Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T20:18:57.482Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Baroda Crisis of 1873–77: A study in Governmental Rivalry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

I. F. S. Copland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A Feature which has long characterized the study of Indian administrative history in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries has been the tendency of scholars to identify the British Raj with the Government of India, or more narrowly still, with the Governor-General in Council. Certainly one would not write a general history of British India and ignore the pronouncements of Calcutta. Yet by the same token one should not overlook the actions and attitudes of the several provincial governments, and especially of the Presidencies of Bombay and Madras, which, though under the general suzerainty of Calcutta, enjoyed substantial freedom of action within the limits of their own jurisdiction.

Type
Articles
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , March 1968 , pp. 97 - 123
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1968

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 The phrase is the Marquess of Salisbury's, contained in a letter from Salisbury to Sir Richard Temple (priv.), India Office, 6 April 1877. Temple Collection: the papers of Sir Richard Temple, Bart. (1826–1902). MSS. Eur. F86, India Office Library, London, Vol. 16, p. 159.Google Scholar

2 Sir Bartle Frere, Gov. of Bombay, April 1862–March 1867.

3 Sir Seymour Fitzgerald, Gov. of Bombay, March 1867–May 1872.

4 Richard Bourke, 6th Earl of Mayo, Viceroy of India, 1869–72.

5 Sir Philip Wodehouse: Writer, Ceylon Civil Service, May 1828; Assist. Colonial Sec. and Clerk of Exec. and Leg. Councils, October 1833; Dist. Judge of Kandy, 1840; Govt. Agent for Western Prov's., 1843; Supt. of Honduras, 1850; Gov. of Br. Guiana, February 1854; employed on special mission to Venezuela, February–May 1858; Gov. of the Cape of Good Hope, October 1861; Gov. of Bombay, May 1872–April 1877.

6 Lord Northbrook to Salisbury (priv.), Calcutta, August 1874. Northbrook Collection: the correspondence relating to Indian affairs of Thomas George Baring, 1st Earl of Northbrook, Viceroy of India, 1872–1876. MSS. Eur.C144 in the India Office Library, Vol. II, p. lxxxix.Google Scholar

7 Lord Northbrook to Salisbury (priv.), Calcutta, 24 December 1874. Northbrook Collection, Vol. II, pp. cliii–cliv.Google Scholar

8 Same to same, Calcutta, 4 August 1874. Ibid., Vol. II, p. lxxxix.

9 Same to same, Calcutta, 2 June 1874. Ibid., Vol. II, p. lxi.

10 I.e. ‘backward’ relative to Br. India. Compared to most of the Bombay States, Baroda was both prosperous and progressive.

11 An adjective commonly applied in the nineteenth century to British policy vis à vis the Indian States.

12 Sec. Foreign Dept. to Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. No. 1854P, Simla, 28 August 1872. Bombay Political Proceedings, Vol. 480, No. 654 of 30 January 1873.

13 Sir Charles Aitchison (1832–96): Dist. Officer Lahore, 1856; Personal Asst. to Judicial Commr. of Punjab, 1858; Under-Foreign Sec., 1859; dist. work in Punjab; Foreign Sec., 1870–77; Chief Commr. of Br. Burma, 1878; member of Viceroy's Council, 1882 and 1888–89; Lieut.-Gov. of Punjab, 1882–88.

14 Aitchison to Sir Lewis Pelly (priv.), Simla, 12 May 1875. Pelly Collection: the correspondence and papers of Sir Lewis Pelly, MSS. Eur. F126 in the India Office Library, London, Box 4, Bundle 9, ‘Baroda, 1874–75’.

