No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 April 2017
In April 1839, 29 Muslims in Vellore (South India) accused their maulvi, Sayyid Shah Modin Qadiri, of preaching seditious sermons in his mosque, which exhorted Muslims to wage jihad against the ruling East India Company. The ensuing criminal trial of Maulvi Modin illustrates key aspects of liberal imperialism as it was interpreted and implemented in pre-Mutiny India. As a central ideology of the British empire, liberalism championed the rights and freedoms of rational individuals and constraints on state power. At Modin's trial, however, this framework did not lend itself to a sanitary, evidence-based enquiry that bracketed the identities of the accused or the accusers. Rather, the trial measured a Muslim's place within networks of patronage that ensured namak halal, or the bonds of loyalty between rulers and subjects. Far from being a post-Enlightenment adjudication of guilt or innocence, his trial reveals the Company's investment in a particular kind of social order maintained by its scrutiny of class backgrounds and its patronage of traditional identities—a fact that softens the distinction often made between a commitment to liberal transformation before the Great Rebellion of 1857 and a return to conservatism afterwards.1
1 I am grateful to Marc Gaborieau and Mitra Sharafi for their careful reading of my initial draft of this article and valuable input. This article is based on a chapter in C. Mallampalli, A Muslim Conspiracy in British India? Politics and Paranoia in the Early Nineteenth Century Deccan (forthcoming with Cambridge University Press).
2 Whereas the sermon itself was referred to as the wa'z, the preacher whose task it was to exhort and admonish the congregation to instill pious commitment was also known as the wa'z. Muslim witnesses at Vellore referred to Modin's seditious sermon or message as the jihad wa'z. For a concise etymology of the term, see J. S. Meisami, ‘Oratory and Sermons’, in Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature, vol. 2, Meisami, J. S. and Starkey, P. (eds), Routledge, London, 1998, pp. 593–4Google Scholar.
3 Statement of Ali Sahib, Police Peon, n/d. IOR, F/4/1877, File 79786, pp. 55–6.
4 The court relied on language contained in Section 113 of T. B. Macaulay's 1837 draft of a Penal Code: ‘Whoever, by words, either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs, or by visible representations, attempts to excite feelings of disaffection to the Government established by law in the territories of the East India Company, among any class of people who live under that Government, shall be punished with banishment for life or for any term from the territories of the East India Company’, A Penal Code Prepared by the Indian Law Commissioners and Published by the Command of the Governor General in Council, Military Orphan Press, Calcutta, 1837, p. 30. When the Penal Code was enacted in 1860, it retained much of the original language concerning sedition. It was largely in response to the Wahhabi trials of the 1860s that the government introduced Section 124-A of Chapter VI of the Penal Code (‘Of Offences against the State’). The law is discussed at length in Donogh, W. R., A Treatise on the Law of Sedition and Cognate Offenses in British India, Thackel, Spink and Co., Calcutta, 1911, pp. 41–101 Google Scholar. The bulk of this discussion, however, concerns cases tried toward the turn of the twentieth century. Sparse information is to be found about the interpretation and prosecution of sedition before the mutiny. This is largely because it predates any formal codification of sedition law. I am grateful to the sources compiled by Jeanine Cali, Law Librarian of Congress. See ‘Sedition Law in India’, http://blogs.loc.gov/law/2012/10/sedition-law-in-india/ [accessed 9 November 2016].
5 According to one witness, he had been preaching sedition over the span of eight years. M. Lewin, Special Commissioner to Secretary to Government (Political), Fort Saint George, 12 October 1839. IOR, F/4/1877, File 79786, pp. 191–2.
