After the fall of Tipu Sultan (1799), the East India Company government restored the Mysore kingdom to the Wodeyar dynasty. It decided to pay a stipend to Tipu’s sons and intern them in two palaces, Hyder Mahal and Tipu Mahal, specially constructed for them in the Vellore Fort. Along with the family of Tipu Sultan, about 3,000 Mysoreans settled in Pettai, a habitat around the fort. For about five years there was calm. Then suddenly erupted an armed insurgency in the Fort.
The English garrison of Vellore at the time of the uprising consisted of four companies of His Majesty’s 69th Regiment, six companies of the 1st Battalion of the 1st Regiment of Native Infantry, and the 2nd Battalion of the 23rd Regiment.
The Europeans were about 370 in number, the natives 1,700. Colonel John Fancourt was the garrison’s commandant. The 1st Battalion of the 1st Regiment comprised Mysore Muslims, many of whom had been in the service of Tipu.
Its Commandant was Lt. Colonel Nathaniel Forbes. The 23rd Regiment had been raised in the district of Tirunelveli and contained in its ranks a number of followers of the Palayakkarars of southern Tamil Nadu. John McKerras commanded this regiment.
Controversial Rules
Soon after Sir John Cradock assumed office as the new Commander-in-Chief of the Madras Army (1805), he obtained the Governor’s permission to codify the regulations of the military department. The newly compiled code of military regulations and dress, notified to the Army by the Commander-in-Chief on March 13, 1806, insisted that an Indian soldier should not denote his caste on his forehead or wear earrings when dressed in his uniform and should have his chin clean-shaven at all parades.
This caused resentment in the Indian infantry as it was viewed as an attempt to coerce natives into Christianity. The most offensive part, from the Indian perspective, was the leather cockade in the new turban. Usually the turban was made of an iron frame and blue braid cloth and a plume, or cotton tuft. This time the cockade was made of animal skin. Pig’s skin was anathema to Muslims, while upper-caste Hindus shunned anything to do with cowhide.
First Protest
The first incident of protest occurred in May. The men in the 2nd Battalion of the 4th Regiment at Vellore refused to wear the new turban. On the evening of May 6, the Adjutant reported that the men refused to put on their side arms. The following day, the commandant Lt.-Col. Darley paraded the corps.
When the men were about to be dispersed, someone from the sepoy crowd jeered “dhoot, dhoot”, meaning “get lost”. The matter was reported to the Commander-in-Chief, who ordered that the ringleaders be arrested and sent to Madras for trial.
The court martial, after investigations, tried 21 privates (10 Muslims and 11 Hindus) for defiance. Governor William Bentinck communicated the result of the trial to the Adjutant General for action.
Two soldiers, Sheik Abdul Rymen and Anantaraman, refused to apologise and hence were sentenced to receive 900 lashes each and were discharged from service. The remaining 19, who complied with the orders of the court and apologised, were sentenced to 500 lashes each but pardoned. The Company government heaved a sigh of relief that a great disaster had been averted. But in two months a major uprising broke out in Vellore Fort.
At 2 a.m. in the morning on July 10, the guns boomed in Vellore Fort. Col. Fancourt, alerted by the firing at the main guard, which was close to his house, rushed out in his dressing gown. He was shot on his own doorstep and died a few hours later.
The second victim was Lt.-Col. Kerras, the Commanding Officer of the 23rd Regiment. Sergeant John Eley of the 69th regiment, who was wounded and had a handkerchief tied round his head, was brought from the ramparts. He begged the sepoys for mercy. But he was chased into the guard room and slain.
Major Armstrong of the 16th Native Infantry was outside the Fort when he heard the sound of firing. He alighted from the palanquin he was travelling in, advanced to the glacis and asked what the firing meant. He was answered by a volley from the ramparts, which killed him instantly.
Scores of native soldiers surrounded the barracks, stormed the houses of the Europeans and put to death, with unsparing ferocity, all those they could locate. Totally 15 European officers and 119 European soldiers were killed on that day. The victorious Indian soldiers then hoisted the Mysore Sultan’s Tiger standard in the Fort.
A Jamedar on the late evening of July 9 in a drunken mood disclosed the plan of revolt, and as a consequence the sepoys were constrained to launch the revolt that day itself. Therefore, the information of the revolt did not reach Pettai. Contrary to expectation, armed forces from Kunrathur and Arcot also did not arrive to join the rebels.