15 The Duke of Argyll to Northbrook (priv), India Office, 12 April 1872. Northbrook Collection, Vol. 9, pp. 1–3.Google Scholar

16 This despite an impassioned letter from the Viceroy to the Sec. of State requesting its transfer. Northbrook to Argyll (priv.), Calcutta, 16 June 1873. Northbrook Collection, Vol. 9, p. cxxv.Google Scholar

17 Sec. Foreign Dept. to Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. No. 171P of 23 January 1873. Bombay Political Proceedings, Vol. 480, No. 802 of 6 February 1873.Google Scholar

18 See, for example, the Kathiawar appeals case. Wodehouse to Salisbury, Bombay letter No. 30 of 10 July 1874. Political letters and enclosures from Bombay, Vol. 9, pp. 1091–1092.Google Scholar

19 Sir Dinkar Rao: An astute administrator; dewan of Gwalior, and a member of the Second Baroda Commn. of 1875.

20 Northbrook to Pelly (priv.), Barrakpur, 20 February 1875. Northbrook Collection, Vol. 17, p. xxxviii.Google Scholar

21 Sir C. L. Tupper: Chief Sec. Govt. of Punjab, 1890–99; member of the Viceroy' Council, 1905 and 1906.

22 Indian Political Practice: A collection of the decisions of the Government of India in political cases. Compiled and edited by Tupper, C. L.. Supt. Govt. Printing, Calcutta, 1895, Vol. I, p. 49.Google Scholar

23 Indian term for throne, synonymous with ‘state’ or ‘principality’.

24 See Command Paper, No. 1250 of 1875, p. 9; Accounts and Papers, Vol. LVI of 1875, p. 389et seq.Google Scholar

25 Sir Robert Phayre: Educ. Shrewsbury; entered Bombay Army, 1839; served with distinction in first Afghan War and Sind campaign, 1840–45; Quartermaster General's Dept. Sind, 1844–55; dep. Quartermaster Bombay Army, December 1855; served in that capacity in Abyssinian Exped. of 1867–68; received C.B. and was appointed Hon. A.D.C. to the Queen; Pol. Supt. Sind Frontier, July 1868–December 1872; Res't. Baroda, February 1873–December 1874; returned military duty; Brig.-Gen. in charge Nusseerabad, April 1875; earned K.C.B. and thanks of Parliament for part in Afghan War of 1879–80; Maj.-Gen., May 1880; Commander Mhow Div., March 1881–February 1886; Lieut.-Gen., November 1881; acting C-in-C Bombay, November 1885–February 1886; retired to England, March 1886.

26 100,000.

27 Col. Sir William Merewether, Chief Commr. of Sind 1867–1879.

28 The Pioneer, Allahabad, 26 October 1871, p. 1.Google Scholar

29 Charles Gonne: Entered Bombay C.S., 1854; served various appointments as Assist, Collector and Magst. and later as Assist. Judge and Sessions Judge; Judge, Ahmednagar, May 1861, and Tanna, March 1863; Sec. Pol. and Judicial Depts., March 1864; Judge, Poona, April 1864; Registrar High Court, June 1864; Sec. Pol. and Judicial Depts., October 1864–July 1884, with absences on furlough, etc.; Chief Sec. to Govt. from 1882.

30 Sec. Foreign Dept. to Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept., No. 2432P of 28 December 1872. Bombay Political Proceedings, Vol. 480, No. 371 of 21 January 1873. See also Aitchison to Pelly (demi-official), Calcutta, 1 March 1876. Pelly Collection, 4/9.

31 Bombay Political Proceedings, Vol. 480, No. 371 of 21 January 1873.Google Scholar

32 Ibid., Vol. 480, No. 1548 of 12 March 1873. It is not necessary to put his appointment down solely to the fact that he was related to the Gov. of Bombay by marriage. Patronage through family or other connexions was an accepted mode of advancement in the Political Service. See the minute of the Under-Sec. of State to this effect in Encl. No. 3 in Bombay pol. letter No. 73 of 14 December 1874. Political letters and enclosures from Bombay, Vol. 10, pp. 2940–41.Google Scholar

33 General Sir H. D. Daly: Agent-to-the-Gov.-Gen. in Central India, 1870–1881.

34 General Sir Richard Meade: Agent-to-the-Gov.-Gen. in Central India, 1861–1870; Chief Commr. of Mysore, 1870–75; served on Baroda Commn. of 1873 and 1875; Agent-to-the-Gov.-Gov.-Gen. in Baroda, 1875; Res't. at Hyderabad, November 1875–March 1881.

