Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T22:35:54.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Punjab Disturbances of 1907: the response of the British Government in India to Agrarian unrest

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

N. Gerald Barrier
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Two major factors determined the growth of Indian nationalism: developments within Indian society and indigenous political organizations and the British response to agitation and the demands of Indian politicians and interest groups. Current studies of Indian nationalism generally focus upon the former, while the relation of British rule to political development is either ignored or misunderstood. Frequently the British are portrayed as inept bureaucrats, or the government as a monolithic structure run on inflexible bureaucratic principles and bent upon a policy of repression. While the shoe often fits, this caricature ignores the basic fact that, despite mounting pressure from 1904 onwards, the British rulers managed to keep order and to choose their hour of departure. They were able to continue governing primarily because they were adroit in handling agitation, minimizing serious grievances, and retreating from policies or measures which threatened to inflame the subcontinent. Professor Anthony Low of the University of Sussex has shown graphically how the Government of India manipulated Gandhi's first and second civil disobedience campaigns to its own political advantage. This paper explores the background and the British response to an earlier but equally volatile situation, the 1907 rural disturbances in the Punjab.

Type
Articles
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 1 , Issue 4 , July 1967 , pp. 353 - 383
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1967

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 E.g., Majumdar, R. C., History of the Freedom Movement in India, Calcutta, 1963, II, pp. 1–6, 251–64; III, pp. 67–225.Google Scholar

For the general historiographical problem, Robert Crane, I., ‘Problems of Writing Indian History’, in Problems of Historical Writing in India, New Delhi, 1963, pp. 41–5.Google Scholar

2 ‘The Government of India and the First Non-Cooperation Movement—1920–22’, in Journal of Asian Studies, 25, 1966, pp. 241–59; ‘Sapru and the First Round Table Conference’, unpublished paper presented at the Working Conference on Indian Politics and Political History, University of Sussex, 1965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 This attitude or adminstrative tradition is discussed in the following: Cust, R. N., Memoirs of Past Years of a Septuagenarian, London, 1899, pp. 29–30; J. Douie minute, 24 December 1900, Punjab Government (hereinafter PG) Judicial File, February 1901, 14–38A. Although a few of the PG files cited in this study are available only in the West Pakistan Record Office (hereinafter WPRO), most files are found both in the WPRO and the India Office, London.Google Scholar

4 The bill and subsequent agitation are discussed in Barrier, N. G., The Punjab Alienation of Land Bill of 1900, Durham, N.C., 1966, Chapters 1–3.Google Scholar

5 Wilson, J. minute, 22 February 1904, Financial Commissioner File (WP Board of Revenue, Lahore; hereinafter cited as FCF) 441/108A.Google Scholar

6 Pioneer Mail, 27 January 1905. Also noting in Judicial and Public File (hereinafter J & P) 1380, 1905.Google Scholar

7 Popham Young minute, 15 November 1895, Government of India (hereinafter GI) Revenue File, December 1896, 22–47A; Popham Young minute, 16 April 1907, FCF 441/108A. All GI files are from the National Archives of India, New Delhi.Google Scholar

8 Revenue Report of the Punjab Irrigation Department, 1902–1905, Lahore, 1905, p. 5.Google Scholar

For the background on the colonies and irrigation, Paustian, P. W., Canal Irrigation in the Punjab, New York, 1930.Google Scholar

9 Beazley, J. and Puckle, F., The Punjab Colony Manual, Lahore 1922, I, pp. 5–22.Google Scholar

10 PG to GI, 337S, July 1891, GI Revenue, November 1891, 35–37A; Chenab Colony Gazetteer, Lahore, 1905, pp. 29–33.Google Scholar

11 Statistics from ‘Report on the Rakh and Mian Ali Branches of the Chenab Colony’, GI Revenue, September 1897, 59–62A.Google Scholar

12 PG to GI, 129, 12 March 1889, and Buck minute (26 April 1889), GI Revenue, May 1891, 15–18A.Google Scholar

13 Conditions and contracts in Puckle, Colony Manual, vol. II.Google Scholar

14 FC to PG, 19 January 1903, and noting, FCF 441/108A.Google Scholar

15 Tupper, C. L. minute, 1 March 1901, FCF 441/108A and Keep-With (KW).Google Scholar

16 Popham Young minute, 15 November 1895, GI Revenue, December 1896, 22–47A. Young was immortalized in a sixty-stanza poem frequently read in the colony.Google Scholar

