Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T08:47:06.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Superintendence of British Interests in South-East Asia in the Nineteenth Century *

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

Nicholas Tarling
Get access

Extract

With the end of the East India Company's monopoly of trade to China in 1834, relations with the Celestial Empire came under the direction of the Foreign Secretary in London, who appointed a Superintendent of Trade, subsequently British Plenipotentiary and also, under the Colonial Office, Governor of Hong Kong. In Southeast Asia, no similar arrangements were made. The three Straits Settlements remained under the Company's administration, with a Governor controlled by the Supreme Government in India, between 1834 and 1851 via the subordinate Bengal Government. The “foreign relations” of the Settlements in regard to indigenous states tended to be handled by the Company's or by naval officers. Relations with the Dutch were handled in London and The Hague by the Foreign Office and its envoys. At various times the appointment was urged of a Superintendent or Plenipotentiary or Commissioner to conduct British diplomacy in South-east Asia, but none ever eventuated. This may seem an unimportant point. But it calls attention to certain basic traditions in British policy in Southeast Asia, as distinct from China, and the fact that the appointment was not made despite pressure for it calls attention to a challenge to these traditions in the little studied mid-century period, a challenge, however, never pressed hard and ultimately only partly successful.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian History , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , March 1966 , pp. 97 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1966

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Tarling, N., “British Policy in the Malay Peninsula and Archipelago, 1824–1871”, Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, XXX, Pt. 3 (10 1957), p. 80n.Google Scholar

2. Raffles, S., Memoir of the Life and Public Services of Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles, London, 1830, p. 71.Google Scholar

3. ibid., p. 379.

4. Tarling, N., Anglo-Dutch Rivalry in the Malay World, 1780–1824, Brisbane, London & New York, 1962, pp. 98–99, 121, 142–43, 145.Google Scholar

5. Tarling, , J.M.B.R.A.S., XXX, Pt 3, pp 26–27, 131.Google Scholar

6. ibid., pp. 133–35, 137–38.

7. ibid., p. 52.

8. ibid., pp. 142–43.

9. ibid., pp. 192–93, 196.

10. Earl, G. W., The Eastern Seas, London, 1837, pp. 428–29.Google Scholar

11. Anderson, 's letter, 3rd 07 1840Google Scholar, and enclosures. F.O.37/233, Public Record Office, London.

12. Memorial of Glasgow East India Association, 17th April 1841. F.O.37/233; Parliamentary Papers, House of Commons, 1842, XXX [352], p. 30.Google Scholar

13. Anderson, to Aberdeen, , 28th 11 1843. F.O. 37/244.Google Scholar

14. Tarling, , J.M.B.R.A.S., XXX, Pt 3, p. 193.Google Scholar

15. Tarling, N., Piracy and Politics in the Malay World, Sydney, Canberra and Melbourne, 1963, pp. 128–30.Google Scholar

16. Anderson, to , F.O., 2nd 11 1844. F.O.12/2.Google Scholar

17. Anderson, to Aberdeen, , 14th 07 1845. F.O.12/3.Google Scholar

18. de Sturler, J. E., Het Grondgebied van Nederlandsch Oost-Indie, Leiden, 1881 p. 40.Google Scholar

19. Nielsen, A. K., Leven en Avonturen van een Oostinjevaarder op Bali, Amsterdam, 1928, pp. 22–24, 26–28Google Scholar. Jardine Matheson Archives, East Indies, nos. 2621, 2659, 2664, 2742, 2963, 3284, 3366, Cambridge University Library.

20. Lekkerkerker, C., “Het Voorspel der vestiging van de Nederlandsche macht op Bali en Lombok”, Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land-, en Volkenkunde, lxxix (1923), pp. 249–51.Google Scholar

21. For Kutai, see de Sturler, , op. cit. p. 245Google Scholar. For Belcher's treaties, see SirBelcher, Edward, Narrative of the Voyage of H.M.S. Samarang, London, 1848, i, pp. 220, 236–37Google Scholar. For the Borneo Government, see Irwin, G., “Nineteenth-century Borneo …”, Verhandelingen van het Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land-, en Volkenkunde XV (1955), p. 156Google Scholar, and Veth, P. J., Borneo's Wester-afdeeling … , Zalt-Bommel, 1854, ii, p. 654.Google Scholar

22. Tarling, , J.M.R.A.S., XXX, Pt. 3, p. 148.Google Scholar

23. Petition, printed in Overland Singapore Pree Press, 7th 12 1847Google Scholar; also in F.O.12/6; C.O.144/2, Public Record Office, London; and Board's Collections 112468, p. 39, India Office Library.Google Scholar