Adjutant Ewing, who could slip out of the Fort, managed to assemble several Europeans and join Col. Nathaniel Forbes, who lived outside the Fort. Accompanied by a number of unarmed men belonging to the 1st Battalion of the 1st Regiment, these two officers took possession of the hill fort and waited there until British authority was re-established in the main Fort.
The native troops made the tactical blunder of not checking how many European privates were hiding in the fort and how many had left it and rallied under their surviving masters. As a result, Sergeant Jones of the 1st Regiment and Sergeant Dean of the 23rd Regiment could collect all those who survived the firing of native troops and succeeded in bringing them under their control.
Suppression of revolt
The Indian troops remained unchallenged until Colonel Gillespie, stationed at Arcot, 25 kilometres away, arrived at 9 a.m. with a squadron of the 19th Dragoons and the 7th Madras Cavalry. The Dragoons, supported by the Madras Cavalry, then charged into the Fort and wreaked vengeance on the mutineers.
Hundreds of fleeing soldiers were caught and butchered, while many were taken prisoner in different parts of the country within the next few days. There is no consensus among historians on the death toll. However, W.J. Wilson’s number of 879 out of 1,700 in the Fort is acceptable.
General Harcourt’s official figures tell us the number of prisoners. There were 466 prisoners in Vellore, while 321 were still at large. Apart from these 787 prisoners, there were also persons kept in confinement in different parts of the country.
Court of Inquiry
Immediately after the suppression of the rebellion, Colonel Gillespie constituted a court of inquiry, presided over by Lt.-Col. Kennedy of His Majesty’s 19th Dragoons. However, a Special Commission was appointed by the Company government on July 12, 1806, with Major General Pater as President.
Many officials, realising that the safety of the Empire depended on the bonding between the native troops and their British officers, pressed for admonition and not “barbarous punishment”. General pardon was given to 516 mutineers, who were allowed to continue in service without any restraint. At the same time, on the basis of depositions before the court of inquiry, the Native General Court Martial awarded death punishment and banishment to select individuals.
Even before the commission of inquiry presented its findings, the Mysore princes were ordered to be sent to Calcutta. Moiz-Ud-Din, against whom there was still suspicion, was kept for some time in confinement but was eventually liberated.
Eight of the retainers of the Mysore princes were tried before a Special Commission at Chittoor in April 1807, and the proceedings were confirmed by the government in May. One was sentenced to death, two to transportation for life, one to imprisonment for life, one to imprisonment for 10 years, and three were acquitted.
The officers and men engaged in the suppression of the mutiny were thanked for their services. Sergeant Brady of the 69th Regiment was promoted as Conductor of Ordnance, Colonel Gillespie was presented 7,000 pagodas (Rs. 24,500), and Sergeant Brady 800 pagodas (Rs.2,800) in acknowledgement of their services.
The native cavalry detachment that consisted of 107 men of the 7th Regiment under Captain Doveton, and of 305 men drawn from all ranks of the other seven regiments, under Captain Mason of the 5th Regiment, was rewarded with enhanced pay.
Finding Scapegoats
The Special Commission presided over by J. Pater, which commenced its inquiry on July 21, presented its findings to the government on August 9. According to the commission, the decisive factor for the revolt was the residence of Tipu’s family at Vellore. The confessional statements extorted from the sepoys were mostly on a promise of pardon or enticement. As a result, many of them turned approver.
The higher tribunals of the Home Government held the Governor of Madras, the Commander-in-Chief, and the Adjutant General responsible for the bungling and ordered their recall. The Adjutant General P.A. Agnew was subsequently restored to his post. The Deputy Adjutant General Major Pierce was made a scapegoat and ordered to return to England.
The obnoxious regulations to which the soldiers objected were withdrawn. A government order issued on July 17, and reissued on September 24, prohibited all unauthorised alterations in dress and interference with the native soldiers’ national customs.
It was further directed that the turban sanctioned by the government on March 15, 1797, should continue to be the pattern for the army. The new regulation about the turban was repealed on September 24, 1806. The government dissolved the 1st and 23rd Regiments from December 31, 1806, and in their places stationed two regiments of two battalions each, numbered the 24th and the 25th Regiments.