6 Strictly speaking, Wahhabis were followers of the Arabian Muslim reformer, Ibn Abdul Wahhab (1703–92). As numerous scholars have pointed out, the reformers who were most active in India during this period were not the Arabia-based Wahhabis, but the followers of the Indian reformer, Sayyid Ahmad Barelvi (1786–1831) who called themselves the Tariqah-i-Muhammadiya (Order of the Prophet Muhammad). Colonial officials and Muslim opponents of the movement labelled Sayyid Ahmad's followers (inaccurately and pejoratively) ‘Wahhabis’. See Pearson, H., Islamic Reform and Revival in Nineteenth Century India: The Tariqah-i Muhammadiyah, Yoda, New Delhi, 2008 Google Scholar; Metcalf, B. D., Islamic Revival in British India: Deoband, 1860–1900, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1982 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hardy, P., Muslims of British India, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1972 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ahmad, M., Saiyid Ahmad Shahid: His Life and Mission, Academy of Islamic Research and Publications, Lucknow, 1975 Google Scholar. In South Asia and elsewhere, other reform movements calling for a return to the ‘path of the Prophet Muhammad’ referred to themselves as the Tariqah-i-Muhammadiyah. For instance, Khwaja Muhammad Nasir of Delhi founded in the eighteenth century an organization bearing the same name. This movement functioned as a Sufi sect, with Nasir maintaining intimate ties with notable pirs, authoring important mystical works, and claiming divine inspiration for himself. See Rizvi, S. A. A., Shah Wali-Allah and His Times, Ma'rifat, Canberra, 1980, pp. 344–5Google Scholar.
7 See for example Q. Ahmad, The Wahabi Movement in India, Firma K. L. Mukhopadhyay, Calcutta, 1966, pp. 239–79; P. Robb, ‘The impact of British rule on religious community: reflections on the trial of Maulvi Ahmadullah of Patna in 1865’, in Society and Ideology: Essays in South Asian History Presented to Professor K.A. Ballhatchet, P. Robb (ed.), Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1993; Bayly, C. A., Empire and Information: Intelligence Gathering and Social Communication in India, 1780–1870, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996, pp. 338–46Google Scholar; Hardy, Muslims of British India, pp. 61–91.
8 Hunter, W. W., The Indian Musalmans: Second Edition, Trubner and Co., London, 1872, p. 143 Google Scholar.
9 Mamdani, M., Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, the Cold War, and the Roots of Terror, Permanent Black, Delhi, 2005 Google Scholar.
10 Stephens, J., ‘The phantom Wahhabi: liberalism and the Muslim fanatic in mid-Victorian India’, Modern Asian Studies, vol. 47, no. 1, 2013, p. 48 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
11 Ibid., p. 24.
12 Ibid., pp. 26–7.
13 It is assumed, for instance, that liberal, transformative policies of the Company during the early nineteenth century are what caused the rebellion, and that the Crown responded with a return to conservatism. In the decades preceding the rebellion, the Company not only advanced reforms in the realm of culture and religion, but also approached Indians, according to Peter Hardy, as ‘rational individuals capable of pursuing their own enlightened self-interest’. After the rebellion, the Crown adopted far more conservative and communitarian policies. A renewed commitment to ‘non-interference’ led to, among other things, the heightened awareness of Muslims as a ‘community’ distinguishable from ‘Hindus’. See Hardy, Muslims of British India, p. 62.
14 This return to conservatism is described variously. Karuna Mantena frames it as a ‘crisis’ of liberal imperialism and an ensuing return to ‘traditional society’ as conceived of by law minister, Henry Maine. See Mantena, K., Alibis of Empire: Henry Maine and the Ends of Liberal Imperialism, Permanent Black, Delhi, 2010, pp. 18–19 Google Scholar, 56–88. Nicolas Dirks describes a new emphasis on custom following the rebellion, giving rise to an ‘ethnographic state’ and a ‘policing of tradition’; Dirks, N., Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India, Permanent Black, Delhi, 2002, pp. 43 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 149–72. See also Thomas Metcalf's discussion of the new emphasis on Indian difference and the ‘revitalized conservatism’ that followed the 1857 Rebellion, in Metcalf, Ideologies of the Raj, pp. 43–57. See also Metcalf, T., The Aftermath of Revolt: India, 1857–1870, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1964 Google Scholar.
