1798 was an ad hoc measure; hence, a new treaty was concluded in 1800. The new treaty increased the subsidiary force, and instead of cash payment, the Nizam ceded part of his territories to the Company.

Raja of Mysore

• After the Fourth Anglo-Mysore War, Krishnaraja III was made the king of Mysore. A special treaty of Subsidiary Alliance was imposed on the new Raja, and the Governor-General was authorised to take over the administration of the state in case of necessity.

Nawab of Awadh

• The threat of invasion by Zaman Shah of Afghanistan was the pretext for Wellesley to force the Nawab of Awadh to enter into a subsidiary treaty.
• The Nawab of Avadh signed a Subsidiary Treaty in 1801. In return for a larger subsidiary force, the Nawab was made to surrender to the British nearly half of his kingdom consisting of Rohilkhand, Gorakhpur and the territory between the Ganga and the Jamuna (Lower doab).
• Moreover, the Nawab was no longer to be independent. He must accept any advice or order from the British authorities regarding the internal administration of his state.

Attitude towards Tanjore, Surat and Carnatic

• Wellesley assumed the administration of Tanjore, Surat, and the Carnatic by concluding treaties with their respective rulers.

Tanjore

• The Maratha state of Tanjore witnessed a succession dispute. In 1799, Wellesley concluded a treaty with Serfoji. By this treaty:
  • The British took over the administration of the state.
  • Serfoji was allowed to retain the title of Raja and given a pension of four lakh rupees.

Surat

• The Nawab of Surat died in 1799, and his brother succeeded him. The change of succession provided Wellesley an opportunity to take over the administration of Surat.
• Wellesley took over the administration of Surat in 1800, and the Nawab was allowed to retain the title and was given a pension of one lakh rupees.

Carnatic

• Wellesley signed a treaty with Azim-ud Daulah (the nawab of Carnatic) in 1801. Accordingly, the entire military and civil administration of Carnatic came under the British.

Expansion Under Lord Hastings (Lord Moira) (1813-23)

• Lord Hastings became Governor-General in 1813. He adopted a vigorous forward policy and waged wars extensively. His aggressive and imperialist policies paved the way for the general expansion of the British Empire.
• Lord Hastings defeated the Gorkhas in the Anglo-Nepal War (1814-16) and secured the territories of Shimla.
• In the Third Anglo-Maratha War (1817-19), Lord Hastings crushed the Maratha power and removed the last hurdle in the way of British paramountcy.

Policy of Paramountcy

• Lord Hastings started a new policy of paramountcy. According to the policy, the Company claimed that its authority was paramount or supreme; hence, its power was greater than that of Indian states. To protect its interests, it was justified to annex or threaten to annex any Indian kingdom.
• However, the process of annexation did not go unchallenged. When the British tried to annex the small state of Kitoor/Kittur/Kitturu, Rani Chennamma took arms and led an anti-British resistance movement.

Expansion Under William Bentinck (1828-35)

• William Bentinck adopted a policy of non-intervention and non-aggression with Indian states. He annexed a few states because of the misgovernment of local rulers.

Mysore

• In Mysore, Wellesley restored Hindu rule under Krishnaraja III. In the beginning, the young Raja functioned well with his able minister, Puranaiya. Later, when the young Raja assumed full control of the government, he proved to be incompetent.
• In 1831, William Bentinck took over the administration of Mysore State and placed it under the control of a commissioner. The Raja was given a pension.
• The British controlled Mysore from 1831 to 1881, and in 1881, power was transferred back to the Wodeyars.

Coorg

• Lord William Bentinck deposed the Raja of Coorg in 1834 and annexed the State. Sir Mark Cubbon was concurrently appointed as the Chief Commissioner of Coorg in 1834.
• In sharp contrast to the chaotic rule of the last raja of Coorg, Sir Mark tried to improve the people’s standard of living. He provided timely assistance in establishing schools and helped German missionaries upgrade the standard of education.

Cachar and Jaintia

• After the Treaty of Yandabo (1826), Cachar and Jaintia became the British Protectorate. William Bentinck annexed them to improve the administration.

Expansion Under Lord Auckland (1836-42)

• Lord Auckland (1836-42) became the Governor-General in 1836. He supported the forward policy, which advocated an aggressive British intervention in Afghanistan to seize territory and assert influence to prevent threats to their Indian Empire.
• Auckland’s Forward Policy led to the First Afghan War (1836-42). Due to his failure in Afghanistan, he was recalled in 1842.
  • Lord Ellenborough succeeded him and ended the Afghan War.

Expansion Under Lord Dalhousie (1848-56)

• Lord Dalhousie was the Governor-General of India from 1848 to 1856. He was determined to extend direct British rule over a vast area. He annexed the Indian states using various means and policies.
• During the administration of Dalhousie, the British waged wars against the Sikhs and Burmese, ultimately annexing the Punjab and Lower Burma.
• Lord Dalhousie applied the Policy of Doctrine of Lapse to annex Indian princely states such as Satara, Sambalpur, Udaipur, Nagpur, and Jhansi. His strict policy implementation was one of the causes of the Revolt of 1857.
• In 1856, Dalhousie annexed the Awadh and argued that he was “obliged by duty” to take over Awadh to free the people from the “misgovernment” of the Nawab.

Doctrine of Lapse Policy

• Lord Dalhousie used the Policy of Doctrine of Lapse to annex Indian princely states.
• According to the Doctrine of Lapse, when the ruler of a protected state died without a natural heir (son), his kingdom would lapse, that is, become part of the company’s territory. The state would pass to an adopted child only if the British authorities approved the adoption. That is, the adopted children had no legal right over the throne.
• The introduction of this policy was the British EIC’s final attempt to integrate Indian princely states with the British Empire.
• Satara became the first state to be annexed under this policy by Dalhousie in 1848. Appa Sahib, the king of Satara, died without a natural heir (son) in 1848. Just before death, he had adopted a child but did not seek permission from the company.

• Lord Dalhousie is often associated with the Doctrine of Lapse policy. However, he did not create the policy himself. It was already in existence before he assumed office. However, Dalhousie implemented it more stringently than his predecessors.
• The British EIC took over the princely state of Kitturu in 1824 using the ‘doctrine of lapse’, which was likely the first time the doctrine was applied.

States Annexed under the Doctrine of Lapse

• In 1857, many Indian rulers from whom the states were annexed under this policy fought against the British. As a matter of policy, after the Mutiny of 1857, the doctrine of lapse was withdrawn.
• Dalhousie’s annexations and the doctrine of lapse caused great anger among the ruling princes in India, making it one of the causes of the Indian Mutiny of 1857.

Reasons for the Policy of Annexation

• Many British historians believe that Dalhousie’s main objective was to end misrule in the annexed states. However, his policy’s underlying motive was the expansion of British exports to India.
• Dalhousie believed that the maladministration of Indian rulers in the native states of India was negatively affecting British exports to India. Therefore, his annexation policy in India was primarily driven by British interests, specifically the desire to expand exports to India. It was not motivated by any noble intention to improve the maladministration of Indian rulers.