Causes of the Revolt
The military historian John William Kaye and the historian S.S. Furnell attributed the trouble to the estranged relationship between European and native officers, caused by the racial arrogance of the former and their lack of acquaintance with native languages.
The refusal of the erstwhile Palayakkarars and rajas to reconcile themselves to Company rule, French instigation stoking their hopes of regaining their regimes, and the contact of Fateh Ali, Tipu’s nephew, with the Marathas and the French in Pondicherry were thought to be contributory factors by the historian Dodwell.
Some military officials attributed the mutiny to the activity of Christian missionaries. According to historians James Mill and H.H. Wilson, the interference of the government in matters of religious faith was disastrous. The role of Fakirs in inciting the people and the army against the government was emphasised by Furnell.
The exploitative land revenue policy of the British resulting in successive droughts, and increasing incidence of poverty, the loss of power and authority suffered by south Indian potentates, and the Palayakkarars, who were looking for an opportunity to be rid of the British, and the apprehension of the Indian armed personnel that the controversial military regulations, dress and hat were aimed at forcing them into Christianity were the factors that contributed to the outbreak of the revolt.
United action
Sinking their regional, religious, linguistic and caste differences, Indian soldiers decided to rally behind Tipu’s family to forge a united front against the common adversary, the British. Albeit confined to cantonments, in its origin and in terms of causes, the 1806 Vellore Revolt is certainly a forerunner to the more widespread Great Rebellion of 1857.
Recent Posts
Petrol in India is cheaper than in countries like Hong Kong, Germany and the UK but costlier than in China, Brazil, Japan, the US, Russia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, a Bank of Baroda Economics Research report showed.
Rising fuel prices in India have led to considerable debate on which government, state or central, should be lowering their taxes to keep prices under control.
The rise in fuel prices is mainly due to the global price of crude oil (raw material for making petrol and diesel) going up. Further, a stronger dollar has added to the cost of crude oil.
Amongst comparable countries (per capita wise), prices in India are higher than those in Vietnam, Kenya, Ukraine, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Venezuela. Countries that are major oil producers have much lower prices.
In the report, the Philippines has a comparable petrol price but has a per capita income higher than India by over 50 per cent.
Countries which have a lower per capita income like Kenya, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Venezuela have much lower prices of petrol and hence are impacted less than India.
“Therefore there is still a strong case for the government to consider lowering the taxes on fuel to protect the interest of the people,” the report argued.
India is the world’s third-biggest oil consuming and importing nation. It imports 85 per cent of its oil needs and so prices retail fuel at import parity rates.
With the global surge in energy prices, the cost of producing petrol, diesel and other petroleum products also went up for oil companies in India.
They raised petrol and diesel prices by Rs 10 a litre in just over a fortnight beginning March 22 but hit a pause button soon after as the move faced criticism and the opposition parties asked the government to cut taxes instead.
India imports most of its oil from a group of countries called the ‘OPEC +’ (i.e, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Russia, etc), which produces 40% of the world’s crude oil.
As they have the power to dictate fuel supply and prices, their decision of limiting the global supply reduces supply in India, thus raising prices
The government charges about 167% tax (excise) on petrol and 129% on diesel as compared to US (20%), UK (62%), Italy and Germany (65%).
The abominable excise duty is 2/3rd of the cost, and the base price, dealer commission and freight form the rest.
Here is an approximate break-up (in Rs):
a)Base Price | 39 |
b)Freight | 0.34 |
c) Price Charged to Dealers = (a+b) | 39.34 |
d) Excise Duty | 40.17 |
e) Dealer Commission | 4.68 |
f) VAT | 25.35 |
g) Retail Selling Price | 109.54 |
Looked closely, much of the cost of petrol and diesel is due to higher tax rate by govt, specifically excise duty.
So the question is why government is not reducing the prices ?
India, being a developing country, it does require gigantic amount of funding for its infrastructure projects as well as welfare schemes.
However, we as a society is yet to be tax-compliant. Many people evade the direct tax and that’s the reason why govt’s hands are tied. Govt. needs the money to fund various programs and at the same time it is not generating enough revenue from direct taxes.
That’s the reason why, govt is bumping up its revenue through higher indirect taxes such as GST or excise duty as in the case of petrol and diesel.
