Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:15:13.243Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

VI. The Royal Titles Act and India1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

L. A. Knight
L. A. Knight
Affiliation:
School of Oriental and African Studies, London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The consolidation of the Indian Empire after the Mutiny brought with it a more closely defined honorific hierarchy. From the first investiture at Windsor in 1861 of the Star of India and increasingly agter the assumption by the Queen of her new title of Empress, high service came to be rewarded in honours and distinctions with a discriminating lavishness reminiscent of the creations of the Younger Pitt. But the title assumed by the Queen and announced on 28 April 1876 had not originally been designed for India alone. It was Disraeli's caution that induced the Queen to abandon the style of ‘Empress of Great Britain, Ireland and India’. In his anxiety to avoid controversy many assurances were given that the United Kingdom would not be affected. Thus limitation of the title to India did not at first have any special significance. In reply to Lowe's criticisms, the Prime Minister saw no reason why two of the Queen's sons should not become Dukes of Canada and Australia. It was only in the course of the preparations for proclaiming the title on the first day of 1877 that the Indian Government, recovered from its surprise, suggested that the occasion might be invested with a political as well as a symbolic significance. The Viceroy, Lytton, came to believe that the occasion was a unique opportunity, not merely for broadening the base of the imperial Government through a popular symbol, but for materially strengthening the executive by a new understanding with the native princes of India.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , September 1968 , pp. 488 - 507
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1968

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 Buckle, G. E. (ed.), Letters of Queen Victoria, 2nd series (London, 1926), ii, 440.Google Scholar

3 However, the title was to appear on the coinage in 1893, and from the very beginning Victoria did not distinguish between her two signatures.

4 Letters of Queen Victoria, ii, 448.Google Scholar

5 Blake, Robert, Disraeli (London, 1966), especially p. 562.Google Scholar

6 Buckle, G. E., Life of Beaconsfield (London, 1920), v, 457.Google Scholar

7 Davies, C. C., ‘India and Queen Victoria’, Journal of the East India Association, xxviii (1937).Google Scholar

8 BXXF, Hughenden Papers.

9 A background factor in the publication of ‘The Monarchy’ by Harrison, F. in the Fortnightly Review of June 1872 had been the fear that Disraeli was willing to make political capital of the institution.Google ScholarHirst, F. W., Early Life and Letters of John Morley (London, 1927), I, 212.Google Scholar

10 Ponsonby, Arthur, Henry Ponsonby (London, 1942), pp. 76, 176, 251.Google Scholar

11 Disraeli to Salisbury, 13 Dec. 1875, Salisbury Papers, [Christ Church, Oxford].

12 Disraeli to Salisbury, 11 Jan. 1876, Salisbury Papers.

13 Guedalla, P., The Queen and Mr. Gladstone (London, 1933), I, 455; II, 10.Google Scholar

14 BXIX, 13, 494, Hughenden Papers.

15 Corry, to Disraeli, , Good Friday, 1876, Hughenden Papers.Google Scholar

16 For example, Russell, W. H., The Prince of Wales' Visit, etc. (London, 1877), p. vii.Google Scholar

17 Ponsonby, Arthur, op. cit. p. 100.Google Scholar

18 17 Nov. 1875, Bishwa Dutt, Bengal Vernacular Newspaper Reports. The visit of the Duke of Edinburgh in 1869, the success of which presumably encouraged the Prince, had aroused similar hopes that greater English interest in India would improve the tone of the relations between the races. Mukhopadhyaya, Sambhu Chandra, The Prince in India, and to India, by an Indian (Calcutta, 1871).Google Scholar

19 26 Nov. 1875, Rajshaye Samachar, Bengal Vernacular Newspaper Reports.

20 6 Jan. 1876, Amrita Bazar Patrika, Bengal Vernacular Newspaper Reports.

21 Disraeli, to Salisbury, , 11 Jan. 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

22 In his second term of office, 1859–-66, Sir Charles Wood, Secretary of State for India, thought that the conservative temper of the country, in so far as it was expressed on Indian matters, was a force to be reckoned with. Wood to Canning, 20 July 1861, MSS. Eur. F78, I[ndia] O[ffice] L[ibrary].

