Wilson it is perhaps fair to speak more fully. He held the command till Delhi fell, and victory always throws a halo over a commander. Yet Wilson, in his conduct of the operations, showed rather knowledge than genius. His knowledge of a soldier's art was always prompting him to observe the rules of war, which a man of genius would probably have disregarded. And so, though Wilson commanded when Delhi fell, the merit of its fall has been usually ascribed to another officer, Chamberlain, who led a welcome reinforcement from the Punjab in the middle of August.1 The fall of Delhi. The revolt of Delhi marks the true commencement of the Indian Mutiny. Its capture marks the beginning of the end. In Oudh, however, still sterner and harder work had to be accomplished; and to understand the operations in Oudh it is necessary to realise what was occurring in Calcutta. For, if the men who captured Delhi were launched by Lawrence from the Punjab, the men who saved Lucknow and avenged Cawnpore were despatched by Canning from Bengal. Till the middle of May, the Governor-General had persisted in regarding the events which had occurred as the mutinies of regiments rather than the insurrection of an army. But the occurrences at Meerut and the loss of Delhi either changed the nature of the crisis or opened his eyes to its exigencies. Yet at that fatal moment, while all around him were agitated with anger and alarm, the Governor-General never lost his calm composure. And the course which he took to restore the authority of the British was, even in the opinion of his detractors, the very best which he could have taken. He telegraphed to Bombay for the soldiers which the peace with Persia had freed from duty; he telegraphed to Madras and Ceylon for any troops which could be spared from presidency or colony; he sent to Singapore for the regiments which were on their way to China to punish an aggression of the Chinese. His numerous critics, indeed, are never tired of stating that these measures were suggested to 1 For the whole siege, cf. Kaye's Sepoy War, vol. ii. p. 513 to end of volume. him by subordinates with more energy than his own.1 The man, however, who authorises, not the adviser who suggests a policy, should have the credit attaching to it. The measures which Canning took in May saved India for England, and to Canning should belong the credit of saving it. Nor was it only for bringing up reinforcements that Canning deserves praise. He had the wisdom to see that a great crisis requires exceptional proceedings. To the two Lawrences in the Punjab and Oudh he gave, practically, unlimited authority. Though he felt much more strongly than his detractors that a rebellion against British rule should be put down by the unaided strength of Britain, he gave a reluctant consent to Henry Lawrence to seek aid from Nepaul.2 No one except John Lawrence saw so clearly as he the paramount necessity of striking a prompt blow at Delhi.3 But he saw, what John Lawrence did not see, that even Delhi could be recovered at too high a price.4 In the two Lawrences he had the best subordinates a Governor-General could require; and, fortunately, at Bombay the British had a representative who had both the capacity and the energy for dealing with the crisis. John, Lord Elphinstone, was the nephew of that distinguished official who stands in the very front rank among the great servants of the Company. His father was, therefore, the cousin of that unfortunate general whose name is associated with the greatest reverse that a British army ever sustained in India. Twenty years before, Elphinstone had been sent out as a young guardsman to govern Madras. He had now returned to India to contribute to the preservation of British authority. Appreciating the full extent of the crisis and the true mode of dealing with it, he took every precaution for preserving authority in his own Presidency, while he hurried up reinforcements towards Calcutta; and thus, towards the end of May, and throughout the succeeding months, troops and 1 See e.g., Red Pamphlet, p. 61. Lucknow. 2 Life of Sir H. Lawrence, p. 575. 8 Red Pamphlet, p. 61. 4 For the Peshawur and Delhi dispute, see Holmes's Indian Mutiny, p. 364, and Kaye's Sepoy War, vol. ii. p. 607 seq. leaders gradually came from Madras, from Bombay, from Ceylon, from Singapore, and finally from England, who were destined to restore the authority of the British and enable the Company to reassert its authority. And help was sorely needed. Ever since Lawrence had died of his wound, Inglis, whom he had selected to succeed him, with a small force, assailed by heavy battalions, had gallantly held the Residency at Lucknow. Exposed to incessant attacks by a vigorous enemy, constantly disturbed by false alarms, in a building not intended for defence, and surrounded by houses which afforded shelter to the enemy, decimated by illness, with no communication with the outside world, Inglis and his comrades held out against the mutineers, during the three months which passed before the reinforcements which were gradually arriving were able to relieve the beleaguered garrison 1 Measures for The story of its relief cannot be told at length in these pages. The first help reached Calcutta on the 23rd of May. Neill on that day brought a fusilier regiment from Madras, and was hurried on towards Cawnpore.2 its relief. In the next four months Neill wrote his name in the blood of his country's enemies; and his arm never wearied, his heart never softened, till he found, in the hour of victory, a soldier's death in the streets of Lucknow.3 His fusiliers were rapidly followed by two regiments from Persia, and with these regiments came a man of spare frame but large heart, who in Burma, in Afghanistan, in the Punjab, and in Persia had. already on a score of fields done soldier's service, and who, throughout his career, had been sustained by his indomitable spirit and his undying faith in the God of battles. Havelock, like Neill, whom he superseded, was destined to fall a victim to the Mutiny. He died of disease Havelock. 