The Rajas of the Punjab by Lepel H. Griffin/The History of the Patiala State:Part III

Wikified by:Laxman Burdak, IFS (Retd.), Jaipur

Go to Index of the Book The Rajas of the Punjab by Lepel H. Griffin Printed by the Punjab Printing Company, Limited, Lahore 1870

The History of the Patiala State:Part III

1 Maharaja Narindar Singh succeeds
2 Several important reforms introduced
3 The case of the Chaharumi Sikhs
4 The proposed visit of Maharaja to England
5 The mutiny of 1857
6 Sanads granted for new territories
7 The right of adoption
8 Lord Canning's durbar at Ambala in January 1860
9 The Maharaja Narindar Singh invested with Order of the Star of India
10 The death of Maharaja Narindar Singh, November 1862
11 Mahindar Singh
12 The Sirhind Canal
13 The area, population, and revenue of Pattiala

Maharaja Narindar Singh succeeds

The new Chief was even better disposed towards the British Government than his father had been ; but it would be idle to assert that in him or in any Sikh Chief south of the Satlej, there existed, at this time, an active spirit of loyalty, such as, in 1857, induced this very Prince to strain every nerve and enlist every available man to fight for the English ; or which led the Rajas of Jhind and Kapurthalla to head their troops and help Englishmen to capture Dehli and reconquer Oude.

The sympathies of the Pattiala Chiefs with Lahore:

In 1845 the feeling south of the Satlej was strongly in favor of the Khalsa ; and although the Chief of Pattiala and Jhind knew that their interests were bound up With those of the English, their sympathies were with Lahore.

No information of the intention of the Sikh army to cross the Satlej given to British authorities:

No information was given to the British authorities of the intention of the Sikh army to cross the Satlej on the 11th of December ; although this intention was well known to every Chief south of that river, where every Jat village contained soldiers of the Lahore army, regular or irregular, by whom a constant communication was kept up with the "Panches," or Committees, of the army, and to whom the intention to invade British territory was universally confided.

Yet, in comparison with other States, Pattiala did good service, as Major Mackeson, Captain Mills and Mr. Cust, have testified. From the first, supplies and carriage were freely given.

[Page-203]

and the conduct of the contingent only proved that the authorities at Pattiala were not always able to control troops whose sympathies were with the Lahore army. At the investment of Gongrana the contingent behaved well, though it was unsuccessful in intercepting the garrison when they vacated the fort ; but a detachment of the same contingent, consisting of 200 horse, had, on a previous occasion, when garrisoning Badhowal for the English, given up that post without a struggle to an overwhelming force of Sikhs, which the contingent joined in a body, a desertion at the time highly prejudicial to the English cause.^*

At the conclusion of the war the Maharaja of Pattiala was rewarded for his services by the grant of a Sanad expressing the high sense which the Government entertained of his loyalty, t and of certain estates resumed

* From Major Mackeson, Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Agent Governor General of 27th July 1846. Agent to Govenior General to Government of India, 18th September 1846. Mr. R. Gust, Assistant Agent to Governor General to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States of 7th March 1846.

Captain Mills, Asistant Agent to Governor General to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States 1st February 1846.

Parwanas from the office of Agent Governor General to Pattiala authorities of 27th December 1845, 9th, 13th, 14th, 15th, 17th January and 13th February 1846. Major Broadfoot, Agent to Governor General to Government of India, 26th April 1845.

† Sunud to the Maharaja of Pattiala, dated 22nd September 1847. The Right Honorable the Governor General having resolved to bestow certain lands on the Raja of Pattiala as a mark of consideration for his attachment and services to the British during the late war with the Lahore State, and the Raja of Pattiala having requested that he may at the tame time receive a renewed assurance of protection and guarantee of his rights in his former possessions, the Governor General is pleased to confer this assurance in the form of a Sunud or grant as follows, in order that the Maharaja and his successors after him, may, with perfect confidence, continue to exercise the same rights and authority in his possessions as heretofore.

The Maharaja's ancient hereditary estates, according to, annexed schedule, shall continue for ever in the possession of himself and his

[Page-204]

from the Raja of Nabha. Lands to the value of a lakh of rupees, per annum, belonging to this Chief were confiscated ; of which Rs. 22,766, were taken by the British Government as commutation for the service of horse, and the remainder, Rs. 71,224, divided equally between Pattiala and Faridkot. The Maharaja also received a gift of a house belonging to the rebel Raja of Ladwa, situated at Hardwar. ^*

successors, with all Government rights thereto belonging of Police jurisdiction and collection of revenue as heretofore. The Maharaja’s chaharumiaus, feudatories, adherents and dependents, will coutinue bound in their adherence and obligations to the Raja as heretofore. His Highness will exert himself to do justice and to promote the welfare and happiness of his subjects, while they, on their part, considering the Raja as their true and rightful lord, must obey him and his successors accordingly and pay the revenue punctually, and be always zealous to promote the cultivation of their hands, and to testify their loyalty and obedience. The Maharaja has relinquished for himself and his successors for ever all right to levy excise and transit duties, which have been abolished throughout the Pattiala territory. His Highness also binds himself and his successors to the suppression of suttee, infanticide and slave dealings within his territories. If, unknown to the Maharaja’s authorities, any person should be guilty of these acts, the Maharaja’s authorities will, on conviction, punish them with such severity as to deter others. The British Government will never demand from the Maharaja and his successors and their dependents above named anything in the way of tribute or revenue or commutation in lieu of troops or otherwise, for the reason that His Highness will ever continue as heretofore sincerely devoted to the service and interests of the British. The British Authorities will not entertain complaints of the Maharaja’s subjects or dependents, or interfere with the Maharaja’s authority. Should an enemy approach from any quarter to this side the Beas or Satlej for the purpose of conquering this country, the Raja will join the British Army with his forces and exert himself in expelling the enemy, and act under discipline and obedience ; and in time of war place the resources of his country at the disposal of the British Government. His Highness engages to have made and to keep in repairs, through his own officers, the Military roads through his territory, for the passage of British Troops from Umballa and other stations to Ferozpore, of a width and elevation to be determined on by the Engineer officer charged with the duty of laying down the roads. His Highness will also appoint encamping grounds for British Troops at the different stages, which shall be marked off, so that there be no claims made hereafter on account of damaged crops.

* Government of India to Agent to Governor General, 1st May 1846.

Agent to Governor General to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, 9th May 1846.

Agent to Governor General to Government of India, 18th September 1846.

[Page-205]

The change effected by Sikh War:

The services, the ingratitude, the rewards and the punishments of the great Cis-Satlej Chiefs, will be recorded in detail in their family histories ; but, as Pattiala is the representative and head of all, it is necessary to explain here the effect which the Sikh war had upon the general relations of the British Government with the State is, small and large, south of the Satlej. It has been seen that from the year 1809, when the Chiefs were taken under British protection, till 1845, their relations with the Government had undergone no change. Protected, by the proclamation of 1809, against the ambition of Lahore, and, by that of 1811, from one another, the Cis-Satlej Chiefs had enjoyed thirty-six years of absolute peace and security. No tribute was demanded from them, though they were required to aid the Government with all their force in the event of war; but no special contingent had been fixed, and through all these years no occasion had arisen to test their fidelity and their gratitude. They were allowed absolute civil, criminal and fiscal jurisdiction within their respective territories, subject to the general authority of the Governor General's Agent, while the Government most scrupulously abstained from any interference with their internal and domestic affairs.

The advantages which British protection had given the Chiefs:

To the Cis-Satlej Chiefs the British Government had been an unmixed good. Under its strong protection, which asked for no return, save good conduct and loyalty, they had greatly prospered.

The contrast between their position, and that of the country north of satlej:

To the north of that river which had been fixed as the boundary of Ranjit Singh's ambition, there was, in 1845, no independent Chief, what-

[Page-206]

ever, with the exception of Nihal Singh Ahluwalia, whose existence, always precarious, was only due to the indirect action of the British Government. Every one else had fallen before the strong, shrewd, faithless ruler of Lahore. The great Katoch family of Kangra, which had ruled in the hills through all historic time, had been driven as exiles from the Punjab; Mandi and Suket were Sikh provinces; the ancient tribes of the north, the Ghakkars, the Awans, the Janjoahs, who had held their own against the Emperors of Dehli, were now tenants on the lands which they had once ruled as lords; the Afghans had been driven beyond the Khyber ; and the whole frontier side, after, thousand fights, had been compelled to acknowledge Lahore as supreme : Kashmir had been conquered, and the chivalrous ruler of Multan had been slain with his sons in the hopeless defence of his capital.

South of the Satlej there had been neither war nor conquest. With the exception of a few estates which had lapsed from failure of heirs, the descendants of the Chiefs who had welcomed Sir David Ochterlony in 1809, still ruled over the territory which they at that time possessed.

The ingratitude of the Chiefs and their punishment:

Their prosperity had been so great ; the benefits which British protection had conferred on them were so undeniable ; and ingratitude for benefits conferred is so certain, that it was no matter for surprise when, at the first opportunity, certain Chiefs turned against the power which had befriended them and openly or secretly joined the ranks of its enemies. But the British Government was still strong to punish. The Raja of Nabha was deposed, and one-

[Page-207]

fourth of his territories confiscated and divided among the faithful allies of the English. All the Cis-Satlej possessions of the Raja of Kapurthalla were forfeited; the Chiefs of Ladwa and Rupar were removed as prisoners from the province, and the whole of their estates confiscated, as was that of the Sodhis of Anandpur.

The relations of Government and the Chiefs undergo a change:

But the time had arrived when an entire change in the character of the relations of the Government with the Chiefs had become necessary. There was nothing whatever to admire in the internal management or administration of their States and there was certainly no sign that the people preferred native rule, the rule of their own hereditary Chiefs, to that of the English.

Their Mal-administration:

The history of every State proves that the reverse was the case, and that it was with the universal satisfaction of the peasants that any estate came under the direct management of the British Government. Thirty-six years of peace had somewhat tamed the barbarous Sikh barons, but their civilization was still imperfect, and their progress had not been such as to wipe out the memory of the days when their administration was but an organized system of rapacity and oppression ; when each one did what seemed most advantageous to himself, without any thought of the rights or wrongs of others; when fraud of the grossest kind, debauchery the most degrading, and an entire absence of any principle of truth and honor were the characteristics of almost every Sikh State South of the Satlej.

[Page-208]

Several important reforms introduced

Nor had the majority of the Chiefs shown their loyalty, in 1845, in any more conspicuous manner than in not joining the enemy. Gratitude they did not understand, and to show them any special consideration at the close of the campaign was unnecessary, Several most important measures were then adopted by the Government. The first was the abolition of all police jurisdiction in most of the States; for the existing system was so favorable to crime, that, in the midst of half a hundred conflicting authorities, the capture of a criminal was well nigh impossible. The second measure was the abolition of transit and custom duties, which were as injurious to trade as the police system was fatal to justice ; and the last was to accept a commutation for the personal service of the Chief and his contingent.

The following are extracts from the Despatch of the Governor General of the 17th November 1846, giving his views at length, and the resolution at which he had arrived : —

1. " It is impossible to read the Reports drawn up by Lieutenant Colonel Lawrence, C. B., and Major Mackeson, C. B., and to examine the documents by which their proposals are supported, without coming to the conclusion that it is the duty of the Government of India to correct the inefficiency and danger inherent in the present system of our relations with the Sikh Protected States, provided the remedies to be applied can be reconciled with justice and good faith.

[Page-209]

2. This system has lasted for nearly 40 years, during which period, judging from the experience of the last campaign, no progress has been made in gaining the attachment of the Sikh population under British protection. The people seldom have any opportunity of feeling the benefits of British rule, being in all their internal affairs governed by their own native Chiefs. Although of warlike and predatory habits, they were never taken into our service, whilst their own national and religious feelings disposed them to consider the Sikh Army, into whose ranks they were admitted by thousands, as composed of friends and relations. The Panchayat system, good pay and loose discipline, were infinitely more agreeable to their habits than the stricter system of our regular system.

3. Our protection was felt by the Chiefs during Ranjit Singh's career of conquest, but as regards the people of these States, our intercourse was not of a nature, by the benefits we could confer, to secure their attachment

4. Every village had some relations in the Sikh ranks, and if questioned by our officers to what Regiment he belonged, the soldier usually replied, in a tone of defiance, that he was a soldier of the Khalsa army on furlough at his native home. On the breaking out of the war, these men came over to their villages as emissaries, and whenever the hostile feeling against the British Government could be prudently exerted, no occasion was omitted for so doing, by intercepting stragglers and plundering baggage. Even in the case of the troops of the Maharaja of Pattiala, the most faithful of our

[Page-210]

adherents, when the affair of Buddeewal was going against us, and the baggage was sent off from the main body, the whole of the Pattiala cavalry, about 200 in number, went over bodily to the enemy, and the villagers in the rear cut up our sick and plundered the camp-followers. This force, employed at Loodiana, conveyed daily information to the enemy. I notice these facts because this contingent was esteemed to be the most trustworthy in consequence of the fidelity of their Chief to the British cause.

5. It is scarcely necessary to dwell upon the fact that the hearts of the Sikh population in our protected States were with the men of their own tribe and sect, and decidedly averse to the British Government

6. The disaffection to the British power, which for years had protected them, may be said to have been almost universal from the Jamna to the Satlej, with the exception of a few villages which for years had been administered by British Officers.

7. The great majority of the Petty Chiefs, some of whom held offices at Lahore, and to many of whom the Lahore service held out the prospect of making their fortunes, were as adverse, as their own ryots, to the British Government, in fact neither these petty Chiefs nor their ryots derive any direct and manifest advantages from British protection. The door for employment with us is closed against them, with the Lahore Government it was open.

