40

CHAPTER II-

BRITISH RELATION WITH TRIPURA AMD ITS IMPACT OH THE

ADMINISTRATION

Synopsis s Introduction - Contact with British -

Previous History of the Occupation of the plains by
Mughals - Annexation of Chakla Roshn.abad by the British -
Effect of British Annexation on the Disputes of Success­
ion - For Suppression of the Kookies - Duties on Hill
Produce and the Question of Paramountcy - Advent of a
Hew Era in the Administration*

INTRODUCTION

An intermittent political structure characterised

by a primitive political system in ancient Tripura was
white-washed by the introduction of some features of
Muslim administration during the reign of Ratnamanlkya
at the end of the 15th century A.D* He introduced a form
of patrimonial political system,nin which there are
specialised political elites such as Kings, sub-chiefs,
and a. relatively specialised officialdom1' in 'the Muslim
l

model.such a system has been classified as patrimonial

-j
by Almond and Powell because all, or most, of these
offices are located in the ruler’s household. This
system was never abolished in the princely state of ••
Tripura due to the predominant role of family feud,

the best remedy of which lies in the system as it

offers opportunities to satisfy a number of aspi­

rants to the throne or to,the posts nearer to it.

But it was considerably reformed in the British

•
Model as the princes came in contact wit 6 the British

rule gradually after the advent of the British regime

in India, 1

CONTACT WITH THE BRITISH

The first contact of Tripura with the British

Bast India Company was a feud with Krishnamanikya who

ascended the throne in 1760 A,D. This was the time

when the political horison of Bengal was thickly

overcast* There were troubles all around* The death

of Alibardi Khan, succession of his grandson Sira3a-

ddcwla and his fall through the mean treachery of

some of his courtiers and the final shifting of the

administrative power of the province from the ftawabs

to a handful of English merchants followed one after

another, '

"The first few years of the rule of Krishna­

maniky a saw him involved in quarrels not only with

 1*2 *

their old foe, the Mawab or Bengal, but also with

the English who were daily growing into a power both

politically and commercially. Chakla Roshnabad was

the bone of contention this time. The Fauadar of

the Hawab, diffident as he was of success in a fresh

•
*

trial of strength with Tripura, sought the help of

the English and Governor Vansittart was not slow to

avail himself of this golden opportunity of extending

p
their power towards Chittagong . He ordered the

Chief of Chittagong, Mr. Verelst, to occupy Tripura

and accordingly Lieutenant Mathews the Officer

Commanding’ in Chittagong, mareheu against the King,

Mahara^ Krishnamanikya. By the machination of a

traitor Bakshi, the soldiers of Tripura grew panlck-

strieken and thus, without any fight, the English

flag was hoisted over the plains of Tripura before

four years of their acceptance of the Dewani of

Bengal.

PREVIOUS HISTORY OF THE OCCUPATION OF THE PLAINS BY

MUGHALS

From the last phase of the Mughal period

the 2emindary of chakla Roshnabad gave a dual posi­

tion to the kings of Tripura. They were sovereign

in respect of their hill-territory, but they were

vassals of the Emperor of Delhi or the Hawab of

Bengal in respect of the plains of Chakla Boshna-

bad. The story of the conquest of the plains was

thus, stated by Charles Stewart in his History of

--- a
Bengal^. A "nephew (Jagat Bay) of the Baia of

Tipperah, having displeased his uncle was banished

the country. The youth took refuge with a Mohammedan

Zemindar, named, Ak& Sadik, and entreated him to

assist him in recovering the share of his inheri­

tance. The zemindar being'intimately acquainted with

Meer Hubbeeb (Dewan'of Dacca), recommended the cause

of the young man to him; and pointed out the favour­

able opportunity it offered of subjecting Tipperah

to the Mohammedan arms.

