236 SIR GEORGE BARLOW AT MADRAS. [СНАР. the protection of Jeypore and Boondee did not equally come within the category of a "defensive policy." The Court went further, and questioned the propriety of the moderation which Lord Minto had exhibited towards Ameer Khan. "We are not satisfied," they said, "with the expediency of abstaining from disabling any power against whom we may have been compelled to take up arms from renewing his aggressions;" at the same time, they strongly advised the conclusion of a subsidiary treaty with the raja of Nagpore, though it would have involved the necessity of protecting him against all opponents, and extended the circle of those defensive alliances which had been reprobated six years before. But when this despatch reached Calcutta Lord Minto was in Java, and when he returned he found himself superseded in the Government. Sir George Barlow, who had been appointed to Sir George Barlow at Ma- Succeed Lord William Bentinck in the Government dras, 1807-10. of Madras, proceeded to that Presidency on the arrival of Lord Minto. During the twenty months in which he filled the office of Governor-General he had disgusted society by his cold and repulsive manners, and the absence of all genial and generous feeling in the intercourse of life. He was never able to obtain that deference and respect, or to exercise that personal influence which is so important to the efficient administration of public affairs. The duties of retrenchment, at all times invidious, which devolved on him, were performed in the most ungracious manner. He manifested on all occasions a lofty sense of his official dignity, and exacted a stern and implicit obedience to his will. But that which was regarded in the case of Lord Wellesley as the natural absolutism of a great mind, was in Sir George Barlow resented as the vulgar despotism of power. The feeling of personal aversion which pervaded the community was heightened by a contempt of his abilities. At Madras, he became unpopular by isolating himself in a small circle of officials and confidants, and his administration has been described, and not unjustly, as a 66 season of unprecedented private misery, and unexampled peril and alarm." XXIV.] Case of 1808. CASE OF MR. SHERSON. 237 The first occasion of offence arose from his unMr. Sherson, just proceedings against Mr. Sherson, a civil servant deservedly held in high estimation. He was superintendent of the stores of rice laid in by the Government of Madras against the periodical famines on that coast. A charge of fraud had been brought against him, which was under investigation when Sir George Barlow entered on the Government. His accounts were submitted to the scrutiny of the civil auditor and pronounced correct, but as they did not happen to tally with the native accounts kept in the office, the new Governor removed both the auditor and Mr. Sherson from their situations. A prosecution was likewise commenced against Mr. Sherson in the Supreme Court, which ended in his honourable acquittal. The Court of Directors condemned these proceedings without reserve, restored Mr. Sherson to the service, and compensated him for his loss by a donation of 70,000 rupees. The Carnatic 1808. Sir George Barlow incurred still greater obloquy Commission, by his proceedings in reference to the Carnatic Commission, appointed by Act of Parliament to investigate the debts of the nabob, for which the Company became responsible when they took over the Carnatic. The claims on the nabob amounted to the gigantic sum of thirty crores of rupees, of which the validity of less than a tenth was eventually substantiated. But the bonds were considered negotiable securities, and many of them, though originally fraudulent, had been honestly purchased, and the whole community of Madras, not excepting the officers of Government, was deeply interested in the enquiry. To secure impartiality, the Commissioners were selected from the Bengal Civil Service, and they had just opened their court when Sir George Barlow took his seat at the Council board. They appointed one Reddy Rao, who had been an accountant in the finance office of the late nabob, as their confidential adviser. A bond which he held came up for examination; its validity was impeached by a native, named Papia, but the Commissioners pronounced it genuine, and resolved to prosecute Papia's witnesses for 238 THE CARNATIC COMMISSION. [CHAP. perjury. He anticipated this movement by charging Reddy Rao before a magistrate with forgery, and he was committed for trial. The Commissioners appealed to the Governor for support, and he ordered the Advocate-General to defend the case. The legitimacy of such a proceeding cannot be controverted; but the mere appearance of a public officer, in his official capacity, in connection with the investigation of claims which Government was interested in disallowing, created a feeling of indignation and dismay among the creditors, European and native, inasmuch as it could scarcely fail to deter timid natives from coming forward to give evidence. This feeling was intensely aggravated when the Governor, in a spirit which was considered vindictive, dismissed the magistrate who had committed Reddy Rao, expelled from the country Mr. Parry, a merchant, who had manifested opposition to the Commissioners, and banished Mr. Roebuck, a civilian of long standing, for his share in the proceedings, to a remote post of inferior rank and emolument, where