8. Throughout the Lahore districts and the Aloowala Estates, now about to be brought under the direct superintendence of British officers, the case will be different. Liberal assessments and strict justice over the Sikh States ceded to us, will.

[Page-211]

I should hope, in a short time create a feeling very favorable to British rule, as contrasted with that of the Native Chiefs. The estates now belonging to the East India Company will comprise about one-half of the territory between the Jamna and the Sutlej.

9. But these papers demonstrate that the hostility was not confined to the less wealthy Chiefs.

10. The Raja of Ladwa, with an estate of £10,000 a year, almost openly avowed his treason, and, after a time, went over to the enemy with all his troops and artillery.

11. The Raja of Nabha, with an estate of £40,000 a year, did not hesitate openly to defy the British Authorities by a total disregard of the orders he received.

12. At the time when this hostile feeling was so unequivocally expressed, the British army had been successful in capturing 100 pieces of the enemy's artillery, and in compelling the Sikh army to cross the Satlej.

13. There can be no doubt, if we had suffered reverses, that, as in the case of the Pattiala troops at Buddeewal, the contingents would have joined the enemy and we should have had a general rising of the population in our rear as far east as Kurnal, cutting off our supplies and our small detachments, and making war upon us to the knife.

14. When the war suddenly broke out I felt, notwithstanding this hostile feeling on the part of the population, that it was quite impossible to apply a Military remedy by detachments in sufficient strength to keep up our communication with the rear. This could only be partially and occasionally

[Page-212]

done by the Regiments marching up to the south : no detached forces could be afforded of sufficient strength. It was absolutely necessary to concentrate every man where the battle was to be fought against a well-appointed and well-drilled army, inferior to none in Asia for its courage and its national pride, and superior to every other native army except our own, from its European system of disciplme.

15. Minor points were risked by bringing away 5,000 men ttnd 12 field guns from Loodiana, the same measure was adopted at Ferozepur on the 21st December, and my deliberate conviction is, that if the British army had concentrated its forces on Umbala, allowing the Sikh army to advance through the Protected States to meet us, that the whole population would have risen in arms against us.

16. I state this conviction in reference to the policy of the questions now before me in these reports.

17. There can be no doubt that the security of this part of the country demands a modification of the existing system, as far as it can be effected, consistently with good faith and an adherence to treaty.

18. These papers incontrovertiably shew the existence of a disaffected feeling on the part of the Chiefs and the people, either by overt acts, or by neglecting to obey orders, which they were lawfully bound to fulfil.

19. The refusal to obey the orders given to afford supplies, and to join the British army with their contingents, is clearly established by proof. The

[Page-213]

evidence is ample to justify the general measures proposed of no longer permitting these States to raise contingents of their own, but to pay to the British Government a ratable annual sum in lieu of personal service. These contingents were not forthcoming when wanted : the disobedience was willful and almost universal, and by the 4th and 5th Articles of the Declaration of Protection, these obligations are laid down in the most precise terms, viz., that the contingents are bound to join the British forces in war and their Chiefs to provide supplies. This betrayal of their duty did not arise from any want of power to fulfill the requisitions made on them. Supplies came in most abundantly as soon as the struggle was decided, and not before.

20. The delay was persisted in for the purpose of impeding the operations of the British army at a most important crisis, by crippling our means of movement ; and after the experience of the past, it can never be tolerated that the territories under British protection, who pay no taxes and contribute nothing to the State, shall furnish from 10 to 15,000 soldiers to the ranks of a neighbouring power, and shall, in time of war, evade, with impunity, to fulfill the very moderate demands which the paramount power has thought it right to exact.

21. These States have, in reality, (with very few exceptions ), forfeited their privileges by their repeated acts of disaffection and disobedience during the war; they have shewn that their contingents are not to be depended upon ; they cannot be distinguished from the enemy; they are neither an efficient or a faithful force; and are worse than useless, for they are positively dangerous.

[Page-214]

22. To abolish the existing practice of each petty Chief furnishing his contingent for the service of the paramount power, and substituting in lieu of it local corps, commanded by our European officers, recruited from the Sikh population and paid by the Sikh Chiefs indirectly, will, to a certain extent, remedy the mischief of the present system.

23. I therefore, without hesitation, sanction the proposition, that the moderate rate proposed shall be taken in commutation of personal service, making the exceptions recommended by the Political Agent, and including the Chief of Mumdote in the number of the excepted Chiefs.

24. I also sanction, on the same ground, viz., that these States have forfeited their privileges by their disobedience, the abolition of all transit and custom duties, which, levied through so many independent small States, is a system most ruinous to the trade of the country, and ought to be, as it has been in our Provinces, abolished. I approve of the exceptions to be made in favor of the Chiefs who conducted themselves with loyalty to the British Government, and I trust the equivalents for their loss by the abolition, will be given so as to afford satisfaction.

25. I. also entirely approve of the proposal to take this opportunity of settling the rules of succession to property, by a recorded declaration of what the rule is to be for the future in the families of the landholders.

27. With regard to para43. 16 and 17, proposing to resume all the Sikh Protected estates, and then granting new Sunuds from the Government,

[Page-215]

I consider the same ends will be obtained by carrying out the proposals of the Political Agent, as detailed in the preceding paras, to 16 and 17 which I have sanctioned. A general measure of resumption would create alarm, and must be preceded by a public declaration of the disloyalty of the largest portion of the Sikh Protected States, explaining the grounds of forfeiture, which general measure, not being absolutely necessary, had better be avoided. The object in view seems to be as well obtained without it.

28. I therefore prefer to apply the remedies proposed, as being justified by the misconduct of the Chiefs during the late war, without proclaiming that misconduct to all India.

29. The preceding observations apply to the general measure proposed."

The states exempted from reforms:

The only States exempted from the action of these reforms were Pattiala, Jhind, Faridkot, Maler Kotla, Chichrowli, (Kalsia) Raikot, Buria and Mamdot.^* Nabha was treated exceptionally and part of its punishment was the abolition of all transit duties, with the exception of the customs of the town of Nabha itself,^† Every care was taken that the changes thus effected should not needlessly offend the susceptibility of the Chiefs, and their persons were exempted from police jurisdiction, except under the direct orders of the Commissioner,

* The estates of Raikot and Buria have since lapsed : Mamdot was annexed in 1855 for the gross mis-government of the Chief, but on his death in 1863, was restored to his brother, who, however, has no fiscal jurisdiction.

† Secretary to Government, to Agent to Governor General, 17th November 1846.

[Page-216]

Changes in legal procedure: These arrangements were completed in March Changes in legal 1847, and a few months later it was ruled that the Chiefs and their subjects were amenable to the British Judicial Courts, if the defendant resided within jurisdiction of these Courts or if the cause of action arose there. But if the defendant was a subject of an independent State and the cause of action arose in such State, the case was not cognizable by the British Courts. Nor could any authority be exercised over the person or property of a foreign subject amenable to the Courts, when he was beyond its jurisdiction. In that case a notice was directed to be served on the defendant, through the agency of the Political Officer, and should be not appear, an ex-parte judgment would be given, and the decree, if granted against the defendant, would be executed against any property he might possess within the jurisdiction of the Court or against his person if found therein.^*

The abolition of the police jurisdiction somewhat inconvenient:

After a short trial it was found that, when Their police jurisdiction was gone, The Chiefs were unable to collect their revenue, and the Commissioner proposed the execution of a regular Settlement to protect the interests of the Chiefs and the people alike. The time for this might perhaps be considered to have not yet arrived, in which case papers might be drawn up for every village, defining the rights and obligations of both parties.

* Chief Commissioner, Punjab, to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, dated 9th and 13th June 1848.

[Page-217]

The insurrection of 1848 and annexation of Punjab:

But the circumstances of the case again changed before the Government was able to reply to these recommendations.

The Sikh army had again taken arms to expel the foreigners who were loyally doing their best to make a Sikh Government possible, and the result was the annexation of the Punjab. From Calcutta to Peshawar the whole country was in the hands of the British, and there were no political reasons, save those arising from considerations of good faith and equity, which could influence the Government in its determination of the amount of power to be left to the Cis-Satlej Chiefs. Accordingly, in June 1849, it was declared that, with the exception of the nine States before mentioned, all the Chiefs would cease to hold sovereign powers; would lose all civil, criminal and fiscal jurisdiction ; and would be considered as no more than ordinary subjects of the British Government in possession of certain exceptional privileges. The political power of the District officers was abolished, and the Commissioner of Ambala appointed the only referee in disputes between the Chiefs. The zamindars were declared to have the power of claiming an assessment in money or grain, or a regular Settlement, and records of rights were directed to be prepared; where the British Government held any shares of the estate, no option was permitted, and the whole was to be measured and assessed ; and such an estate was to be brought under British jurisdiction in police and revenue matters, even though a sovereign Prince might be a co-sharer ; but exchanges of such co-parcenary tenures were permitted to be effected. Regular Settlement operations were also to be

[Page-218]

carried on in estates under the police jurisdiction of the British Government ; in those from which an appeal lay to Government or in the concerns of which the Governor General's Agent had ever authoritatively interfered. Also in those estates which would escheat to Government on failure of heirs, or those held by the sovereign Princes with concurrent police jurisdiction.^*

The result:

With this decision of the British Government fell, for ever, the power of the petty Cis-Satlej Chiefs, who had too long been permitted to play at independence, which for them had no nobler significance than the right to do evil without restraint, and to oppress the people who were so unfortunate as to be their subjects. It was with a satisfaction, too enthusiastic to be insincere, that the people of these States came under the direct administration of the British Government ; while their loyal and peaceable conduct since that time proves that they have not yet found cause to regret the change.

The case of the Chaharumi Sikhs

The necessary result of the British Government assuming the direct management of so large a portion of the Cis-Satlej territory was the readjustment of the relations of those Petty Chiefs who were half subject to and half independent of the larger States. The most intricate and tedious of the cases which thus arose, related to what were known as

*Mr. Erskine, to Chief Commissioner Punjab, 7th February 1849. Board of Administration to Commissioner, 8th June 1849. Board to Commissioner 3rd May, 29th June and 18th October 1849.

For the whole question of escheats and the rights of collaterals reference must be made to “The Law of inheritance to Chiefships” by the author of the present work.

[Page-219]

Chaharumi^* villages, in which the Maharaja of Pattiala and various petty Sikh Chiefs were co-sharers. Colonel Mackeson had, in 1850,^† reported to the Board of Administration, with regard to the majority of these villages, declaring them to have rights independent of Pattiala, and, consequently, to be entitled to a separation from her should they so desire. This separation was desired by them, and the Board of Administration reported at length on the subject to the Government of India, which issued orders to at once take up and dispose of the case.^†† The Singhpuria Sirdars and the Lidhran Chiefs had not originally been included by Colonel Mackeson in his report, but were subsequently added. The Chaharumi villages, 97 in number, were grouped into several distinct estates, and the shares held by the Sikhs and by Pattiala, had been fixed at the time of their first conquest, when the several Chiefs were stronger and Pattiala weaker and unable to claim the lion's share of the new territory.

The principle of division:

In the division of these petty baronies or co-seignories, it was directed that the villages should be assigned to the different claimants with regard both

*A " Chaharumi," is a sharer entitled to a quarter (Chaharam- fourth) of the gross produce of the village ; two shares, or a half, going to the cultivator, and a quarter to each of the lords of the estate. This is the definition accepted in the Punjab and by the Chiefs themselves in their depositions before Sir D. Ochterlony in 1816. In the coarse of the present case, however, Pattiala tried to maintain that the Sikh co-sharers, the Chaharnmis, were only entitled to a quarter of the revenue.

† Colonel Mackeson’s Report, No. 16, dated 8th Jannary 1850.

†† Board of Administration to Government of India, No. 21, dated 6th January 1852. Government of India to Board, No. 399. dated 27th February 1852, and Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, to Settlement Officer Ambala, No. 1484, dated 5th August 1882.

[Page-220]

to shares and to topographical considerations ; that, in those allotted to Pattiala, she would collect the revenue and exercise full jurisdiction, while the Sikh co-sharers would collect the revenue in the villages allotted to them but in every other respect would be under British jurisdiction.

The estates affected:

The estates affected were the following:

Name	No. Of Villages.
Shill,	9
Gurangan,	10
Gudherah,	7
Buras,	4
Todar Majra,	8
Chuni Machhli,	39
Singhpurah (Banur),	15
Lidhran,	5
Total,	97

Mr. Melvill’s report on the same:

On these estates, Mr. Melvill, Settlement officer of Ambala, was directed to report, which he did, at great length, in 1853.* The enquiry into the rights of the claimants was one of extreme difficulty. It was necessary to understand in what proportion the shares were held at the first acquisition of the villages ; what encroachments had been made ; and whether these encroachments had been so recent, or so persistently resisted, as to give the injured party a claim to redress.

* P. S. Melvill, Esquire, No. 128, dated 25th May 1853, to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States.

[Page-221]

The Pattiala State, as has been several times shown in its history, has felt no scrpuless in possessing territories of its weaker neighbours, nor regarding the means of obtaining such possession. Previous to 1809, violence, without any shadow of excuse, was the usual means employed, while, subsequent to that time, fraud, corruption and intimidation were used, too often with success ; for the agents of the British Government could only judge from such evidence as was put before them, and Pattiala evidence was mostly bought, and reference to arbitration was merely reference to persons whose opinions had been, for sufficiently strong reasons, formed in favor of Pattiala, entirely independently of the merits of the case and indeed before the case had been submitted for their decision.