"Meer Hubbeeb, having represented the cir­

cumstances to his master (Murshood Gpoly, Deputy

laaim of Dacca), obtained permission to proceed v;ith

all the troops that were then in the vicinity of

Dacca* to effect the object. The Moghul troops

crossed the Burhampooter, and entered Tipperah before

the Baja (Dharmamanikya II) was aware of their inten­

tions 5 and having the young man with them whose

cause they espoused, lie pointed out to them the road
by which they should advance. Aided by such a guide,
they reached the capital- before 'the Raja could make
any preparation to oppose them; he was obliged to
flee to the mountains; and the nephew was raised to
the .Raja, upon condition of paying a large portion
of the revenue to the governor of Bengal. The whole
country, in consequence, quietly submitted j and thus
the province of Tipperah, which from time immemorial
had been an independent kingdom, became annexed to
the Moghul empire; and in order to support the young
Raja against his uncle, and at the same time to secure
his fealty a considerable number of Mohammedan troops
were left in the country, under the command of Aka
Sadik, who was nominated Foujedar. On receiving
intelligence of this event the Mawab was much pleased,
and changed the name of Tipperah to Roshenabed (the
t '

country of light), and gave to, or procured for,

Moorshud Cooly the additional title of Bahadur; and
to Meer Rubbeeb that of Khan'*. This was an event of
1733.

This incident and its aftermath is mentioned

in Progressive Tripura,by shri A.,C.Bhattacharyya. lie.
writes that, Oharmamanikya II ascended the throne of
Tripura in 1714- A.D. During his reign, Jag at' Hay, a

descendant of Chhatra Manikya, rebelled and, with

the help of Nayeb Mazim of Dacca, became King, of

the plains, which was named VRoshnabad* or the

‘Land of Light'» by the Mahomedans. But, Dharmamanlkya

II appealed to Hawato Sujauddin (mentioned as Shujaa

Adden Khan by Stewart) of Murshidabad, who granted

him the zemindary right over the Pargana of Roshnawad

on a yearly rent of Bs*5f00D/-6, Since then the kings

of Tripura possessed, it as zemindars*

It is clear from the two narratives that

the hill territory of Tripura was never conquered

by the Moghuls nor the Raja of Tripura ever surren­

dered his sovereignty over that territory. The very

sentence of Stewart quoted in his narrative *The whole

country, in consequence, quietly submitted, and thus

the province of Tipperah, which from time immemorial

had been an independent kingdom, became annexed to

the Moghul empire;‘ created a confusion by the term

“the whole country” to later writers and to the

British officers who claimed to extend the paramount

-cower of the British Government in India over the • <

Raja of Tripura. In fact the Raja was a zemindar

with regard to the plains of Tripura under the Nawab

and a sovereign chieftain with regard to the Hills

of Tripura.

AMIXATIGM 0? CHACKLA KGSHNABAD BY THE BRITISH

n.rn—- ......... .............. ............... .. .......... «iin id ■ ■■■■ ■ ■»"? ■■■■■■.'

The same arrangement, was Blade by the East India

Company with Maharaj Krishnamanikya with regard to Ghakl

Roshnabad in lieu of an annual rent of Rs.10p001/- after

its annexation in 1761. The British troops under Lieute­

nant Mathews came to assist the Hawab's forces in sub­

duing the Raja of Tripura (Krishnamanikya). As men­

tioned earlier they occupied the plains of Tripura and

the Raja surrendered -to them. The intention of Governor

Vansittart, representative of the Company,, now entering

•
on its strange career of empire was to reduce the Raja

to his due state of obedience to the Government of

Islamabad (refers to the Kawab’s regime in Dacca, which

was then called Islamabad) and to gain some advantages

by the expedition from the Hawab of Bengal. He writes

from' Calcutta to the President and Council of the

Factory at Islamabad* ’’With regard to the Tippera Raja,

as the Hawab»s Fouzder has been obliged from his ill

behaviour to take up arms against him, we desire

that you will use your endeavours to reduce him to

his due state of obedience to the Government of Isla­

mabad, acquainting 'us then what advantages may accrue

to the Company from the possession of that country,

' •

and x<re will ansx*er any representations the Nawab

b
may make on. the subject” . The passage of the letter

connotes that he had an ultimate motive of occupying

that territory also. The circumstances favoured him.