24. Tarling, N., “Siam and Sir James Brooke”, The Journal of the Siam Society, XLVIII, Pt 2 (11 1960) p. 47Google Scholar. Vella, W. F., Siam under Rama III, New York, 1957, pp. 126–30.Google Scholar

25. Butterworth, to Bushby, , 4th 12 1847Google Scholar. Board's Collections 112468, p. 31.Google Scholar

26. Indian Government to Court, 19th February 1848. Ibid., p. 7.

27. Palmerston, to Disbrowe, , 10th 12 1847. F.O.37/267.Google Scholar

28. Crawfurd, to Stanley, , 28th 01, 3rd March 1848Google Scholar. F.O.37/280. Kinnear, to Palmerston, , 3rd 02 1848Google Scholar. F.O.12/6.

29. , F.O. to Hume, , 10th 03 1849. F.O.12/7.Google Scholar

30. , F.O. to Wise, , 16th 03 1847, F.O.12/5.Google Scholar

31. Gregson, to Palmerston, , 23rd 07 1849Google Scholar; reply, 9th October 1849. F.O.37/288.

32. Memorial from Singapore Chamber of Commerce, 25th July 1850. F.O.97/249.

33. Gregson, to Palmerston, , 16th 10 1850Google Scholar. F.O.12/8.

34. Memorandum on Singapore Petition. F.O.97/249.

35. Palmerston, to Brooke, , 23rd 02 1848Google Scholar. F.O.12/6; greatly and significantly abbreviated in Parliamentary Papers, 1850, LV (122), p. 5.Google Scholar

36. Maxwell, W. G. and Gibson, W. S., Treaties and Engagements affecting the Malay States and Borneo, London, 1924, pp. 143–47.Google Scholar

37. Brooke, to Palmerston, , 4th 07 1848. F.O.12/6.Google Scholar

38. Disbrowe, to Palmerston, , 9th 04 1849Google Scholar. F.O.37/283. F.O. to Brooke, , 20th 06 1849Google Scholar; Brooke, to Palmerston, , 3rd 10 1849Google Scholar. F.O.12/7.

39. Nicol, to Butterworth, , 5th 04 1849Google Scholar, and enclosure. Board's Collections 124781, p. 4.Google Scholar

40. Memorial, 1st May 1849. F.O.12/7.

41. Palmerston, to Disbrowe, , 26th 06 1847Google Scholar. F.O.37/281. Disbrowe, to Palraerston, , 9th 07 1849Google Scholar. F.O.37/283. Lightenvelt, to Disbrowe, , 24th 08 1849Google Scholar. F.O.37/284.

42. Brooke, to Palmerston, , 17th 04 1849Google Scholar. F.O.12/7. For the treaty, see F.O.71/1; Board's Collections 125401, p. 5Google Scholar, and Saleeby, N.M., The History of Sulu, Manila 1908, pp. 350–51.Google Scholar

43. Brooke, to Palmerston, , 21st 06Google Scholar; reply, 10th November 1849. F.O.12/7.

44. Butterworth, to Indian Government, 14th 10 1848Google Scholar. F.O.37/288; B.C.117467, p. 15Google Scholar. King had aided the Mataram prince in securing supremacy in Lombok and so forced Burd and Lange out of Lombok. Nielsen, , op. cit., pp. 31–44.Google Scholar

45. Halliday, to Butterworth, , 25th 11 1848Google Scholar. F.O.37/288. B.C.117467, p. 21Google Scholar; Palmerston, to Wodehouse, , 6th 03 1849Google Scholar. F.O.37/288.

46. Hearder, and Secretan, to Russell, , 25th 08 1849Google Scholar. F.O.12/7. “Hurder” was, or had been, King's agent. Jukes, J. B., Narrative of the Surveying Voyage of H.M.S. Fly … , London, 1847, p. 203.Google Scholar

47. , F.O. to Hearder, , 14th 01 1850. F.O.37/296.Google Scholar

48. Brooke, to Palmerston, , 28th 01 1851. F.O.12/9.Google Scholar

49. Brooke, to Palmerston, , 27th 08 1849Google Scholar; reply, 6th November. F.O.12/7. The Bali-Lombok Strait was “one of the thoroughfares between the Indian and Pacific Oceans.” Crawfurd, J., A Descriptive Dictionary of the Indian Islands and Adjacent Countries, London, 1856, p. 11.Google Scholar

50. Brooke, to , F.O., 4th 02 1850. F.O.12/8.Google Scholar

51. Tarling, , Journal Siam Society, XLVIII, Pt 2, pp. 47–48.Google Scholar

52. Ibid., pp. 59–60.

53. Brooke, to Palmerston, . 1st 12 1850Google Scholar. F.O.12/8. Brooke, to StJohn, , 17th 01 1851Google Scholar. F.O.12/9.