17 FC to PG, 19 January 1903, FCF 441/108A and KW.Google Scholar

18 Douie letter, Reports for the Chenab, Jhalum, Chunian Sohaq Para Canals, 1903, Lahore, 1904, pp. 8–9. Also, Douie minute, FCF 441/108A.Google Scholar

19 Dobson, B. H., Report on the Chenab Colony Settlement, Lahore, 1915, pp. 9, 13–14 C. L. Tupper minute, 18 March 1907, KW to FCF 441/108A.Google Scholar

20 Tupper, C. L. minute, 1 March 1901, FCF 441/108A.Google Scholar

21 Dobson, , Chenab, p. 13.Google Scholar

22 Connolly, J. F. minute, 5 September 1903, FCF 441/108A; FC to PG, 858, 17 October 1901, GI Revenue, May 1902, 32–34A.Google Scholar

23 Tupper, C. L. minute, 1 March 1901, and noting, GI Revenue, December 1904, 8–9A.Google Scholar

24 Wilson, minute, 13 September 1904, and council noting, GI Revenue, December 1904, 8—9A.Google Scholar

25 Fitzpatrick minute, 1 January 1905; Sec. of State Leg. Despatch 5, 3 March 1905, J & P 3075, 1905.Google Scholar

26 PG to GI, 18, 22 January 1906; Ibbetson, minute, 10 February 1906; GI Revenue Despatch 9, 24 May 1906, GI Revenue, May 1906, 43–44A; Sec. of State Leg. Despatch 150, Revenue and Statistics File (hereinafter R & S), 1439, 1906.Google Scholar

27 This paragraph drawn from Return of the Punjab Land Colonization Bill, London, 1907, pp. 3–14.Google Scholar

28 Popham Young note, in Minto to Morley, 3 July 1907, Minto Collection, National Library of Scotland, Edinburgh. All Minto correspondence hereinafter is from the Minto Collection.Google Scholar

29 Zamindar, 18 August 1905, Selections from the Punjab Vernacular Press (Hereinafter SPVP), 1905, p. 215. Siraj-ud-Din Ahmad, a retired postal officer who ran the paper, had no previous connexion with agitation or public criticism of the British.Google Scholar

30 Dobson, , Chenab, pp. 13–14; confidential circular, 7 May 1907, and noting, PG Revenue file (Printed), 108A.Google Scholar

31 The attitudes of these men are reflected in the following: Ibbetson letter to PG, 7 March 1889, GI Judicial, December 1891, 234—300A; Rivaz minute, May 1899, GI Revenue, July 1899, 44–45A; minute, 1 September 1904, attached toPG Revenue (Printed), 108A; Wilson, minute, 4 May 1907, GI Leg., June 1907, 4–8A.Google Scholar

32 ‘Report on the Punjab Press, 1903’, GI Public, September 1904, 218B. A voluminous file, FCF 441/108A, is filled with clippings and comments on editorials and attacks on the government.Google Scholar

33 Rivaz minute, 18 November 1906, KW, FCF 441/108A.Google Scholar

34 PG to GI, 5377, October 1890, GI Irrigation, March 1891, 25–30A. Also discussion in GI to PG, 511, 23 March 1891, same file; Bingley, A. H., Sikhs, Simla, 1899, pp. 29, 106.Google Scholar

35 Sec. noting, PG Revenue, December 1902, 7–9A; Wilson minute, 8 August 1905, GI Revenue, June 1905, 11B; Sec. noting in GI Irrigation, August 1906, 6–8A.Google Scholar

36 Notes by Lahore DC (22 July 1907), FC (10 October 1907), GI Revenue, June 1908, 15B.Google Scholar

37 Bari Doab Committee Report, in PG to GI, 20RI, 21 January 1908, GI Revenue, June 1908, 15B.Google Scholar

38 Maclagan, minutes, 22 April, 2 May 1906; Rivaz minute, 3 May 1906, printed notes, PG Irrigation, December 1902, 7–9A. Also Walker minute, 10 October 1907, GI Revenue, June 1908, 15B.Google Scholar