After the surrender of the Baja a Collector of Revenue

was despatched from Chittagong with instructions to

enquire into the resources of the country and demand

payment of the expenses of the expedition. The

Collector found the province desolated by the Nawab»s

troops and was compelled to take payment by instal­

ments “as the Raja was very low in cash”. The revenue *

for the first year was fixed at one Lakh and one sicca
£
Rupees . Thus the Raja of Tripura became a zeminder

of Chackla floshnabad under the Bast India Company,

and a British Resident was appointed in his court to

look after the affairs of the zemindary.

After the death of Krishnainanikya in 1783 it

was made Khas land of the company and was returned to

his successor Rajdharmanikya only after 10 years in

1792 under the permanent settlement of Lord Cornwallis

The administration of the plains began to be

modernised under the supervision of the East India

, •

Company. Mr. Leeke was appointed Resident in the Court

of Krishnamanikya to look after the affairs of Chackla

Boshnabad, During his time the judicial system of the

plains was separated from that of the hills. The King

xfould appoint Judges for the hill territory of whom

he was the supreme chief, but the Court for Boshnabad

was composed of the British Resident and the King

himself or his representative, the Dewan of Boshnabad.

This is evident from the copies of some judgements

delivered at that time under the joint seal and slgna-

ture ,

In 17921 when Boshnabad was given to Maharaj

Hajdharmanikya in Permanent Settlement, the post of

the Resident was abolished, the territory was turned

into the District of ’Boshnabad Tripura’ and a British

Collector was appointed under the Maharaja for its

administration. Thus the features of District Adminis­

tration began to develop in this part along with other

parts of British India*

EFFECT OF BRITISH ANNEXATION ON TEE DISPUTES OF
SUCCESSION

Holding of the Eemindary of Chackla Roshnabad

had a tranquil effect upon the struggle for the throne

among the near relatives of a deceased King or between

the Jubraj and the Barathakur, two most potential

heirs. In ancient times the eldest son was the heir to

the throne in Tripura according to convention. If a

King would have no son, his brother would- occupy the

throne with the approval of the noted citizens and

ordinary subjects. In this system, sometimes there

were strifes over the throne. Maharaj Amarmanikya

0577-1586 ^Numismatic, evidence by K.P.Sen Gupta)

created the post of Jubraj to avoid such strifes

7
according to Kaiiprasanna Sengupta'. Shri Sengupta

quoted different Rajmala scripts in support of his

contention. None of the quotations speaks of the

creation of the post of Jubraj, but only stated the

fact that after the death of his eldest son, Rajballav

Narayan, Rajdhar Narayan, his second son, was declared

as jubraj. Shri Sengupta writes that Rajballav Narayan

was declared as Jubraj by Amarmanikya, and later when

Rajballav died, he again appointed Rajdhar as Jubraj•

 50

However, the mention of the post of Jubraj in Rajmala

scripts on this occasion led shri Sengupta to coiae to .

this conclusion, with which he refuted the assumption

of Kailash Chandra,Singha that the post of Jubraj

•was created by Kalyanmanikya a later King . Of .course,

Shri Sengupta states that the title *Thakur* for the

princes’ and members of the royal family was created

by Kalyanmanikya v;ho reigned from 1625 to 1660 A.D.

To return to the narrative, after the death

of .Bajdharmanikya, Bamgangamanikya., the Barathakur

occupied the throne.- Jubraj Durgamani revolted at first

but later went to the British Court by the advice cf

the Governor General, who declared that the right on

the zemindary would' also decide the right on the throne.

It was not legally correct, but this system of appeal

to the Court by the contestants for the throne avoided

many a bloodfeuds at the subsequent period.