54. Brooke, to Palmerston, , 24th 01 1851Google Scholar. 27th January/3rd February 1851. F.O.12/9.

55. Tarling, , J.M.B.R.A.S., XXX. Pt 3, p. 200.Google Scholar

56. Brooke's Memorandum. 31st July 1852. F.O.12/11; Parliamentary Papers, 1852/1853. LXI [1599], p. 3.Google Scholar

57. Tarling, , Journal Siam Society, XLVIII. Pt 2, pp. 68–70.Google Scholar

58. Church to Wise, 3rd November 1847. F.O.12/5; C.O.144/2, Public Record Office, London.

59. Butterworth, to Karr, Seton, 7th 01 1850Google Scholar. B.C.128904, p. 89.Google Scholar

60. Brooke, to , F.O., 24th 09 1850Google Scholar; StJohn, to , F.O., s.d. F.O.12/13.Google Scholar

61. Minutes of 5th, 6th December 1853. F.O.1215.

62. Minute by Wodehouse, 18th July 1855; Wodehouse, to StJohn, , 9th 08 1855Google Scholar; Clarendon, to Brooke, , s.d. F.O.12/22.Google Scholar

63. StJohn, to , F.O., 12th 01 1856Google Scholar; minute of 4th April; StJohn, to Clarendon, , 26th 08 1856Google Scholar; reply, 10th December. F.O.12/23.

64. StJohn, to Shelburne, , 24th 01 1857Google Scholar. F.O.12/24.

65. Tarling, , J.M.B.R.A.S., XXX, Pt 3, pp. 157–58.Google Scholar

66. StJohn, to , F.O., 28th 05 1857Google Scholar; reply, 4th September. F.O.97/249.

67. Crawfurd, 's notes, 11th 04 1857Google Scholar. F.O.12/24.

68. Crawfurd, to Malmesbury, , 19th 01 1859Google Scholar, and notes thereon. F.O.12/26. Another proposal for a British consul came from Joseph Carter, a British merchant resident in Lombok since 1855. This derived from a dispute with the Sultan of Mataram, in which Carter considered the aid of the Dutch Resident of Banyuwangi inadequate. Carter to Blundell, 2nd May, 6th, 11th August 1859. Coll. 11 to no. 84 of 1860, Collections to Political Despatches 37, India Office Library; also C.O.273/4. The British Consul at Batavia thought that if the British wished to appoint a consul, they would have to sign a convention with Lombok, which was impossible under the treaty of 1824. Fraser to Cavenagh, 17th October 1859. .C.P.D.37. The naturalist Alfred Wallace had been “kindly received” by Carter in 1856. Wallace, A.R., The Malay Archipelago, London, 1863, p 153Google Scholar. Carter had lived at Kutai. Carter to Brooke, 25th February 1849 F.O.12/11; Parliamentaiy Papers, 1852, XXXI [1538], p. 14Google Scholar. The Lombok trade was still largely in rice for China. Wallace, , op.cit., p. 176.Google Scholar

69. Petition, 1858. Parliamentary Papers, 1862, XL (259), p. 3Google Scholar; Singapore Free Press, 15th 10 1857Google Scholar. On dissatisfaction with Blundell, see, eg., S.F.P., 21st 04 1859.Google Scholar

70. House of Lords Debate, 10th March 1859. Hansand, 3rd series, CLII, col. 1602.Google Scholar

71. Singapore Free Press, 5th 04 1860.Google Scholar

72. Cowan, C.D., Nineteenth-Century Malaya, London, 1961, p. 32.Google Scholar

73. “The British Possessions in the Straits of Malacca”, sent to Colonial Office, 20th April 1861. C.O.144/20.Google Scholar

74. Read and others to Newcastle, 30th June 1861, and enclosures. C.O.144/20; Parliamentary Papetis, 1862, XL (259), p. 75Google Scholar. Cf. also Cameron, J., Our Tropical Possessions in Malayan India, London, 1865, p. 26.Google Scholar

75. Tarling, N., “The Mission of Sir John Bowring to Siam”, The Journal of the Siam Society, L. Pt. 2 (12 1962), pp. 112–13.Google Scholar

76. McIntyre, W.D., “Britain's Intervention in Malaya. …”, Journal Southeast Asian History, II, no. 3 (10 1961), p. 51.Google Scholar