15 The Company's introduction of a new type of turban is widely cited as a key factor that triggered the Vellore Mutiny. James Frey (formerly Hoover) discusses the resemblance of the discourse surrounding the turban to that of the greased bullet cartridges in the 1857 Rebellion. Frey argues convincingly that these ‘symbols’ performed different tasks for rulers and ruled. Drawing upon Ranajit Guha's insights, he notes how the turban and greased cartridges became rallying points for indigenous mobilization against colonial authority. For Company officials, however, they reflected an underlying cultural conservatism that motivated rebellion (as distinct from a more modern political consciousness). See Frey, J., ‘The sepoy speaks: discerning the significance of the Vellore Mutiny’, in Mutiny at the Margins: New Perspectives on the Indian Uprising of 1857, vol. 4, Rand, G. and Bates, C. (eds), Sage, New Delhi, 2013, pp. 3–4 Google Scholar. The Vellore Mutiny, coupled with the circulation of a series of Persian pamphlets that had maligned the Prophet Muhammad, inclined many to believe that missionary activity would likely foment rebellion against the Company. Carson, P., The East India Company and Religion, 1698–1858, Boydell Press, Woodbridge, Suffolk, 2012, pp. 90–4Google Scholar.
16 See James Frey's description of the layout of the Vellore Fort and plans of the 1806 conspirators in J. W. Hoover, Men without Hats: Dialogue, Discipline and Discontent in the Madras Army, 1806–1807, Manohar, Delhi, 2007, pp. 105–14.
17 Bayly, S., Saints, Goddesses and Kings: Muslims and Christians in South Indian Society, 1700–1900, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998, p. 152 Google Scholar.
18 Rampuri belonged to Sayyid Ahmad's original movement. He was one of the editors of the first Wahhabi text printed in Bengal in 1822, the Persian Siratu'l-mustaqim, authored by Shah, Ishmael. Gaborieau, M., Le Mahdi incompris: Sayyid Ahmad Barelwi (1786–1831) et le millenarisme en Inde, CNRS Editions, Paris, 2010, p. 155 Google Scholar.
19 The pamphlet that seems to have evoked the greatest opposition from the ulama was Shah Ishmael's Taqwiyat al-Iman. In his sworn statement, Muhammad Ali Rampuri stated ‘I am not following the doctrines of the Taqwiyat al-Iman and other similar works which are . . . derogatory to the supremacy of Muhammed/peace be upon him/whosoever amongst my adherents follows the creed of those books is in error’. G. L. Pendergast, Superintendent of Police at Madras to the Chief Secretary to the Government at Fort St. George, TNA No. 151 (Secret), 22 October 1839, p. 4783. Exchanges between the ulama and Muhammad Ali Rampuri are enclosed in correspondence between Pendergast and the government of Madras.
20 Ibid., p. 7.
21 Stewart had asked Cubbon to account for a list of men suspected of being Wahhabis at Mysore. Cubbon responded by stating that four are altogether unknown, six are dead, and two are residing in the honourable Company's provinces. From M. Cubbon, the Commissioner for the Government of the Territories of the Rajah of Mysore, to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Fort St. George, TNA No. 145 (Secret), 13 August 1839, p. 2900.
22 Subadar Mohijuddin Khan Examined, 22 August 1839 in the Commissioner's Cutcherry, TNA No. 147 (Secret), 1 October 1839, p. 3501.
23 From M. Cubbon, the Commissioner for the Government of the Territories of the Rajah of Mysore, to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Fort St. George, TNA No. 145 (Secret), 13 August 1839, pp. 2897–2907.
24 Ibid., p. 2899.
25 Elizabeth Kolsky describes how the Company constituted the ‘fanatic’ as a legal category in order to warrant speedy trials and extreme punishments for Afghans who committed violent acts against Europeans. Officers who presided over trials of Afghan fanatics often lacked formal training in the law, invited no legal arguments, and did not record the proceedings. Kolsky, E., ‘The colonial rule of law and the legal regime of exception: frontier “fanaticism” and state violence in British India’, American Historical Review, vol. 120, no. 4, 2015, 1218–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The normative categorization of Afghan fighters as ‘fanatics’ is traceable to a much earlier period, as Benjamin Hopkins has shown. See Hopkins, B., The Making of Modern Afghanistan, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, United Kingdom, 2008, p. 77 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