Direct taxes are progressive as it taxes according to an individuals’ income however indirect tax such as excise duty or GST are regressive in the sense that the poorest of the poor and richest of the rich have to pay the same amount.
Does not matter, if you are an auto-driver or owner of a Mercedes, end of the day both pay the same price for petrol/diesel-that’s why it is regressive in nature.
But unlike direct tax where tax evasion is rampant, indirect tax can not be evaded due to their very nature and as long as huge no of Indians keep evading direct taxes, indirect tax such as excise duty will be difficult for the govt to reduce, because it may reduce the revenue and hamper may programs of the govt.
Globally, around 80% of wastewater flows back into the ecosystem without being treated or reused, according to the United Nations.
This can pose a significant environmental and health threat.
In the absence of cost-effective, sustainable, disruptive water management solutions, about 70% of sewage is discharged untreated into India’s water bodies.
A staggering 21% of diseases are caused by contaminated water in India, according to the World Bank, and one in five children die before their fifth birthday because of poor sanitation and hygiene conditions, according to Startup India.
As we confront these public health challenges emerging out of environmental concerns, expanding the scope of public health/environmental engineering science becomes pivotal.
For India to achieve its sustainable development goals of clean water and sanitation and to address the growing demands for water consumption and preservation of both surface water bodies and groundwater resources, it is essential to find and implement innovative ways of treating wastewater.
It is in this context why the specialised cadre of public health engineers, also known as sanitation engineers or environmental engineers, is best suited to provide the growing urban and rural water supply and to manage solid waste and wastewater.
Traditionally, engineering and public health have been understood as different fields.
Currently in India, civil engineering incorporates a course or two on environmental engineering for students to learn about wastewater management as a part of their pre-service and in-service training.
Most often, civil engineers do not have adequate skills to address public health problems. And public health professionals do not have adequate engineering skills.
India aims to supply 55 litres of water per person per day by 2024 under its Jal Jeevan Mission to install functional household tap connections.
The goal of reaching every rural household with functional tap water can be achieved in a sustainable and resilient manner only if the cadre of public health engineers is expanded and strengthened.
In India, public health engineering is executed by the Public Works Department or by health officials.
This differs from international trends. To manage a wastewater treatment plant in Europe, for example, a candidate must specialise in wastewater engineering.
Furthermore, public health engineering should be developed as an interdisciplinary field. Engineers can significantly contribute to public health in defining what is possible, identifying limitations, and shaping workable solutions with a problem-solving approach.
Similarly, public health professionals can contribute to engineering through well-researched understanding of health issues, measured risks and how course correction can be initiated.
Once both meet, a public health engineer can identify a health risk, work on developing concrete solutions such as new health and safety practices or specialised equipment, in order to correct the safety concern..
There is no doubt that the majority of diseases are water-related, transmitted through consumption of contaminated water, vectors breeding in stagnated water, or lack of adequate quantity of good quality water for proper personal hygiene.
Diseases cannot be contained unless we provide good quality and adequate quantity of water. Most of the world’s diseases can be prevented by considering this.
Training our young minds towards creating sustainable water management systems would be the first step.
Currently, institutions like the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras (IIT-M) are considering initiating public health engineering as a separate discipline.
To leverage this opportunity even further, India needs to scale up in the same direction.
Consider this hypothetical situation: Rajalakshmi, from a remote Karnataka village spots a business opportunity.
She knows that flowers, discarded in the thousands by temples can be handcrafted into incense sticks.
She wants to find a market for the product and hopefully, employ some people to help her. Soon enough though, she discovers that starting a business is a herculean task for a person like her.
There is a laborious process of rules and regulations to go through, bribes to pay on the way and no actual means to transport her product to its market.
After making her first batch of agarbathis and taking it to Bengaluru by bus, she decides the venture is not easy and gives up.
On the flipside of this is a young entrepreneur in Bengaluru. Let’s call him Deepak. He wants to start an internet-based business selling sustainably made agarbathis.
He has no trouble getting investors and to mobilise supply chains. His paperwork is over in a matter of days and his business is set up quickly and ready to grow.
Never mind that the business is built on aggregation of small sellers who will not see half the profit .
Is this scenario really all that hypothetical or emblematic of how we think about entrepreneurship in India?
Between our national obsession with unicorns on one side and glorifying the person running a pakora stall for survival as an example of viable entrepreneurship on the other, is the middle ground in entrepreneurship—a space that should have seen millions of thriving small and medium businesses, but remains so sparsely occupied that you could almost miss it.