. The longest case of dispute for the throne of

Tripura was instituted perhaps after the death of Jshan

Chandra Manikya in 1862. It took about eight years for

the final judgement to come from the highest Imperial

Court of Appeal, i.e., Privy Council. Birchandra Manikya,

/
who virtually occupied the throne after the death of

Ishan Chandra, ceremonially ascended it on the 9th

March, 1870. He ushered in a new era in Tripura by

his numerous social and administrative reforms.

FOE .SUPPRESSION OF THE KQOKIBS

The Kookies at the eastern boundaries of

i

Tripura were a violent race occasionally attacking

parts of Tripura and British territory towards Chitta­

gong. Lord Mayo, the then Governor-General of India,

appointed a Political Agent in Tripura for the first

time in 1871 for the suppression of the Hookies in

the Lushai Hills. According to the advice of the

Political Agent, a reform was introduced in the judi­

ciary of Hill Tripura. So long the King was the

supreme court of appeal, a remnant of the primitive

system. But in 1872, Maharaj Birchandra established

Khas Appeal Adalat (Hoyal Court of Appeal) for final

judgment of. the civil and criminal cases. It was

constituted with two judges to some extent in the

model of the Privy council, the King remaining the

fountain of justice. In 1878, Pahari Adalat (Hill

Court) was abolished. In 1886, the post of Chief

Justice was created, •

 Though the Political Agent was appointed in

the name of looking into the. arrangements made "by the

Maharaja to prevent the attacks of the Kookles* the

British relation with Tripura was concerned with as

many as five problems:-

(1) Annexation of chackla Koshnabad;

(2) Disputed succession and proceedings in the

British Courts;

(3) Question of boundary between the hill kingdom

of the Raja and the British territory surround

ing it particularly in Sylhet and Chittagong;

(4) Co-operation of the Raja in suppressing the

outrages of the indomitable Kookies;

(5) - Duties on hill produce, raising the question

of paramountcy*

Effect of British contact on three heads, iA,

(1), (2) and, (4-) have just been noted— not discussed

in detail. The salutary effects of the ■ :

contact on the administrative system and succession

feuds of the royal house have also been pointed out.

The problem Ho. (3) is* partly Included in problem ('<-)

and is partly a problem of aggressioncf the British

territory by the Raja,of Tripura.

 Mackenzie observes? ”Jt would seem that as

soon as the Tipperah Hawaii had assured themselves

of the mild character of our Government, and realised

the fact that in some part, at any rate, of their

ancestral territory they were to be completely free

•

from control, they diligently set themselves to

enlarge the borders of their independent kingdom on
1o
its further sides'* * In 1809, on the -Sylhet Frontier
a bitter enmity subsisted between the land owners of

the plains' and the Raj ah»s people. Every outlying hill

was claimed as belonging to Rajah. The Government had

to interpose in the most determined manner and one

or two resolute Magistrates soon restored order.

Independent Rookies and these under the

nominal subjection of the Hajah of Tripura would

a

very often sack and plunder the British villages at

the border of Tripura. The Government would make the

Rajah responsible- for such outrages, sometimes assum­

ing that the marauders were either Tripurls or

•Rookies under the Rajah and sometimes believing that

the Rajah had not prevented the independent Rooki

raiders from passing through his territory with the

purpose of outraging the British territory. But the

 54 .

Rajah when approached would always throw the blame

on the independent Kookies and shirk his responsibi­
lity.

Besides, the deprived and dissatisfied

members of the Rajah»s family would create disturbances
in the British territory. In 1824-, Samblioo Thakur,
brother of the Rajah, whose claim to succeed had been
rejected by the Sudder Dewany Adalat, had set up the
standard of rebellion in the Chittagong Hill Tracts.
In 1836, Hamkanoo Thakur, a relative of the Rajah
(Ramganga Manikya), attacked Kundul at .3 ill a, Tipperah
at the head of three or four hundred tribal men. To
the demand for his apprehension, the Rajah sent a'
curt return that they were not resident of his juris­
diction. But afterwards, when the Commissioner of ,
Chittagong pressed the Rajah with certain other ques­
tions regarding the proper limits of Ms territory and
his right to levy certain dues within his zemindary,
the Rajah was compelled to surrender Ramkanoo Thakur
who had been quietly residing in a village of Hill
Tipperah. In 184-3, Bugwan Chunder Thakur, son of
Sambhoo Thakur, also attacked a village in Zilla
Tipperah with a band of Kookies. Bugwan Chunder was