26 Their stories are discussed in Mallampalli, A Muslim Conspiracy in British India?.
27 Seema Alavi sets the global movements of Muslims within a context of inter-empire rivalry. She explores the ‘the formation of the “Muslim international” by tracing the movements of Muslim men who traveled out of India and located themselves at the intersection of the British, Ottoman and Dutch Empires’. See Alavi, S., ‘“Fugitive mullahs and outlawed fanatics”: Indian Muslims in nineteenth century trans-Asiatic imperial rivalries’, Modern Asian Studies, vol. 45, no. 6, 2011, p. 1339 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
28 This is how J. D. Awdry, the Superintendent of Police at Vellore, had narrated the contents of Elphinstone's letter. Captain Awdry, Superintendent of Police, Witness at Vellore examined on oath, 1 October 1839, IOR, F/4/1877, File 79786, p. 373. Awdry's summary of the letter is in fundamental agreement with Elphinstone's references to ‘swarms of faqirs and other agents of disaffection [traversing] the country in every direction and in unusual numbers’. See Elphinstone's Minute on Enquiries at Kurnool and Udayagiri, 18 August 1840, IOR, F/4/1880, File 79794, pp. 10–11.
29 Captain Awdry, Superintendent of Police, Witness at Vellore examined on oath, 1 October 1839, IOR, F/4/1877, File 79786, p. 373.
30 Ibid.
31 Extract Fort St. George Secret Consultation of 6 August 1839. Letter from C. P. Brown, Persian Translator to Government to the Secretary to the Government, dated 19 July 183, IOR, F/4/1877, File 79786, p. 12 (hereafter all references to File 79786 may be presumed to come from shelfmark IOR F/4/1877).
32 See also the statement of Ihan Khan, Police Peon, File 79786, p. 115.
33 Testimony of Sayyid Qadr Modin, Jagirdar of Chedwall, File 79786, p. 30. Another witness, Buddin Munshi, also made reference to shaven faces. Because Muslims ‘walked unwisely and many having shaved their beards and mustachios . . . . Men with faces of women having no beards conquered them’, Testimony of Buddin Munshi, File 79786, p. 78.
34 Testimony of Sayyid Qadr Modin, p. 30.
35 Testimony of Gholam Hussein, adopted son of the late Muhammed Motathur, Head Eunuch of the Palace, dated 6 August 1839, File 79786, pp. 26–9.
36 Testimony of Sayyid Qadr Modin, p. 31.
37 Captain Awdry, Superintendent of Police, Witness at Vellore examined on oath, 1 October 1839, File 79786, p. 379.
38 Extract from Fort Saint George Secret Consultations, 15 October 1839, Letter from H. L. Prinsep, Secretary to Government of India to R. Clerk, Secretary to Government of Fort Saint George, 18 September 1839, File 79786, p. 176.
39 H. T. Prinsep, Secretary to the Government of India to Robert Clerk, Secretary to the Government of Fort St. George, 14 August 1839, File 79786, p. 102.
40 Ibid., p. 104.
41 Regimental maulvis were employed by the Company to offer religious services to Muslim troops. See Green, N., Islam and the Army in Colonial India, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009, p. 87 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
42 From the Secretary of the Board of Revenue, TNA No. 147 (Secret), 24 September 1839, p. 3473. Modin's accusers, as we shall see, would use this fact to make their case for his disloyalty.
43 A total of 29 came forward, of which 12 claimed to have heard the messages directly.
44 In addition to the testimonies already discussed, this phrasing is used in the testimonies of Modin Badsha (pp. 160–1), Abu Khan (p. 162), and Mir Kosim Ali Shah (p. 170), File 79786.
