Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-09T07:49:12.640Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Swettenham and British Residential Rule in West Malaya

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

Ernest Chew
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Within the last two decades, and particularly after the Federation of Malaya achieved its independence (1957), most historical writings on Malaya (now called Peninsular Malaysia) have been inspired or influenced by a marked revisionist tendency. Such revisionism, abetted by nationalism, has led to (a) a critical reappraisal of British personalities and policies in Malaya, and (b) a relative reduction of historical interest, both professional and popular, in the ‘imperial theme’ as compared with indigenous topics. While some of these revisionist writings may be self-conscious and tendentious, they do provide a corrective to earlier colonial historiography and have encouraged a more balanced estimate of the British element in Malaysian history.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 5 , Special Issue 2: The Centenary of British Intervention in Malaya , September 1974 , pp. 166 - 178
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Cowan, C. D. (ed.), “Sir Frank Swettenham's Perak Journals, 1874–1876,” Journal of the Malayan Branch, Royal Asiatic Society (JMBRAS), XXIV, 4 (1951)Google Scholar; E. Sadka (ed.), “The Journal of Sir Hugh Low, Perak, 1877,” JMBRAS, XXVII, 4; and Clifford, H., “Expedition to Trengganu and Kelantan” (with an introduction by Khoo Kay Kim), JMBRAS, XXXIV, 1 (1961).Google Scholar

2 See, e.g., Gullick, J. M., “Kuala Lumpur, 1880–1895,” JMBRAS, XXVIII, 4 (1955)Google Scholar; Allen, J. de V., “Two Imperialists: A Study of Sir Frank Swettenham and Sir Hugh Clifford,” JM(alaysian) BRAS, XXXVII, 1 (1964), 41–73;Google Scholar and Chew, E., “Sir Frank Swettenham and the Federation of the Malay States,” Modern Asian Studies, II, 1 (1968), 51–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Viz., Parkinson, C. N., British Intervention in Malaya, 1867–1877 (Singapore, 1960)Google Scholar; Cowan, C. D., Nineteenth Century Malaya (London, 1961)Google Scholar; Sadka, E., The Protected Malay States, 1874–1895 (Kuala Lumpur, 1968)Google Scholar; Seng, P. Loh Fook, The Malay States, 1877–1895: Political Change and Social Policy (Singapore, 1969)Google Scholar; Thio, E., British Policy in the Malay Peninsula, 1880–1910, I (Singapore, 1969)Google Scholar; and Hon-Chan, Chai, The Development of British Malaya, 1896–1909 (Kuala Lumpur, 1964).Google Scholar

4 On Low, see E. Sadka, works cited in fn. 1 & 3; and Pope-Hennessy, J., Verandah (London, 1964), passimGoogle Scholar. On Clifford, see J. Allen, article cited in fn. 2; and Roff, W. R., introduction to Stories by Sir Hugh Clifford (Kuala Lumpur, 1966).Google Scholar

5 For recent studies of this central theme, see Milne, R. S., Government and Politics in Malaysia (Boston, 1967)Google Scholar; Simandjuntak, B., Malayan Federalism, 1945–1963 (Kuala Lumpur, 1969)Google Scholar; Means, G. P., Malaysian Politics (London, 1970)Google Scholar; and Sopiee, Mohamed Noordin, From Malayan Union to Singapore Separation. Political Unification in the Malaysia Region, 1945–65 (Kuala Lumpur, 1974)Google Scholar. A pioneer work in this field was Emerson, R., Malaysia. A Study in Direct and Indirect Rule (New York, 1937).Google Scholar

6 Cf. Kennedy, J., A History of Malaya, 2nd ed. (London, 1970), pp. 170–178Google Scholar; and Tregonning, K. G., A History of Modern Malaysia and Singapore (Singapore, 1972), pp. 111–114Google Scholar. For reappraisals of Birch, see Mallal, M. A., “J. W. W. Birch: Causes of his Assassination”, Unpublished M. A. thesis, University of Malaya, 1952Google Scholar; and Kim, Khoo Kay, “J. W. W. Birch: A Victorian Moralist in Perak's Augean Stable?” Journal of the Historical Society, University of Malaya, IV (1965/1966), 33–47Google Scholar. For an attempt to redeem Douglas’ reputation, see Jackson, J.C., “Kuala Lumpur in the 1880's: the Contribution of Bloomfield Douglas,” Journal of Southeast Asian History, IV, 2 (1963), 117–127Google Scholar. Contrary verdicts are found in J. M. Gullick, work cited in fn. 2, 23–32; and Chew, E., “Frank Swettenham and Yap Ah Loy: the Advance of British ‘Influence’ in Kuala Lumpur, 1871–1885,” Journal of the Historical Society, University of Singapore (1967/1968), 67–70.Google Scholar

7 A balanced assessment of Low's achievements should take into account his advantages over Birch (his previous service in Borneo, sympathy with the indigenous peoples, and the effective suppression of Malay resistance in Perak) and his occasional firmness as well as obvious diplomatic flexibility in dealing with Malay chiefs, Chinese capitans and British colonial officials.

