|
Go to the Indian Marine, Bombay Marine & Indian Navy 1613-1858 |
The Bengal Marine |
History
From
the sources so far seen, I have not been able to determine when the Bengal
Marine was formed, but John Keay’s history of the
Company states that they had pilots certainly by the late 1680s or early 1690s.
Even although there was no properly established settlement, the River Hughli (or variants of spellings such as Hoogli) is well known to have been so routinely hazardous to navigation,
it would not have been out of the question to have employed pilots from the
beginning. c.1640.
From
the first (known) surviving edition of The
East India Calendar of
1791, it can be seen that there was a local marine board, with pilots, masters
and mates (as well as ‘free mariners’) listed. An East-India Register and Directory, of 1803, gives much
more info though. As well as those on the marine board are ‘Europeans employed
in the Company’s Marine’ - all the way down to boatswains and seamen. Not only
are twelve pilot schooners detailed, so two are other vessels employed by this
board. They were one agent vessel, Charlotte; one buoy vessel, Abercrombie; two river transports, George and Charles; and one anchor boat
apparently named Diamond Harbour.
With
this (and further info quoted below) in mind, it is not unlikely that a pilot
service was formed early on, under the administrative control of a marine
board. As there were also other local maritime requirements, political/martial
and commercial, these too were dealt with as one organisation as and when
required.
Although
there are occasional mentions of the Bengal Marine supplying vessels for
martial operations in the published histories of the H.E.I.C. emphasising
maritime activities, no particular detail is given for the period of the
Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars (1793-1815). Nevertheless, one entry in The Original Calcutta Annual Directory and Calendar, of 1813, prints an extract from a Company despatch of
August 1798. For the sake of interest, I quote this in full:-
‘ RANK OF THE HON’BLE COMPANY’s MARINE
OFFICERS.
PAR. 58.- In order to preserve due
respect and attention to the officers of your marine, who on important
occasions, especially during war, are associated with the military, and assist
in operations of a warlike nature, we have resolved that certain ranks should
be assigned for your marine officers, corresponding with those of the military,
and we therefore direct,
That
the Commodore have equal rank with Colonels in the
army.
The Captains of the
larger vessels of 28 guns, equal rank with Lieut.-Colonels in the army.
The Captains of
small vessels under 28 guns, equal rank with Majors in the army.
The 1st Lieutenants equal
rank with Captains in the army.
And the 2d Lieutenants,
rank with Lieutenants in the army.
PAR. 59.- In
all cases the dates of the respective commissions, are to regulate the
precedence of military or marine officers...’.
Although
the Bombay Marine undoubtedly
contributed more minor men-o-war to the joint amphibious force that took Java
in 1811, the Company’s naval element was under the command of an officer of the
Bengal Presidency. He was John Hayes, described in this edition of the
above-mentioned Calcutta register as ‘Senior Officer of the H.C.’s Marine
Forces, Eastern Side of India’ and further as ‘senior Captain in the Line,
Master Attendant’.
The
entries in the various published directories and registers can be frustrating
in some respects. While the description of the employment of named vessels are
frequently different, whether they were ‘government yachts’, or ‘state boats’,
is not intrinsically problematical. Neither is the fact that individual vessels
could be used surveying one year and on some other duty on another. But, the
physical appearance can be difficult to understand sometimes. Of course, small
two-masted vessels could be described as brigs and snows interchangeably -
depending on whether some auxiliary spars were rigged or not. But, brigs and
schooners cannot be seen in the same light. Re-rigging of sailing vessels was
not infrequently carried out, but the idea of entire tranches of craft being
re-rigged from one year to another does not appear to make sense (to me
anyway).
Bearing
in mind events about to happen, in October 1822 port regulations at Chittagong,
were instituted by the Company’s Governor-General. Later that same year there
was also a notification of the newly found Phillip’s Channel relating to the
Straits of Singapore.
In
terms of naval force, it is not until the First Anglo-Burmese War (1824-26)
that any particular detail is given in the published history (of the Indian
Navy by Charles Rathbone Low). In this it is said
that their wooden-hulled, steam-powered paddle-steamer Diana, newly built in Kiddepore,
was the ‘first steam vessel ever seen Eastern waters’.
According
to published listings the first steam vessel operated by the Bengal Marine was
the Enterprize in 1826, although this was probably not the case, since she
did not even arrive at Calcutta until early December of that year. So, Charles
Low was probably correct.
The
Ganges and Irrawaddy appear in the listings
three years later; the Burranpooter and Hooghly in 1830. The only
technical information that I have found out on these early steam vessels
apparently relates to the Hooghly. She was built by the
Howrah Dock Company; of 89 tons; launched in 1825; for the East India Company’s
service; and was employed ‘on the river’ in 1839.