The final recommendations:

The final recommendations of the Settlement Officer were as follows :

Designation of Chaharumis:	Pattiala's Share:No of villages	Pattiala's Share: Jams	Chaharumi's share:No of villages	Chaharumi's share: Jams	Excess given to the Chaharumis	Deficiency given to Chaharumis
Shill.	5	2416	4	3011	297	...
Gurangan,	2	4278	8	3485	...	381
Buras,	4	1662	2	1325	...	88
Todar Majra,	4	1112	4	2351	231	...
Chuni Machhli,	20	12006	19	11991	...	7
Banur,	9	10310	6	2124	...	4163
Lidhran,	...	...	5	2335	1165	...
Khas Pattiala,	...	....	4	2954	2954	...
Gudherah.	...	...	...	...	....	....
Total,	44	35377	52	31932	4647	4772

[Page-222]

The four khas villages, Budali, Budiala, Tolah Majra, and Moti Majra, were the property of Pattiala, but being surrounded by estates under British jurisdiction, were proposed for exchange with two others Naya Shahr and Badalah, which the Maharaja had some wish to retain, as he had lately located some traders in the former village. The two villages assigned to Sirdar Kahn Singh of Buras, belonged to Pattiala, and were allowed him as a matter of convenience, with regard to residence and the boundary line, instead of assigning him a share in the four Buras villages.

Pattiala objects to the decision and claims more than a half share:

The arrangement, after much discussion and some modifications, was laid before Government, ^* and the Pattiala officials were allowed to urge any further objections they might have to the scheme. With reference to the estates of Todar Majra and Lidhran, no objection whatever was made ; but in the Shill, Gurangan and Gudhera estates, which had been divided in equal shares between the Chaharumis and Pattiala, and to which division and the allotment of villages the latter had advanced no objection whatever before the local officers, the Maharaja, before the Chief Commissioner, claimed more than a half share.

And produces proofs in support of her assertions:

A proceeding of Mr. Clerk, the Governor General's Agent at Ambala, of the year 1842, was produced in support of this claim, by which it certainly appeared that Pattiala had, in these estates,

Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, to Financial Commissioner, No. 111, dated 3rd April 1854.

Memorandum by G. F. Edmonstone. Esquire, late Financial Commissionor, dated 21 st April 1854. Financial Commissioner to Government Panjab, No. 221, dated 17th June 1854.

[Page-223]

been accustomed to collect on certain kinds of crops about 5/8ths and the Chaharumis 3/8ths only : while the village account books produced by Pattiala were to the effect that the Pattiala collections, for many years past, had been in excess of those of the Chaharumi Sikhs to the amount of Rs. 863 per annum, to which amount Pattiala required to be further reimbursed.

The question really at issue was, whether the original sharc of Pattiala was larger than that of the Sikhs, and, if not larger, whether the Sikhs had accepted the encroachments by Pattiala on their right, or had resisted them. It was evident that the shares were originally equal ; the villages having been conquered by the Sikhs and Pattiala conjointly, and a half share conferred on Raja Amar Singh by Ahmad Shah Durani. The encroachments of Pattiala had been continuous ; violence and fraud being alike used to increase her own rights at the expense of the Sikhs ; but the latter had never acquiesced in this state of things. Between 1830 to 1844 they had had given in some three hundred petitions praying for protection and redress. In these they constantly reiterated their claim to a full half share. Even after the Dastur-ul-amal or Rules of practice, had been drawn up by Mr. Clerk in 1842, the Sikhs continued to remonstrate against its terms ; declaring that the papers on which it was formed were false and fraudulent. There is little doubt that this was the case : the village accountants and headman who Compiled the annual accounts were in complete subordination to Pattiala, and dared

[Page-224]

not express any view opposed to her ; and there was nothing to show that in the document finally framed, the arguments of the Sikhs had been fairly considered, or their long and persistent opposition to Pattiala claims taken into account The Government accordingly ruled, with reference to their former instructions, that the estates should be equally divided, an aggressor not being permitted to profit by encroachments which had been continuously resisted.^*

The Banur estate:

Pattiala gained an advantage in the Banur estate, shared with the Singhpuria Sirdars, in the possession of the town of Banur, the second in importance in the whole territory. To compensate the Chiefs for this, a somewhat larger moiety of the income than their proper share was allowed them, the village of Baddali, formerly in Pattiala, having by this distribution been assigned to the Singhpurias and then annexed to British territory, a payment of 10 per cent, on the value of the share was allowed to the Maharaja to compensate him for the loss of the remote and contingent interest in the succession to lapsed sharers.

The Burhas estate:

With reference to the state of Burhas, which was so isolated that it was considered better to make over the four villages to Pattiala, and allot the Sirdar villages elsewhere, the Maharaja objected to the proposed

* Punjab Government No. 59, dated 27th January 1855, to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States. Nos. 41 and 139, dated 10th February and 9th May from Deputy Commissioner Ambala to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, and Nos. 42 and 138, dated 23rd February and 22nd June to Government Punjab. Government Punjab, No. 533, dated 18th July to Government of India, and Government of Indians No. 3799, dated 26th October 1855 to Government Punjab.

[Page-225]

payment of 10 per cent, on the revenue to compensate the Sirdar for the inconvenience of moving ; and the Government allowed this objection, considering that although the Chief of Burhas was entitled to compensation, it should be paid by the British Government and not by Pattiala who had had nothing to do with his compulsory removal.

The Chuni Machhli estate:

The last case was that of Chuni Machhli. Here the dispute had reference to the important village of Barwala, which both Pattiala and Sirdar Jaswant Singh, the co-sharer, desired to retain. The Maharaja's claim was based chiefly on the alleged possession of a fort and certain family cenotaphs in the village ; but, on enquiry, it appeared that the fort was nothing more than a defensible house, while the cenotaphs were admitted to be in Barnala, a totally distinct village ; it apparently being hoped, as was nearly the case, that the difference of a letter in the name would be overlooked. It appeared, however, that the possession of the village of Barwala, was far more necessary to Sirdar Jaswant Singh than to Pattiala, and it was included in his share of the estate.^*

The termination of the case:

Thus terminated, with some approach to equal justice, a conflict which had been going on between Pattiala and the Chaharumi Sikhs ever since the British connection with the Cis-Satlej territory. If justice was at length done, it was owing to the long, painful and patient enquiry of British officers, and owed nothing

* Punjab Government to Government of India, No. 553, dated 18th July, and Government of India to Government Panjab, No. 8799, dated 26th October 1855.

[Page-226]

to the sense of generosity or justice of Pattiala. Neither in this case nor in any of a similar nature does the conduct of Pattiala appear to advantage.

Uniformly litigious and ungenerous conduct of Pattiala:

Unwilling to yield to the British Government to whose protection she owed her existence, the rights which every paramount power necessarily claims, and jealous of every advantage gained by a neighbour, she abused the patience with which the Government attended to her every remonstrance and investigated her every claim, to press claims the most extravagant and unfounded, to support them with fraudulent evidence, and to prevent, in every possible manner, the British officers, whose duty was sufficiently arduous without her willfully adding to its difficulty, from obtaining a fair view of the case. Justice, in the eyes of Pattiala, consisted in the British Government surrendering everything to her, and she considered herself treated with exceptional harshness if their undoubted rights were accorded to her weaker neighbours. Every neighbour was for Pattiala a rival, and every rival an enemy against whom all arms were legitimate. It would be unfair to assert that in this conduct Pattiala was singular. What is considered unfair and dishonorable in English politics, is the ordinary practice of most native States. Founded upon violence, they ruled and increased their dominions by force, so long as this was possible. A stronger power than themselves has now insisted upon peace ; and they attempt to win by fraud what they are unable to gain by force.

The case of village of Bugar:

There were several other Pattiala cases, besides that of the Chaharumi Sikhs, difficult to Settle, a brief account of

[Page-227]

which is necessary here. The first of these relates to the village of Bugar, and the case is chiefly interesting from a ruling of the Supreme Government with reference to the investigation of rights which had accrued previous to 1809.

Granted to Bibe Fatoh by her brothers Rama and Tilokha:

This village, which must not be confounded with one granted to Pattiala in 1855, had been originally given by Rama and Tilokha, the sons of Phul, to their sister Fatoh, whose descendants still own it. Both Pattiala and Nabha, the descendants of the original grantees, claimed jurisdiction over Bugar; and the jagirdars were divided into two parties, favoring the claim of the respective States, while the cultivators of the village asserted that both Nabha and Pattiala exercised jurisdiction and inflicted fines. The Commissioner Cis-Satlej States held that neither had a right to the village, which had been granted when the ancestors of the Pattiala and Nabha Chiefs were mere zamindars, subjects of the Dehli Emperor who received the Imperial share of the revenue of Bugar as of other villages, and that the British Government, in taking the place of that of Dehli, had succeeded to its jurisdiction also. It was, besides, unjust to the people to make them over to either State, for partisans of the one would be, in any case, oppressed by the triumphant partisans of the other ; while to continue the joint jurisdiction of both in a single village was impossible.

The Government of India declined to take this which declined to view of the case. The argument drawn from the status at the time of the grant was asserted to be fallacious, for the proclamations of Sir D. Ochterlony, in 1809 and

[Page-228]

1811, had absolutely shut the door against the investigations of anterior rights, and guaranteed the Chiefs of the Cis-Satlej in the exercise of the same rights and authority, within their possessions, which they enjoyed before they were taken under British protection. As the village, at the date of the proclamation, was under the jurisdiction of either Pattiala or Nabha, it would be a breach of the agreement then made to extend the British authority over the village. The inconvenience to the people by giving Bugar to either State might be great, but this, though matter of regret, did not, in any way, affect the merits of the question, or render a breach of the distinct understanding on which the Government assumed the protection of the Cis-Satlej States any less objectionable. It was manifest that the Government could not interfere in favor of the rights of all the people of India, to whomsoever they might happen to be subject ; and it was ordered that the village should be given to Pattiala or Nabha, as appeared the most appropriate.

The village assigned to Nabha:

After some further discussion, the village was assigned to the Raja of Nabha, the Maharaja of Pattiala acquiescing in the decision. ^*

The Khumanun estate:

The second case referred to the estate of Khumanun, consisting of 58 villages, and situated a few miles north of Sirhind. Pattiala had in it no proprietary rights, but,

* Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Government Punjab, No. 184 dated I6th August 1865. Government Punjab to Government of India No. 630, dated 29th August. Government of India, to Government Punjab, No. 643, dated 10th October 1855.

Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Government Punjab, No. 106, dated 4th May 1857. Government Punjab to Commissioner, No. 400, dated 25th April, and to Government of India, No. 624, dated 4th September 1857. Government of India, No. 4641, dated 19th November 1857.

[Page-229]

in 1815, it was entrusted to her by Sir D. Ochterlony, for administrative purposes ; and the, Pattiala Chief was empowered to exercise criminal jurisdiction and exact service. When the English first took the Cis-Satlej territory under their protection, they seem to have fancied that the whole was under the jurisdiction of a few great Chiefs, and it was only gradually that it was discovered how numerous were the small communities claiming virtual independence. The Government at length sought to lighten it own labors by making the principal Chiefs responsible for the conduct of their weaker neighbours, authorizing them to hear and decide their disputes, and this course, though it gave a power to some States which was not unfrequently abused, on the whole worked well.

Transferred to Pattiala jurisdiction in 1815:

In 1815, the Sikhs of Khumanun, a large co-parcenary body, were so transferred to Pattiala jurisdiction. The next year Sikhs of Panjokra, Syadpur, Dhanori, Lakhnour, Khumbra and Barail; and, in 1821, the Chaharumis, co-sharers with Pattiala, were referred to her for general control and, in 1823, the Sikhs of Tullakour. ^*

Colonel Mackeson, in his report of 1847, suggested that the Khumanun Sikhs might be permitted to select whether they would remain under Pattiala or come under British jurisdiction ; but the Government of India, while admitting that it would be desirable to assume the direct control of the estate, declared that it was not desired to alter the position or

* Of these, the Khumanun, Tullakour, Dhanori and Lakhnour Sikhs are still under Pattiala jurisdiction for life of the Maharaja, paying commutation tax in lieu of service to Government.

[Page-230]

limit the authority of the Pattiala Chief, as exercised before, the Satlej campaign, but rather to improve and increase them, in consideration of the excellent service then rendered by him, and declined to alter the arrangement which would be reconsidered at the death of the Maharaja. ^*

Difficulty in maintaining rights of Government:

In 1855, when the Chaharumi tenures came under consideration, that of Khamanun was also discussed. The British Government had, not given up its rights as paramount over the estate. It exacted a commutation of Rs. 4,128 a year, and claimed all escheats. But there was much difficulty in discovering what escheats lapsed, and their real value, of which it was evidently not the interest of Pattiala to inform the Government. To obviate this, it was ruled by Mr. Edmonstone, when Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, that enquiries into escheats should not be made on the ordinary basis, viz., the year of protection, 1809, but that existing possession should be made the foundation for regulating rights of the British Government to future escheats, while the Maharaja was to file papers showing the approximate value of the share, the amount of which would be added to the annual amount of commutation paid by Pattiala. ^†

This rule had worked badly, and it was then proposed either to request the Maharaja to prepare

Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Secretary to Government of India, No. 125, dated 9th June 1847.

Government of India, No. 2352, dated 5th October 1847, to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States.

† Mr. Melvill to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, No. 102, dated 30th December 1852. Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, to Mr. Meivill, No. 35, dated 11th January 1853.

[Page-231]

a complete rent-roll of the whole estate with the value of each share, or to make a regular settlement of all the villages. But the Government unwilling to adopt the latter course, as it was thought likely to give umbrage to the Maharaja, the estate having been so long under his sole jurisdiction ; and it was finally determined to leave the existing arrangements as they were during the life time of Maharaja Narindar Singh.^*

Which were not however resigned:

Some doubt was, after this, expressed as to the intention of Government to relinquish all claims to escheated shares, and it was found necessary to intimate to the Maharaja that the just claims of Government were in no way abandoned. He was directed to file, within three months, a list of sharers and their collateral descendants, showing the shares held by them, and the ancestor from whom they derived their right ; and his acquiescence in this was a condition on which his jurisdiction over the Khumanun estate was continued. The rules of succession of 1851 were applicable to this estate, according to which, collaterals, claiming from a common ancestor, would succeed to so much of the estate as was in possession of that ancestor in 1809.^† The Maharaja nevertheless delayed the required report till the 7th May 1857. The number of lapses

* Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, to Government Punjab, No. 204, dated 5th September 1855, Government Punjab to Government of India No. 762, dated 11th October. Government of India, No. 3894, dated 2nd November 1853 ; Government Punjab to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, No. 983, dated 14th November 1855.

† Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Government Punjab, No. 282, dated 19th December 1855. Government Punjab, to Government of India, No. 934, dated 37th December. Government of India to Government Punjab, No. 837, dated 13th February 1856. Government Punjab, to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, No. 134, dated 21 st February 1856.

[Page-232]

were only two, amounting to Rs. 1,650 per annum, which was very small, considering that the number of sharers was 225. This amount was charged against the Maharaja from the date of the lapses.* Two years later the Khumanun estate was transferred to Pattiala in perpetuity.

The proposed visit of Maharaja to England

Maharaja Narindar Singh had always expressed a great desire to visit England. The Sikhs are not a race much addicted to travelling, and no Sikh Chief, of any consequence, had ever left India and very few had travelled as far as Calcutta. In 1854 he formally asked permission to visit England and that an English officer might be appointed to accompany him. The consent of Government was given, on the condition that satisfactory arrangements were made for the administration of the Pattiala State during his absence.

Arrangements during his absence:

A council of Regency was appointed, consisting of three officers who were to have full powers and, in case of difference of opinion, the majority was to decide ; and, in compliance with the suggestion of the Government of India, the Maharaja abandoned his intention of taking with him a suite of 500 persons in favor of a smaller number. All arrangements were completed, but the Maharaja, at the last moment, postponed his departure, and before he had again made

* Government of India to Government Punjab, No. 2131, dated 11th June 1858. Government Punjab to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, No. 421 dated 23rd June. Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Government Punjab, No. 197, dated 9th July. Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Deputy Commissioner Ambala, No. 601, dated 20th April 1857, and Deputy Commissioner Ambala to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, No. 204, dated 5th July 1858.

[Page-233]

up his mind to starts the mutiny broke out, and his presence was necessary in his own State.^*

The design a second time formed:

After the mutiny, Narindar Singh again determined to visit England. His services, during 1857, had been so brilliant, and the acknowledgments of the Government so warm, that he believed that in England he would receive a very flattering reception. His expectation would no doubt have been realized, but, unfortunately, a second time, domestic affairs and political questions forced him to abandon the intention after all arrangements had been completed and an English officer, Major R. Lawrence, Military Secretary to the Chief Commissioner, had been selected to accompany him.^†

The mutiny of 1857

The mutiny put on its trial the great experiment which the British Government had been laboriously working out since 1809, with regard to the Cis-Satlej States; and it indisputably proved that the Sikh Chiefs knew that they had been treated with generosity and consideration by the paramount power.

During the disturbances of 1857-58, no prince in India showed greater loyalty or rendered more conspicuous service to the British Government than the Maharaja of Pattiala. He was the acknow-

* Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, Nos. 154 and 205, dated 13th July and 23rd August 1854, with enclosures. Government Punjab to Government of India, Nos. 642 and 717, dated 19th July, 6th September. Government of India's Nos. 3648, 800 and 885, dated 18th August, 25th September and 15tli November 1854.

Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Government Punjab, No. 289, dated 16th October 1858. Government Punjab to Government of India, No. 791, dated 30th October.

[Page-234]

The influence of the Maharaja:

... lodged head of the Sikhs, and his hesitation or disloyalty would have been attended with the most disastrous results ; while his ability, character and high position would have made him a most formidable leader against the Government.

His conspicuous loyalty:

But following the honorable impulses of gratitude and loyalty, he unhesitatingly placed his whole power, resources and influence at the absolute command of the English, and during the darkest and most doubtful days of the mutiny he never for a moment wavered in his loyalty, but, on the contrary, redoubled his exertions when less sincere friends thought it politic to relax theirs.

His immediate action on the side of British Government:

When the news searched Pattiala of the mutinies at Dehli and Meerat and the doubtful attitude of the native troops at Ambala, the Maharaja placed himself at the head of all his available troops and marched the same night to Jesomli, a village close to Ambala, sending, at the same time, his elephants, camels and other carriage, to Kalka, for the transport of European troops to Ambala from the hill stations of Kussowli, Dagshai and Sabathu. From Jesomli he marched to Thanesar, and placed there a force of 1,300 men, with four guns, for the protection of the district.

The opinion of the Commissioner of Ambala:

" This straightforward and loyal conduct, " wrote the Commissioner of the Commissioner of Cis-Satlej States, " was of infinite importance to our cause at that time. Peoples’ minds were agitated with various rumours about the cartridges, about the adulteration of flour and other subtle designs to destroy

[Page-235]

their caste. "When the Maharaja placed himself boldly and heartily on our side these mischievous reports began to be discredited. The Maharaja was an orthodox Hindoo, whose position and career alike commanded respect. His support at such a crisis was worth a Brigade of English troops to us, and served more to tranquillize the people than a hundred official disclaimers would have done,"

His services at Ambala, Thanesar and Delhi:

Thanesar, Karnal and the station of Ambala, were hold by Pattiala troops, who also guarded the Grand Trunk Road from Karnal to Phillor. The Maharaja constantly expressed his earnest wish to lead a contingent to Dehli, but, both by the Commander-in-Chief and the Civil Authorities, he was dissuaded from this, as his presence in the Cis-Satlej States was considered of the highest importance. He sent, however, 500 horse and foot, under the command of Sirdar Partab Singh, and these troops did good service during the siege and at the assault of Delhi, and the assistance rendered by Pattiala was warmly acknowledged by General Wilson in his despatch of the 22nd September 1857.

At the commencement of the disturbances the Maharaja received a letter from the King of Dehli, urging him to come over his side, and promising him rewards for so doing. This letter the Maharaja gave to the English authorities.

In Sirsa, Rohtak and Hisar:

Besides troops at Dehli, Karnal, Thanesar and Ambala, the Pattiala Chief sent a detachmcnt with General Van-Cortlandt, and materially aided in restoring order in Sirsa, Rohtak and Hissar ; another detachment

[Page-236]

was employed at Saharanpur and Jagadri and was twice engaged with the mutineers : on the revolt of the 10th Cavalry at Firozpur, his troops followed them up, and in a skirmish that took place, several of his men were killed and wounded.

He furnishes carriage and supplies:

The Maharaja, in his own territories, furnished supplies and Carriage, and kept the the roads clear for all Government troops passing through from the Punjab to Dehli ; and all refugees from Sirsa, Rohtak and Hissar, who came into Pattiala, were received with kindness and supplied with everything they required.

He also gave a loan of five lakhs of Rupees to to Government, and expressed his Willingness to double this amount, but no more was required of him.

The number of his troops employed:

The Pattiala contingent employed in the British cause duriug 1857, consisted of 8 guns, 2,156 Horse, 2,846 Infantry, with 156 Officers, the most distinguished of whom were Sirdar Partab Singh and Syad Muhammad Hassain, who commanded the detachment at Dehli ; Kour Dip Singh at Thanesar ; Sirdars Hira Singh and Hazara Singh at Ambala; Sirdars Karam and Kahan Singh at Hissar ; Sirdars Dal Singh and Fatah Singh at Hansi; and Sirdar Jiun Singh at Firozpur, ^*

* No. 77, from the Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Chief Commissioner Punjab, 9th March 1858, enclosing statement of the Maharaja’s services. No. 34 of 13th April 1858 from Chief Commissioner Punjab to Government of India.

Commissioner Cis-Catlej States’ Nos. 8, 133, 150, 200, 352, dated 8th January. I2th May. 2l8t May, 12th Jul}', 12th November 1858. Commissioner Hissar’s, Nos. 38, 44, 140, dated 15th June, 22nd June, 30th October 1858. Commissioner Dehli's, No. 31, dated 4th November 1857.

[Page-237]

Most of the services of the Maharaja in 1858 were rendered at Dholepur, a small Rajput State (? It was Bamraulia Jat State:Wiki editor), between Agra and Gwalior, the Chief of which, Rana Bhagwant Singh, had married his daughter. Early in September 1857, the combined insurgent forces of Indore and Gwalior entered the Dholepur State. Most of the Rana's troops and officials joined the rebels, who ravaged the district, defied the Chiefs authority and even threatened his life until he consented to their demands. At length they left Dholepur, taking with them the Rana's guns, for Agra, where they were totally defeated by the Agra garrison and the Dehli Column under General Greathed, on the 10th of October, But Dholepur remained in a state of anarchy, and the Chief was unable to restore order ; till, with the consent of the North West and Punjab Authorities, the Maharaja of Pattiala sent there a force of 2,000 men and two guns, under the command of Nihal Chand and Diwan Jagdesh Singh Motando, two of his ablest officials. * Although Dholepur was tranquillized, the neighbouring States were in so disturbed a condition that the Pattiala troops were directed to remain there. Gwalior, which had already been the scene of rebellion and bloodshed, was again attacked by the rebels, and, for a time, held by them. The Maharaja Sindiah fled to Dholepur, on the 2nd of June, and was supplied with an escort of Pattiala troops to Agra. A British force then marched

* Letter of Colonel Riddell, Commanding Dholepur force, to Diwan Nihal Chand, dated 2nd February 1858.

No. 784 of 27th July 1858, from General G. Lawrence, Agent Governor General Rajputana to Government of India. No. 6 of 10th February 1858, from Major Macpherson, Political Agent Gwalior, to Agent Governor General for Central India.

[Page-238]

against the rebel army at Gwalior, and the Pattiala Chief increased his force at Dholepur by every available man. He guarded all the ferries on the Chumbal river, collected supplies for the British army, and a detachment of 500 of his troops served under General Napier in the action at Alipur, on the 19th of June, when the rebels, who had been defeated before Gwalior, were again attacked and routed.

A month later, at the requisition of Sir R. Hamilton, a Pattiala detachment of 600 infantry and 300 horse was moved from Dholepur to Gwalior, where it remained, doing excellent service, reducing rebellious villages and acting as guards and escorts.

At Jhajjar and in Oude:

In February 1858, the Maharaja, at the request of the Chief Commissioner, sent a force of 600 foot and 200 horse, afterwards doubted in strength, to Jhajjar, where they were employed during the whole year under the Civil authorities, in maintaining the order of the district. Two months later the Chief Commissioner of Oude applied for a regiment fully equipped for service in that province. Although all his regular troops were employed at this time on active service, the Maharaja raised 820 infantry and 203 sowars, and despatched them to Oude without delay, where their services were most useful. ^*

The rewards given to the Maharaja for his service:

The Pattiala Chief was splendidly rewarded for his services by the Government.

:* No. 53, from Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Secretary to Government Punjab, dated 16th February 1859. Government Punjab, to Government of India, No. 161, dated 23rd February. No. 2216, from Government of India, to Government Punjab, dated 23rd April 1859. Kharita addressed to Maharaja of Pattiala by His Excellency the Viceroy, dated 21st April 1859.

[Page-239]

Firstly, — The Narnoul division of the Jhajjar territory, the ruler of which had rebelled, valued at Rs. 2,00,000 a year, was granted to him on condition of good behaviour and service, Military and Political, at any time of general danger or disturbance.

Secondly. — The jurisdiction over Bhadour, long the subject of dispute, was ceded to him, with the right of escheats, the reversion to lapsed estates therein, and the annual commutation tax amounting to Rs. 5,265.

Thirdly. — The confiscated house in Dehli formerly belonging to the Begam Zenat Mahal, and valued at Rs. 10,000, was granted to him and his honorary titles were increased.^*

The reason for granting Jhajjar territory to Pattiala:

It had been first proposed to give the Maharaja territory adjoining his own State, To the value of Rs. 50,000 a year, but this idea was abandoned ; for it was undesirable to transfer territory which had been for many years under British rule, the more especially as there was new territory which had been

* The titles of the Maharaja in 1857 were— Mahārāja Dhirāj Rājeshar Mahāraja Rājagān Narindar Singh Mohindar Buhādur.

They were increased in 1858 as follows :— Farzand Khās, Dowlat-i-Inglisia, Mansur Zamān, Amir-ul-Umra, Mahārāja Dhirāj, Rājeshar Sri Mahārāja Rājagān Narindar iSlugh Mohindar Bahādur.

No. 34, from Secretary to Government Punjab to Government of India, dated 13th May 1858.

No. 1549, from Government of India to Chief Commissioner Punjab dated 2nd June 1858.

The term " Dowlat-i-Inglisia," meaning " of the British Government" was inserted later, " Farzand Khās" signifying " choicest son," and requiring some after qualification to shew whose son the Chief was.

Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, No. 337, dated 30th December 1859.

Government of India, No. 8 dated 4th January 1860.

