A REBELLION IN BURMA: THE SAGAING UPRISING OF 1910 S. R. ASHTON It is of course difficult to obtain the candid view of Burmans on our policy and administration, but whenever they are obtained there is no disguising of the fact that the removal of their King, the representative of their nation and the head of their religion, is resented even by those who have been for years the subjects of the British Government, and there is a strong belief among the common people that sooner or later there will be a restoration of the Kingdom. The history of Burma is the history of a succession of revolutions and wars in which strange changes come about. The character of the people is still the same. G. J. S. Hodgkinson^ Commissioner of the Pegu Division, ^o August 1888^ THIS paper examines the British reaction to a rebellion which took place in the Sagaing district of Upper Burma in November 1910. This occurred twenty-five years after the British annexation of the kingdom of Upper Burma and the deposition of King Thibaw, the last monarch of the Konbaung dynasty. It was led by a minlaung^ a pretender or would-be king. About 800 men were said to have been involved in the rebellion which took the form of an abortive attack on a police post at Myinmu, a township in the Sagaing district. The paper is based on two principal sources within the records of the India Office: firstly, the police reports of the rebellion which appear in the Confidential Home Department Proceedings of the Government of Burma;^ secondly, transcripts of the trial judgements which were passed by the Sessions Court and the Judicial Commissioner for Upper Burma in the cases of those who were arrested by the British and charged with being the main conspirators in the rebellion. Copies of these transcripts were forwarded to London by the Government of India and are now deposited on a Public and Judicial Department file within the India Office Records.^ The paper begins by examining the precedents, proceeds to describe the rebellion and the trials and concludes with a discussion of the repercussions. THE PRECEDENTS It is not the intention in this section to dwell at length on the phenomenon which is a recurrent one in Burmese history of a minlaung or would-be king leading a rebellion 71 with the aim of usurping the throne.* Instead, reference will be made to two comparatively minor incidents which occurred under British rule in the 1890s. In the first, which occurred in March 1894, a doctor from Lower Burma assumed the title Nyaungyan Prince^ and led an attack on a police post at Chaungu in the Sagaing district. Guns and ammunition were stolen and three people, including a child, were killed. Seventeen people were said to have planned the attack, although more were reported as having joined in, and five monks were subsequently arrested and charged with harbouring the rebels and concealing arms in the monasteries.*^ The second incident occurred in October 1897 when a monk attacked the palace at Mandalay (fig. i) with about fifteen or twenty followers. The monk intended to rally wider support by seating himself on the Golden Throne and he was even said to have chosen a queen to share his throne with him. A European soldier was killed in the attack.'' Feelings ran high over this second incident and Sir Frederick Fryer, the Acting Chief Commissioner, had to overrule demands for a public execution of those convicted.^ Twelve individuals were sentenced to death. Two had their sentences commuted by Fryer. In two further cases, both involving old men aged seventy-two and sixty-five. Fryer contemplated exercising clemency but then decided that they had played prominent roles in the attack and so deserved their fate. The Acting Chief Commissioner summed up his feelings in a letter to the Viceroy, Lord Elgin: 'It was a lamentable business, and, considering the nature of the Burmans and the danger of the recurrence of such risings, I think that mercy might have been misplaced.'^ These incidents at Chaungu in 1894 and Mandalay in 1897 were by no means exceptional. The years immediately following the annexation witnessed several abortive insurrections. ^° However, the incidents were significant for two reasons. First, they were seen by the British as precedents for the much larger uprising which took place at Sagaing in 1910. During the trial proceedings which followed the Sagaing uprising, the court used the Chaungu and Mandalay incidents as points of reference from which to^etermine both the nature of the offences which had been committed and the nature of the sentences which should be imposed. Secondly, both incidents reveal something of the British mentality when confronted by continuing manifestations of nationalist resistance. They in part explain why British officials in Burma were so sensitive about the movements abroad of members of the deposed royal family. In June 1894, just three months after the incident at Chaungu, the Government of Burma reacted sharply to a proposal made in a demi-official letter from the Foreign Department of the Government of India to the effect that ex-King Thibaw was likely to be transferred from Ratnagiri in Bombay to Madras. In a letter to Lord Elgin, Sir Alexander Mackenzie, who had returned to his post as Chief Commissioner in place of Fryer, confessed himself ^startled' that the suggestion should have been made in so casual a manner without prior consultation. 