45 Testimony of Mirza Ishmael Beg, brother of Ramned Bee, a concubine of the late Tipu Sultan and who is now a state prisoner in the palace of Vellore, File 79786, p. 125. Ishmael Beg's testimony at Vellore (before Awdry and Stewart) is consistent with his testimony at Chittoor before the magistrate. There, he described the degree of autonomy Modin enjoyed through his independent wealth. He claimed that members of Tipu's harem had paid Modin significant sums of money along with precious stones toward the costs of their funeral rites. ‘The possession of this wealth,’ he claimed, ‘has made him haughty and employ this language’. Testimony of the 4th witness, Mirza Ishmael Beg, son of Ranjan Beg. A Mussalman of Hanafi sect, aged 54 years, gains his livelihood from the Mahal or Palace, and at present resides at Vellore, in the Zillah of Chittoor, IOR, F/4/1878, File 79788, pp. 420–1.
46 Statement of Qadr Badshah, File 79786, pp. 168–9.
47 A makan could refer to a home but, in this instance, it referred to a living compound containing multiple buildings for hosting guests.
48 Statement of Mir Hamed Ali, in charge of the Qadr Wali Dargah at Vellore, before J. D. Awdry, dated 24 August 1839, File 79786, p. 44. The kalima here refers to a prayer or declaration of Muslim belief.
49 Ali Sahib, discussed at the outset of this chapter, was among those who named Europeans as the chief target of the wa'z.
50 Statement of Mir Hamed Ali, File 79786, pp. 45–51.
51 Gommans, J., The Rise of the Indo-Afghan Empire, 1710–1780, Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1999, pp. 83–4Google Scholar, 101.
52 Statement of Buddi ud-Din Khan Sahib, commonly called the Nawab of Truksaul, who receives Rs. 175 monthly at the stipend pay office, File 79786, p. 64.
53 Ibid., pp. 65–6.
54 Statement of Shaikh Ibram, an inhabitant of Vellore, File 79786, p. 97.
55 Statement of Ihan Khan Police Chowdry, File 79786, p. 115.
56 G. M. Ogilvie, Principal Collector at Chittoor to Clerk (Secretary to Government of Fort St. George), 19 September 1839, File 79786, p. 127. Regulation XX of 1802 extends the right to a trial by a Special Court to anyone accused of ‘treason, rebellion, or other crimes against the state’, but stipulates no punishment for those convicted of such crimes. To address this omission, Regulation I of 1834 states that any person convicted of these crimes is liable to the death penalty. Papers Relating to East Indian Affairs viz. Regulations Passed by the Government of Bengal, Fort St. George, and Bombay in the Years 1832 to 1836, in The Sessional Papers Presented by Order of the House of Lords or Presented by Royal Commands in the Session 1837–38, vol. VIII, p. 78.
57 Ogilvie is designated variously in official correspondence, for instance as Principal Collector at Chittoor or North Arcot, and as magistrate at Chittoor.
58 The government commissioned Lewin along with Mahomed Ghous, Mahomedan Law Officer of the Provincial Court at Chittoor, to try Maulvi Modin before a magistrate according to Regulation XX of 1802 (see note 54), TNA No. 147 (Secret), 24 September 1839, p. 3450.
59 Letter from Awdry to Stewart, 29 April 1839, File 79786, p. 90. Though this letter is dated 29 April, this is possibly a recording error. None of the documentation of this case (roughly 1000 pages) is dated as far back as April. Quite likely, the letter was written on 29 August.
60 Ibid., p. 90.
61 Ibid., p. 93. Upon the commencement of the trial at Chittoor, Modin, as we shall see, chose to remain in confinement at the Chittoor jail.
62 Awdry to Stewart, 19 October 1839, File 79786, p. 215.
63 Awdry to Stewart, 11 October 1839, ibid., p. 180.
64 Stewart to Clerk, 28 November 1839, ibid., p. 270.
65 Stewart to Clerk, 21 September 1839, ibid., p. 146.
66 Stewart to Clerk, 10 October 1839, ibid., p. 205.
67 G. M. Ogilvie to Clerk, 19 September 1839, ibid., p. 130.
68 Strictly speaking, Awdry was not Modin's prosecutor and these were not ‘his’ witnesses. Awdry did, however, request to serve as Modin's prosecutor at Chittoor. Awdry to Stewart, 29 April (again, the date is quite likely 29 August, not April) 1839, ibid., p. 90. He requested this to reduce their sense of vulnerability while testifying under oath. Lewin, however, denied Awdry's request as being inconsistent with the procedures of the Special Court. Lewin to the Acting Register to the Court of Faujdari Adalat, Fort St. George. IOR, F/4/1878, File 79788, p. 89.