[Page-240]

only recently annexed, that of the rebel Nawab of Jhajjar, which was not too far from the Pattiala territory to prevent the Maharaja exercising over it an efficient control. It was, moreover, an advantage to have a Sikh Chief, whose loyalty had been so well tried, located in the midst of the turbulent and, at that time, disaffected Muhammadan population of the Jhajjar territory and interposed as a barrier towards the independent States of Alwar and Jaipur, with its feudatories of Shaikhawati and Ketri, whose army and population had shown themselves unfriendly during the mutinies. The Narnoul division of the Jhajjar territory, which was granted to the Maharaja, was the frontier division adjoining the above named States. The revenue of Narnoul was estimated at two lakhs of rupees, on the faith of the assessment fixed the Nawab of Jhajjar, which was in excess of that sum. It did not, at any rate, on its first acquisition by the Maharaja, yield more than Ks. 1,70,000, inclusive of fines and miscellaneous revenue, and this was made the ground for a request for further grants to complete the two lakhs of territory which had been assigned to the Maharaja. But the Government had made no promise and given no guarantee that the territory would yield as much as two lakhs of rupees, nor was there any means of ascertaining its income, except from the assessment of its late owner, which was in excess of two lakhs, and it was reasonably supposed that under another native ruler it would yield at least as much. The Government were thus under no obligation whatever to make up to the Maharaja the amount defi-

[Page-241]

dent ; for, although he had been told the approximate rental, he was quite aware that the territory would yield somewhat less, and that it was made over to him for no specific revenue, but simply for what it was worth.^*

The claims of the Maharaja received every consideration, and in September 1859, the Commissioner Cis-Satlej States made a further and full enquiry into them.^†

But the Government, unable to admit any claim to compensation on account of an alleged deficiency in the income of the grant, was yet willing to make a further grant of territory to the . Maharaja in acknowledgment of the good service he had done, and a proposal was submitted by the Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to transfer to Pattiala portions of the pargannah of Kanoudh and Budwana, in the Jhajjar territory, with an income of about a lakh of rupees per annum, the Pattiala Chief giving a nazarana equivalent to 20 years revenue.^††

The districts of Kanoudh and Budwana assigned to Pattiala:

These pargannahs were the southernmost portion of the confiscated territory of Jhajjar, and it would have been inconvenient for the Government to retain them, as it would entail the maintenance

* No. 53, dated 16th February 1859, from Commissioner Gis-Satlej States to Secretary to Government Punjab. No. 161, dated 23rd February 1859, from Secretary to Government Punjab to Secretary to Government of India, No. 2216, of 23rd April 1859, from Secretary to Government of India to Secretary to Government Punjab.

† Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, Nos. 264 and 274, dated 27th September and 1st October 1859 to Government Punjab.

†† Memorandum by Commissioner Cis-Satlej States, dated 22nd December 1859, and Memo, by Lieutenant Governor Punjab, 31st December 1359.

[Page-242]

of a separate judicial and revenue establishment. The Chiefs of Pattiala, Jhind and Nabha were, on the other hand, most anxious to acquire this territory, which lay adjacent to that conferred upon them in 1858. There was, besides, an advantage to Government in clearing off the large debts which were due to Pattiala and Nabha for loans advanced in 1848 and 1857.

The Pattiala and Nabha loans:

These amounted, in 1860, to the following sums : —

Pattiala, 5 percent loan of 1848, Rs. 16,96,000*

Do., 6 per cent loan of 1857, „ 2,36,000

Total, ...Rs. 19,32,000

Nabha, 5 per cent loan of 1848, Rs. 7,00,000

Do., 6 per cent loan of 1857, „ 2,50,000

Total, ...Rs. 9,50,000

There was also a large sum due to Pattiala for interest which had not been drawn since 1857, which was separately considered. The Raja of Jhind had never had any pecuniary transactions with the British Government, but, considering the great services he had rendered during the mutiny and his desire to acquire additional territory, it was determined to give him a share with the other States. To Pattiala were assigned villages of Kanoudh, with the town and fort, worth Rs. 98,000 a year ; to Nabha villages worth Rs. 48,000 ; and to Jhind, villages worth Rs. 21,000. Twenty years purchase of the share allotted to Pattiala would be more than the principal of his debt, but the balance

* The sum lent by Pattiala in 1848-49, was Rs. 30,00,000, and in 1857, Rs. 5,00,000.

[Page-243]

was deducted from the interest still due. In the same way with the Nabha grant ; while the Raja of Jhind paid for his new territory a nazarana of Rs. 4,20,000. The remainder of the district of Jhajjar was then absorbed into the Rohtak district.^*</supf>

The Estate of Khumanun granted in lieu of interest due:

There still remained a balance of interest due to Pattiala, amounting to Rs. 3,10,666. principally on tho 5 per cent loan. To reduce this, the district of Khumanun, which has been before described, was made over to Pattiala, the Government giving up the commutation tax of Rs. 4,128 per annum, and the right to escheats, estimated at 10 per cent, on the gross rental of the estate, which was worth Rs. 48,000. Four out of seven villages, shared with the British Government, Chiri, Phuror, Lakhanpur and Amargarh, were also made over to Pattiala, and the value of the estates and rights ceded to him amounted to Rs. 1,76,360, On the 30th of June 1860, the balance due to Pattiala was Rs. 93,767-15-10, which was paid to him in cash and the transactions closed.^†

Sanads granted for new territories

Sauads were granted to the several Chiefs for their new territory, and

* Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Government Punjab, No. 87, dated 23rd May 1860. Government Punjab to Government of India, No. 347, dated 4th June. Government of India to Government Punjab, No. 1977, dated 14th June 1860. Despatch of Secretary of State, No. 12, dated 30th January 1861.

† Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Punjab Goremment, No. 109, dated 14th June 1860. Punjab Government to Government of India. No. 423, dated 3rd July. Government of India to Government Punjab, No. 2779, dated 18th July 1860. Despatch of Secretaiy of 8tate for India, No. 12, dated 30th January 1861.

Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Government Punjab, No. 187, dated 22nd September 1860.

[Page-244]

complimentary letters addressed to them by the Governor General. ^*

There were other privileges and concessions granted to the Maharaja of Pattiala and the Rajas of Nabha and Jhind, of the greatest value and of a character which changed materially the nature of their relations with the British Government. In 1858, these Chiefs had united in soliciting certain concessions which were referred to the Secretary of State and some granted at once ; others, including the most desired of all, the right of adoption guaranteeing the perpetuity of their rule, a little later.

* Translation of Sunnud or grant of portions of the Pargunnahs of Kunoudh and Boodwanah, district Jhajjar, and of Ilaqah Khumanun, district Ambala bestowed upon His Highness the Maharaja of Pattiala by His Excellency Earl Canning, G, C. B., Viceroy and Governor General of India.

Preamble. -Whereas the devotion and loyalty of His Highness the Maharaja of Pattiala and of his ancestors have always been couspicuous since the establishment of British sapremacy in India, His Excellency the Viceroy and Governor General being desirous of marking bis high appreciation of those qualities, has been pleased to bestow upon the Maharaja portions of Pargunnahs Kunondh and Boodwanah of the district of Jhajjar, containing one- hundred and ten villages (110) according to vernacular list annexed, assessed at a yearly revenue of ninety-six thousand nine-hundred and forty Rs. (96,940), and to accept from His Highness a "Nuzzuranah" of nineteen lakhs thirty-eight thousand and eight hundred Rs. (19,38,800). Further, His Excellency has been pleased in like manner to bestow upon the Maharajah the Ilaqah of Khumanun, district Umballah, with the Service commutation tax, and the right to escheats, and to accept from His Highness a Nuzzuranah of one lakh seventy-six thousand three hundred and sixty (1,76,360) Rupees.

It is accordingly ordained as follows :—

ARTICLE 1.— The territories above-mentioned are conferred upon His Highness the Maharaja Pattiala and his heirs for ever.

ARTICLE 2.— The Maharaja and his successors will exercise the same rights, privileges, and prerogative in these newly acquired territories as His Highness at present enjoys in his ancestral possessions, according to the term of the Sonnud, dated 5th May 1860, and signed by His Excellency Earl Canning, Viceroy and Governor General of India.

ARTICLE 3. — The Maharaja and his successors will continue to maintain the same loyal relations with the British Government, and to fulfil the same obligations with regard to these newly acquired territories as were imposed upon His Highness by the terms of the Sunnud, dated 5th May 1860, relating to His Highness" ancestral possessions.

[Page-245]

The power of inflicting capital punishment : The first request related to the power of inflicting capital punishment. This had been taken from the Chiefs after the first Sikh war, although no allusion had been made to it in the granted Sanads, for reasons given by the Secretary in his letter conveying the Government orders ^*: —

"You must impress upon the Maharaja and upon the other protected Chiefs under your jurisdiction, that no mutilation will be allowed within their respective territories, and that, in no case can they be permitted to execute the extreme sentence of the law and deprive of life without the approval and consent of the Agent, to whom each case considered deserving of capital punishment must be submitted, after receiving he final orders of the local authorities. No stipulations to this effect have been inserted in the Sanad, in consequence of the desire expressed by the Raja of Jhind that such might be omitted, but you will require both His Highness and the Maharaja of Pattiala to conform implicitly to the above instructions of Government, as if the stipulations were formally entered in the Sanad."

This deprivation of the power of inflicting capital punishment was regarded by the Chiefs as limiting their independence more than any other of the regulations which were issued after the Satlej campaign. The Maharaja of Pattiala would never apply for sanction to inflict it, and the practical result of the order was the abolition of capital punishment in his territory. Indeed, between 1847 and 1856, only three applications for sanction were made to

*Para. 19 of No. 2352, dated 5th October 1847, from Secretary to Government of India to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States.

[Page-246]

the Agent, two from the Raja of Jhind and one from the Raja of Faridkot.^*

The three Phulkian Chiefs, accordingly, solicited, in 1858, that the power of life and death might be again restored to them During the mutiny, indeed, it had been restored, for, without it, they could never have maintained order in their territories, and they were then specially authorized to execute heinous offenders without reference to the Commissioner ; and the Government, in 1858, granted them the right fully and absolutely, as they desired, considering that they might with safety be entrusted with the power ; that they would, as a rule, be more sparing of its exercise than European officers would be ; and that, under the existing system, the Commissioner could exert no real check, except a moral one, which would not be lessened by conferring the power. If the moral check should fail, there remained the power of sequestration or absolute deprivation of powers which had been abused, which, in 1856, the Government had used against the Nawab of Mamdot.

The arrangement with regard to the appointment of council of regency:

The second request of the Chiefs was, that in case of a minority in any one of the three houses, a Council of Regency, formed of three of the old and trusted servants of the State, should be appointed by the British Agent and the other two Phulkian Chiefs, while, from this Council, strangers and the relatives of the minor should be excluded. The Government agreed to this request.

* Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Secretary to Government Punjab, No. 13, dated 16th January 1856, and No. 39, dated 2lst January, from Secretary to Government Punjab to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States.

[Page-247]

The right of adoption

The third and fourth clauses of the memorial of the Chiefs asked for the right of adoption, in default of male issue, from among the members of the Phulkian family ; and, in case of the death of a Chief without male issue and without having adopted an heir, that the two remaining Chiefs should have power to elect a successor from the same family.

The custom and law the adopted son had no right to succeed:

The privilege of adoption was one which the Chiefs desired with the greatest earnestness. Hitherto, among the Sikhs, Cis and Trans-Satlej, adoption, though carrying with it all the right of succession to private property enjoyed by the son of the body, had never been acknowledged as conferring any right of succession to a Chiefship. In the Punjab proper, the Maharaja at Lahore, and, south of the Satlej, the British Government, claimed, as paramount, the right of inheriting all estates to which there were no near male heirs, among whom the adopted son had no place ; and the families of Ambala, Firozpur, Bilaspur, Rupar, and many others, had vainly endeavoured to secure for adopted children a share at least in the estate.

The policy of the Government with regard to collaterals:

The British Government, too, had, in 1837, excluded females from the succession to the Phulkian States ; and although allowing the right of collaterals, had only admitted their right to such property as had been held by the common ancestor from whom they derived their claim.

The Cis-Satlej Chiefs thus lived in a perpetual fear that one porsion of their possessious, in the event of their dying childless, would pass to distant kins-

[Page-248]

men with whom they were at constant feud, while the most ancient and dearest loved portion would become an escheat of the British Government, which threatened in course of time to absorb them all. Nor was this fear at all unreasonable. The number of lapses that had fallen to the Government from the time of its first connection with the country north of Dehli was very great ; and Chiefship after Chiefhip had been absorbed in the British territories.

The debauched lives of the Sikhs, and their addiction to intoxicating spirits of the fiercest quality, were all in favor of the paramount power, if the policy of that power was annexation. Vainly did a Sikh Chief marry a succession of wives ; his excesses had brought their curse with them, and no son was born to inherit his wide estates. It was, then, with a keen desire, that the Chiefs solicited the privilege of adoption. To them, as to all Hindus, the adopted son was as dear and as much their own as one born of their body ; and Hindu law and custom had ever held him as such. It was in succession to Chiefships alone that the right of adoption was denied, and the Rajas asked themselves whether the English protection had not been bought at too dear a cost, and whether the policy, which had given to the British Government the fairest portion of the territories won by the Khalsa in the days of its first triumphs, had been so disinterested as that Government had always declared. It is not that they would have fared better with Ranjit Singh :

Ranjit Singh like the British Government denied the right of adoption: he asserted the rights of a sovereign more jealously than ever the British Governmeut had done, and neither allowed the claims of adopted

[Page-249]

sons nor of the nearest collaterals. But his conquests and annexations were made in the name of the Sikh nation, and for the glory of a religion of which its professors had not yet had time to grow weary. So it happened that at the time of the campaign on the Satlej, many of the Chiefs thought that if it were their fate to be absorbed, it were better to become a portion of the monarchy whose seat was at Lahore, than of that which ruled them from Calcutta, not unkindly nor unjustly, but with which they had little sympathy ; which sternly repressed anarchy and confusion ; and forbade them to increase their possessions at the expense of their neighbours.

The great importance of the question:

The British Government saw at once the significauce of the request made by the Chiefs. To alloW it,was to change the policy which had been sanctioned by long usage, and which had been, to a certain extent, successful. It was at least difficult to prove that any of the dangers which had, from time to time, gathered thick around the Government were due to the sense of insecurity in the permanence of their rule, felt by the native princes of India. Were the right of adoption granted, the Government must give up all hope of future escheats ; for so long as one male of the Phulkian race existed he would unite under himself all the possessions of the family. In 1858, there were 34 males of this family living, and as time progressed the family might be expected to multiply.