Their
early usage is not mentioned clearly. By 1835 there was a Controller of Steam
Vessels, and in a different listing a year later there is a steam department
specifically mentioned - headed by a lieutenant Royal Navy. What is more, the
earlier named vessels (including the Diana) were described as
‘steam vessels for tugging & sea steamers’. There was also another listing
in this marine list of 1836 - of ‘inland iron steamers’. They were the rather
impressively named the Lord William
Bentinck, George Swinton, Sir Charles Metcalfe and William Blunt.
Thankfully,
further information can be gleaned from a few corporate histories of companies
now only known of by specialists in Indian business matters. Incidentally, it
may be worth mentioning that Bengal had access to locally-mined coal and so,
was at real advantage over other ports regionally in advancing the use of
steam.
Anyway,
according to one history devoted to the Indian General Steam Navigation
Company, the H.E.I.C.’s Lord William
Bentinck
was the first of the river steamers that worked Ganges and began her service in
1834. Within two years she had been joined by the other three steamers
mentioned in the last paragraph. All four reflected the names of ‘leading
officials of the day’. This was relatively short-lived though and in 1838 the
latter three were renamed as the Thames,
Jumna
and Megna. Although they could
carry freight commercially, such as for the newly-formed Assam Company, this
was not really their role, which was for multifarious government duties. Not
therefore providing a liner service, private capital was used to develop
commercial enterprises.
Elsewhere,
by 1835 newer and more powerful Government steamers had replaced the older
ones. Nevertheless, they were not paid off and instead, the Enterprize, Ganges and Irrawaddy were deployed very
profitably on the River Hughli as a tug service.
The
Bengal Marine was also involved in the First China War (1839-42), or ‘First
Opium War’ as it became known. By the end they had provided a number of
paddle-steamers, being the sloop Tenasserim (4),
with others of rigs as yet unknown - Queen
(4), Prosperine (2), Pluto (1) and the unarmed Hooghly. And, there were two other of the Company’s
vessel involved that were on the strength of the Bengal Marine. One was the new
iron-hulled, paddler Nemesis, built by Laird, of Birkenhead and was in a curious position.
Although never commissioned as a fighting craft; her principle officers held
commissions in the Royal Navy; and she was armed with two 32-pounder cannons,
along with fifteen lesser cannons and also rocket launchers. These were used to
devastating effect during the Yangtse campaign,
although some modern analysis reckons that she was not as overwhelmingly
effective as was made out at the time). The other was Phlegethon that was similar to Nemesis, both in construction and role in China, but
less written about.
According
to the published listings once again, rearranged in late 1841, the steam
department was by then operating what can be described as liner services.
Between Calcutta and Allahabad, intermediate ports were then were Rage Mehal, Bhaungulpore, Moughyr, Dinapore, Ghazeepore, Benares and Mirzapore:
carrying both freight and passengers.
Unsurprisingly,
they also contributed to the naval assets used in the Second Anglo-Burmese War
(1852-53). Early on a joint R.N. and Bengal Marine force took Martaban and
during hostilities their Tenasserim (4), Pluto (1), Phelgethon (2), Prosperine (2),
the unarmed Enterprise and Firequeen. There was also another, the Mahanuddy (or
Maha Muddie in Rear-Admiral
Austen’s original reports to the Admiralty, or even Mahuddy as later shown in listings), a steamer
sporting 4 guns post-war, but have been unable as yet to find out if she was
armed during this conflict.
By
1852 there was also a Dacca and Assam Line. Due to only some editions of the
more useful directories surviving, I have not been able to determine when this
was begun though. Similarly, there were liner services with Chittagong, Arracan and Moulmein in Burma. Even so,
with British martial success in Burma commercial operators, such as the
Calcutta and Burmah Steam Navigation Company (to become the British India Steam Navigation Company),
were soon also capitalising on this and beginning their own liner services.
The
organisation of the Bengal Marine would seem to have been heavily used in
relation to the Great Sepoy Mutiny. The Indian Navy is definitely known to have supplied officers
and men to the Bengal Government as of the summer of 1857, used variously
ashore. It is highly likely that their compatriots of the Bengal Marine were
similarly deployed at this time. Anyway, in a re-organisation as of May 1858
company sized detachments (approximately numbering 100), complete with
12-pounder howitzers were formed and apparently used in a less haphazard
manner.
Interestingly, in dealing with the abolition of
the Indian Navy in the aftermath of these monstrously terrible events, good explanatory information is given
on the past nature of the Bengal Marine. In a despatch from the Secretary of
State for India, dated 28th November 1862, it is stated that:-
‘...5.
