Arakan Library - Araka Past Present Future

Arakan: - One Who Preserves and Takes Care of Their Own Nationality.

Publication by Arakan Action Association (AAA.)

Arakan Past – Present – Future

BY JOHN OGILVY HAY, J.P.

Arakan Library was founded by a group of Arakan Action Association (AAA) in exile in Thailand from Burma in 2007 doing to voice for the knowledge, the people democratic and human rights.

Arakan Action Association (AAA)

Chotana Road , Chaing Mai ( 50301 ), Thailand.

Email : arakanactionassociation@walla.com , +66—089-637-4383, +66—053-409-577

Letter to an Indian Official.

15^th April 1889.

At our interview on Saturday, I understood you to say you were not aware of Captain (now Major-General) Strover’s report on the mineral resources of Burmah. I send it herewith. It is attached (p.9) to letters which I addressed to the Secretary of State for India in 1874 – 75. From these you will see that my proposals are not of yesterday, and that in 1875 I suggested the connection which is now about to be made between Assam and the Bay of Bengal. Some of the enclosures may now be antiquated, but there may be some points in them still worthy of reference, and I can only regret that excepting the Rangoon and Prome, and the Rangoon Tounghoo and Mandalay lines, the means of communication in Burmah are not further advanced than at the date of these letters. You asked me as to the prospects for cultivation in the hills through which my proposed line would go. I have made every inquiry I can on this subject, but so far my inforfmation is almost nil – inquiries of officers who have been in Arakan hill tracts, and also of the Commissioner of Arakan. (Subsequently the late Sir Edward B. Sladen wrote of the “intervening tracts of valuable territory” – doubtless based on information derived when Political Resident in Mandalay, and also when Commissioner of Arakan – information not possessed by a subsequent commissioner.) Colonel Woodthrope, R.E., read a paper last January before the “Geographical” on his explorations in the Chindwin valley, but he gave no information as to the capabilities of the country for cultivation. After hearing his paper, I wrote him on the subject, but unfortuntaely he had left for India before my letter reached his agents, and I had no reply. (See P. 93.)

I would ask your reference to a remark on p.21 of the letters accompanying this, bearing on matters in the Lushai country, where we have at present an expendition. The Government and their commanders should, of course, be better judges than I can be. It, however, strikes me that the burning of villages, reported in late telegrams, may show that vengeance has been taken; but it is hardly the way to conciliate these with tribes, who are known to harbour very revengeful feelings for such treatment even towards their own neighbours – how much more will they resent such from foreign wites? Even in the ‘Times’ telegram this morning the Commissioner of Chittagong, in addressing the chiefs who had come in, threatens them with the burning of their villages. Is this a conciliatory or Christian policy in this enlightened nineteenth century? It is of a piece with the advice given by a Barukzye chief to Major Broadfoot at the time of the first Sikh campaign, who said, “You do not know how to make war. You should invite the heads to meet you, seize and kill them.” In Colonel Woodthorpe’s paper he alluded to the little that had been done in the way of conciliating or cultivating intercourse with the tribes on the Assam frontier. In the brochure I published last September, of which I sent you a copy, I made a remark to the same effet as to the tribes on the Arakan frontier. Had the road from Chittagong to Akyab, ordered by Lord Dalhousie so far back as 1852, been carried through, the settlers along the route would gradually have come in contact with these wild tribes, and this intercourse would have had a civilising influence over them, “paving the way for what we now require – access through their territory.” There is no question as to the effects of railways, and it cannot be questioned that their influence would be more beneficial in the interest of all concerned than “fire and sword.”

The Secretary of State requires my proposals to be “accompanied by proofs of adequate financial support.” I have been in communication with some of the first houses in the city – bankers and contractors; but no one will take up a matter of the kind without some knowledge of the security they are to get. They all agree that much is to be done in the development of Burmah – a rich country; and that it entirely depends on whether the terms to be granted by Government are satisfactory. An engineer of authority in these matters wrote me as to my proposed line (Akyab to Mandalay): “It is needless to say how valuable such a line would be to Government.” You referred to the proposed line by the Mu Valley to Assam. Very likely that, in connection with the Assam and Chittagong line, would be very serviceable; but from their length, they cannot compare with a line over the Arakan Yoma. Government are anxious to send their surplus population in Bengal to Burmah. The “Kala-panee” is a great hindrance to that. The shortest land route should therefore be adopted. I have not the pleasure of Sir Henry Thuillier’s acquaintance; but through a mutual friend I learn that he has expressed himself much in favour of my view. From his long connection with India, and his position as Surveyor-General, I consider his opinion of great weight.

On receiving a reply to my letter now before Government I would formulage a proposal for the construction of the railway, the security being …. In a paper to-day I see the New Zealand Midland Railway in their prospectus state that they have a free grant of upwards of 2,000,000 acres of land, and for the Canadian Pacific Railway, besides a subsidy from Government of $ 25,000,000 in cash, they had a grant of 25,000,000 acres of land. Of course, my proposed line is nothing in extent to these; but where, as in this case, the land is waste, and, without a railway and settlers, will be so for long, Government should not hesitate at the extent of grant, or delay in granting it. The sooner the line is started, the sooner will there be a development and settlement of the country. You will, I hope, pardon my writing at such length. I do so thus fully in the hope it may receive an impetus from your advocacy, if you approve of my views. – I am, &c.