0
 55 •

an intriguer against the Raja (Krishna Kishore

Manikya). Still it was' held that had the police

of the Raja been a little more efficientthe war

parties of savages could not have passed across his

territory.
> *

\ .

All these misunderstandings occurred due

to lack of a fixed boundary between the kingdom of

Hill Yipperah and the bordering districts under the

British. However, under the order of the Government,

Lt. Fisher laid down a boundary in 1822. But the

Rajah (Ramganga Manikya) was dissatisfied with it,

and its declaration was immediately followed by.a

murderous attack upon a party of cultivators going

into the British hills to joom. The Rajah, when

applied to, threw the blame on the independent Kookies .

and took no real pains to discover the murderers.

The Government wrote a letter, worded in the most

peremptory terms, stating at length the proofs of the

\

complicity of his people if not himself, and con­

taining the following remarkable passagej-

"You seem to-; have adopted the plan of committ­

ing these murders and other acts of violence as a means'

of taking revenge on the zemindar and the ryots of

this Government who have opposed you. Considering the

very strong presumptions against you, resulting from

the above circumstances, the Governor-General in

Council was prepared to have ordered you personally

to he called in to be put on your trial in the courts

m

of Government for instigating the murders in question.

In his consideration however for you, he has now

ordered that you shall in the first instance he called

upon by this letter through the Magistrate of lipperah,

to state whatever you may desire to urge in explana­

tion, within twenty days from the receipt of tbis^1.

The Government (of East India Company) however,

could not establish the case legally and was content

to drop it with only a solemn warning as to the future

conduct of the Rajah. The.Rajah was at the same time •

t

bold that if he could prove in the civil courts that

the boundary line was incorrect, Goverment would

alter it. He was also given the right to collect dues

from the, Joameas of British territory on the ground

of protection afforded them and the right to purchase

any lands he choose, though he would have no sovereign

rights over those lands. Thus the boundary dispute went,

in certain respects, to the favour of the Raja of #

 57 .

Tripura with regard to his prestige and recognition

of sovereign rights in his territory, though the
suggestion for decision of boundary lines by the
British subordinate courts was an anomally from the
point
a. of view of the Law of Nations* Mackenzie remarks,
m #

nso anomalous has the position of Hill Tipperah been, .

that it is only of late years that the principles of
• *

extradition law have been applied in our dealings with

that state. He find that sometimes British subjects
were surrendered at the Rajah’s request; at others
our courts were directed by the Government to inquire
into cases beyond the border when it was doubtful
whether either of the parties were British subjects.
Ho treaty existing 'to define the limits or conditions
of extradition, the demands both of the Hill Tipperah
and of the British authorities have extended to all
classes of criminals. But in every instance it has
been the monotonous and never ceasing complaint of
our Magistrates that real and hearty assistance was
never to be looked for from Agartolla” 12 . , So a
Political Agent was later appointed in Tripura In 1871
particularly to watch and advise the Raja in dealing
with the Kookies*
DUTIES "Oil HILL PRODUCE AMD THE QUESTION OF PARAMOUNICY