1 See Inglis's account of the defence in despatches relating to the relief of Lucknow, p. 14. Canning said of this despatch, "Never has a tale been told which will so stir the hearts of Englishmen and Englishwomen as the simple, earnest narrative of Brigadier Inglis," p. II. 2 Red Pamphlet, p. 62. 3 For his death, inter alia, see Holmes's Indian Mutiny, p. 318. two months after his comrade fell in battle.1 In death sans peur, in life sans reproche, he is the hero of the Mutiny; and, so long as the world honours courage and reverences worth, the story of his career will not be forgotten. Havelock superseded Neill, and Havelock in his turn was superseded by Outram, who was selected by Canning as Lawrence's successor.2 But, with a generosity which Outram. has left few brighter examples, Outram left the honour of the relief of Lucknow to Havelock, and accompanied him only in his civil capacity as chief-commissioner. On the 25th of September these gallant men forced their way through the streets of Lucknow, and joined hands with the survivors of the band who had held the Residency. Yet the danger was not over. Havelock and Outram had fought their way into Lucknow; but it was one thing to enter the city, it was another to withdraw from it. Outram, who after the relief of the Residency had assumed the command, found that he had no means of removing his sick and wounded Instead of doing so, he decided on remaining at Lucknow. But his decision involved a new series of operations. Havelock and Outram had relieved Inglis, but Outram in his turn required relief. A new duty was to test the endurance of a new hero. men. By Anson's death the Bengal army had been deprived of its commander in the hour of its supreme need. On Canning being told of its occurrence in May, he telegraphed for Sir Patrick Grant, the Commander-in-Chief in Madras; on the news of Anson's death being brought to England, Colin Campbell, Colin the most distinguished of the Crimean generals, Campbell. was sent to India. Sir Patrick, the son-in-law of Gough, had done good service in the Sikh war; he reached Calcutta on the 17th of June; and, with perhaps a sound appreciation of his own capacity, and of the immediate requirements of the situation, he remained at Calcutta to orga 3 1 Holmes's Indian Mutiny, p. 424. Colin nise a force with which the rebellion could be quelled. Campbell, who in his youth had served throughout the Peninsular campaign,1 who as a man had shared the glories and dangers of the second Sikh war, and who had proved his capacity and courage on the Alma and at Balaklava, did not suffer a day to pass 2 before he set out for India. He reached Calcutta on the 13th of August, and on the 17th of August assumed the command. He threw all the energy of a strong will into the work of preparation. But even his efforts did not enable him to collect troops and supplies sufficient to justify an advance for more than two months afterwards. On the 27th of October he set out from Calcutta, on finally the 17th of November the British at Lucknow were a second time relieved, and within the following week withdrawn from the Residency. Lucknow relieved. Thus at the end of November the tide was already turned. British authority had been reasserted at Delhi, the British garrison had been removed from Lucknow. Months of labour and of battle were indeed still in store before the mutineers were finally dispersed and order was completely restored. But no detailed account of these events can be given in the narrow compass of these pages. Those who wish to know how Oudh was reconquered, how Havelock died, or how the Queen of Jhansi, whose son's territory had been escheated by Dalhousie, rallied her countrymen on the plains of Gwalior, and died, fighting to the last gasp, the heroine of the Mutiny,3 must turn for this knowledge to other works. In these pages all that it is possible to do is to dwell for a few more sentences on the policy of the Governor-General. 1 He was at Vimiera and Corunna as well as in the later campaigns of Wellington from 1811 to 1813. Shadwell's Life of Lord Clyde, vol. i. pp. 1-34. 2 He was offered the command late in the afternoon of the 11th of July, he undertook to start that evening, and he did start the following day. Life of Lord Clyde, vol. i. p. 405. 3 For the Ranee of Jhansi's case, Arnold's Dalhousie's Admin., vol. ii. pp. 146-153, where Sir H. Rose's emphatic testimony will also be found: The best man upon the side of the enemy was the woman found dead, the Ranee of Jhansi ;" and cf. Malleson's Hist. of Indian Mutiny, vol. i. p. 182, and vol. iii. p. 221. |