23 Burne, O. T., Memories (London, 1907), p. 198, Ponsonby to Burne (1875?).Google Scholar

24 Wood, to Canning, , 31 Aug. 1860, MSS. Eur. F78, I.O.L.Google Scholar

25 Wood, to Elgin, , 18 July 1863, MSS. Eur. F78, I.O.L.Google Scholar

26 149–52, 30/6, Carnarvon Papers, Public Record Office.

27 The tone had been set higher up. Northcote wrote to Lawrence about the latter's correspondence with the Nizam, ‘I sometimes wonder how he takes your plain speaking; but I suppose what would hardly do with an European potentate answers with an Asiatic’ 26 May 1867, MSS. Eur. F90, I.O.L.

28 Harrison, F., ‘The Conservative Reaction’, Fortnightly Review, 03. 1874.Google Scholar

29 Harrington, to Bright, , 13 Mar. 1876, MSS. Add. 43,387, British Museum.Google Scholar

30 Duke of Argyll, Autobiography and Memoirs (London, 1906), ii, 289.Google Scholar

31 Harrington, to Granville, , 3 Mar. 1876, Granville Papers, Public Record Office.Google Scholar

32 8 Feb. 1876, House of Lords. Granville's researchers told him that medieval history afforded examples of kings supreme over subordinate rulers.

33 The Blot on the Queen's Head (London, 1876)Google Scholar; The Pin in the Queen's Shawl (London, 1876).Google Scholar

34 Diaries of John Bright (London, 1930), p. 377.Google Scholar

35 Russell, to Granville, , 17 Mar. 1876, Granville Papers, Public Record Office.Google Scholar

36 To many members of the Liberal party, Robert Lowe was more unacceptable than the Title and they were prepared to acquiesce in the latter when Lowe's intemperate opposition offered the opportunity of disposing of him. He had earlier clashed with the Queen over the appointment in 1871 of the Auditor of the Home Accounts of the Indian Government. Reel 320, I.O.L.

37 30 Mar. 1876, House of Lords.

38 9 Mar. 1876, House of Commons.

39 8 Feb. 1876, House of Lords.

40 14 Mar. 1876, House of Commons.

41 ‘The Value to the United Kingdom of the Foreign Dominions of the Crown’, Fortnightly Review, 11. 1877.Google Scholar

42 ‘The Policy of Aggrandizement’, Fortnightly Review, 09. 1877.Google Scholar

43 3 Apr. 1876, House of Lords.

44 17 Feb. 1876, House of Commons.

45 3 Mar. 1876, House of Lords.

46 Salisbury, to Disraeli, , 10 Jan. 1876, Hughenden Papers.Google Scholar In fact only in foreign relations had the anarchy of styles been somewhat regulated. Since 1839 Persia, despite a preference for ‘malika’, had been required to use ‘padishah’, the term that Victoria and the Council regarded as the translation for empress. Though in the event a title with less partial historical associations was chosen (Kaiser-i-Hind). Within India ‘malika’ was used officially though various titles were used in practice, e.g. ‘maharani’ and even ‘queen’ untranslated on rupees minted by an earlier Rao of Cutch. Leitner, G. W., Kaiser-i-Hind, etc. (Lahore, 1876).Google Scholar

47 Queen, to Lytton, , 15 June 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

48 Lytton, to Disraeli, , 30 Apr. 1876, Hughenden Papers.Google Scholar

49 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 24 Mar. 1876,Google Scholar MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L. 1 Apr. 1876, Friend of India. Though it was a view held strongly by the Queen that ‘attacking Russia from India is the right way’ and that the title might focus loyalty for that purpose. Queen, to Disraeli, , 23 July 1877, Hughenden Papers.Google Scholar

50 Lytton, to the Queen, , 15 Nov. 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

51 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 24 Mar. 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

52 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 7 Apr. 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

53 Life of Beaconsfield, v, 480.Google Scholar The Queen's memory for opponents of the Bill was very long. For the consequences for Granville, see Blake, Robert, Disraeli, p. 717.Google Scholar

54 9 Mar. 1876, House of Commons.

55 12 1875, Burne, O. T., Memories, p. 203; not discovered in the records.Google Scholar

56 March 1875, p. 633; discussion of this minute, draft dispatches based on it, etc., pp. 635, 657, 667 of 1875, Political and Secret Home Correspondence.

57 18 May 1876, Note by the Viceroy on Baroda, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.