35 Northbrook to Salisbury (priv.), Sonepur, 27 November 1874. Northbrook Collection, Vol. II, pp. cxxxii–cxxxiii.Google Scholar

36 Res't. Baroda to Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. No. 107–573 of 28 June 1873. Command Paper No. 1203 of 1875, p. 8.

37 Same to same, No. 103–557 of 25 June, and No. 107–575 of 28 June 1873.

38 Same to same, No. 107–573 of 28 June 1873. Ibid., p. 10.

39 Bombay Political Proceedings, Vol. 480, No. 1745 of 20 March 1873.Google Scholar

40 Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. to Rest. Baroda, No. IT of 23 April, and No. 33T of 26 July 1873. Command Paper No. 1203 of 1875, pp. 16, 13.

41 Bombay Political Proceedings, Vol. 480, No. 5784 of 19 September 1873.Google Scholar

42 Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. to Sec. Foreign Dept., No. 64T of 29 August 1873. Encl. No. 1 in Bombay pol. letter to the Sec. of State, No. 51 of 5 September 1873. Political letters and enclosures from Bombay, Vol. 6, pp. 698–701.

43 Sec. of State to the Govt. of Bombay, No. 54 of 30 September 1873. Political despatches to Bombay, Vol. 13 (1872–1873), pp. 671–3. See also minute of the Under-Sec. of State in Encl. No. 2 of Bombay pol. letter No. 42 of 25 July 1873. Political letters and enclosures from Bombay, Vol. 6, pp. 338–9.

44 Thomas George Baring, Earl of Northbrook (1826–1904): Educ. privately and at Ch. Church; M.P. for Penrhyn and Falmouth, 1857; Civil Lord of the Admiralty, 1857; Under-Sec. of State for India, 1859; at the Home Office, 1866, and at the War Office, 1868; Viceroy of India, 1872–76; First Lord of the Admiralty, 1880; High Commr. in Cairo and fin. adviser, 1884; Lord-Lieut. of Hampshire, 1889.

45 Northbrook to Argyll (priv.), Simla, 21 September 1873. Northbrook Collection, Vol. 9, p. clxiii.

46 Same to same, Calcutta, 24 January 1873. Ibid., p. lxxxix.

47 Namely, E. W. Ravenscroft, Lieut.-Col. Etheridge, and Mr. Mackensie (Sec.).

48 Thornton, T. H., General Sir Richard Meade and the feudatory States of Central and Southern India, London, 1898, pp. 163–5.Google Scholar For the opposing views of the Bombay Govt. see the letter from the Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. to the Sec. Foreign Dept. of 15 November 1873; also same to same, No. 677 of 29 September 1873, and Phayre to the President Baroda Commn, No. 2897P of 22 December 1873. Command Paper No. 1203 of 1875, pp. 52, 35, and 59.

49 Subsequently Gonne chastised Aitchison with the reminder that in the appointment of the Commn. the Bombay Govt. alone had taken the view that the Paramount Power had a ‘moral responsibility for the continued abuse of power prevailing in any State’, whereas the Govt. of India had been reluctant to interfere with the details of the Gaewar's administration. Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. to Sec. Foreign Dept. No. 1196 of 5 March 1874. Encl. No. 1 in Bombay pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 14 of 21 December 1874. Political letters and enclosures from Bombay, Vol. 10, p. 2963.