The manner in which the Bengal Marine has answered the purposes of the
Government of India proves that there are many Maritime duties which can be
performed with efficiency by a temporary Service, fluctuating in numbers as the
demand for vessels may increase or diminish; and Her Majesty’s Government
consider that such duties on the West coast of India as have hitherto been
performed by the Indian Navy, but for which it may not be convenient to employ
ships of the Royal Navy - namely, the transport of troops and stores, and other
civil duties - can be performed for the future by a local Service entitled the
Bombay Marine, on the same footing as that which the Bengal Marine has always
been, and not under martial law...’
As
already mentioned in the main page, the vessels that were earmarked for retention
came both from the Indian Navy and the Bengal Marine. In total there were
eleven of these. Of six steam transports, four were to be ‘ready for sea’,
split equally between Bombay and Calcutta, with two in reserve. The Bengal
Marine’s contribution was to comprise the unarmed screw-steamers Sydney, Australian and the paddle-steamer
Arracan). Three sailing
transports were to be retained, one at Calcutta and
two in reserve - all from the Bengal Marine. They were Sesostris (turned over to the
Bengal Presidency in 1853, she seems to have been re-built as a sailing vessel
between 1858 and 1859), Tubal Cain and Walter Morrice. There were also two
steam vessels ‘for general service’ of the Government of India, both from the
Indian Navy. In the case of Calcutta, Ferooz was detailed.
Incidentally,
the above mentioned despatch also dealt with the Madras Presidency. This stated
that:-
‘...There
is not need for a separate Marine for Madras; the
vessels required there for transport services have always been furnished from
other Presidencies where there are docks and conveniences for the repair and
fitting of ships, as well as for their lying in safety during the adverse
monsoon. One or two of the Government vessels retained on the Bengal side,
might be considered as available for transport service of Madras upon the
requisition of the Government of the Presidency, and while detached upon such
Service they should be under the orders and charge of that Government...’
Again
from the published listings, in the latter half of 1868 it would appear that
the Bengal Marine lost not only it’s ‘commercial’
operations, but also it’s surveying responsibilities.
Nevertheless, it still retained it’s
pilot service.
Finally,
the Bengal Marine only survived independently in terms of supplying naval power
until 1877, when it became part of Her Majesty’s Indian Marine. Nevertheless,
the eastern division remained based on Calcutta and unsurprisingly, the
Government of Bengal still had its other marine responsibilities, including
surveying, but also seemingly shed of everything commercial. It is clear that
there were weaknesses in standards of Calcutta pilots and so, covenanted pilots
were introduced around this time.
Tracing individuals in the Bengal Marine
So,
in many respects, apart from the marine board controlling maritime affairs for
the Bengal Presidency, the pilot service was an integral element of the Bengal
Marine. Nevertheless, pilots’ duties (along with those dealing with the
maintenance of buoys and other inshore and harbour work) were essentially
different to those of the mariners employed in commercial and/or military
operations. Therefore, as far as possible I have split the records relating to
the ‘static’ and ‘seagoing’ activities. That does not mean to say that individuals
could not be employed in both elements (as can be seen occasionally).
PILOT
SERVICE
Unless
this has been affected through decisions on retention for posterity, it would
seem that the day-to-day records of the pilot service were inherently different
from the other parts of the Bengal Marine. Those specifically for the pilot
service at the British library so far found are nominations
and
associated records of appointment including
original nominations, baptisms etc, showing their entry. There are numerous
volumes of seniority
lists
from c.1793 through to 1869, with some ‘casualty’ returns for tracing careers,
although the various published listings might also be of use. Among the
standard certificates of service, printed annually for
all officials in the Indian Government’s employment, are those for pilots
covering 1896 to 1926. There are also some
pay documents, but quite
frankly, do not make exciting reading and are of little use to most
researchers!
MARINE
SERVICE
In
many respects similar to the documentation for their compatriots on the West
Coast of India, the careers of individuals can be establishment and casualty lists. Unless within the
above referred to records for the pilot service and just not noticed by me,
there would appear to be no nominations, baptism forms, records of appointments
or pay records. Again there are certificates
of service
for the period 1896 to 1926 for officials in this Presidency’s marine service.
It should be noted that some of these individuals had come from the Royal Indian Marine.
GREAT
SEPOY MUTINY
There
are two volumes of records relating to the Naval
Brigades.
One of these is stated as a ‘list of European Officers and Seamen who served on
the books of H.M.’s vessel Calcutta’ from August 1858 to
December 1859. There is fascinating detail in this, whereby it can be seen that
a great many ‘white’ foreigners in Bengal acted in the defence of British
interests. For instance there were numerous Prussians that volunteered in
August 1858. These records are important at a personal level, as there are
details not only of joining, but also of their fate: whether discharged,
discharged dead, or had run (deserted) and when. The other shows the order of
battle of the naval brigades in 1860, down to the level of individuals.
Helpfully, there is also a separate listing of those from the Indian Navy.