8 Both men had more than a Malayan reputation, and held Governorships in west Africa. On Clifford's work in Africa, see Metcalfe, G. E., Great Britain and Ghana. Documents of Ghana History, 1807–1957 (London, 1964), pp. 544–572Google Scholar; and Nicolson, I. F., The Administration of Nigeria, 1900–1960 (Oxford, 1969), especially ch. 8.Google Scholar

9 Rodger, Treacher and perhaps Ernest Birch (who, like his ill-fated father, served as Resident of Perak) deserve to be rescued from near oblivion. They did much of the hard administrative work for which Swettenham received the kudos: see Chew, E., “Sir Frank Swettenham's Malayan Career up to 1896”, Unpublished M. A. thesis, University of Singapore, 1966, especially pp. 188–204.Google Scholar

10 Gov. Straits Mitchell to Sec. State Chamberlain (private), 12 Nov. 1895 (Chamberlain Papers, Birmingham University Library; microfilm extract, University of Singapore Library).

11 Ireland, A., The Far Eastern Tropics (London, 1905), p. 113.Google Scholar

12 Note, however, his modest preface to Footprints in Malaya (p. 4): “I do not pretend to be an artist in any sense … I had some sort of story which it interested me to tell, and I have told it in my own fashion as a sufficient object in itself.”

13 See my article, cited in fn. 2, 51–52 and 55–64.

14 See Swettenham to Sec. State Crewe (private), 3 June 1910, and to A. J. Harding (private), 19 Sept. 1910, and minutes thereon (CO 273/368); and cf. Thio, op. cit., pp. 207–216.

15 See Swettenham, , “Malay Problems, 1926,” British Malaya, I, 1 (May 1926), 7–14Google Scholar; and his “Policy in British Malaya,” British Malaya, VII, 2 (June 1932), 41–44.Google Scholar

16 See Swettenham,, British Malaya, revised ed. (London, 1948), pp. v–xiiiGoogle Scholar; and cf. Allen, J. de V., The Malayan Union (New Haven, Conn., 1967), pp. 36–44, 89–90, 180–181.Google Scholar

17 Viz., his “Two Imperialists” (see fn. 2, above) and “Johore 1901–1914,” JMBRAS, XLIV, 2 (1972), especially 1–22.Google Scholar

18 Thesis cited in fn. 9.

19 By Gungwu, Wang, “1874 in Our History,” Peninjau Sejarah, I, 1 (1966), 12–16Google Scholar; and Kim, Khoo Kay, “The Pangkor Engagement of 1874,” JMBRAS, XLVII, 1 (1974), 1–12.Google Scholar

20 Malaya (London, 1963), p. 34.Google Scholar

21 Sec. State Kimberley to Gov. Straits Clarke, 20 Sept. 1873 (CO 273/67). For the background of this famous despatch, see Cowan, Nineteenth Century Malaya, ch. 4; and Chew, E., “The Reasons for British Intervention in Malaya,” JSEAH, VI, 1 (1965), 81–93.Google Scholar

22 Cf. Cowan, op. cit., ch. 5; and Parkinson, op. cit., chs. 5–7.

23 Gov. Straits Clarke to Sec. State Carnarvon (confidential), 30 Dec. 1874 (CO 273/76). On Swettenham's varied roles during 1874, see my thesis, pp. 34–79.

24 Ibid., pp. 72–83.

25 Cf. Parkinson, op. cit., pp. 194–203; and Sadka, Protected Malay States, pp. 77–88.

26 Swettenham, “Memorandum … on the Position in Perak, recommending that Sultan Abdullah should rule the State under the British,” composed ca. July 1875 (Swettenham Papers, SP 12/17, Arkib Negara Malaysia). For analysis and text, see my thesis, pp. 95–97 and appendix E:

27 Sec. State Carnarvon to Gov. Straits Jervois, 135 of 1 June 1876 (Parliamentary Papers C. 1512, no. 70).

28 Ibid.

29 Col. Sec. Straits to Resident Selangor, 21 May 1878, enclosed in Gov. Straits Robinson to Sec. State Hicks Beach, 170 of 13 June 1878 (CO 273/94).

30 Sec. State Hicks Beach to Gov. Straits Robinson, 149 of 31 Aug. 1878 (CO 273/94).

31 Circular, Col. Sec. Straits to Residents, 17 May 1878, enclosed in Gov. Straits Robinson to Sec. State Hicks Beach, 171 of 13 June 1878 (CO 809/18).

32 Resident Perak to Gov. Straits, 28 May 1878, enclosed in ibid.

33 Gov. Straits to Resident Perak, 9 June 1878, enclosed in ibid.

34 Minute by C. P. Lucas, 27 June 1878, on ibid. (CO 273/94); and Sec. State to Gov. Straits, 150 of 31 Aug. 1878 (CO 273/94).