69 Ogilvie to Awdry, 14 October 1839, File 79786, p. 233.
70 Awdry narrated the objections of Modin's mother in a letter to Stewart. Awdry to Stewart, 10 October 1839, File 79786, pp. 205–9.
71 Chunam is a type of flooring composed of lime, made of burnt shells. Yule, H., Hobson-Jobson: A Glossary of Colloquial Anglo-Indian Words and Phrases, Crooke, W. (ed.), Asian Educational Services, New Delhi, 1995, p. 219 Google Scholar.
72 Testimony of the 19th witness, Mahomed Cassim, son of Shaikh Hussein, of Shaikh caste, Hanafi sect, aged about 30 years, a Commissariat Officer's Peon and a resident of Vellore. Under cross-examination by Modin, IOR, F/4/1878, File 79788, pp. 52–3.
73 Ibid., p. 51.
74 From Lewin, the Special Commissioner, TNA No. 151 (Secret), 22 October 1839, p. 4818.
75 Clerk to Lewin, 21 October 1839, File 79786, p. 222.
76 A revealing discussion of salt imagery in relation to the sepoy is found in Roy, P., Ailmentary Tracts: Appetites, Aversions and the Postcolonial, Duke University Press, Durham, 2010, pp. 40–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
77 Testimony of the third witness, Mir Hamed Ali, son of Mir Murid Ali, of Sayyid caste, 42 years, occupation begging, at present residing at Vellore, in the Zillah of Chittoor, was sworn according to the customs of his caste, IOR, F/4/1878, File 79787, p. 370.
78 Before Awdry, he claimed to have resided at Modin's makan for seven years.
79 Testimony of Mir Hamed Ali at Chittoor, File 79786, p. 378.
80 Cross-examination of Mir Hamed Ali by Maulvi Modin, ibid., pp. 390–3.
81 Cross-examination of Mir Hamed Ali by the mufti of the court, ibid., p. 409.
82 Fatwa of the Faujdari Adalat in the case before the Special Commission held at Chittoor, IOR, F/4/1878, File 79788, p. 81.
83 The 9th witness, Chandkhan, son of Shah Mahomed Khan, of Pathan caste, Hanafi Sect, aged 86 years, a Chowdry in the Commissary Bazaar and at present residing at Vellore, IOR, F/4/1878, File 79787, p. 542.
84 The 17th witness, Sayyid Ali, son of Sayyid Ishmael of Musselman caste, Hanafi sect, aged 28 years, a Military Police Peon and resident of Vellore in the Zillah [District] of Chittoor, IOR, F/4/1878, File 79787, p. 692.
85 More specifically, a khatib is a preacher who delivers khutba, or sermons, during the prayers of Friday afternoon and great festivals.
86 The 57th witness, Khatib Shah Muhammed Jacob, son of Shaikh Muhammed of Shaikh caste, Sunni Sect, aged about 40 years, a cultivator and khatib, and resident of Vellore in the Zillah of Chittoor, IOR, F/4/1878, File 79788, p. 351.
87 The 57th witness, Khatib Shah Muhammed Jacob, under cross-examination by Maulvi Modin, ibid., pp. 354–5.
88 Testimony of Maulvi Modin Sahib, son of Shabal Hussum Sahib Qadri of Sayyid caste, Hanafi religion, aged 39 years, IOR, F/4/1878, File 79788, p. 419.
89 Ibid., pp. 428–9.
90 Ibid., p. 433.
91 Ibid., pp. 436–7.
92 Ibid., pp. 437–9.
93 See Bahadur, S. A. K., Review on Dr. Hunter's Indian Musalmans: Are They Bound in Conscience to Rebel Against the Queen?, Medical Hall Press, Benares, 1872 Google Scholar; Hunter, The Indian Musalmans.