he died soon after. Three actions were brought in the Supreme Court in reference to this transaction; and Reddy Rao was convicted by the jury of forgery, but recommended to the favourable notice of the Crown by the judge of the Supreme Court, on the ground of his innocence. He received a pardon, as a matter of course, but before it could reach India he had terminated his existence by swallowing poison; and it was discovered after his death that the bond was spurious, and that he was deeply implicated in all the villanies of the Carnatic bonds. The Madras These undignified proceedings affected the reputation and the strength of the Madras Government, but the mutiny of the European officers of the army which was to be attributed in a great measure to the same violent and arbitrary spirit, threatened its very existence. Thrice in the course of less than half a century had the Company's Government been shaken to its foundation by the sedition of its European officers. The mutiny of 1765 was overcome by the undaunted firmness of Lord Clive. That of 1796 and XXIV.] THE EUROPEAN MUTINY AT MADRAS. 239 '97 was fostered by the feebleness of Sir John Shore, and extinguished by the simple mandate of Lord Wellesley, who, seeing a number of malcontent commanders congregated at his first levée, peremptorily ordered them to rejoin their regiments within twenty-four hours. The glance of his very remarkable eye had, it was said, quenched the mutiny. In the present instance a feeling of dissatisfaction had been for some time fermenting in the Madras army, and not without cause. There was an invidious distinction between the pay of the European officers in Bengal and Madras, and all posts of command and dignity were monopolised by the officers of the royal army. This spirit of discontent was unhappily promoted rather than repressed by the demeanour of the Commander-in-chief. A seat in council, with an additional allowance, had always been attached to the office, but on the dismissal of Sir John Cradock after the Vellore mutiny, the Court of Directors had refused it to his successor, on some technical ground, and filled up the vacancy with a civilian. The General considered this a personal grievance and affront, and he did not care to conceal the exasperation of his feelings from the officers of the army, who were the more disposed to sympathise with him as they were thereby deprived of a representative of their interests at the Council board. Since the close of the Mahratta war the Court of Directors had been fierce for retrenchment, and had threatened "to take the pruning-knife into their own hands," if they found on the part of the Madras Government to use it. Among the plans suggested for reducing the military charges was the abolition of the tent contract, which furnished the officers in command of regiments with a fixed monthly allowance to provide the men with camp equipage, whether they were in the field or in cantonments. The system was essentially vicious, but not more so than all the other devices in the King's and Company's army for eking out the allowances of commanding officers by anomalous perquisites. The Quartermaster-general, Colonel John Munro, had been requested to draw up a report Abolition of the tent contract, 1809. any hesitation 240 VIOLENCE OF GENERAL MACDOWALL. [СНАР. on the subject, and both Sir John Cradock and Lord William Bentinck had come to the determination to abolish the contract, when they were suddenly recalled. It fell to the unhappy lot of Sir George Barlow, already sufficiently unpopular, to carry this resolution into effect. Charges against 1809. This retrenchment increased the resentment Col. Munro, of the officers, and they determined to wreak their vengeance on the Quartermaster-general, who had stated in his report that the result of granting the same allowance in peace and in war for the tentage of the native regiments, while the expenses incidental to it varied with circumstances, had been found, by experience, to place the interest and the duty of commanding officers in opposition to each other. This was a harmless truism, but when the body is in a state of inflammation, the least puncture will fester. The officers called on the Commander-in-chief, to bring Colonel Munro to a court-martial, for aspersions on their character as officers and gentlemen. The Judge Advocategeneral, to whom the question was officially referred, considered that the officers had neither right nor reason on their side; but General Macdowall, then on the eve of retiring from the service, yielded to their wishes, and at once placed him under arrest. He appealed to the Governor in Council, under whose authority he had acted, and the Commander-in-chief was ordered to release him. With this mandate he was constrained to comply, but he gave vent to his feelings in a general order of extraordinary violence, in which he protested against the interference of the Government, and stated that nothing but his approaching departure for Europe prevented his bringing Colonel Munro to trial for disrespect to the Commander-in-chief, and contempt of military authority, in having resorted to the power of the civil government in defiance of the judgment of the officer at the head of the army. Colonel Munro's conduct was likewise stigmatised as destructive of military subordination, a violation of the sacred rights of the Commander-in-chief, and a dangerous example to the service. |