Page:EB1911 - Volume 07.djvu/787

Rh into closest intimacy with him, whether at school or at Oxford, suspect the higher qualities of statesmanship which afterwards established his fame on so firm a foundation.

Several years of his early boyhood were spent with his father and mother in Canada, reminiscences of which were still vivid with him when governor-general of India. Returning to Scotland he was prepared for Harrow, where he entered in 1825. Two years later he was removed from school, his entire education being entrusted to the Rev. Mr Temple, incumbent of a quiet parish in Staffordshire. To this gentleman he referred in later days as having taught him all he knew, and to his training he must have owed those habits of regularity and that indomitable industry which marked his adult life. In October 1829 he passed on to Christ Church, Oxford, where he worked fairly hard, won some distinction, and made many lifelong friends. His studies, however, were so greatly interrupted by the protracted illness and death in 1832 of his only surviving brother, that Lord Ramsay, as he then became, had to content himself with entering for a “pass” degree, though the examiners marked their appreciation of his work by placing him in the fourth class of honours for Michaelmas 1833. He then travelled in Italy and Switzerland, enriching with copious entries the diary which he religiously kept up through life, and storing his mind with valuable observations.

An unsuccessful but courageous contest at the general election in 1835 for one of the seats in parliament for Edinburgh, fought against such veterans as the future speaker, James Abercrombie, afterwards Lord Dunfermline, and John Campbell, future lord chancellor, was followed in 1837 by Ramsay’s return to the House of Commons as member for East Lothian. In the previous year he had married Lady Susan Hay, daughter of the marquess of Tweeddale, whose companionship was his chief support in India, and whose death in 1853 left him a heartbroken man. In 1838 his father had died after a long illness, while less than a year later he lost his mother.

Succeeding to the peerage, the new earl soon made his mark in a speech delivered on the 16th of June 1840 in support of Lord Aberdeen’s Church of Scotland Benefices Bill, a controversy arising out of the Auchterarder case, in which he had already taken part in the “general assembly” in opposition to Dr Chalmers. In May 1843 he became vice-president of the board of trade, Gladstone being president, and was sworn in as a member of the privy council. Succeeding Gladstone as president in 1845, he threw himself into the work during the crisis of the railway mania with such energy that his health partially broke down under the strain. In the struggle over the corn laws he ranged himself on the side of Sir Robert Peel, and after the failure of Lord John Russell to form a ministry he resumed his post at the board of trade, entering the cabinet on the retirement of Lord Stanley. When Peel resigned office in June 1846, Lord John offered Dalhousie a seat in the cabinet, an offer which he declined from a fear that acceptance might “involve the loss of public character.” Another attempt to secure his services in the appointment of president of the railway board was equally unsuccessful; but in 1847 he accepted the post of governor-general of India in succession to Lord Hardinge, on the understanding that he was to be left in “entire and unquestioned possession” of his own “personal independence with reference to party politics.”

Dalhousie assumed charge of his dual duties as governor-general of India and governor of Bengal on the 12th of January 1848, and shortly afterwards he was honoured with the green ribbon of the Order of the Thistle. In writing to the president of the board of control, Sir John Hobhouse, he was able to assure him that everything was quiet. This statement, however, was to be falsified by events almost before it could reach England. For on the 19th of April Vans Agnew of the civil service and Lieutenant Anderson of the Bombay European regiment, having been sent to take charge of Multan from Diwan Mulraj, were murdered there, and within a short time the Sikh troops and sardars joined in open rebellion. Dalhousie agreed with Sir Hugh Gough, the commander-in-chief, that the Company’s military forces were neither adequately equipped with transport and supplies, nor otherwise prepared to take the field immediately. He also foresaw the spread of the rebellion, and the necessity that must arise, not merely for the capture of Multan, but also for the entire subjugation of the Punjab. He therefore resolutely delayed to strike, organized a strong army for operations in November, and himself proceeded to the Punjab. Despite the brilliant successes gained by Herbert Edwardes in conflict with Mulraj, and Goagh’s indecisive victories at Ramnagar in November, at Sadulapur in December, and at Chillianwalla in the following month, the stubborn resistance at Multan showed that the task required the utmost resources of the government. At length, on the 22nd of January 1849, the Multan fortress was taken by General Whish, who was thus set at liberty to join Gough at Gujrat. Here a complete victory was won on the 21st of February, the Sikh army surrendered at Rawal Pindi, and their Afghan allies were chased out of India. For his services the earl of Dalhousie received the thanks of parliament and a step in the peerage, as marquess.

The war being now over, Dalhousie, without waiting for instructions from home, annexed the Punjab, and made provision for the custody and education of the infant maharaja. For the present the province was administered by a triumvirate under the personal supervision of the governor-general, and later, a place having been found for Henry Lawrence in Rajputana, by John Lawrence as sole commissioner. Twice did Dalhousie tour through its length and breadth, settling on the spot all matters of importance, and when he left India no province could show a better record of progress.

One further addition to the empire was made by conquest. The arrogant Burmese court at Ava was bound by the treaty of Yandabo, 1826, to protect British ships in Burmese waters, but the outrageous conduct of the governor of Rangoon towards the masters of the “Monarch” and “Champion” met with no redress from the king. Dalhousie adopted the maxim of Lord Wellesley “that an insult offered to the British flag at the mouth of the Ganges should be resented as promptly and fully as an insult offered at the mouth of the Thames”; but, anxious to save the cost of war, he tried to settle the dispute by diplomacy. When that failed he made vigorous preparation for the campaign to be undertaken in the autumn, giving his attention to the adequate provision of rations, boat transport, and medical supplies, composing differences between the military contingents from Bengal and Madras, and between the military and naval forces employed, and conferring with General Godwin whom he had chosen to command the expedition. Martaban was taken on the 5th of April 1852, and Rangoon and Bassein shortly afterwards. Since, however, the court of Ava showed no sign of submission, the second campaign opened in October, and after the capture of Prome and Pegu the annexation of the province of Pegu was declared by a proclamation dated the 20th of December 1853. To any further invasion of the Burmese empire Dalhousie was firmly opposed, being content to “consolidate” the Company’s possessions by uniting Arakan to Tenasserim. By his wise policy he pacified the new province, placing Colonel Arthur Phayre in sole charge of it, personally visiting it, and establishing a complete system of telegraphs and communications.

These military operations added force to the conviction which Dalhousie had formed of the need of consolidating the Company’s ill-knit possessions, and as a step in that direction he decided to apply the doctrine of “lapse,” and annex any Hindu native states, created or revived by the grants of the British government, in which there was a failure of male lineal descendants, reserving for consideration the policy of permitting adoptions in other Hindu chiefships tributary and subordinate to the British government as paramount. Under the first head he recommended the annexation of Satara in January 1849, of Jaitpur and Sambalpur in the same year, and of Jhansi and Nagpur in 1853. In these cases his action was approved by the home authorities, but his proposal to annex Karauli in 1849 was disallowed, while Baghat and the petty estate of Udaipur, which he had annexed in 1851 and 1852 respectively, were afterwards restored to native rule.