39 Reports of meetings in Civil and Military Gazette, 13 and 31 January 1907; Popham Young note, Minto to Morley, 3 July 1907; Montmorency, G. De minute, 28 March 1907, GI Revenue, October 1907, 13–25A.Google Scholar

40 Tribune, 1 February 1907.Google Scholar

41 Montmorency, De minute, 28 March 1907; minutes by A. Diack (2 April 1907), A. Kettlewell (17 April 1907), notes attached to FCF 441/108A. Also comments in Panjabee, 12 December 1906; Tribune, 4 November 1906.Google Scholar

42 Zamindar, 8 April 1907, SPVP 1907, pp. 102–103.Google Scholar

43 Observer, 9 March 1907, SPVP 1907, p. 65.Google Scholar

44 Reports in Tribune, 7 February 1907; Panjabee, 6 February 1907.Google Scholar

45 Rai, Lajpat, Autobiographical Writings of Lajpat Rai, ed. by Joshi, V. C., Delhi, 1965, pp. 119–20; Lajpat Rai to G. K. Gokhale, 29 January 1907, Gokhale Collection (Friends of India Society, on permanent loan to the National Archives of India, New Delhi).Google Scholar

46 Rivaz minute, 18 January 1906, printed notes, FCF 441/108A. Discussion of bill from proceedings of legislative council, Vol. I, pp. 178–82.Google Scholar

47 Douie minute, 5 April 1907, and noting, FCF 441/108A. Under the Indian Councils Act the Viceroy had to assent to a local act before it came into operation.Google Scholar

Practice and Procedure of the Indian Government, Calcutta, 1913, pp. 177–80.Google Scholar

48 Reports in Zamindar, 24 March 1907, SPVP 1907, p. 97; Panjabee, 20 April 1907, Civil and Military Gazette, 19 March 1907.Google Scholar

49 Notification of 13 March 1907, and sec. noting, FCF 441/108A.Google Scholar

50 Report in Panjabee, 27 March 1907.Google Scholar

51 Lajpat Rai speech, appended to history sheet, GI Home-Political File, August 1907, 148–235A (hereinafter cited as ‘Disturbances File’). Also, Autobiographical Writings, pp. 112–22. Lajpat Rai and Ajit Singh were enemies and had not planned the meetings or the agitation.Google Scholar

52 Ajit Singh's speech, appended to history sheet, ‘Disturbances File’. Also Ajit Singh, ‘Autobiography’ (unpublished ms., Joshi, V. C., National Archives of India), pp. 10–11.Google Scholar

53 Lajpat Rai history sheet, Ajit Singh history sheet, ‘Disturbances File’. Also Ajit Singh autobiography, pp. 13–14.Google Scholar

54 Telegram in R & S 1036, 1907. It is unclear why Ajit Singh waited until April to agitate. Other papers and organizations had taken up the cry a month earlier.Google Scholar

55 Ajit Singh history sheet and proceedings of the meeting, ‘Disturbances File’. Meeting reports in Tribune, 11 April 1907; Panjabee, 1 May 1907.Google Scholar

56 Ibbetson to Minto, 23 March 1907.Google Scholar

57 Resolution in Civil and Military Gazette, 28 April 1907; comments in Panjabee, 1 May 1907.Google Scholar

58 Ibbetson, minute, in PG to GI, 695, 3 May 1907, ‘Disturbances File’.Google Scholar

59 Ibbetson, minute. The deportations were to be carried out under Regulation III of the 1818 Bengal Regulations, which gave the Governor-General in Council the right to deport Indians to a place in India or outside India on the grounds that they endangered the peace.Google Scholar

60 Drawn from the first three ‘Information’ telegrams sent to Morley. The telegrams were based on CID reports, principally those of 4, 5 and 6 May (in appendices to notes, ‘Disturbances File’).Google Scholar

61 Enclosures to PG to GI, 695, 3 May 1907, ‘Disturbances File’. Also Ibbetson to Maclagan, printed notes, FCF 441/108A.Google Scholar