50 Published as the Report of the First Baroda Enquiry Commission in Command Paper No. 1203 of 1875, pp. 63 et seq.

51 This group, composed principally of radicals like Gibbs, Tucker, and Rodgers, would have thrown over Malhar Rao altogether and established in his stead a written constitution and the rule of law. See Minutes by A. Rodgers (1 March), H. P. St. G. Tucker (3 March) and J. Gibbs (28 May 1874). Encls. Nos. 1 and 2 in Bombay pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 14, of 21 December 1874. Political letters and enclosures from Bombay, Vol. 10, pp. 2967, 2987 and 2993–4. At that time the radicals enjoyed little official support, even in Bombay. Wodehouse, for instance, ‘flatly refused to have anything to do with them’. Wodehouse to North- brook (priv.), Parell, 4 March 1874. Northbrook Collection, Vol. 15, p. 101.

52 Northbrook to Salisbury (priv.), Calcutta, 27 March 1874. Ibid., Vol. II, p. xviii.

53 This was a constant theme in Northbrook's correspondence with the Gov. of Bombay as late as the middle of 1874. See Northbrook to Wodehouse (priv.), Calcutta, 4 June 1874. Northbrook Collection, Vol. 15, p. 142.

54 Certain basic improvements in the administration of land revenue, justice and relations with the Baroda sirdars had to be carried out within a prescribed period of twenty-one months, at pain of disposition. It was for this reason that Aitchison, writing to Gonne in June 1874, could reprove Malhar Rao for not treating Phayre with the proper respect due to a representative of the Crown. See Sec. Foreign Dept. to Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. No. 1225P of 6 June 1874. Encl. 26 in Govt. of India pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 213 of 27 November 1874.

55 Dadabhai Naoroji: later a prominent nationalist, and advocate of the so-called ‘drain theory’ which attempted to provide an explanation for India's slow economic growth.

56 Cited in Naoroji, D., Essays, speeches, addresses and writings on Indian politics, Ed. Parekh, C. L., Bombay 1887, pp. 388–9.Google Scholar

57 Ibid., p. 393.

58 For a defence by Phayre of his attitude towards Naoroji, see the letter from Res't. Baroda to Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. No. 367–1234 of 4 November 1874. Encl. No. 26 in Govt. of India pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 213 of 27 November 1874.

59 Wodehouse to Northbrook (priv.), Mahableshwar, 26 April 1874. Northbrook Collection, Vol. 15, p. 204.

60 Same to same, 21 April 1874. Ibid., Vol. 15, p. 196.

61 Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. to Res't. Baroda, No. 24P of 16 August 1874. Encl. No. 25 in Govt. of India pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 213 of 27 November 1874.

62 In later correspondence with the Govt. of India the Bombay Govt. defended their failure to remove Col. Phayre on the grounds that no suitable alternative appointment could be found. Calcutta rightly rejected this explanation as nonsensical. Bombay letter to the Sec. of State, No. 7549 of 14 December 1874. Political letters and enclosures from Bombay, Vol. 10, p. 2940 and Sec. Foreign Dept. to Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept., No. 293P of 28 January 1875. Encl. No. 25 in Govt. of India pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 25 of 29 January 1875.

63 Wodehouse wrote of the interview: ‘He [Phayre] does not like it at all, but I think he sees it must be done’. Priv. letter to Northbrook, dated Guneshkind, 31 August 1874. Northbrook Collection, Vol. 16, p. 62.

64 Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. to Rest. Baroda, No. 22P of 6 August 1874. Encl. No. 25 in Govt. of India pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 213 of 27 November 1874. A further insurance against Phayre's impetuosity was to have been the appointment of a special advisory assistant to the Baroda Residency, but the idea was not proceeded with owing to the objections of Calcutta. Wodehouse to Northbrook (priv.), Guneshkind, 30 July 1874, and Northbrook to Wodehouse (priv.), Calcutta, 3 September 1874. Northbrook Collection, Vol. 16, pp. 26 and xxxvii.

65 Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. to Res't. Baroda, No. 120P of 20 October 1874. Command Paper No. 1251 of 1875, p. 73.

66 A formal document of state.

67 Malhar Roa to Northbrook, Kharita of 2 November 1874. Encl. No. 27 in Govt. of India pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 213 of 27 November 1874.