The policy of the Government had changed since 1857:

Yet the Government Government had had begun to doubt the wisdom of followed. The mutiny had taught it some lessons, and had disposed it to try experiments which were

[Page-250]

opposed before, because they were new. In open Durbar, the right of adoption had been conferred on the Raja of Chirkari ; the Maharaja of Rewah ; the Maharaja of Gwalior ; and the Maharaja of Jaipur ; and the Phulkian Chiefs had, thus, reason to hope that it would not be denied to them. In this, however, they were at first disappointed.

The Governor General declined the request:

The Governor General stated that the right of adoption, and on failure of adoption, the right of electing a successor from among the descendants of Phul were important innovations on the custom which had always prevailed among the Chiefs of the Cis-Satlej territories, and could not be sanctioned.

Which was granted by the Home Government:

But the Home Government took a view of the case more favorable to the wishes of the chiefs : — "The request " wrote the Secretary of State, preferred by the Maharaja of Pattiala and the Rajas of Jhind and Nabha, to be permitted, in all cases of failure of male issue, to adopt an heir from among the descendants of their common progenitor Phul, and, in case of such their by adoption not being named before the decease of any one of the three, for permission to the surviving Rajas to elect a successor from the same stock, has not been complied with by your Lordship's Government . But, adverting again to the very great services rendered by these Chiefs ; to their long tried loyalty and fidelity to the British Crown, and to the great anxiety which they evince to obtain this boon. Her Majesty's Government are of opinion that you might expediently, as a special case, concede to them the desired privilege; and to request, therefore, that you will

[Page-251]

take steps to communicate, with as little delay as possible, this decision to the Chiefs concerned ; and request them to supply you with an authenticated list of the existing descendants of Phul, to be periodically revised by them. Her Majesty's Government are, however, of opinion, that, in consideration of this concession, you should levy a nazardna of a year's revenue on the occasion of every case of adoption or election in the manner above described. It should be distinctly made known to them that, in no case of direct lineal descent, will any nazarana be demanded." ^*

The happy results of the conclusion: The concession thus granted was valued by the Chiefs more highly than the new territory, the reward for their loyalty ; and later it was extended to other Chiefs in the Punjab, Sikh, Rajput and Muhammadan. Till now these Chiefs had believed, and with justice, that the British Government, while it would neither use violence nor fraud to obtain their territories, would, nevertheless, gladly annex them to its own dominion should misfortune leave them without male heirs. They had at last learnt that it was possible to be strong and yet generous, and that a Government like the British, before which organized opposition was hopeless and against which surprise had been tried in vain, might be content to trust rather to the affection and confidence of its feudatories than to their weakness or their destruction.

* No. 104, from Chief Commissioner Panjab to Government of India, of 16th June 1858. No. 3047, from Government of India, to Government Punjab, of 25th May 1859. Secretary of State to Government of India, of 1st December 1859.

[Page-252]

The exclusion of women from political affairs:

The fifth request made by the Phulkian Rajas, was that no women should have admission into the Council of Regency, or have any participation in affirs of State, either on the ground of the youth of the Chief, or on any other pretext whatever ; and that no complaints of any sort, preferred by women of their family, should be received by the British Government.

The Government agreed to the exclusion of women from participation in affairs of State, considering that nothing but evil could accrue from the supremacy of women, uneducated and secluded as is the custom in Hindostan.^* It refused, however, to promise never to interfere in case of complaints on the part of female relatives of the Chiefs. The Government had not been accustomed, as a rule, to interfere in such cases, but it was impossible to surrender the right to do so, when its protection was especially invoked, as in a case that had recently occurred, where the Raja of Faridkot kept his two sisters-in-law in confinement until the interference of Government compelled their release.

Interference of Government on behalf of Dependants: The Chiefs, moreover, requested that the British Government should bind itself not to interfere on behalf of relatives, connections, or Dependants of the family. The Government would not pledge itself to such a promise, though its interference never had been, nor would be great.

* It was not the custom for women to be secluded in early Sikh days. In Pattiala the custom was Introduced so late as the reign of Raja Karam Singh ; and, as has been shown, the ladies of the family have shown quite as much or more political ability than the men.

[Page-253]

Seventhly.- The Chiefs asked for Sanads, guaranteeing to them their hereditary possessions in perpetuity, under the hand and seed of Her Majesty the Queen.

This request Was submitted for the consideration of the Secretary of State for India, but, on the recommendation of the Governor General, it was not complied with. Such a concession Was considered Unnecessary, as the fullest powers had been conferred on Her Majesty's representative in India, and Sanads would acquire no additional force or sanctity by execution in England ; while such execution Would be both inconvenient and impolitic, as all Sanads formerly granted Would require renewal or a suspicion of their Validity might be raised ; and not only Sanads, but treaties. Would be affected, to the renewal of Which there are two parties, and some of which, still in force, were of such a nature that it would be most impolitic to cast loose the obligations of the engagement.

The last request was that no claims against subjects of the Chiefs should be entertained in British Civil Courts. Previous to 1853, all suits against foreign subjects had been referred to the tribunals of the territory in which the defendant ordinarily resided ; since that time,^* if the cause of action arose in British territories, or the defendant possessed property therein, the suit could be heard and determined in the ordinary way. Although this system had not worked altogether well, yet it was fair, seeing that foreign subjects ordinarily used the British Courts to prosecute claims against par-

* Board of Administration, 13th October 1849.

[Page-254]

ties resident in British territory, and to ensure reciprocity for British subjects it was necessary to maintain it. This request, upon which the Chiefs did not lay much stress, was accordingly refused.^*

Lord Canning's durbar at Ambala in January 1860

In January 1860, Lord Canning, the Viceroy and Governor General, visited the Punjab, and, on the 18th of that month, he held a private Durbar at Ambala, for the reception of the Chiefs of the Cis-Satlej States and the Simla Hills, at which the Maharaja of Pattiala, the Rajas of Jhind, Nabha, Bilaspur and Keonthal, the Nawab of Maler Kotla and the Sirdar of Bassi had audiences. The next day an open Durbar was held, at which were present all the Rajas, Chiefs, Sirdars and Native gentlemen of the Cis-Satlej States and the neighbouring districts. In investing the Maharaja with his khillat, the Viceroy addressed him in the following terms : — " Maharaja of Pattiala — It is very agreeable to me to have this opportunity of thanking you, personally and in public, for the valuable services you have rendered to the State. I esteem them, not more for the effective aid which they gave to the forces of the Government, than for the promptness with which they were offered, and for the example of hearty and unhesitating loyalty which you thereby set before the Queen's subjects in Upper India from the very beginning of the strife.

* No. 84, from Government of India to Secretary of State, dated 3rd June 1859. No. 149, from Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Chief Commissioner Punjab, dated 20th May 1858. No. 104, from Chief Commissioner Panjab to Government of India, dated 16th Jane 1858. No. 3047, from Government of India to Government Punjab, dated 25th May 1859. No. 64, from Secretary of State to Government of India, dated 1st December 1859. No. 9, from Governor General of India to Secretary of State, dated 28th January 1860.

[Page-255]

" I need not recount those services : they are well known to every one here present, and the history of them is recorded in the history of the operations by which the British troops sustained and asserted the power of England in this part of Her Majesty's dominions. There is no fear therefore of their being forgotten.

" But I desire to assure you, before this Durbar, of the satisfaction which the Queen's Government has had in augmenting your honor and possessions, and of the wish which it entertains that these may long remain under the rule of descendants of your own, — brave and loyal as yourself.

"I have directed that a grant be prepared confirming your title to these possessions, and to all the privileges attached to them. I have also directed that it be recorded, that if, unhappily, lineal heirs should fail you, your adoption of a successor from the ancient Phulkian house, of which your family forms a part, will be recognised and respected."^*

The sanad of adoption:

The grant referred to in this speech, confirming the Maharaja all his territories, ancestral and acquired; conferring the right of adoption on failure of male issue and of election of a successor under certain circumstances set forth, was given to the Maharaja by the Viceroy on the 5th of May 1860.^†

* Notification No. 172 A, dated 20tli January 1860.

† Translation of the Sanad of the 5th of May 1860.

since the establishment of British authority in India, His Highness the present Maharaja of Pattiala, and his predecessors, have always been steady in their allegiance. They have frequently received rewards for their fidelity in the accession of fresh honors, dignity and territory. More recently, His Highness, the present ruler of Pattiala, has surpassed the former achievements of his race, by the constancy and courage he evinced during the mutiny of 1857-58. In memory of his unswerving

[Page-256]

The Maharaja Narindar Singh invested with Order of the Star of India

On the 1st November 1861, Maharaja Narindar Singh was invested with the Most exalted Order of the Star of India, at Allahabad ; and, about the same time,

Appointed member of the Legislative Council: he was appointed a member of the Governor General's Council for making Laws Regulations, The Maharaja accordingly left for Calcutta, arriving there in time for the opening of the session, on the 15 th January 1862.

and conspicuous loyalty, His Excellency the Viceroy and Governor General of India has conferred additional honors and territories upon the Maharaja for himself and his heirs for ever, and has graciously acceded to His Highness's desire to receive a Sanad or grant under the hand and seal of the Viceroy, guaranteeing to the Maharaja the free and unreserved possession of his ancient territories, as well as of those tracts bestowed on his Highness and his predecessors at various times by the British Government. It is accordingly ordained as follows :—

Clause I.—His Highness the Maharaja and his heirs for ever will exercise full sovereignty power his ancestral and acquired domains according to the annexed list All the rights, privileges, and prerogatives, which His Highness enjoys in his hereditary territories, he will equally enjoy in his acquired territories. All feudatories and dependents of every degree will bound to render obedience to him throughout his dominions.

Clause I.— Except, as provided in Clause III, the British Government will never demand from His Highness or any of his successors, or from any of his feudatories, relations, or dependants, any tribute on account of revenue service, or on any other plea.

Clause III.— The British Government cordially desires to see the noble house of Pattiala perpetuated, and in this spirit confers upon His Highness and his heirs for ever, whenever male issue may fail, the right of adopting a successor from among the descendants of the Phulkian family. If, however, at any time any Maharaja of Pattiala, should die without male issue and without adopting a successor, it will still be open to the Rajas of Nabha and Jhind, in concert with the Commissioner or Political Agent of the British Government, to select a successor from among the Phulkian family, but in that case a nazarana or fine equal to one-third of the gross annual revenue of the Pattiala State shall be paid to the British Government.

Clause IV.- In 1847 the British Government empowered the Maharaja to inflict capital punishment after reference to the Commissioner. It now removes the restriction imposed by this reference, and invests His Highness with absolute power of life and death over his own subjects. With regard to British subjects committing crime and apprehended in his territory, the Maharaja will be guided by the rules contained in the Despatch of the Honorable Court of Directors to the Madras Government, No. 8, dated 1st June 1886. The Maharaja will exert himself to execute justice, and to promote the happiness and welfare of his people. He

[Page-257]

During the absence of the Maharaja, the Commissioner of the Cis-Satlej States, at the request of the Chief, was directed to exercise a general supervision over the affairs of the Pattiala State, aiding with his counsel the officers who had been appointed to conduct the administration of the country, and taking care that the wishes of the Maharaja were loyally carried out.^*

The Pattiala Chief remained in Calcutta the whole time that the Legislative Council sat, and, on the approach of summer, returned to his capital where everything had gone on satisfactorily.

engages to prohibit Sati, Slavery and Female Infanticide throughout his territories, and to punish with the utmost rigor those who are found guilty of any of these crimes.

Clause V.— The Maharaja will never fail in his loyalty and devotion to the Sovereign of Great Britain.

Clause VI.——If any force hostile to the British Government should appear in this neighbourhood, the Maharaja will co-operate with the British Government and oppose the enemy. He will exert himself to the utmost of his resources in providing carriage and supplies for the British troops, according to requisitions he may receive.

Clause VII.—.The British Government win not receive any complaints from any of the subjects of the Maharja, whether mafidars, jagirdars, relatives, dependants, servants or other classes.

Clause VIII. —The British Government will respect the household and family arrangements of the Maharaja, and abstain from any interference therein.

Clause IX.—— His Highness the Maharaja will, as heretofore, furnish, at current rates, through the agency of his own officers, the necessary materials required for the construction of rail-roads, railway stations, and imperial roads and bridges. He will also freely give the land required for the construction of rail-roads and imperial lines of road.

Clause X.—The Maharaja and his successors, &c., will always pursue the same course of fidelity and devotion to the British Government, and the Government will always be ready to uphold the honor and dignity of the Maharaja and his house.

Schedule of territories belonging to the Mahjaraja of Pattiala

Ancestral.— Paraganah Pattiala Khas and Sanonr. Ilakas Murdanpur, Ghanour, Ranimazra, Amargarh, Chinarthal, Sonam, Rajpura, Anahadgarh or Baruala, Sherpur, Bhiki, Banur,

* Government of India to Government Punjab, No. 210, dated 27th December 1861. Letter from Secretary to Government of India to Maharaja, dated 10th December 1860, and No. 188, the same date, to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States.

[Page-258]

In March 1862, the right of adoption granted in 1860 was confirmed by a special Sanad.^*

The death of Maharaja Narindar Singh, November 1862

It was a calamity for Pattiala that the life of the most enlightened ruler she had possessed was destined to be short. In the beginning of November 1862, the Maharaja fell ill of fever, and though his illness was not at first considered serious, he

Bhawanigrh urf Doda, Boha Surdulgarh urf Dodhal, Akalgarh or Manak, Karmgarh or Kulbanun Dirha, Bangarh or Narwana, Pinjor, Govindgarh or Batindah, Ramgarh or Ghuram, Sahibgarh or Pael, Fatahgarh or Sirhind, Alamgarh or Nandpur Kaloar.