62 Agnew letter to PG, 8 May 1907, GIPOL (Home-Political), July 1907, 8A. Agnew was an intimate friend of Ibbetson.Google Scholar

63 Ibbetson, to PG, 7 March 1889, GI Judical, December 1891, 234–300A Ibbetson to Minto, 23 March 1907.Google Scholar

64 Ibbetson, minute, 26 April 1907, printed notes FCF 441/108AKW; PG to GI, 22 January 1906, and Ibbetson note, 10 February 1906, GI Revenue, May 1906, 43–44A.Google Scholar

65 As Minto later observed, ‘Ibbetson appears to me to entirely misunderstand the position. He appears to assume that we can stamp out the unrest. This we can never do. It has come to stay, in the shape of new ideas and aspirations of which everyone who has thought seriously over the subject ought to be aware. He confused this with sedition…’, Minto to Morley, 5 November 1907.Google Scholar

66 Minto to Morley, 16 May 1907; Kitchener to Minto, 5 May 1907; Minto to Lord Roberts, 6 June 1907.Google Scholar

67 Punjab CID Manual, Lahore, 1915, pp. 7–8, 43.Google Scholar

68 Approximately 30,000 Silkhs (23 per cent of the army) and 18,000 Punjab Muslims (13 per cent of the army) were in the army in 1907. Statistics from Indian Army List, 1907.Google Scholar

69 Erle, Richards minute, 5 May 1907, ‘Disturbances File’,Google Scholar

70 Adamson minute (5 May), Baker minute (6 May), Finlay minute (6 May), Kitchener minute (6 May), ‘Disturbances File’. Also Minto to Lady Minto, 9 May 1907, Minto to Morley, 8 May 1907.Google Scholar

71 Minto to Morley, 8 May 1907.Google Scholar

72 Minto to Valentine Chirol, 18 May 1910.Google Scholar

73 Ibbetson to Minto, 25 June 1906.Google Scholar

74 Richards, Diary, 6 August 1906. Richards Collection (Eur. Mss. F. 122, India Office Library).Google Scholar

75 Ibbetson to Minto, 21 and 24 July 1906; Minto to Ibbetson, 21 and 23 July 1906.Google Scholar

76 Order in Council, 6 May 1907, and 8 May telegram, ‘Disturbances File’.Google Scholar

77 Risley, H. minute, 11 5 1907, ‘Disturbances File’.Google Scholar

78 Telegram to Minto, 6 May 1907.Google Scholar

79 Diary, Hirtzel, 8 May 1907, Home Misc. Series 864, India Office Library; Morley to Minto, 9 May 1907.Google Scholar

80 Hirtzel, Diary, 10 May 1907.Google Scholar

81 Printed circular, 7 May 1907, and noting by FC Secretariat, PG Revenue (Printed) 108A; CID report, 13 June 1907, West Pakistan CID Archives, Punjab CID Reports of 1907.Google Scholar

82 Ibbetson to Minto, 13 May 1907.Google Scholar

83 Minto to Morley, 18 June 1907; Minto to Lady Minto, 15 May 1907.Google Scholar

84 CID report, 15 May 1907, and resulting telegram, 16 May 1907, GIPOL, July 1907, 29–117B. Risley, the Home Secretary, also perpetuated the mistakes because he believed that Punjabis and Bengalis had joined in an all-India plot.Google Scholar

85 Minto minute, 17 May 1907; telegram to Morley, 12 May, later corrected by 21 May telegram and Punjab demi-official letter, 19 May 1907, GIPOL, July 1907, 29–117B. The latter issue was over a Reuter telegram which the Punjab somehow used as a source of news for what was happening. The telegram claimed that thousands of ‘rustics’ had invaded Lahore.Google Scholar