35 Gov. Straits Robinson to Colonial Office, 29 Apr. 1879 (CO 273/101).

36 Ibid. Cf. OAG Straits Anson to Sec. State Hicks Beach, 25 Feb. 1880 (CO 273/102): “Mr. Low now reports that Perak differs very little from a Crown Colony.…”

37 See minutes by de Robeck, 5 May, and Cox, 6 May, on Gov. Straits to Colonial Office, 29 Apr. 1879 (CO 273/101).

38 See minutes by Herbert, 12 June, and Hicks Beach, 13 June, on ibid.

39 Cf. my article, “The Withdrawal of the Last British Residency from Upper Burma in 1879,” JSEAH, X, 2 (1969), 253–278.Google Scholar

40 See my thesis, pp. 146–154; and Sadka, op. cit., pp. 105–113.

41 See my short note on “The First State Council in the Protected Malay States,” JMBRAS, XXXIX, 1 (1966), 182–184Google Scholar; and the concise discussion in Sadka, op. cit., pp. 176–195. The third State Council, that of Sungai Ujong, was formed in 1883; see Gov. Straits Weld to Sec. State Derby, 29 Jan. 1883 (Parl. Pap. C. 4192).

42 For a detailed account, see my thesis, ch. 3. Cf. Sadka op. cit., pp. 137–153; and P. Loh; op. cit., ch. 1 passim.

43 Gov. Straits Weld to Sec. State Kimberley, 339 of 22 Sept. 1881 (CO 273/109).

44 Gov. Straits Weld to Sec. State Kimberley (confidential), 21 Oct. 1880 (CO 273/104).

45 Ibid. On the background of Weld, and the context of this despatch, see Thio, op. cit., ch. 1.

46 Sec. State Kimberley to Gov. Straits Weld (confidential), 11 Feb. 1881 (CO 273/104).

47 Gov. Straits Weld to Sec. State Derby, 29 Jan. 1883 (Parl. Pap. C. 4192).

48 Weld, , speech on “The Straits Settlements and British Malaya”, 10 June 1884, in Proceedings of the Royal Colonial Institute, 15 (1883–1884).Google Scholar

49 Reported in Gov. Straits Weld to Sec. State Kimberley (private), 4 Oct. 1882 (Kimberley Papers; reference by courtesy of Prof. E. Thio).

50 On the grounds for this conclusion, see my thesis, especially ch. 4. Cf. Sadka, op. cit., pp. 153–154 and passim.

51 See Chew, E., “Sir Frank Swettenham and the Federation of the Malay States”, Modem Asian Studies, II, 1 (1968), 51–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Cf. Sadka, op. cit., ch. 11; Thio, op. cit., ch. 6; and Milner, A. C., “The Federation Decision: 1895,” JMBRAS, XLIII, 1 (1970), 104–115.Google Scholar

52 See Swettenham,, About Perak (Singapore, 1893), pp. 77–78Google Scholar. A critic of the book regarded Swettenham's arguments against annexation as “the conspicuous instance of his special pleading”! (quoted in The Pinang Gazette, 4 Nov. 1893, p. 2).

53 See my article, cited in fn. 51, especially pp. 66–67.

54 Lugard, , The Dual Mandate in British Tropical Africa (Edinburgh, 1922), pp. 130–131.Google Scholar

55 Swettenham, , Footprints in Malaya (London, 1942), pp. 101–102.Google Scholar

56 Cf. Sadka, op. cit., especially pp. 119 ff.

57 Cf. Roff, W. R., The Origins of Malay Nationalism (New Haven, Conn., 1967), pp. 11–32.Google Scholar

58 Cf. Fieldhouse, D. K., The Colonial Empires (London, 1966), pp. 295–296.Google Scholar

59 See Moon, P., Warren Hastings and British India (London, 1947)Google Scholar, ch. 7; Beaglehole, T. H.Thomas Munro and the Development of Administrative Policy in Madras 1792–1818 (Cambridge, 1966), passim.Google Scholar; and Bastin, J., The Native Policies of Sir Stamford Raffles in Java and Sumatra (London, 1957), introduction and epilogue.Google Scholar

60 See Stokes, E., The English Utilitarians and India (Oxford, 1959), pp. 311–317Google Scholar; Owen, R., “The Influence of Lord Cromer's Indian Experience on British Policy in Egypt 1883–1907,” Middle Eastern Affairs, No. 4, ed. Hourani, A. (London, 1965), pp. 109–139Google Scholar; and Marlowe, J., Cromer in Egypt (London, 1970), passim.Google Scholar

61 See, e.g., Kirk-Greene, A. H. M. (ed.), The Principles of Native Administration in Nigeria. Selected Documents, 1900–1947 (London, 1965), passim.Google Scholar