94 Among them are Patrick Smollet, and John Bruce Norton, another judge of the Madras Sadr Adalat, who advocated legal reforms that would better sensitize European legal practitioners to Indian social realities. See Norton, J. B., The Administration of Justice in Southern India, Athenaeum Press, Madras, 1853 Google Scholar, and my discussion of Norton in Mallampalli, C., Race, Religion and Law in Colonial India: Trials of an Interracial Family, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011, pp. 198–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Other liberal voices included members of the ‘Torture Commission’, who conducted a far-reaching enquiry into the use of torture by police and revenue collectors in the Madras Presidency. Besides Lewin, its members included Edward Francis Elliot, Chief Magistrate of Madras, and Hudleston Stokes, a Civil Servant at Madras. See Rao, A., Discipline and the Other Body: Correction, Corporeality, Colonialism, Duke University Press, Durham, 2006, p. 180 Google Scholar.
95 Prinsep, C. C., Record of Services of the Honorable East India Company's Civil Servants in the Madras Presidency from 1741 to 1858, Trubner and Co., London, 1885, p. 88 Google Scholar.
96 Lewin, M., Is the Practice of Torture in Madras with the Sanction of the Authorities of Leadenhall Street?, Thomas Brettell, Westminster, 1856, p. 10 Google Scholar.
97 Ibid., p. 14.
98 Ibid., p. 4.
99 The Circular Orders of the Court of Foujdaree Udalat, From 1803 to 30th June, 1834, Church Mission Press, Madras, 1835, p. 15. IOR.
100 Oddie, G., ‘Constructing “Hinduism”: the impact of the Protestant missionary movement on Hindu self-understanding’, in Christians and Missionaries in India: Cross-Cultural Communication since 1500, Frykenberg, R. (ed.), Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 2003, p. 170 Google Scholar.
101 Fort St. George Judicial Department. Letter and memorandum concerning the Indian government's dispute with Malcolm Lewin, Madras Civil Service 1814–47, suspended as a judge of the Sudder Court, Madras in 1846, MSS Eur F213/55, p. 8. OIOC.
102 Ibid., p. 1.
103 Lewin, M., The Way to Lose India, James Ridgeway, London, 1857, p. 7 Google Scholar.
104 Ibid., p. 16.
105 Lewin to Secretary to Government at Fort St. George, 12 October 1839, IOR, F/4/1877, File 79786, p. 191.
106 Ibid., p. 193.
107 Lewin to Secretary to Government (Political Department), 15 October 1839, IOR, F/4/1877, File 79786, p. 228.
108 Lewin to the Acting Register of the Faujdari Adalat, IOR, F/4/1878, File 79787, p. 96.
109 Lewin to Secretary to Government (Political Department), 15 October 1839, IOR, F/4/1877, File 79786, p. 228.
110 Awdry to Stewart, 6 November 1839, IOR, F/4/1877, File 79786, p. 295.
111 Lewin to the Acting Register to the Court of Faujdari Adalat, Fort St. George (n/d), IOR, F/4/1878, File 79788, p. 91.
112 Deposition of Captain Awdry, Superintendent of Police, Witness at Vellore, examined before Lewin on oath on 1 October 1839, IOR, F/4/1877, File 79788, pp. 401–2.
113 Ibid.
114 Lewin to the Acting Register to the Court of Faujdari Adalat, Fort Saint George, File 79788, 232–4.
115 Minute of the 3rd Puisne Judge of the Court of Foujdaree Udalat on Trial by the Chittoor Special Commission of Moulavee Moideen Saib, File 79788, pp. 56–7.
116 Fatwa of the Faujdari Adalat in the case before the Special Commission held at Chittoor, File 79788, pp. 2–5.
117 Ibid., pp. 62–4.
118 Minute of the Second Puisne Judge of the Faujdari Adalat, W. Hudleston, 1 February 1840, IOR, F/4/1877, File 79788, p. 73.
119 Ibid., p. 74.