68 Northbrook to Salisbury (priv.), Calcutta, 12 November 1874. Northbrook Collection, Vol. II, pp. cxxi–cxxii.

69 Res't. Baroda to Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. (t'gram.), 9 November 1874. Encl. No. 20 in Govt. of India pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 213 of 27 November 1874.

70 Lieutenant-General Sir Lewis Pelly: Commd. Bombay Inf., 1840; served as Assist. Res't. Baroda; personal assist. to Commr. of Sind, 1856; A.D.C. to Jacob and Pol. Sec. to Outram (Persian Exped.); Chargé d'Affaires Persia, 1860; Pol. Agent Zanzibar, 1861–1862; Res't. Persian Gulf, 1862–1873; Agent Gov.-Gen. in Rajputana, 1873–1874; Special Commr., Baroda, 1874–1875; Envoy and plenipotentiary for Afghan affairs, 1876; Conserv. M.P. for North Hackney, November 1885.

71 Viceroy to Govt. of Bombay (t'gram.), 13 November 1874. Encl. No. 18 in Govt. of India pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 213 of 27 November 1874.

72 Sec. Foreign Dept. to Pol. Sec. Bombay, No. 2563P of 25 November 1874. Encl. No. 28 in ibid.

73 Sec. Foreign Dept. to Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept., No. 2563P of 25 November 1874. Encl. No. 28 in Govt. of India pol. letter to the Sec. of State, No. 213 of 27 November 1874.

74 Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. to Sec. Foreign Dept., No. 1065 of 15 February 1875. Encl. No. 6 in Bombay pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 15 of 15 February 1875. Political and secret letters and enclosures received from Bombay, Vol. I, p. 627.

75 Same to same. Ibid., p. 627.

76 Same to same. Ibid., pp. 627–8.

77 Minute by Sir O. Burne on Encl. No. 3 in Bombay pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 73 of 14 December 1874. Political letters and enclosures from Bombay, Vol. 10, p. 2940.

78 Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. to the Sec. Foreign Dept., No. 79 of 14 December 1874. Command Paper No. 1251 of 1875, p. 89.

79 ‘Radical’ is used here to describe those who favoured a programme of intervention and reform in the Native States, on the grounds that the Paramount Power was as morally bound to see to the welfare of the subjects of the Princes as it was to ‘civilize’ the inhabitants of British India.

80 As Northbrook wrote to Pelly: ‘I have the fullest confidence in your firmness and good judgement’. Letter dated Calcutta, 29 December 1874. Pelly Collection, 4/9. For Northbrook's opinion of Meade, see his minute of 29 April 1875, ibid. Salisbury's estimate is contained in his letter to the Viceroy, dated 11 December 1874, Northbrook Collection, Vol. II, p. 84.

81 Special Commr. Baroda to Sec. Foreign Dept., No. 433–1431 of 19 December 1874. Encl. No. 6 in Govt. of India pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 17 of 22 January 1875.

82 The Pioneer, 25 January 1875, p. 3.

83 Salisbury to Northbrook (priv.), India Office, 10 July 1874. Salisbury Papers/Letter Books, Vol. I, p. 64, and Salisbury to Wodehouse (priv.), India Office, 17 July 1874. Ibid., Vol. I, p. 67.

84 Hon. Major-General M. K. Kennedy: Sec. Public Work and Railway Dept. 1863–75. Subsequently served with distinction as famine officer in Madras.

85 Northbrook to Salisbury (priv.), 28 July 1874. Northbrook Collection, Vol. II, pp. lxxxvi–lxxxvii.

86 Salisbury to Northbrook (priv.), India Office, 26 April 1874. Salisbury Papers/Letter Books, Vol. I, p. 87, and Salisbury to Wodehouse (priv.), India Office, 19 February 1875. Ibid., Vol. I, p. 201.