The matter regarding dues on hill produce raised

the question of independence of the Rajah of Tripura and

that of paramountcy to the highest dispute and conflict­

ing decisions. Mackenzie observes: "It had always of

late years been the policy of the Rajahts advisers,

European and Native, to insist on the absolute indepen­

dence of his hill territory as never, according to them,

having been subdued by the Moghul, They urged accordingly

that in treating with him the British Government should

be guided only by the law of nations, and they repu­

diated, so far as they were able, the existence of any

paramount authority or any real control over the actions

of their master in the hills

The dispute on the dues on hill produce relate

to the following occurrences. The Rajah, as zeminder

of Chackla Roshnabad, got a remission of fts. 28,000/-

from his annual jumma when, in 1792, the Government

had abolished throughout Bengal all internal transit

duties and cesses which, under the Generic name of

Gayer or Sayerat, were a fruitful source of revenue

to the zemindars. In 1836 the Commissioner of Chitta­

gong found that such transit duties as were abolished

 59 ’

were levied on bamboo,, cotton and other articles of

hill produce under the Raj ah ’ s orders within the

permanently-settled Boshanabad. The Raja’s contention

was that as an independent prince, he was entitled to

impose what taxes he pleased in his own kingdom; and

that the collection of these at the frontier of his

zeraindary was a mere matter of convenience. So the

Government should not interfere with the matter; the

Rajah as independent prince of hill Tipperah was not

compensated for his dues in the hills.

There was a large number of correspondence

between the Commissioner of Chittagong, Mr. Dampler,

and the Rajah’s Attorney, Mr. Blgnell, The Government

at first held that the Raja eouid have no claim to

enjoy the remission in perpetuity granted in 1792 and .

the proceeds of the duties then forbidden to be levied.

Lord Auckland decided that the Rajah was neither as

Chief nor as zemindar entitled now to impose such.

Subsequently this decision of Lord Auckland

was reversed by his successor at, the end of the argu­

ments and counter-arguments between the Rajah’s

attorney and the Government summarised in an order

addressed to J. J. Harvey S3q* Commissioner of the

 60 •

Chittagong division dated the 27th December 1638. This

order refers to the historical position of the Raj a by

14 *
quoting Stewart that the province of Tipperah was

never conquered and added to Moghul Empire until 1733,

though from 1708, the Rajah received investiture from

Moorshed Kooly Khan and renewed the »Kfailut» annually.

In 1733? the Dewatt of the Naib Nazim of Dacca, Meer

Rabheeb overran and subdued the territory. There also

the subdued territoiy was mentioned as Roushenabad

which meant the portion of plains under the Rajah.

The Deputy Governor thought that there was nothing

that could bear out the Commissioner's supposition

that, by receiving a Khilut or investiture the right

of administering the raj or jageer of the inferior

feudatory passed in effect into the hands of the

superior state. On'this ground also the argument

against the independence of the Raja based on the

right of the decision of succession in the British

Courts and- the receipt of investiture from the British

Government was quashed. The said order affirmed "that

the Rajah is under no engagement, expressed or

implied, to refrain from the levy of Sayer duties

within his hill territory; and when considered in

 61

connection with the strong arguments produced, by

the Hajah himself, through Mr. B.ignell, \d.ll fully

warrant the opinion to which, after due considera­

tion His Honor has arrived, that there is no ground

whatever to interfere with the Raja’s right of levy-

Ing, within his own hill territory, whatever taxes

or duties he may think proper*’^.

Thus the question of Paramountcy was settled

by the order, in favour of the Raja of Tripurah, the

British Government in India having no paramount power

over the Rajah. The British Governors with their

inborn respect for rule of law did not acquiesce, in

the arguments of their officers like Mr. Dampier and

Mr. Harvey. Mr. Mackenzie sheds crocodile tears for

this policy of the Government in the following words

with reference to Durgamoni case when the Government

invested him with the insignia of Kingship as regard

to the hills, while the courts gave him possession

of the lands of the plains *

"Ho one can fail to see how inconveniently

the fiction of independence worked in this case. Years

of misery to the people might have been avoided, had

 v2 .