FURTHER
RESEARCH INTO THE BENGAL MARINE
As
far as I can determine, hardly anything has been written about this
organisation at all. There will be a lot of information within the original
Company and India Office files at the British Library, with other bits and
pieces elsewhere. In particular, there are two volumes of annual reports
relating to the period 1845 to 1857 that are excellent. Not the easiest
documents to work with at first sight, after one has become used to the
different clerks’ handwriting a great deal of good information can be
extracted. For instance, apart from showing movements and reporting on their
activities when at war, they also include financial statements on cash received
from freight for the steamer services in peacetime. Pilots are also mentioned
routinely as well, in tables of groundings in the Hooghly. Being such a
difficult waterway, this was apparently seen as an occupational hazard and there
are additional comments mentioning whether any complaints had been made against
the pilots, or not.
I
have absolutely no doubt that there are other similar reports within the
Company’s body of administrative papers, although at this time I have not sought
out any of these. The published listings also contain interesting info that can
be tapped into easily enough.
There
is also a card index as part of the ‘Percy Smith’ collection, part of which is
now in the possession of the National Maritime Museum, Greenwich (the military
aspects are, as far as I can determine, at the National Army Museum, Chelsea).
Percy Smith was an officer in the Indian Army and on retirement active with the
Society of Genealogists. From what I have seen so far, his papers are rather
bizarre, inasmuch as they basically comprise a collection of lists, in all
sorts of different formats.
Within
this is a card index, comprising two out of
eight compartments of a filing cabinet, is a listing for the Bengal Marine,
with some specifically shown as in the pilot service. While I have not gone
through all of these by any means, the earliest so far seen relates to 1706.
Most are for the late eighteenth century, or
nineteenth and the last date so far seen is 1867. It would seem that only
executive officers and pilots have been included - there being no engineers.
The quality and quantity of information logged is less than consistent. Some
entries are lengthy with substantial genealogical info including wills, others
show virtually nothing. Just occasionally there are very interesting snippets. As a damper, it should
be pointed out that this collection is at one of the museum’s outstations and
requires prior notice (at least of days and possibly weeks) to arrange. Therefore,
some thought should be given before using this collection that could yield
nothing, or as good as nothing in searches.
The
primary published sources for this section have mostly been from details in the
published following registers and directories; some corporate histories; and
standard histories of the Indian Navy:-
Scott and
Company’s Bengal Directory and Register (Calcutta: Scott & Co.)
The Bengal
Almanac and Directory
(Calcutta: Mirror Press)
The Bengal
Directory and Annual Register (Calcutta: Mirror Press)
The Calcutta
Annual Register and Directory (Calcutta: Scott &
Co.)
The East-India
Company Register and Army List (London, East India Company)
The East-India
Registry and Directory (London: W.H. Allen)
The New
Calcutta Directory
(Calcutta, Frank Carbery)
Thacker’s
Indian Directory (Calcutta:
Thacker, Spink & Co)
H.A.
Antrobus: A
History of the Assam Company 1839-1953 (Privately printed by T. & A. Constable
Ltd., Edinburgh, 1957)
Alfred
Brame: The
India General Steam Navigation Company Limited (London: The Leadenhall Prefs, Ltd., 1900)
Cdr.
D.J. Hastings R.I.N.V.R.: The Royal
Indian Navy, 1612-1950 (North Carolina and London: McFarland & Co. Inc.,
1988)
Charles
Rathbone Low: History
of the Indian Navy (1613-1863) (London: The London Stamp Exchange Ltd., 1990
reprint) in two volumes
There
were also more minor (or indirect) consultations from other publications
including:-
Shipping and
Ship Building in India 1736-1839 (London: India Office Record, 1995)
J.J.
Colledge & Ben Warlow: Ships of the Royal Navy - The Complete Record of all
Fighting Ships of the Royal Navy from the 15th Century to the
Present
(London:
Chatham Publishing, 2006 revised)
Robert
Gardiner (Editor): Steel, Steam &
Shellfire - The Steam Warship 1815-1905 (London: Conway Maritime Press, 1992)
Captain
Peter Hore R.N.: Seapower Ashore - 200 Years of Royal Navy Operations on Land (London: Chatham
Publishing, 2001)
Andrew
Lambert: ‘Strategy, Policy and Shipbuilding: the Bombay Dockyard, the Indian
Navy and Imperial Security in Eastern Seas, 1784-1869’ in H.V. Bowen, Margarette Lincoln & Nigel Rigby (Editors): The
Worlds of the East India Company (London & Leicester: The Boydell Press, N.M.M. & University of Leicester, 2002)
David
Lyon & Rif Winfield: The Sail
& Steam Navy List - All the Ships of the Royal Navy 1815-1889 (London: Chatham
Publishing, 2004)
Also,
I referred to operational records in relation to an aspect of the Anglo-Burmese
War (1852-53) for the Bengal Marine:-
TNA:
PRO ADM 1/5612