58 Lytton, to Salisbury, , 11 May 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

59 The Government had removed the Gaekwar of Baroda in 1875 on the suspicion of his having poisoned the resident and in the belief in his incapacity. For Lytton's view, Lytton to the Queen, 25 May 1876; for Northbrook's reaction in proposing that relations with the states should be put under the central government and that a new title for the Queen should be promulgated to clarify the position, Lytton, to Northbrook, , 10 Apr. 1876Google Scholar and Lytton, to Salisbury, , 2 May 1876, respectively, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

60 Lytton, to SirNorman, H., 6 Dec. 1876Google Scholar with Lytton, to Carnarvon, , 29 Nov. 1876, Carnarvon Papers, Public Record Office.Google Scholar

61 18 May 1876, Note by the Viceroy; Lytton, to Salisbury, , 5 Aug. 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

62 SirHunter, W. W., Earl of Mayo (Oxford, 1891), p. 101.Google Scholar

63 Canning, to Cubbon, , 24 Nov. 1860, Canning Papers [Leeds Public Library].Google ScholarMayo, to Duke, of Cambridge, 26 Jan. 1869, MSS. Add. 7490, C[ambridge] U[niversity] L[ibrary].Google Scholar

64 Mayo, to Argyll, , 10 Apr. 1871, MSS. Add. 7490, C.U.L. For disagreeable memories of Mayo's viceroyalty see, for example, H190 on the Harcourt Butler Committee, Political and Secret Library.Google Scholar

65 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 2 Nov. 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

66 Ripon, to Dilke, , 6 Mar. 1880, MSS. Add. 43,894, British Museum.Google Scholar

67 2 Jan. 1877.

68 These two views of paramountcy and their implications were discussed by SirHoldsworth, W. in ‘The Indian States and India’, Law Quarterly Review (1930).Google Scholar

69 Salisbury, to Disraeli, , 13 Dec. 1875, Hughenden Papers.Google Scholar

70 13 Jan. 1871, memo, by Sir J. Kaye, Appendix A, D74, Secret and Political Memoranda.

71 For example, 4 Apr. 1874, Sir G. Clerk, I, Dissents by Members of the Indian Council.

72 Halifax, to Northbrook, , 3 July 1879, MSS. Eur. C144, I.O.L.Google Scholar

73 4 Aug. 1868, Minutes of Sir H. Maine, H78, Political and Secret Library.

74 For example, 17 Apr. 1844, Parliamentary answer on Mysore, MSS. Add. 44,734ee98, British Museum.

75 1112. 1875, Note on Bhaonagar case, Perry Papers, I.O.L.Google Scholar

76 For the Government attitude to the case of Statham v. Statham and the Gaekwar, 1911, see D250, Secret and Political Memoranda.

77 Smith, Vernon to Canning, 8 Jan. 1858, Canning Papers.Google Scholar

78 Canning, to Stanley, , 28 Aug. 1858, Canning Papers.Google Scholar

79 Lady Canning to Canning, 29 Mar. 1858, Lady Canning Papers, Leeds Public Library.

80 Canning, to Wood, , 18 Mar. 1861Google Scholar; Canning, to Denison, , 10 Jan. 1862, Canning Papers.Google Scholar

81 Travancore and Indore particularly urged this. For the former, Prince Varma Rama to Bowring, 2 Feb. 1869, 12 Ed. 1, MSS. Add. 7490, C.U.L.

82 Lytton, to Saunders, , 21 Aug. 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

83 17 May 1876, Note by Lytton, MSS. Eur. E2i8, I.O.L.

84 4 Apr. 1873, D61, Secret and Political Memoranda.

85 Lawrence, to Cranborne, , 6 Dec. 1866, MSS. Eur. F90, I.O.L.Google Scholar

86 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 4 Aug. 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

87 Lytton, to Salisbury, , 25 May 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

88 Perry, to Halifax, , 20 12. 1878, MSS. Add. 49, 552, British Museum.Google Scholar

89 Thornton, T. H., Life of Sir Richard Meade (London, 1898), pp. 316 ff. The ‘libro d'oro’ was not accepted.Google Scholar