86 Kitchener to Minto, 12 May 1907. Also memorials to Kitchener, in appendix to GI Leg., June 1907, 4–8A.Google Scholar

87 Wilson, minute, 4 May 1907, GI Leg., June 1907, 4–8A.Google Scholar

88 Miller, minute, 6 May 1907, GI Leg., June 1907, 4–8A.Google Scholar

89 Minto, minute, 14 May 1907, GI Leg., June 1907, 4–8A.Google Scholar

90 Practice and Procedure of the Government of India, pp. 29–30.Google Scholar

91 Ibbetson to Minto, 14 May 1907.Google Scholar

92 Kitchener to Minto, 12 May 1907.Google Scholar

93 Morley, telegram to Minto, 14 May 1907; Hirtzel Diary, 14 May 1907.Google Scholar

94 Enclosures to PG to GI, 60 RS, 29 April 1907, GI Revenue, October 1907, 13–28A.Google Scholar

95 Minto, to Lady Minto, 15 May 1907.Google Scholar

96 Minto to Morley, 16 May 1907; Wilson minute, 14 May 1907; Minto minute, 7 July 1907; GI Revenue. October 1907, 13–28A.Google Scholar

97 Minuting, 14–20 May 1907, GI Leg., June 1907, 4–8A.Google Scholar

98 Minto to Lady Minto, 20 June, 5 July 1907. Official minute, 26 May 1907, GI Leg., June 1907, 4–8A.Google Scholar

99 Minto minute, 26 May 1907, GI Leg., June 1907, 4–8A.Google Scholar

100 Punjab unofficial letter to GI, 5 June 1907; Wilson minute, 10 June 1907; Minto minute, 11 June 1907, GI Leg., June 1907, 4–8A.Google Scholar

101 Zamindar, 1 June 1907, SPVP 1907, p. 222. Also comments in Tribune, 15 June 1907; Stuart, H. minute, 2 July 1907, GIPOL, August 1907, 113A.Google Scholar

102 Popham Young minute, enclosed in Minto to Morley, 3 July 1907.Google Scholar

103 Ibid.

104 Minto to Morley, June 1907; GI to PG, 1027, 29 May 1907, GI Leg., June 1907, 4–8A.Google Scholar

105 GI to PG, 995/205–3, 24 June 1907, GI Revenue, October 1907, 13–28A.Google Scholar

106 PG to GI, 882, 2 July 1907, ibid. Also Ibbetson to Minto, 27 June 1907.

107 Minutes by Miller (13 June), Baker (18 June), Adamson (19 June), ibid.

108 Minutes by Wilson (3 July), Minto (7 and 11 July), ibid. Also Minto telegram to Morley, 15 July 1907.

109 GI to PG, 1121, 15 July 1907, ibid.

110 Ibbetson to Minto, 27 June 1907; PG to GI, 1764S, 19 August 1907, ibid.

111 PG to GI, 1764S, 19 August 1907; GI to PG, 1380, 8 September 1907; Minto minute, 31 August 1907, ibid.

112 Report of committee, in PG to PG, 20 RI, 21 January 1908, GI Revenue, June 1908, 15B.Google Scholar

113 Draft resolution in PG 20 RI, 21 January, 1908, ibid.

114 Minutes by Miller (19 April), Minto (18 May), GI to PG, 1162–1, 25 May, 1908, ibid.

115 Order in Council, 20 May 1908. ibid.

116 Report of committee, GI Revenue, April 1909, 1–4A. The remainder of the paragraph is drawn from this report.Google Scholar

117 This innovation had been anticipated and favoured by the Indian Revenue Department. For example, Miller, minute, 13 June 1907; Minto minute, 7 July 1907; GI Revenue, October 1907, 12–28A.Google Scholar

118 PG to GI, 2141S, 21 August 1908, GI Revenue, April 1909, 1–4A.Google Scholar

119 Order in Council, 15 January 1909, and prior noting, ibid. The death of Ibbetson and the elimination of his influence on the Council undoubtedly strengthened its attitude toward the Punjab authorities.

120 Miller, minute, 4 January 1910, GI Revenue, May 1910, 10–12A.Google Scholar

121 Adamson, minute, 19 June 1907, GI Revenue, October 1907, 13–28A. Also Minto to Morley, 3 July 1907.Google Scholar

122 Committee report, PG to GI, 633S–RA–1, 23 June 1909, GI Revenue, December 1909, 10–11A.Google Scholar

123 Proceedings of the Punjab Legislative Council, 1912, p. 103.Google Scholar