If we are to achieve meaningful economic growth in our country, we need to incorporate, in our national conversation on entrepreneurship, ways of addressing the missing middle.
Spread out across India’s small towns and cities, this is a class of entrepreneurs that have been hit by a triple wave over the last five years, buffeted first by the inadvertent fallout of demonetization, being unprepared for GST, and then by the endless pain of the covid-19 pandemic.
As we finally appear to be reaching some level of normality, now is the opportune time to identify the kind of industries that make up this layer, the opportunities they should be afforded, and the best ways to scale up their functioning in the shortest time frame.
But, why pay so much attention to these industries when we should be celebrating, as we do, our booming startup space?
It is indeed true that India has the third largest number of unicorns in the world now, adding 42 in 2021 alone. Braving all the disruptions of the pandemic, it was a year in which Indian startups raised $24.1 billion in equity investments, according to a NASSCOM-Zinnov report last year.
However, this is a story of lopsided growth.
The cities of Bengaluru, Delhi/NCR, and Mumbai together claim three-fourths of these startup deals while emerging hubs like Ahmedabad, Coimbatore, and Jaipur account for the rest.
This leap in the startup space has created 6.6 lakh direct jobs and a few million indirect jobs. Is that good enough for a country that sends 12 million fresh graduates to its workforce every year?
It doesn’t even make a dent on arguably our biggest unemployment in recent history—in April 2020 when the country shutdown to battle covid-19.
Technology-intensive start-ups are constrained in their ability to create jobs—and hybrid work models and artificial intelligence (AI) have further accelerated unemployment.
What we need to focus on, therefore, is the labour-intensive micro, small and medium enterprise (MSME). Here, we begin to get to a definitional notion of what we called the mundane middle and the problems it currently faces.
India has an estimated 63 million enterprises. But, out of 100 companies, 95 are micro enterprises—employing less than five people, four are small to medium and barely one is large.
The questions to ask are: why are Indian MSMEs failing to grow from micro to small and medium and then be spurred on to make the leap into large companies?
At the Global Alliance for Mass Entrepreneurship (GAME), we have advocated for a National Mission for Mass Entrepreneurship, the need for which is more pronounced now than ever before.
Whenever India has worked to achieve a significant economic milestone in a limited span of time, it has worked best in mission mode. Think of the Green Revolution or Operation Flood.
From across various states, there are enough examples of approaches that work to catalyse mass entrepreneurship.
The introduction of entrepreneurship mindset curriculum (EMC) in schools through alliance mode of working by a number of agencies has shown significant improvement in academic and life outcomes.
Through creative teaching methods, students are encouraged to inculcate 21st century skills like creativity, problem solving, critical thinking and leadership which are not only foundational for entrepreneurship but essential to thrive in our complex world.
Udhyam Learning Foundation has been involved with the Government of Delhi since 2018 to help young people across over 1,000 schools to develop an entrepreneurial mindset.
One pilot programme introduced the concept of ‘seed money’ and saw 41 students turn their ideas into profit-making ventures. Other programmes teach qualities like grit and resourcefulness.
If you think these are isolated examples, consider some larger data trends.
The Observer Research Foundation and The World Economic Forum released the Young India and Work: A Survey of Youth Aspirations in 2018.
When asked which type of work arrangement they prefer, 49% of the youth surveyed said they prefer a job in the public sector.
However, 38% selected self-employment as an entrepreneur as their ideal type of job. The spirit of entrepreneurship is latent and waiting to be unleashed.
The same can be said for building networks of successful women entrepreneurs—so crucial when the participation of women in the Indian economy has declined to an abysmal 20%.
The majority of India’s 63 million firms are informal —fewer than 20% are registered for GST.
Research shows that companies that start out as formal enterprises become two-three times more productive than a similar informal business.
So why do firms prefer to be informal? In most cases, it’s because of the sheer cost and difficulty of complying with the different regulations.
We have academia and non-profits working as ecosystem enablers providing insights and evidence-based models for growth. We have large private corporations and philanthropic and funding agencies ready to invest.
It should be in the scope of a National Mass Entrepreneurship Mission to bring all of them together to work in mission mode so that the gap between thought leadership and action can finally be bridged.