In Calcutta's eyes, the main duties of the governor of the Straits Settlements were to 'balance his budget and to insulate the settlements from complications in the hinterland.' This policy, as Turnbull puts it, was doomed to fail;15 instead it provided the background causes for the agitation of the European merchant community for the transfer of the Straits Settlements from the India Office to the Colonial Office in London.
For example, as the settlements prospered, the European merchants demanded more expensive and sophisticated administration, an efficient judicial system, defence, and security for their property and trade.1 However, due to Raffles' free trade policy, which was extended to all three settlements, and the failure of land and agriculture, there was insufficient revenue to fund these demands.
The activities of ambitious pioneers, mainly Chinese migrant workers, who were 'lured by the wealth of the interior [of the Malay states],' made it impossible for the Straits government to cut the settlements off from the affairs of the Malay states. Calcutta maintained its policy of non-intervention to the end, but in practice, every would-be final settlement the government of India authorized merely provided the basis for further involvement.18
The petition of 1857, wherein the grievances of the Straits merchants were cited
In 1857, the Straits merchants sent a petition to the House of Commons,19 explaining their grievances with regard to the administration of the Straits Settlements under the EIC, and requesting a transfer of control (by means of an Act of Parliament) from the EIC to the Colonial Office. However, some of the issues raised to the House of Commons appear to be questionable (that is, not all the issues were as serious as they were made out to be). This calls for an examination of the validity of these hazy 'problems,'20 in order to assess the necessity of the transfer.
In the process, I will also highlight the way in which constitutional and legal changes were introduced in the Straits Settlements. Legal changes emerged in response to the demands of the Straits society; that is, such changes were governed by a variety of factors. Hence, I will
4
In Calcutta's eyes, the main duties of the governor of the Straits Settlements were to 'balance his budget and to insulate the settlements from complications in the hinterland." This policy, as Turnbull puts it, was doomed to fail;15 instead it provided the background causes for the agitation of the European merchant community for the transfer of the Straits Settlements from the India office to the Colonial Office in London.
For example, as the settlements prospered, the European merchants demanded more expensive and sophisticated administration, an efficient judicial system, defence and security for their property and trade.1 However, due to Raffles' free trade policy which was extended to all three settlements, and the failure of land and agriculture, there was insufficient revenue to fund these demands.
The activities of ambitious pioneers, mainly Chinese migrant workers, who were 'lured by the wealth of the interior [of the Malay states], made it impossible for the Straits government to cut the settlements off from the affairs of the Malay states. 'Calcutta maintained its policy of non-intervention to the end, but in practice every would-be final settlement the government of India authorized, merely provided the basis for further involvement. '18
The petition of 1857, wherein the grievances of the Straits merchants were cited
In 1857, the Straits merchants sent a petition to the House of Commons," explaining their grievances with regard to the administration of the Straits Settlements under the EIC, and requesting for a transfer of control (by means of an Act of Parliament) from the EIC to the Colonial Office. However, some of the issues raised to the House of Commons appear to be questionable (that is, not all the issues were as serious as they were made out to be). This calls for an examination of the validity of these hazy "problems,**20 in order to assess the necessity of the transfer.
In the process I will also highlight the way in which constitutional and legal changes were introduced in the Straits Settlements. Legal changes emerged in response to the demands of the Straits society, that is, such changes were governed by a variety of factors. Hence, I will
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.