Acquired territories.— Ilaka Umralah. The Hill district of Bughal, the Hill district of Keonthal. ilaka Chamkorian, Pargaaahs Bassai Mulk Hydar, Fatah Jhuneri, Muhla, and Naruoul,

List of Feudatories.Skhs of Lunda, Lohari, Bhet Kot, Gunar, Chakia, Rara, Kotila, Bulara Bulari, Budadi Bhai, Bir Singh Rampur, Kot Dana, The Jagirdars of Bhadour and Jiundan.

The Jagirdars of Khamanun, Tullakour, Dhanonri and Lukhnonr, are at present under the jurisdiction for life of the Maharaja of Pattiala, but paying commutation tax in lieu of service to the British Goverument.

Ilaka Bhai Rapa shared with Nabha and Jhind.

SANAD OF ADOPTION.

Dated 5th March 1862.

• Her Majesty being desirous that the Governments of the several Princes and Chiefs of India who now govern their own territories should be perpetuated, and that the representation and dignity of their houses should be continued, I hereby, in fulfillment of this desire, repeat to you the assurance which I communicated to you in the Sanud under my signature, dated 5th May 1860, that, on failure of natural heirs, the adoption by yourself and the future Rulers of your State of a successor, from the ancient Phoolkian House, of which your family forms a part, will be recognized and confirmed ; and that if at any time any Maharaja of Pattiala should die without male issue, and without adopting a successor, it will still be open to the Rajahs of Jhind and Nabha, in concert with the Commissioner or Political Agent of the British Government, to select a successor from among the Phulkian family, but in that case a nuzzuranah or fine equal to one-third of the gross annual revenue of the Pattiala State shall be paid to the British Government,

Be assured that nothing shall disturb the engagement thus made to you so long as your house is loyal to the Crown and faithful to the conditions of the treaties, grants or engagements which record its obligations to the British Government.

[Page-259]

was unable to regain his strength, and died on the 13th November, aged thirty-nine, after a reign of nearly seventeen years. ^*

The character of Narindar Singh has been shown in the preceding pages. He inherited from his father and grand- father a jealousy of the English Government and a disposition to assert his own dignity, rights and pretensions in a factious and litigious spirit, which turned into a conflict every enquiry which the Government were compelled to make, and which they desired to conduct with the utmost delicacy and consideration for Pattiala. The events of 1857-58 changed the disposition of the Maharaja altogether. He was wise enough to understand what the inevitable result would be ; and, like a brave soldier as he was, his sympathies were all with the few Englishmen, holding gallantly their own throughout India, against tremendous odds. The generous manner in which he was rewarded by Government after the mutiny and the grant of the right of adoption, with its assurance that the British Government did not desire the ruin of the Cis-Satlej Chiefs but their continued prosperity, removed all mistrust from his mind ; and, had he lived, Narindar Singh would have been one of the most valuable friends of the British Government in northern India.

The Punjab Government issued a Gazette Extraordinary on receiving the news of his death, the terms of which will show the estimation in which he was held : —

* Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Punjab Government No. 852, dated 14th November 1862. Deputy Commissioner Ambala No. 852, dated 14th November.

[Page-260]

The Gazette Order announcing his death:

"The Hon'ble the Lieutenant Governor has received, with the deepest regret, intelligence of the demise, on the 13th instant, of His Highness the Maharaja of Pattiala.

"His Honor, in announcing the melancholy event, laments the removal, in the prime of life and usefulness, of a Feudatory Prince, who, at the time of the mutiny of the Native Army in 1857, performed the most eminent services to the Crown, and who administered the Government of his territories with exemplary wisdom, firmness and benevolence."

Dip Singh, the brother of the deceased Chief: Maharaja Narindar Singh had a half-brother, Dip Singh, who died, without issue, a short time before him, in 1862, aged 35. He was not a man of any note. He enjoyed for life the income of the district of Karhali, about Rs. 25,000 a year; but generally lived in Pattiala. Some suspicion of his loyalty was entertained at the time of the mutiny, but there is no reason to believe that he was in any way implicated.

The family of the Maharaja:

Narindar Singh married seven wives, who bore him one son and three daughters. The eldest of these was Basant Kour, born in 1845, and married to the Rana of Dholepur. The second daughter is now dead : she married Sirdar Narain Singh, son of Sirdar Dewa Singh of Sialba. The third was Bishan Kour, born in 1849, and married, in 1859, to Maharaja Jaswant Singh of Bharatpur. From this last marriage the happiest political results were hoped, which unfortunately have not been realized. The wedding ceremonies were conducted on a scale of great splendour, though the Maharaja of Bharatpur was induced

[Page-261]

to depart from the custom of distributing large sums of money among the congregated multitude of mendicants, vagabonds and thieves. Among the Chiefs assembled at the ceremony were the Rajas of Jhind and Nabha, Raja Jowahir Singh, Raja Gurbaksh Singh of Manimajra ; Sirdar Jiun Singh Buria ; the Nawab of Maler Kotla ; Sirdar Dewa Singh of Kalsia; the Nawabs of Loharu and Karnal Presents were given amounting in cash to Rs. 62608, thirteen jewelled ornaments ; 404 articles of ladies' dress, 94 horses, 18 of them with gold trappings, two elephants, and two pairs of Kashmir shawls. The Maharaja of Kashmir sent a present of Rs. 21,000 ; the Raja of Kapurthalla Rs. 1,100, 31 articles of dress and two horses ; and the Maharaja of Jodhpur Rs. 500 and an elephant. The British Government gave a marriage gift (neota) of Rs. 5,000, ^*

Mahindar Singh

Mahindar Singh, the only son of the Maharaja, was born on the 16th September 1852, though his birth was not announced to Government till the 14th January 1853. He was consequently only ten years old at the time of his father's death, and it was necessary to make immediate arrangements for carrying on the administration.

* Government Punjab to Government of India No. 860, dated 28th December 1839. Government India to Government Punjab, No. 76. dated 9th January I860. Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Government Punjab No. 38 dated 29th February 1860. Dispatch of Secretary State, No. 46 of 1860, datad 3lst May.

A Neota or wedding present, has occasionally been given by Government as a mark of special favor ; but it is not necessary, nor warranted by precedent. The only instances are, that in the text; the marriage of the Maharaja himself 5th March 1865, alike amount 5,000 Rs. ; the marriage of Prince Randhir Singh, Ahluwalia, 21st February 1848, Rs. 1100; the marriage of his brother Prince Bikrama Singh, 16th February 1849, a like amount; and, lastly, the marriage of the third brother Suchet Singh, 5th February 1852, Rs. 1,100 ; the father Raja Nihal Singh giving a return present of jewels of equal value.

[Page-262]

A Council of Regency provided for in 1858:

It will be remembered that in June 1858, a paper of requests from the Phulkian Chiefs was submitted for Government sanction ; one of the paragraphs of which proposed that in the event of the death of any one of the three Chiefs, leaving an infant heir, "a Council of Regency, consisting of three of the old and trusty and most capable ministers of the State may be selected by the British Agent, acting with the advice of the other two Chiefs, and that no stranger be introduced into the Council of Regency, except with the consent of these two Chiefs, and in the event of misconduct on the part of any one of the Council, a successor to the Regency be appointed by the same means ; in no case should any relatives of the infant heir be admitted to the Regency."

The dying commands of Narindar Singh:

This request was sanctioned by the Government of India. When Maharaja Narindar Singh felt himself to be dying, he called to him the Chief Officers of his State and gave them his last commands ; which were to adhere to the British Government as he had done, to teach his son to follow in his steps, and, in the administration of the State, to maintain the arrangements which he had made. The Maharaja must be considered to have referred to the agreement between the Chiefs and the British Government, as to the measures to be adopted in the case of a regency ; but a later paper was produced, a Dostur-ul-amal or Rules of Practice, drawn up on the 13th October 1860, for the guidance of the Ministers in the event of a

[Page-263]

Regency, This paper was not in any way in super-session of the agreement sanctioned by Government in 1858 ; it entered much more into details and made no mention whatever of the number of the Council of Regency, or the assistance in their selection to be given by the British Agent or the Chiefs of Jhind and Nabha. The Pattiala Ministers tried to show that this document virtually superseded the agreement of 1858, and declared that the Raja's last wish that the arrangements he had made should be maintained, signified that the Ministers then in power should continue to hold office, and that no Council of Regency consisting of three members should be appointed. Such a Council, they urged, would be injurious to the best interests of Pattiala.

The members composing it would obtain too much of power, and discord and jealousy would be introduced into the State ; while the new appointments would cause additional expense and necessitate inferior men being nominated to their former appointments.

All the Chief officers of Pattiala were in favor of the administration being left, as before, in the hands of Diwan Kulwant Rai, Financial Minister ; Abdul Navi Khan, Munshi or Secretary ; Bakshi Bassawa Singh, Military Minister, and Syad Muhamad Hassan, Adalati, or Judicial Minister ; with perhaps the addition of the tutor of the young Prince, an office not then filled up.

The opinion of the Rajas of Jhind and Nabha:

The Agent Cis-Satlej States addressed the Rajas of Jhind and Nabha on the subject of the Pattiala admiuistration, inquiring their views and asking why the purport of the Dastur-ul-amal, or

[Page-264]

Code of Rules, had not been communicated to Government. These Chiefs approved of the continuance of the existing Ministry at Pattiala, and politely represented that, under the terms of the Sanads granted them by Lord Canning, the late Maharaja was not under any necessity of stating his intention to the Agent, as full independence had been granted to him, and full power to make any arrangements which might seem to him appropriate for the administration of his territory.^*

The interpretation of the sanad:

A simple but, at the same time, a most important question, was thus raised as to the interpretation of the Sanad of the 5th of May 1860. The first clause of this agreement, similar to that made with the Rajas of Jhind and Nabha, contained these words. — "His Highness the Maharaja and his heirs for ever will exercise full sovereignty over his ancestral and acquired domains. It is true that this Sanad was granted subsequently to the sanction accorded to the Requests of the Chiefs, containing the Regency arrangement ; but did it give to the Maharaja any such powers as to set aside a solemn agreement, sanctioned by the British Government at the request of the Chiefs, Of what nature was the "full sovereignty" accorded to the Maharaja ? The original Sanad contained the Persian words hasb- -i-dastur-i-kadīm hukmran bāshand, signifying that the " full sovereignty" was such has had been enjoyed

* From Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Punjab Government, No. 278 and B, and 292, dated 21st November, 25th November, and 26th December 1862. Original Dastur-ul-amal, of thirty one Articles, dated 2nd Asoj Badi 1917 Sambat, (13th October 1860). Letters of Rajas of Jhind and Nabha to Agent Governor General dated 21st and 26th December 1862. Secretary to Government of India No. 1213, dated 30th December 1862.

[Page-265]

according to ancient custom. This undoubtedly meant that it was the intention of Government to acknowledge the independent sovereignty of the Chiefs in the manner allowed in 1809 and 1811, and restore the power of capital punishment withdrawn in 1847, but in no way to preclude the exercise of all interference in matters of extraordinary importance by Government.

Clause VIII of the Sanad, by which the Government promised to respect the household and family ^* arrangements of the Maharaja, and abstain from any interference therein, did not prohibit interference in a matter of the highest political and public importance, such as the formation of a Regency, the arrangements for which had been sanctioned on the formal request of the Chiefs themselves.

The term " full sovereignty" was a loose rendering of the original version which the Chiefs had clearly understood as restoring to them the power they lost after the Satlej war. The interpretation of treaties is no difficult matter if the intention of the contracting parties is known, and former treaties exist to explain the meaning. One Sanad does not cancel another unless this is specially provided, nor had any Chief the power, by a document to which no sanction had been accorded, to cancel a solemn engagement into which he had entered with the British Government. If " full sovereignty" meant a power such as this, the rights, of the British Government, as paramount, would altogether disappear. Full sovereignty," as far as Sanads are con-

* Intazam-i-andaruni — Internal arrangements.

[Page-266]

cerned, is a conventional term, and signifies such independence as is compatible with the claim which the British Government asserts to general control, active loyalty, and regard to all engagements which have not been expressly modified or cancelled.

There is no reason to believe that Maharaja Narindar Singh had any thought of getting the Code of Rules, which he had framed, in opposition to the agreement of 1858 regarding the Regency. Indeed this document expressly declared that it was executed for the purpose of supporting the paper of Requests which contained the agreement. The Maharaja looked confidently to the British Government as his best friend, although he had, perhaps, more than any Chief in North India, a high regard for his own dignity ; and when he left for Calcutta as a member of the Legislative Council, it was at his particular request that the Commissioner of Ambala was enjoined to generally supervise the affairs of the Pattiala State.

The Council of Regency appointed: The Government held that the agreement of 1858 must be ussumed to remain in force and directed that a Council of Regency, consisting of three members, should be appointed. This was done, and the members selected, with the approbation of the Rajas of Nabha and Jhind, were Sirdar Jagdeo Singh, Bakshi Rahim Baksh and Bakshi Udeh Singh.^*

It is undesirable, for obvious reasons, to give any detailed account of the administration of the Pattiala State

* Government Punjab to Government of India, No. 49 dated 24th January 1863. Government of India, No. 126 dated 13th March 1863. Despatch of the Secretary of State, No 60 dated 15th August 1863.

[Page-267]

since the formation of the Council of Regency. Like every Native State in a similar position, with the Chief a minor and the interference of Government limited by engagements which it had no desire to infringe, the atmosphere of Pattiala has been, for some years, one of intrigue, in which a few have labored for the advantage of their Prince and the country, while the majority have thought more of creating confusion in every department of the State, to conceal their own inefficiency and dishonesty. But it must be left to another hand, at a future time, when the strong feelings which now exist with regard to Pattiala affairs have subsided or art forgotten, to write the story of these unhappy days.