90 Lytton, to Disraeli, , 30 Apr. 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

91 Lytton, to Salisbury, , 25 June 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

92 For example, Koebner, R. and Schmidt, H. D., Imperialism (Cambridge, 1964), p. 118.Google Scholar

93 Meade, to Northbrook, , 13 Jan. and 6 Oct. 1877, MSS. Eur. C144, I.O.L.Google Scholar

94 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 2 Nov. 1876, Salisbury Papers. Salisbury had earlier seen the advantages of removing and compensating the claims of dispossessed nobles by the use of titles. The acceptance of the style ‘Prince of Arcot’ by Azeem Jah would make him a subject of the Queen and therefore eliminate the basis of his claims as semi-independent Nawab of the Carnatic—‘an ingenious escape from a serious difficulty’. Cranborne to Lawrence, 17 Aug. 1866, MSS. Eur. F90, I.O.L. As for the requirement of homage from the ruling princes, Stanley had warned Canning in 1858 that although desirable it would be premature and likely to provoke resistance. 8 Sep. 1858, Canning Papers.Google Scholar

95 Lytton, to Salisbury, , 30 July 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

96 Lytton, to Delane, , 14 Aug. 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

97 Lytton, to Morley, , 22 Aug. 1876, MSS. Eur. E218 I.O.L.Google Scholar

98 24 July 1865, I, Dissents by Members of the Indian Council.

99 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 9 June 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

100 2 Jan. 1877.

101 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 30 Aug. 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

102 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 13 July 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

103 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 7 July 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

104 Salisbury, to Disraeli, , 7 June 1876, Hughenden Papers.Google Scholar

105 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 30 Aug. 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

106 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 23 June 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

107 Lytton believed that Salisbury's view of the eastern question underwent a transformation as a result of the Constantinople conference. But it appears that as far as the implications in Asia were concerned Salisbury's different emphasis was of longer standing. ‘Lord Salisbury submits with diffidence an opinion which he fears differs from that of many high authorities; but his opinion is that the Russian Court is at present trying anxiously to avoid further commitments in Asia—perhaps for the sake of reserving its strength for European contingencies.’ Salisbury, to the Queen, , 4 Nov. 1874, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

108 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 4 Aug. 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

109 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 24 Mar. 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

110 Salisbury, to Furdrouji, N., 22 July 1870Google Scholar; Salisbury, to Dawson, E., 18 May 1872, Salisbury Papers. The desire to settle Indian matters quietly on a supra-party level was not confined to Salisbury; it was usual among Secretaries of State.Google Scholar

111 ‘Disintegration’, Quarterly Review (10. 1883). Duff to Northbrook, 11 Jan. 1886, MSS. Eur. C144, I.O.L.Google Scholar

112 Lytton, to Layard, , 2 July 1877, MSS. Eur. E2i8, I.O.L.Google Scholar

113 Dickinson, to Disraeli, , 19 Dec. 1851Google Scholar, Hughenden Papers. Perhaps most ‘anti-imperialists’ did not extend their views to the dependent Empire, employing there the concept of ‘mission’ or ‘task’. Barié, Ottavio, Idee e Dottrine Imperialistiche nell'Inghilterra Vittoriana (Bari, 1953), p. 16.Google Scholar

114 Dickinson, John, Rejected Letter to the Times (London, 1876).Google Scholar

115 Argyll, to Mayo, , 4 June 1869, MSS. Add. 7490, C.U.L.Google Scholar

116 Pioneer (2 Jan. 1877).

117 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 13 July 1876, MSS. Eur. E2i8, I.O.L.Google Scholar

118 This was keenly appreciated in the residencies. For Hyderabad, Temple to Lawrence, 27 Sep. 1867, MSS. Eur. F86, I.O.L.

119 47 of i860, Political Home Correspondence. The Canning and Mayo papers contain much correspondence with the prince, often in terms of fulsome bonhomie on one side and hostile courtesy on the other.

120 Argyll, to Mayo, , 17 Mar. 1871, MSS. Add. 7490, C.U.L.Google Scholar

121 Salisbury, to Disraeli, , 13 May 1876, Hughenden Papers.Google Scholar

122 Bowring, to Lawrence, , 1 Apr. 1868, MSS. Eur. C127/2, I.O.L. When the raja died an unsigned will was found beneath his pillow in which, among other things, the state of Mysore was virtually bequeathed to Dr Campbell. Pp. 252 ff., reel 589, I.O.L.Google Scholar