87 The Govt. of India had still, theoretically, to consult on all matters of policy affecting Baroda, and Pelly had to send Bombay a copy of his despatches to the Viceroy and Foreign Sec. See Sec. Foreign Dept. to Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. No. 207P of 22 January 1875. Encl. No. 2 in Bombay pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 15 of 15 February 1875. Political and secret letters and enclosures received from Bombay, Vol. I, p. 61 and Sec. Bombay Pol. Dept. to Sec. Foreign Dept. No. 854 of 1875. Encl. No. in Bombay letter No. 15 of 15 February. Ibid., Vol. I, pp. 623–5.

88 Northbrook to Salisbury (priv.), Sonepur, 27 November 1874. Northbrook Collection, Vol. II, p. cxxxiii.

89 Minute of 2 January 1875. Political Letters and enclosures from Bombay, Vol. 10, p. 2931A.

90 Pelly to Northbrook (priv.), Baroda, 13 December 1874. Northbrook Collection, Vol. 16, p. 210.

91 Salisbury to Wodehouse (priv.), India Office, 9 April 1875. Salisbury Papers/Letter Books, Vol. I, p. 230.

92 Salisbury Papers/Letter Books, Vol. I, pp. 229–31.

93 Salisbury to Northbrook (priv.), India Office, 15 April 1875. ibid., p. 232; also same to same, 11 February 1876. Ibid., Vol. 2, pp. 27–8.

94 Bombay pol. letter to the Sec. of State No. 15 of 15 February 1875. Political and secret letters and enclosures received from Bombay, Vol. I, p. 609. Also see Wodehouse to Northbrook (priv.), camp near Palitana, 20 January 1875. Northbrook Collection, Vol. 17, pp. 12–13.

95 According to P. Ryan, the Assist. Under-Sec. in the Pol. Dept., the Govt. were ‘simply impotent’ and had no idea what was going on. Letters to Pelly (priv.) date 15 and 22 January 1875. Pelly Collection, 4/9.

96 Gonne to Pelly (priv.), Bombay, 21 January 1875. Ibid., 4/9.

97 Salisbury to Wodehouse (priv.), India Office, 21 April 1876. Salisbury Papers/Letter Books, Vol. 2, pp. 74–5.

98 Northbrook to Meade (priv.), Simla, 22 May 1875. Northbrook Collection, Vol. 17, p. xcix.

99 Same to same, 22 May 1875. Ibid., p. xcix.

100 Viz. their refusal to accept Pelly's proposal for the imposition of ‘conditions’, territorial and other, on the Baroda State; and the decision, forced on the Govt. of India by Whitehall, to throw over the verdict of the Commn. set up to enquire into the attempt to assassinate Phayre.

101 Aitchison to Pelly (priv.), Simla, 12 May 1875. Pelly Collection, 4/9.

102 Salisbury to Lytton (priv.), India Office, 26 May 1876. Salisbury Papers/Letter Books, Vol. 2, p. 104. Lytton was Viceroy of India from 1876 to 1880.

103 Same to same, 5 May 1876. Ibid., Vol. 2, pp. 77–8.

104 Salisbury to Lytton (priv.), India Office, 9 June and October 1876. Salisbury Papers/Letter Books, Vol. 2, pp. 121 and 263–4.Google Scholar

105 Same to same, India Office, 31 March 1876. Ibid., Vol. 2, pp. 63–2.

106 The feud between Salisbury and Northbrook died down with the latters return to England early in 1876, while the entente cordiale between Bombay and Whitehall ended in March 1877 as a result of Bombay's public condemnation of India's conduct of famine relief.