Changes in the Council of Regency:

Bakshi Udeh Singh died on the 26th September 1863, and, in January of the next year, Bassawa Singh, who had been first on the ministry proposed by the Pattiala Court, was appointed in his place with the approval of the Rajas of Nabha and Jhind.^* His tenure of office was very short, for he died in 1866, as did Bakshi Biahim Baksh.

New appointments:

On the visit of the young Maharaja to Simla, in the autumn of 1866, the Viceroy confirmed the appointments of Moulvi Muhammad Hassan and Sirdar Fatah Singh, as members of Council, in the room of those deceased. The former was at the head of the Department of Criminal Justice, and the latter Governor of the district of Narnoul.

* Commissioner Cis-Satlej states to Government, No. 8 dated 4th January. Government Punjab to Government of India. No. 17 dated 8th January, and Government of India, No. 84 dated 28th February 1864.

[Page-268]

In December 1867, Diwan Kulwant Rai, the head of the Revenue office, and Bakshi Bir Singh, Commandant of the Forces, with some of their adherents, were banished from Pattiala. The Council, which had for some time been very unanimous, soon after this split into two parties, and in June 1868, the Agent of the Lieutenant Governor appointed Abdul Navi Khan, Keeper of the Seal, an Extraordinary Member of the Council. Affiars in Pattiala did not, however, progress more smoothly than before, and, in February, 1870, the Maharaja was invested with full powers and the Council of Regency was dissolved.

Character of the young prince:

Maharaja Mahindar Singh is now eighteen of age. His education has been carefully conducted by Ram Chandar, an eminent Mathematician of Dehli, who long performed delicate and difficult duties at Pattiala with singular courage and honesty. His labors appear to have been successful. The young Maharaja is well educated for a native Prince, knowing English, Persian and Gurmukhi. Possessed of great natural intelligence and force of character, there can be little doubt that Mahindar Singh will choose to rule his territory himself, and not surrender his power to unworthy subordinates. The troubles of the Regency have taught him many lessons, which will not be quickly forgotten. He, at any rate, will not begin his reign as his father did, with any suspicion of the intentions of the British Government : he knows well that its only wish is to see him prosperous and contented ; while education has taught him that no Prince can be distinguished

[Page-269]

or worthy of honor, who does not rule for the benefit of his people.

The Lieutenant Governor visits Pattiala:

There remain a few incidents worthy of record in Pattiala history. First may be mentioned the visit of the Lieutenant Governor of the Punjab to Pattiala in January 1867.^* In March 1869, Maharaja Mahindar Singh attended the Durbar held at Ambala in honor of Amir Sher Ali Khan of Kabul, and, in February 1870, visited Lahore, to meet His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh, when the usual ceremonial visits were exchanged between the Prince and the Maharaja.

* It may be interesting to give the program of this visit as a picture of the ceremonies which custom enjoins in meetings with Native Princes. A similar ceremonial would be followed in the case of the Nawab of Bahawalpur, who is of equal rank with Pattiala.

Programme of proceedings on the occasion of the visit of the Honorable the Lieutenant Governor of the Punjab to His Highness the Maharaja of Pattiala.

The Honorable the Lieutenant Governor will leave his camp at 7 o'clock, Ar M.

Two Ministers of State of the first class will come out two miles from the city to meet the Lieutenant Governor.

His Honor will be met by His Highness the Maharaja and his retinue at the village of Chourah.

At this place the Lieutenant Governor will mount the Maharaja's elephant, and proceed to the camp, sitting on the Maharaja's right

The Maharaja will have a suitable guard of honor drawn up in the vicinity of the town of Pattiala, who will salute the Lieutenant Governor as he passes.

A salute of 19 guns will be fired as the cortège proceeds from the walls of the town, and on the Lieutenant Governor reaching his tents.

The Maharaja will accompany the Lieutenant Governor to his tents and there take leave.

Two Ministers of the State of the first rank will come from the Maharaja to enquire after the Lieutenant Governor's health.

His Highness the Maharaja's visit.

In the evening, at 4-30 p. m., the Maharaia will pay a visit to the Lieutenant Governor. In the absence of the Deputy Commissioner, the Deputy Inspector General of Police will proceed on an elephant to accompany the Maharaja. The Military Secretary, Private Secretary, and Aide-de-Camp will go half way on elephants to meet him ; the

[Page-270]

The Sirhind Canal

During the present year, 1870, a scheme of great importance to the Pattiala territory has been finally decided, which had been for many years under discussion. This is a canal from the Satlej near Rupar to irrigate the Pattiala and Ambala districts.

In February 1861, the late Maharaja Narindar Singh, at an interview with the Lieutenant Governor at Pinjor, expressed a desire to construct, at his own expense, a

Agent and Secretary to Government will receive him on alighting. The Lieutenant Governor will come forward two or three paces beyond the edge of the carpet to meet the Maharaja.

The Agent will sit on the Maharaja's right, and the Maharaja's retinue on the right of him.

On the Lieutenant Governor's left will sit the Secretary to Government and the Staff of the Lieutenant Governor.

The Maharaja's officials will then present the usual nazarana.

Khilluts will then be brought in for the Maharaja and the Officials, of the Pattiala State ; and after the ceremony of uttur and pan the ceremony will conclude.

The ceremony of taking the Maharaja back will be the same as those for bringing him reversed.

A salute of 17 guns will be fired on the Maharaja's coming and going, and the troops present in the Lieutenant Governor's camp will present arms.

Return visit.

On the following day, at 4-30 p. m., four Ministers of State of the first rank will come to fetch the Lieutenant Governor, and the Maharaja himself will come halfway to meet His Honor ; and on meeting, the Lieutenant Governor will take the Maharaja up with him on the elephant.

At the gate the troops will present arms.

In the Durbar, the Lieutenant Governor will sit on the right of the Maharaja, and on his right, the Secretary to Government and the other officers present. The Agent will sit on the Maharaja'8 left. State chairs will be provided for the Lieutenant Governor, the Maharaja, the Agent, and the Secretary to Government ; the rest will be plain chairs.

The officers of the Pattiala State will present the usual Nuzzars.

The Lieutenant Governor's Peshkush will then be brought in ; after which uttur and pan will be given by the Maharaja himself to the Lieutenant Governor, the Agent, and the Secretary to Government, and by the Council to the other Officers ; and the Lieutenant Governor will take leave and return. The ceremonies on return will be those of coming reversed.

A salute of 19 guns will be fired on the arrival and departure of the Lieutenant Governor.

[Page-271]

canal from Rupar, on the Satlej, into his own territory. He had some time before formed this intention, but the then Commissioner Cis-Satlej States considered the work impossible, and his idea was temporarily abandoned; however, in 1861, he again took it up and applied for the services of an Engineer officer to survey the line. An officer of experience reported that the country was well adapted for irrigation and greatly in want of it, and the Government expressed a strong desire to give every encouragement possible to a work so useful.^*

The Scheme delayed:

The sudden death of the Maharaja prevented the realization of the project, and it was not till July 1867, that, on the motion of the Government of India, it was again revived, and Sirdar Jagdeo Singh, Member of the Pattiala Council, and Abdul Navi Khan, Foreign Minister, deputed to discuss its details at Simla. Owing to the fierce dissension in the Pattiala Council, great delay took place in the negotiations as to the terms on which that State should join in the work of constructing the canal ; but, in December 1869, the Pattiala Government assented to all the stipulations of Government, and the terms were finally determined in March

The conditions finally determined upon 1870.

The execution and supervision of the work is to be entirely

On the morning of the 36th instant, the Lieutenant Governor will leave Pattiala for Bazidpore ; on his departure a salute of 19 guns will be fired.

The ceremonies of Ziafat, &c., will be carried out by the Maharaja, in communication with the Agent of the Lieutenant Governor.

* Commissioner Cis-Satlej States No. 108, dated 6th May 1861. Letter of Maharaja of Pattiala to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States. Memo, by Secretary to Government Punjab, Public Works Department, dated 14th May. Government of India to Government Punjab, Public Works Department, No. 1843, dated 30th May 1861.

[Page-272]

in the hands of the British Government, whose officers are to have control over the water-supply in the main channel, leaving the distribution from the smaller channels with the Pattiala Government. The cost of the canal is to be borne by both Governments in proportion to the amount of water taken by their respective territories; a certain seignorage being paid, in addition, to the British Government, for the use of the water of the Satlej, a river in British territory. The works of this canal have been already commenced at Rupar, and its completion will prove of the greatest benefit to Pattiala and largely increase its revenue.^*

Donation to the University College:

The Maharaja, in May 1870, presented to the Donation to the University College of Lahore the sum of Rs. 70,000, of which Rs. 20,000 was intended to found a scholarship in honor of the Duke of Edinburgh and to commemorate his visit to the Punjab.^†

The death of heir to the Bharatpur State at Pattiala December 1869:

Rani Basant Kour, sister of the Maharaja, had married the Raja of Bharatpur, and early in 1869, after a long correspondence, she was allowed to visit her home at Pattiala, bringing with her the heir to the Bharatpur State, her son, only a few years of age. She remained at Pattiala for the

* Government of India No 220, dated 12th July 1867, to Government Panjab. Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Government of India No. 203 dated 13th July. Government of India to Government Panjab No. 247 dated 7th August with Memorandum No. 1867. Government of India to Government Punjab, No. 24 dated 30th Novomber 1869. Government Punjab to Commissioner Cis-Satlej States No. 1299 dated 10th December. Government Punjab to Government of India No. 6-14 dated 3rd January 1870.

† Letter of Maharaja to Agent Lieutenant Governor, dated 29th March 1870, and No. 228, dated 30th May 1870, from Agent to Goverument Punjab.

[Page-273]

rest of the year, but the child fell ill and died on the 4th of December of inflammation of the lungs.

The Rani of Bharatpur dies in February 1870:

The Rani herself soon after this fell ill of fever, and, after an illness of nearly three months, died on the 17th February 1870, while her brother was at Lahore, during the visit of the Duke of Edinburgh.^*

Birth of a son to the Maharaja, 1867:

Maharaja Mahindar Singh has married three wives. The lady last married, daughter of Mian Mehtab Singh Dhaliwal of Dina, a relative of the Raja of Faridkot, gave birth to a son on the 17th of October 1867.^†

Appointed to the Order of the Star of India:

In May 1870, the Maharaja was nominated a Knight of the Most Exalted Order of the Star of India.

The area, population, and revenue of Pattiala

The area of the Pattiala State is 5,412 square miles ; the population is not accurately known, but is probably about 1,650,000, and the revenue is estimated at Rs. 38,00,000 a year. A Military force of 8,000 men is maintained, and a contingent of 100 men is furnished by the Maharaja to the British Government for general service.

The Maharaja is entitled to a salute of 17 guns, and ranks second of the Punjab Chiefs in Viceregal Darbars : the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir taking the first place. The following statement of

* Commissioner Cis-Satlej States Nos. 341 and 952, dated 7th September 1868 and 9th December 1869. Government Punjab to Commissioner, No. 816 dated 17th September 1868, and 6th October. No. 989 to Government of India, 2l8t December 1869, and 7th June 1870. Government of India to Government Punjab Nos. 1100 dated 29th September 1868, and No. 189 dated 28th January 1870.

† Commissioner Cis-Satlej States to Government Punjab No. 412 dated 3rd December 1867. Government of India to Maharaja dated 31st December 1867.

[Page-274]

the revenue of the Pattiala State for the year 1868-69 is supplied by the kindness of the Maharaja.

Statement of the Revenue of the Pattiala State for Sumbat 1925, corresponding with financial year 1868-69.

Statement of the Revenue of the Pattiala State

[Page-275]

land (generally two or four ploughs) which have been excluded from the State assessment, and allowed to Biswadars, for distinction and maintenance. The second class Miscellaneous (b), includes those Revenue Free Grants which were allowed either for religious reasons or rewards for service.

† A percentage is allowed to Biswadars from the total assessment of a village for distinction and maintenance. This is called Inam-i-Panchan, and its right descends to the children of the Biswadar. A person receiving this Inam is at once acknowledge as a Biswadar. This per-centage varies from above Rs. 10 to 9, 8, and less.

†† Adhkari means half. It is an allowance to Brahmana, Syads and Faqirs, (Hindu or Muhammadan) agriculturists, who only pay half the demand in proportion to others. Thus it will be seen that Rs. 90,703-3-3 were remitted to them in the year. This amount is subject to fluctuation, as such occupants transfer or abandon their holdings.

§ Panchai is a fixed sum, not on the principle of percentage, and is allowed for the distinction and maintenance of certain families. It is not specially allowed to Biswadars, as No. 8.

|| Certain persons, though entered as Jagirdars or Maafidars of entire or portions of villages, are not however in actual possession of their Jagir or Maafi. The state collects the Revenue from such village or portions of villages, and considers it as part of the State Revenue. The Maafidar being paid an annual pension equal to the amount of his Maafi.

¶ This Panchai is neither a distinctive nor a permanent one. It is allowed to Lambardars, at the option of the settlement officers during settlement operations, as a reward for services performed.

End of The History of the Patiala State

Go to Index of the Book

The Rajas of the Punjab by Lepel H. Griffin/The History of the Patiala State:Part III

Contents

Maharaja Narindar Singh succeeds

Several important reforms introduced

The case of the Chaharumi Sikhs

The proposed visit of Maharaja to England

The mutiny of 1857

Sanads granted for new territories

The right of adoption

Lord Canning's durbar at Ambala in January 1860

The Maharaja Narindar Singh invested with Order of the Star of India

The death of Maharaja Narindar Singh, November 1862

Mahindar Singh

The Sirhind Canal

The area, population, and revenue of Pattiala

Navigation menu

Personal tools

Namespaces

Variants

Views

More

Search

Navigation

Tools