'Thibaw in Madras', wrote Mackenzie to Elgin, 'means trouble in Burma'. He continued: Trom every part of Burma just now I learn that the minds of the people are in a curious state of unrest, and the Province requires careful watching'.^^ Emphasizing the same point in his next letter, Mackenzie warned 72 *-—s OO H d OaO- N o Ci ^j o .»^ p-i Pi i O da c I-H rt c _o rt rt X U C C 3 c <rtu o j=! bo -1-1 4> t-i CJ rt *rt rt J=! (U t-ui 3 ^-> J= _C u rt >. -M c« n rt < oC 6 rt H ^ H be 3 c en ;^ .t^ that constant rumours were being circulated throughout Burma about the coming of a Trince'.^^ The Government of Burma submitted an official reply which pointed out that Thibaw's presence so close to Burma would constitute a 'disturbing' influence. It would stimulate intrigue and afford an opportunity for the mother of ex-Queen Supayalat to indulge in mischief The Government of Burma argued that if Thibaw had to be moved at all, the Punjab or the North Western Provinces of India, even Bengal, would be better than Madras. ^^ In the event he remained at Ratnagiri. Lord Elgin elaborated on his theme and revealed more of the British mentality in a letter to Lord George Hamilton, the Secretary of State for India, in November 1898. Sir Frederick Fryer was now Burma's first Lieutenant-Governor. Elgin's letter was written while he was on tour in Upper Burma and he explained to Hamilton: The people, as might be expected, look prosperous and contented; but I have been struck by the unanimity with which all officials from the Lieutenant-Governor downwards declare that in Upper Burma the people would undoubtedly turn us out in favour of a ruler of their own, if they could. They do not anticipate any trouble, for the people have no leaders and no organisation, but they say the feeling is there. Fryer adds that he thinks it will die out when the generation which remembers the ancient regime disappears, and that then there need be no more feeling against us in Upper than there is now in Lower Burma; but it illustrates the present position that one gentleman of a cynical turn of mind declared that it would be a good thing if the Palace at Mandalay was burnt down, so as to remove this outward sign of a former independence.^'* Elgin dissociated himself from this uncompromising attitude, expressing in the same letter his sense of 'sadness and shame' at the extent to which the palace at Mandalay had been desecrated already. But the mentality of the British official in Burma remained unchanged. He met resistance with fierce repression and remained confident that the problem of opposition to British rule in Upper Burma would resolve itself with the passing of the generation which remembered the Burmese monarchy. THE SAGAING UPRISING The leader of the Sagaing uprising was Maung Po Than, a villager from Pegu in the Sagaing district. His age was estimated at somewhere between nineteen and twenty- one. His fame as a minlaung began during the winter months of December 1909 and January 1910. Returning to his village one day during this period, the sleeve of his jacket accidentally caught fire from a cheroot which he had put into his pocket. Smoke began to rise from his arm. Unaware at first of what had happened, Po Than damped down his smouldering sleeve when it was pointed out to him by a fellow villager. The incident caused momentary amusement and nothing more was said until, about a month later, another villager ran through the streets of Pegu one night shouting: 'It is true that fire comes out from Maung Po Than's arm; lightning will strike those who do not believe and tigers will devour them'. In succeeding months, between February and April 1910, villagers from surrounding districts kept coming to Pegu where Po Than remained. It was widely rumoured that a minlaung had appeared in Pegu. 74 According to the police reports, these rumours were based on a combination of legend and prophecy.15 i^ ^^s said that Po Than had visited Shwebo where he heard that a girl had had her pawa (silk handkerchief) carried away by a kite.