These should be kept within the inspection of the directors who possessed custody of the Company seal. Likewise, no servant or officer affiliated to the Company was allowed to take any present, reward or fee, whether directly or indirectly, unless it was directly allowed by the statutes of the Court of Directors.
Further, none of the finances pertaining to the Company could be invested at any place, whether in the stocks or in shipping without the permission of the General Court [9]. The directors were to be elected on an annual basis, with a public notice being given at least seven months prior to the election period.
This was to be delivered alongside the list of names of members qualified to vote and followed up with a two-weeks notice. In addition, the General Court was held on an annual basis in June.
In this regard, a Committee of Seven was selected, out of which four of them formed a quorum and had the capacity or powers to inspect the rules and by-laws [10].
They were also empowered to make enquiries regarding the execution and observance of the by-laws, as well as consider any additions, modifications and subtractions that should be made. Further, they were to make a periodic report to the General Court regarding these matters.
By the same token, for instance, the Army of East India Company had incorporated a well-defined code of governance comparable to the code of corporate governance pertaining to a large number of present day corporations [11]. The East India Company is primarily known for its capture of India. In fact, contrary to the popular belief, it was the private army of the East India Company, and not the British Army, which accomplished this mission.
The army had the primary objective of protecting the trading empire, and acting as a main tool in extending the British hegemony. Founded by Robert Clive , a British officer, a small force of adventurers and mercenaries had grown both in size and strength to the point of eventually becoming an army that was larger than those of any sovereign European state [12].
The soldiers of this private army were highly professional and disciplined and fought persistently for more than a hundred years before the Great Mutiny resulted in its disbandment, after which the troops were passed to the Crown service. Part of the reason for its success was the organizational structure that had clear guidelines pertaining to the roles and responsibilities of the varying individuals occupying different positions in the entity.
In the mid-eighteenth century, the Company began recruiting its own Indian troops. The first employed Indian troops were watchmen in each of EIC presidencies to defend their trading stations.
These presidencies had separate armies under separate army commanders until the revolt in In , Robert Clive threw the idea of sepoy battalions for the Bengal Presidency into the pot, and it was followed by the Madras in , and later by the Bombay Army in Recruitment was done amongst single castes, from specific communities, villages, and families to prevent the possibility of uniting against in an anti-British [13].
Each presidency army was formed from three elements: native Indian troops, European units, and royal regiments including Artillery, Cavalry, and Infantry regiments.
The establishment of Native Infantry regiments embodied twenty-six British officers and two British warrant officers. Indian personnel were subordinate to even the most junior British officers. No Indian could rise higher than the rank of Subedar-Major in regular infantry units, or Rissaldar-Major in cavalry units, a senior subaltern equivalent. By the year of , the size of the presidency armies was about , with at least sepoy and 16 European regiments, and their combined strength formed one of the largest standing armies in the world [15] [16].
Irregular cavalry regiments had very few British officers. The presidency armies belonged to the Company until the Great Mutiny of , when the Crown took over the Company and its three armies.
In , the three presidency armies were merged into a united Indian Army. Furthermore, the Company employed its European units with infantry battalions and companies of field or horse artillery.
The Company also included regiments of the regular British Army, namely royal regiments, which the Crown dispatched to India to strengthen the EIC armies. Following the Great Mutiny, and the consequential dissolution of the Company, the European and royal regiments were merged with each other in , while the native regiments were not. Hence, the three separate presidency armies were maintained. In , these armies were finally disbanded and a fully unified Indian Army was formed.
Questions have been asked regarding the role that the private army played in the East India Company. This came in handy in the establishment of a large number of well-fortified trading posts in India. Further, the private army gained immense use in the 18 th century when the autonomous regional princes were taking power away from the declining Mughal Emperor in Delhi.
The Company, having become increasingly unhappy with this development utilized its private army in the establishment of governmental control over immense territories in India [18]. Indeed, the Company Army had managed to conquer close to half of India with some assistance from the British Army. Further, it is noteworthy that all officers in the private army held dual ranks, including a rank in the army and another one in their regiment.
Their position or rank in the regiment determined the things that they did on a daily basis. The regiments did not incorporate a meritocratic system rather they based their promotions on the seniority of an individual in the regiment [19] [20]. On the other hand, there existed an informal system in the East India Company Army in which the senior officers were given a monetary incentive by the lower rank officers in order to motivate them to retire so as to allow junior officers to make a step up [21].
In conclusion, the East India Company owed its long existence to its effective administrative and organizational structure. The Company created a detailed system for designation of policies, delegation of authority and tasks, and controlling the operation of the system. In the decision-making process, there were two levels: the Court of Directors, as the superior entity in London, and the local administration, the subordinate entity in Asia.
But he was also seen as a greedy speculator who used his political and military influence to amass a fortune. A rare helmet belonging to one of India's greatest warrior princes sheds light on the relatively unknown Mysore Wars, a series of conflicts in the late 18th century that helped decide the political future of southern India.
Between and , British imperial forces fought a bitter war in Afghanistan. Initially successful, the British eventually withdrew having suffered one of the worst military disasters of the 19th century.
Between and , British forces fought a war in China that benefitted drug smugglers. Their victory opened up the lucrative Chinese trade to British merchants. In , the British fought a war against the Sikh Empire in the Punjab. After several bitterly fought battles, the conflict ended with the British taking partial control of the Sikh territories.