123 Duff, to Northbrook, , 12 Oct. 1877, MSS. Eur. C144, I.O.L.Google Scholar

124 Meade, to Northbrook, , 23 Aug. 1873, MSS. Eur. C144, I.O.L.Google Scholar

125 A collection of letters, Qi, Salisbury Papers.

126 Wodehouse, to Argyll, , 10 May 1873, Reel 316, I.O.L.Google Scholar

127 Mayo, to Perry, , 15 Mar. 1871, MSS. Add. 7490, C.U.L.Google Scholar

128 Indian Public Letter, no. 158, 29 Aug. 1867, restated the rule that addresses to the home Government must come through the regular channel of the Indian Government, central or local. Indian Political Letter, no. 22, 6 Mar. 1873, stated that the Viceroy was the sole channel for communications with the royal family or high officials in England. For a semiofficial attempt to regularize the agency system see a note by Burne, O. T., 10 Mar. 1874, Secret Home Correspondence.Google Scholar

129 There were others. R. M. Martin championed the rajas of Coorg and J. Hope, another durbar surgeon, the house of Sindia.

130 For example, 8 June 1865, Friend of India.

131 It was not until 1926 that Bell's portrait found a place in the Indore “House of Greatness”. 5806–45, National Army Museum.

132 Bell, T. E., Empire in India (London, 1864), p. 411.Google Scholar

133 Idem, Mysore Reversion (London, 1866)Google Scholar and Remarks on the Mysore Blue Book (London, 1866).Google Scholar

134 2 Jan. 1877, Pioneer.

135 Wheeler, J. T., History of the Imperial Assemblage at Delhi (London, 1877), pp. 80 ff.Google Scholar

136 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 9 June 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

137 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 13 July 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

138 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 30 Sep. 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

139 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 1 Nov. 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

140 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 10 Nov. 1876, Salisbury Papers.Google Scholar

141 Salisbury, to Lytton, , 17 Nov. 1876, MSS. Eur. E2i8, I.O.LGoogle Scholar

142 5 Jan. 1877.

143 For an example of the former, i Jan. 1877, Englishman; for the latter, 11 Jan. 1877, Bangalore Spectator.

144 Bengal Vernacular Newspaper Reports.

145 It was for this sort of limited viewpoint that Aurobindo Ghosh was to criticize A. O. Hume and his Congress associates. Discussed by Krüger, Horst, Rabindranath Tagore und die Revolutionare Befreiungsbewegung in Indien, 1905 bis 1918 (Berlin, 1964), pp. 20Google Scholar ff. For the celebrations as a fillip to wider political organisation with particular reference to Western India, see Masselos, J. C., ‘Lytton's Great Tomasha and Indian Unity’, Journal of Indian History, Vol. XLIV, part m, 1966.Google Scholar

146 Napier, to Argyll, , 5 04. 1872, Reel 316, I.O.L. Wilfrid Scawen Blunt, India under Ripon (London, 1909), p. 325.Google Scholar

147 For an early example, the ‘Queen's Song’, composed in Kodagu in 1839 and translated in Rev. Richter, G., Manual of Coorg (Mangalore, 1870), pp. 211–13.Google Scholar For an illustration immediately after the Mutiny, see Ghose, Binoy (ed.), Samayikpatre: Banglar Samqjchitra, 1840–1905 (Calcutta, 1962), part 1, p. 250.Google Scholar

148 Hosein, Mir Musharraf, Jamidar Darpan (Calcutta, 1873), Act ii, Scene iii.Google Scholar

149 Eustis, F. A. and Zaidi, Z. H. II, ‘King, Viceroy and Cabinet: the modification of the partition of Bengal, 1911’, History (06 1964), XLIX.Google Scholar

150 8 Mar. 1876, Bengal Vernacular Newspaper Reports.

151 Madras Vernacular Newspaper Reports.

152 Lytton, to Layard, , 7 Jan. 1876, MSS. Eur. E218, I.O.L.Google Scholar

153 Blunt, Wilfrid Scawen, op. cit. p. 295.Google Scholar

154 21 Jan. 1878, Sahachar; 1 Mar. 1877, Bharat Mihir, Bengal Vernacular Newspaper Reports.

155 17 Jan. 1881, Bengal Vernacular Newspaper Reports.

156 Canning, to the Queen, , 17 Dec. 1861, Canning Papers.Google Scholar

157 Holkar, to Derby, , 6 Feb. 1871, MSS. Add. 7490, C.U.L.Google Scholar