BRITISH POLICY TOWARDS THE INDIAN STATES, 1905-1959 by STEPHEN RICHARD ASHTON Thesis submitted from The School of Oriental and African Studies to the University of London for the degree of doctor of philosophy, 1977• ProQuest Number: 11010305 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a com plete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 11010305 Published by ProQuest LLC(2018). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C ode Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 ABSTRACT Prior to 194-7 approximately one-third of the Indian sub-continent was broken up into 655 Indian States which were ruled by princes of varying rank. In the process of consolidating their empire in India the British had, during the first half of the nineteenth century, deprived the princes of the power to conduct external relations with each other or with foreign powers. Internally the princes were theoretically independent but their sovereignty in this respect was in practice restricted by the paramountcy of the Imperial power. Many of the princes resented the manner in which the British used this paramountcy to justify intervening in their domestic affairs. During the nineteenth century the British had maintained the princes basically as an administrative convenience and as a source of revenue. By the opening of the twentieth century, however, the British had come to regard the princes as potential political allies against the growth of nationalism in India. In order that the princes would willingly serve as allies the British adopted a policy of non-interference in their domestic affairs. In practice such intervention was reduced to an absolute minimum and would only be contemplated in cases of gross misgovernment. This thesis is concerned with how well the princes performed as Imperial allies. Two major themes su?e investigated. First, the position of the princes within an All-India constitutional framework. Here the scheme for an All-India Federation is examined in relation to its origins and ultimate demise in 1959 (Chapters 4, 5 and 6). The second theme concerns the policy of non-interference. While it operated, admin­ istrative standards in the states deteriorated rapidly. By the late 1950*s many of them had become obvious target for nationalist attack. The British belatedly realised that the non-interference policy had failed to make worth while allies of the princes. On the contrary, they had become a serious liability because of it. In vain the British attempted to reverse the trends of the previous thirty years but their efforts were interrupted by the second world war and could not be resumed once it was over (Chapters 1, 2, 5 and 6). 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT 2 TABLE OP CONTENTS 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 5 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 6 CHAPTER 1. Introduction: 1. The Indian States - Political Geography 7 2. The Indian States - Paramountcy 14 2. Removing the Isolation, 1904-1920. 54 3m The Policy of Non-Interference, 1920-1934. 74 4. The Indian States Committee, 1921-1929* 142 5. The Politics of an All-India Federation, 1930-1933* 187 6. The failure of federal negotiations and the abandonment of the non-interference policy, 1933-1939: 1. The failure of federal negotiations 242 2. The abandonment of the non-inter­ ference policy. 279 7* Conclusion 301 BIBLIOGRAPHY 522 GLOSSARY 534 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to Dr.B.N. Pandey of the School of Oriental and African Studies for his constant support and encouragement during the preparation and writing of this thesis. I am also grateful to the staff of the India Office Library for their readiness to deal with my many enquiries and requests while I was undertaking research. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the financial support I received from the Scholarships Committee of the School of Oriental and African Studies which made possible the presentation of this thesis. S.R. Ashton. October, 1977* LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AGG - Agent to the Governor-General AISPC - All India States' People's Conference Chamber of - Proceedings of the Meetings of the Princes' Chamber of Princes (Narendra Mahal). Coll. - Collection. Conference of - Proceedings of the Conference of Ruling Ruling Princes Princes and Chiefs held at £)elhi on the 3Gth October 191&» 5th ^ovemher 19171 20th January 1919 and 3rd November 1919 * FPD - Foreign and Political Department GGC - Governor-General in Council. GOI - Government of India. ICS - Indian Civil Service IOL - India Office Library, London. Montford - Report on Indian Constitutional Reforms, BepoFE” 19151 CmdV 9IU97T9T5:------------------- PCI - Political Correspondence with India. PIC - Political (Internal) Collections. PIF - Political (Internal) Files. PSCI - Political and Secret Correspondence with India. PSSF - Political and Secret Subject Files. PY - Abbreviation used by the Political Department of the India Office, denoting Political (Internal). S/S - Secretary of State. telg. - telegram. CHAPTER 1 . INTRODUCTION (1) The Indian States - Political Geography. Prior to 194-7, two-fifths of the Indian sub­ continent was not British territory and two-ninths of its inhabitants were not British subjects. This territory was broken up into a large number of individual states which displayed an extraordinary diversity in terms of size, population and resources. The states were governed by hereditary princes who owed allegiance to the British Crown as suzerain. The princes were not permitted to enter external relations with foreign powers. In their internal affairs they exercised varying degrees of authority but their sovereignty in this respect was in all cases limited by the control exercised by the Paramount Power. Excluding those of the North-West Frontier Province and Baluchistan, the states were thus classified i by the Indian States Committee in 1929: 1. Report of the Indian States Committee, 1928-1929» Class of State, No, Area in Population Revenue Estate etc. Square in crores ______________________________ Miles__________________ of rupees 1. States the 108 514,886 59,847,186 42.16 rulers of which are members of the Chamber of Princes in their own right. 2. States the 127 76,846 8,004,114 2.89 rulers of which are represented in the Chamber of Princes by 12 members of their Order selected by themselves. 3. Estates, Jagirs 327 6,406 801,674 .74 and others. The total area covered by this classification was 598,138 square miles with a population of 68,652,974. At one end of the scale stood Hyderabad with an area of 82,698 square miles, as large as England and Scotland, and with a population of over 14 million. At the other end was the tiny Kathiawar estate of Veja-no-ness with an area 2 of .29 of a square mile and with a population of 184. The whole range of the scale was covered between these two extremes but in general, statistics indicate the insignif­ icance of the overwhelming majority of the states. There were only twenty-eight with a population of over 500,000, 1. PIC. 1931-50, Coll. 11 File 4, No.4, Descriptive note on the Indian States, 1931* with the first eight of these accounting for half the total population, area and revenue of all twenty-eight. Hyderabad alone accounted for one-sixth of these totals. Equally remarkable was the irregular geographical distribution of the states. In one region, for example, Rajputana, the states were few and of comparatively large size, while in others, such as Central and Western India, they were petty and very numerous. The explanation of these irregularities lies partly in the policies pursued by the British at various times and partly in the course of events over which they had no control. In some parts of India a stronger power had made a clean sweep of upstarts and petty ancient dynasties before the British advanced. During the second half of the eighteenth century the ground had been cleared in the south of India by the Nizam of Hyderabad, the Nawab of the Carnatic and the Muslim usurper of Mysore. When therefore the Carnatic fell under British control and Tipu Sultan was finally overthrown in 1799? large united territories had to be disposed of either by annexation or, as in the case of Mysore, by restitution to a former dynasty. Here the work of consolidation had been accomplished by others before the British became involved. The situation was different in Central and Western India. This was Maratha country but the authority of their nominal head, the Peshwa,, had been steadily weakened during the early 3. PIC. 1931-50, Coll.11 File 5, No.912/1951, Appendix B of documents issued by the Nawab of Bhopal concerning questions relating to the Indian States which emerged from the First Round Table Conference. years of the nineteenth century with the result that territories were constantly changing rulers right up until the moment when the Marathas were finally defeated by Mountstuart Elphinstone at the battle of Kirki in 1817• During these early years British policy had of necessity been one of non-intervention in the affairs of the states but the subsequent ravages caused by the campaigns of marauding Pindaris obliged the Governor- General, Lord Hastings, to abandon this policy for one of political settlement.- In the interests of peace and stability, and also because these regions contained little arable land capable of yielding taxable crops, the disturbed areas of Central and Western India were not brought under direct British control.