Thoroughly enjoyed it. Be the first to hear about our latest events, exhibitions and offers. Simply enter your email address below to start receiving our monthly email newsletter. To find out more about how we collect, store and use your personal information, read our Privacy Policy. National Army Museum Toggle navigation. India Armies of the East India Company Originally formed to trade in Asia, the East India Company came to rule large areas of the Indian subcontinent, exercising military power through its formidable private army.
View this object. Origins Following the loss of the American colonies in the War of Independence , India became the centrepiece of Britain's overseas possessions. Shipping on the River Hoogly, Calcutta, c A sepoy and his wife, The Battle of Assaye, 23 September The Battle of Ferozeshah, 22 December Major-General Lord Robert Clive, Bengal Army Troops, Officers of the Madras Light Infantry at Trichinopoly, Sepoys of the Bengal Army, Cadets at the Company's Military Seminary, Addiscombe, A sowar of the Nizam of Hyderabad's army, The storming of Ghazni fort in Afghanistan, 23 July To facilitate the swift recruitment of these men Clive took the opportunity of proposing exactly the same plan as he had laid before the directors in that a regiment to supervise the task be permanently established in Britain.
Cobbett, Parliamentary Histmy oJEngland 36vols. Wales, Clive MS. Clive to Scrafton, P Oct. I , hid. I , :bid. The directors could no longer prevaricate on the issue and by the following autumn they had once more become aware of the manifold and glaring inadequacies of the recruiting system.
Having adopted this plan, the directors then consulted with the Secretary of State for the South, Lord Weymouth, on the issue, indicated their intentions and sought royal approval for their actions. O n 24 November Weymouth received detailed copies of two zyxwvutsrqponm proposed plans from the chairman and deputy chairman of the Company. Clive to the committee of treasury and correspondence, I1 Oct. Clive, Lawrence and Coote to the committee ofcorrespondence, 94 Oct.
This bill was enacted as 10 Geo. The second plan was more extensive and based on the zy zyx proposals that had been repeatedly advanced by Clive. By this plan the directors were to be empowered to maintain a permanent body of troops in Britain with which they would be enabled to undertake the enlisting and basic training of recruits.
This corps was not to exceed 1, men and was to be officered by men holding royal commissions. Fifteen clauses in all were incorporated in the plan and they furnished details of the organization and structure of the corps.
Indeed, co-operation between the Company and the regular army was the central feature of the plan: the king would appoint six officers to recruit in Germany and the pay structure of the corps would not differ from that in royal regiments so as not to entice troops away from the regular army.
Essentially, therefore, the plan concentrated on allaying two major fears and criticisms: that the scheme would create a substantial standing army operating beyond the bounds of Crown authority, and that it would initiate a harmful drain of resources away from the royal regiments. The first of the two plans formed the basis of a bill presented to parliament in Upon its failure, the substance of the second plan was adopted as the basis of a bill presented the following year.
On g April 17 70 it was ordered in the house of commons that leave be given to prepare and bring in a bill enabling the Company to raise a military force for the protection of its settlements and possessions in India. India Office Libr. I Namier and J. Barrington must have perceived no threat to regular army recruiting in the bill for he actively participated in its drafting. Their favoured proposal was the second plan and they reserved their efforts in order to secure its passage through parliament the following year.
Unfortunately for the Company the adoption of this alternative served only to alienate the support of the military establishment and contemporaries were unanimous in their assessments that this circumstance ultimately led to the failure of the bill in 17 7 1. Both Barrington and Harvey set themselves resolutely against the bill in a manner that contrasted with their behaviour the previous year. On 1o December 1 7 70 leave was given for the second time in nine months to bring into the house of commons a bill for the more effectual raising of a military force for the Company.
In contrast with the previous year, on this occasion none of the members assigned to draft the bill had any military connections. Three of the six were directors of the Company, Colebrooke, John Purling and Sir Robert Gregory, and they were supplemented by three prominent administration supporters, Richard Jackson, Sir Gilbert Elliot and the solicitor-general, Alexander Wedderburn.
A rnis-dated copy of this letter is to be found in India Office Libr.. Waipole, Memoirs ofthe Reign. Russell Barker 4vols. At the time of the drafting of the bill all seven were East India stockholders.
All expenses would be met by the Company and the regiment would be officered by thirty-two men commissioned by the Crown, the main body of the unit consisting of some 1, rank and file members. The method of recruitment, as proposed the previous year, was to be by beat of drum.
Their co-operation with the Company the previous year had illustrated that they were quite prepared to assist the Company, but only if recruiting for the royal regiments was not adversely affected. In the bill now before parliament they perceived a significant threat. The number of men who would join royal regiments would be substantially reduced if a more attractive alternative form of military employment existed.
This alternative, they felt, would be provided by the creation of a permanent regiment of East India zyxwvu Company troops based in Britain. The military criticisms of the bill were codified by Lord Barrington, who drafted a detailed critique of the bill, and his thoughts served to form the basis of the subsequent military standpoint in parliament. Consequently, he recommended that recruiting should continue without beating orders.
These criticisms and objections to the bill, with the exception of the observation on the small number of foreigners, were all seized upon by military personnel in the house of commons and used repeatedly during the debates on the bill in February, March and April 1 7 7 I. The clause stating that only a limited number of the regiment should be foreigners was deleted. Isaac B a d , Gen. Burgoyne, Viscount Howe, Capt.
0コメント