We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In the decade after Warren Hastings’ departure (1785–98), his idea of conciliation encountered new and formidable opposition. He relied on the idea in his defense against impeachment in parliament, but his principal accuser, Edmund Burke, identified it with corruption. Conciliation also acquired a bad name in India, where Hastings’ acting replacement, John Macpherson, made it the watchword of his scandalous administration. Hence, it fell to Lord Cornwallis to rid the idea of its unsavoriness, as part of his attempt to restore metropolitan faith in the Company state. The governor-general’s alliance with Sir William Jones helped in this regard. In the 1790s, pressure on the Company state and on the idea of conciliation abated. Yet this was to be a temporary reprieve. Soon, both would be challenged afresh by the governor-generalship of Lord Wellesley.
In the 1770s, the rapid expansion of the Company’s territorial empire sparked social and political unease in Britain, fueling efforts to reform and to rein in the corporation. For many commentators, few reforms seemed more important than dissolving the Company’s independent army. For years, disagreements about the relative authority of Company and royal forces had complicated British military operations in India, and “consolidating” the two bodies into a unified British Army seemed the clear solution. This chapter explores how the Company’s white officers pushed back against this campaign, establishing a coherent political community in India and an influential lobbying group in Britain. In a flurry of petitions and pamphlets, officers maintained that “consolidation” was both unjust and imprudent: Royal officers would not know how to lead sepoys or to negotiate a war in India. When this written campaign failed to halt the planned reform, white officers across India staged a mutiny, which Company and Crown officials proved unable or unwilling to rebuff. Plans for consolidation were abandoned, while the officers’ collective influence over imperial policies was further solidified.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.