Government assumed the paramount position which it

historically occupied, and. which the application of

17
the investiture virtually recognised*1 . Of course,

he. scornfully admitted that the case was too petty

to demand a policy. Such was the attitude of the,

British officers towards the status of the Maharaja

of Tripura. They often spoke of him with scant res­

pect, the examples of which would only increase the

volume of this paper. After the annexation of the

territory in the plains occupied by the Maharaja

Krishna Manikya, the East India Company’s officers

treated him as' their subject, to which the prince

Eajdhar Manikya, an independent-minded Jubraj? objected

by advising the Raja not to accede to all their

demands. For this Rajdhar had to face a lot of trouble

in their hands, even to’ the extent of being in the

Company’s gaol on a false, allegation of harbouring

dacoits. In fact the Rajahs of Tripura had. to do

many things under duress by the demands of the British

authority as they held insignificant power In com­

parison with the Imperial authority and as they were

in part vassals of the empire with regard to their

resourceful zemindary in the plains*
 63

ADV3HT OF A HEW. ERA IN THE ADMINISTRATION

However, here the actual concern is only with

the development of the Tripura administration which

came as a result of the contact with, and of the

influence of, the British Government. It has been men-

tionecl that after the annexation a British Resident

was appointed.in the court of Krishna Manikya to look

into the affairs of the Chackla Soshnabad. The post

was abolished in 1792 after the Permanent. Settlement

of the zemindary. A Political Agent was. again appointed

in 1871 on the suggestion of the Bengal Government to

assist the Rajah with advice mainly in his treatment

with the Kookies.. The appointment was abolished in

1878, and the conduct of the Government’s political

relation with the State was entrusted to the Magistrate

of Tipperah. An officer of the status of a Deputy

Magistrate was also stationed at Agartale. Their good

offices brought some reforms in the administration of

Tripura, a few of which had been mentioned earlier in

this Chapter, In fine, it may be said that under their

influence there was: (1) introduction of the features

of District Administration, (2) establishment of higher .

courts in the British model, (3) codification of laws,

(if) novel approach to the purpose of administration, *

 6b.

e.g,, looking into the interests of the common people

which had been mentioned in many letters of the Bri­

tish officers, . (5) respect of princes for rule of

law and cessation of succession feuds, and (6) many

other social and political reforms which will be

• 1
mentioned in the next Chapter on Administration of

Bir Chandra and other relevant Chapters afterwards.

It .may be concluded with the remark of' Alexander

Mackenzie, Secretary to the Government of India in

the Home Department, made in his book, T.he History

of the Relations of the Government with the Hill tribes

of the North Bast Frontier of Bengal, published in

188b-, "under the advice and direction of the British

Officers marked improvements have taken place' in the

internal management of the Tipperah state. Bents are

no longer collected at the point of bayonet, as the •

Magistrate of-Tipperah reported to be the case in

1863. Civil and criminal justice is now fairly adminis­

tered? schools have been started, and sane road-making

has been done. The population of the hills according

to last census is 95?637, and the revenue raised

18
sthere nearly two lakhs of Rupees" .
 References

1. Almond and Powell - Comparative Politics, p.223»

2. Bhattacharyya, Apurba Chandra - Progressive

Tripura, pp.29-30*
3. Stewart, Charles - History of Bengal, Edition 1847,

pp. 460-461.

4. Mackenzie, Alexander - History of the Relation of

the Government with the Hill Tribes of the North

Hast Frontier of Bengal, Iublished in Calcutta,

1884, p,271.

5. Ibid., p. 272..

6. Singha Kailash - Rajaala, Published circa 1896, p.130.

7. Sengupta, Kaliprasanna - Rajmala, Tritiya Lahar, p.158,

8. Singha, Kailash, Op.cit., p.37»

9. Sengupta, Kaliprasanna, Op.cit., p. 1^1• *

10. Mackenzie, Alexander, Op.cit., p, 276. .

11. Ibid., p, 279.

12. Ibid., p.. 280.

13. Ibid., p. 281.

14. Stewart, Charles, Op.cit., p. 372.

15» Mackenzie, Alexander, Op.cit., p. 414.

16. Judicial Proceedings, 19th October, 1808, Nos.1-10.

17. Mackenzie, Alexander, Op.cit., p. 274. •

18. Ibid., p. 286.