107 Though both Wodehouse and Temple never gave up trying.

108 The Supreme Government voted on the retention of Baroda in March 1876.

109 Minute by Sir R. Montgomery dated 19 June 1876, J & P Papers, Vol. 223 of 1888, No. 486.Google Scholar

110 In theory Bombay continued to enjoy a vague right of consultation but this was rarely exercis.

111 Report of the Joint Committee on Indian Constitutional Reform, 1918, para. 310. Gwyer, M. and Appadorai, A.: Speeches and documents on the Indian constitution 1921–47. Bombay, 1957, Vol. 2, p. 710.Google Scholar

112 Political despatch to the Govt. of India No. 119 of 29 November 1877, J & P Papers, Vol. 161 of 1885.Google Scholar

113 Salisbury to Temple (priv.), India Office, 23 March 1877. Temple Collection, Vol. 16, p. 157.Google Scholar

114 In a fit of pique Wodehouse stopped corresponding with the Sec. of State after April 1876 and wrote instead to Sir L. Mallet. The following year he received the news of Temple's appointment in a state of ‘temper bordering on mutiny’. Salisbury to Lytton (priv.), India Office, 16 March 1877. Salisbury Papers/Letter Books, Vol. 2, p. 325; same to same, 20 February 1877. Ibid., p. 303.

115 Wodehouse to Northbrook (priv.), Mahableshwar, 9 June 1874. Northbrook Collection, Vol. 15, p. 285.Google Scholar

116 Northbrook was described by the Sec. of State on various occasions as ‘not intelligent’, and ‘indolent and sensitive’. Salisbury Papers/Letter Books, Vol. I, p. 181; and Salisbury to Lytton, 20 February 1877. Ibid., Vol. 2, p. 303.

117 J. Gibbs (member of the Council of the Governor of Bombay) to Lytton (priv.), Mahableshwar, 17 April 1876. Lytton Collection, Vol. 519/I, No. 12.Google Scholar

118 Same to same, 1 April 1876. Ibid.

119 Political letter from the Govt. of Bombay to the Court of Directors No. 20 of 26 June 1852. Sessional Papers No. 615 of 1852, pp. 2053–8; Accounts and Papers, Vol. 14, Part I.Google Scholar

120 Compare the comments of Lord Lamington, Governor of Bombay in the early years of the twentieth century in his reply to the criticisms of Lord Curzon. Lamington to Curzon (priv.), Bombay, 14 February 1904. Lamington Correspondence, I.O.L. Micro. Reel 675, pp. 2–3.Google Scholar

121 J. Gibbs to Lytton (priv.), Mahableshwar, 17 April 1876. Lytton Collection, Vol. 519/I, No. 12.Google Scholar

121 Salisbury to Lytton (priv.), India Office, 22 October 1876. Salisbury Papers/Letter Books, Vol. 2, pp. 263–4.Google Scholar

123 Temple's appointment was a deliberate stroke on the part of Salisbury toheal the breach between the two Governments, Temple being renowned for his loyalty and obedience. Other candidates were Pelly and Sir Bartle Frere. Salisbury to the Duke of Buckingham, Gov. of Madras (priv.), India Office, 23 March 1877. Salisbury Papers/Letter Books, Vol. 2, p. 338. Salisbury to Temple, 15 October 1877. Temple Collection, Vol. 16, p. 202.Google Scholar

124 All danger of this had passed by the middle of 1878. Sir L. Mallet to Temple (priv.), India Office, 8 August 1878. Temple Collection, Vol. 188.Google Scholar

125 Lamington to Curzon (priv.), Bombay, 24 January 1904. Lamington Correspondence, Reel 675, p. 4.

126 Political despatch to the Govt. of India of June 1875. Citd in Thornton, General Sir Richard Meade, p. 223. Salisbury's condemnation of the Govt. of India's proceedings was a trifle unfair, since the idea of a public trial had been originally suggested to Northbrook by the Prime Minister, Gladstone. Lord George Hamilton, the Sec. of State to the Earl of Elgin, Gov.-Gen. of India (priv.), India Office, 10 April 1896. Elgin Collection, MSS. Eur. F84, I.O.L., Vol. 14, p. 42.Google Scholar

127 Until the 1860s the policy of the Imperial Govt. towards the States was based very largely on the old ‘ring fence’ theory according to which the British had no concern with the events inside the States unless they impinged on British territory or British subjects.