The Maratha Period
Annexation of Nagpur

The question of adoption to the Nagpur gadi was discussed thrice prior to the death of Raghuji III. In 1837 the Resident Mr. Cavendish stated that Raghuji III had no right to adopt as his territory had been conquered by the British and given back to him and his sons. In the absence of an heirapparent or a posthumous child, therefore, the Raja's kingdom should escheat or lapse to the British. The views of Resident Wilkinson were in favour of Raghuji. In 1840 he opined that Raghuji or after his death his queen had the right to adopt a son as successor to the Gadi. The case of Nagpur was in no way different from that of Gwalior or Hyderabad. Actually, according to the treaty of 1826, when Mr. Jenkins was the Resident, the British had promised to continue the Raj of the Bhosle in perpetuity. But this term was very conveniently set aside and the Court of Directors in England concurring with the views of Lord Dalhousie, the Governor-General, ordered that, " it had been determined on grounds, both of right and policy to incorporate the state of Nagpur with the British territories" Mr. Mansel, the then Resident, had suggested that Nagpur should be annexed. The fateful decision of the Court of Directors was proclaimed by Lord Dalhousie, and Mr. Mansel was ordered to take charge of Nagpur as the first Commissioner. He started working in this capacity from 13th March 1854.

Bakabai, the favourity queen of Raghuji II, and the queens of Raghuji III were informed of this proclamation. There was no popular agitation against this unjust decision of the British, though the late king Raghuji III was liked by his subjects. There was, however, sorrow and resentment among the Brahmins and the Marathas of Nagpur as is witnessed by the two posters which were stuck on the wall of Jagruteswar Temple. One of the posters expressed anxiety regarding the very existence of the Hindu State after the death of Raghuji and called upon all the brahmins to attend the Abhiseka and Japa (recitation of God's name) which were being performed in the temple of Jagrutesvar in the city. Those not attending were considered as bastards.

The other poster condemned Dadoba strike, a relation of the Bhosles, who helped the British in the annexation of Nagpur.

These posters have their own value but they cannot be taken as expressive of popular view. Colonel Low, a member of the Governor-General's council. Who was against the annexation of Nagpur wreot that the people in the Raj of the Bhosles were very much tired of their rule and would be happy under the British. Mr. Mansel, the Resident, in his report says that the annexation of Nagpur Raj would cause great sorrow to all those who are connected with it, but the general public to whom the Marathas were foreigners would desire to be relieved from their troublesome rule. This state of affairs has got to be taken into account in studying the history of Nagpur after its annexation.

The unjust annexation of Nagpur was followed by the highhanded confiscation of the private treasure of the Bhosle family. Popular estimate placed the value of the treasure between Rs. 50 lacs and Rs. 75 lacs. On July 15th, 1854, the Resident's Assistant informed the Ranis that they would be pensioned and with the exception of a small portion of their jewellery their property would be seized on behalf of the Government. The strong protests of Bakabai and others were of no avail. By the end of October 1854. 136 bags of treasure were removed from the palace to the British treasury. The palace animals were sold by public auction and part of the jewellery was sent to Calcutta where Messrs. Hamilton and Company were appointed as auctioneers.

This loot of the private property of the Bhosles under the garb of law deeply wounded the feelings of Bakabai and the widows of Raghuji III, and caused great excitement among the citizens of Nagpur.

Parvatrav and Jamaluddin who helped the Resident in this arbitrary act became targets of mob fury. The latter was beaten, Mr. Hislop the well-known missionary of Nagpur was mistaken for an officer and manhandled.

From the sales of the confiscated property of the royal family, the Bhosle Fund was formed. This was to be utilised for the pensions of the relatives of the royal family.

Pensions sanctioned for the members of the royal family, were as follows;-

Bakabai tried to represent her case directly to Calcutta pointing out that she herself and the Ranis of the late king had expressed their desire to adopt a son, but the Resident completely changed their case and sent it up while he always promised them that he would look to their interest. Bapu Hanmantrav, the envoy of Bakabai, was asked to send the case through the Commissioner of Nagpur. Later, Bakabai sent her envoys to England to meet the members of he Board of Directors. But she withdraws her case and called back her envoys fearing that this might result in the displeasure of the Commissioner. Bakabai died on 7-9-1858 at Nagpur at the age of seventy seven.

Prior to her death Bakabai arranged the adoption of Yasvantrav, the son of Nana Ahirrav, as the nest successor in 1855. Yasvantrav was renamed as janoji. Final sanction to this adoption was received in 1861 during the Viceroyalty of Lord Canning. An annual pension of Rs. 1,20,000 was sanctioned for Janoji and the title Raja-Bahadur of Devur was conferred on him. The pension was subject to revision after janoji's death but the title was to continue in the family perpetually. Janoji II died in 1881.

Home (Nagpur Online)                                                            Home(Nagpur Collectorate)