Reply.

1^st May 1889.

I have to thank you for your letter of 15^th April, which I have read with much interest, as well as the accompaniments, which I return herewith.

Extract from Letter to an Indian Official.

10^th May 1889.

In the last Administration Report of Burmah the following paragraph struck me: “The northern party acquired much useful information regarding the routes through the Chin Hills to Lower Bengal.” Do you know if this information has been published, or if it can be obtained ? It would be very useful in preparing my scheme. I have just received a letter, from which I make the following extract: “A friend, lately arrived from Upper Burmah, tells me nobody expects the Mu Valley Railway to pay, but the C.C. is most anxious to get it complete to assist in settling a large district.”

The same may be said of what I am proposing. The Administration Report further says: “The trade of the Upper Chindwin would be largely developed if there were better communications.” There is no question but railways are required, and, whether they pay or not at once, should be prosecuted in all promising directions. I say of my route that, however difficult and expensive it may be, it can be, and it should be, made; and such a concession should be given as would fully remunerate the constructions.

Extract from Letter to Lieut-General Sir Henry L.Thuillier.

13^th May 1889.

Our mutral friend, Gordon, sent me on your letter to him of 8^th, by which I was obliged, and am glad to see that you purposed discrussing my proposed connection of Mandalay with the sea-coast at Akyab. As you say, it is an “awful country,” but perhaps exploration and survey might reveal that the construction of a railway might not be so difficult as at present thought. I have advocated this line for the last fifteen or twenty years, and have always been met with the same cry, “It is impossible” – but such is not now in the engineer’s vocabulary. The only question is expense. There is no doubt it would be an invaluable line for Government, but as a paying investment it might be long till such a result was realised. My proposal (in part) is that Government should grant sufficient land to recoup the constructors, and they can well spare some of their wastes, which, without railways and population, will long continue useless. The former would bring in the latter, and the result would be a settled country instead of a wilderness in the occupation only of wild tribes. In 1875 I published a map showing the direction I thought trade should take from all Eastern Bengal and Burmah, and this is what I hope to see carried out. As you will know, the line from Assam to Chittagong has been surveyed, and it is understood a company, with Sir Theodore Hope at the head of it, are desirous of taking it up, but I know not on what terms.

To the Sam:

15^th May 1889.

Thanks for your note of yesterday. The connection with Assam is only one I proposed some years ago, and as the Government have surveyed the route, and the line will be taken up by others, I do not trouble myself further with it. I am only glad it is to be made, and trust this will be soon. Of course, I hope to see the line, at present only surveyed to Chittagong, continued to Akyab. It is that port I desire to see the outlet for as much trade as possible from Eastern Bengal, and also Burmah. I see you connect Akyab with the Aeng Pass. That would be as difficult as any work in that country, and that would take the line too far south. What I propose is, after proper survey, to take the shortest practicable line from Akyab to Mandalay. I know it is “across uninhabited mountains, and would never (hardly?) pay for greasing the wheels,” but that is why I require Government to give such a concession for the cost of the rail, and for a time towards expenses. Ultimately, as the country gets settled, and trade directed to it, the line should pay well; and as a strategic line, would be invaluable to Government. Before Lord Lansdowne went out I communicated my views to him, receiving the assurance they should have his consideration, which, now the matter goes out from here, I hope he will give.

To the Same.

11^th June 1889.

I have to acknowledge receipt of your favor of yesterday, and thank you very much for your full remarks, which I fully appreciate. I feel there are great difficulties in the way, but I cannot dismiss from my mind the idea that the survey should be made. It must be made some day, and why not now as well as fifty years hence? An officer who held a high position in Burmah thus writes me: “Akyab being the best and nearest Century, been very backward in granting encouraging terms to private capitalists; and on every occasion when a tendency is shown to more liberal dealings, they should be encouraged, rather than have caviling obstacles thrown in their way, and more particularly when negotiations are proceeding their action should not be interfered with, probably with the result of an unsatisfactory termination. Sir John E. Gorst was therefore justified in declining to open his hand as to pending matters. Will those who object to grants of waste lands in lien of guaranteed interest point out some other feasible inducement to capitalists to embark in Indian railways, without which the lands given may lie waste till doomsday? – I am, &c.

LETTER to the Secretary, London Chamber of Commerce.

London, 1^st October 1889.

Sir, - Referring to the few minute’s conversation I had with you yesterday, I beg to act on your suggestion, and address the following remarks to you for submission to your committee. I would premise that I have stated my views pretty clearly in the brochure entitled ‘Indo-Burma-China Railway Connection,’ a copy of which I left with you. At pages 6 and 16 you will see reference is made to the meeting of your chamber in November 1888, when Messrs Colquhoun and Hallett detailed the latest development of their scheme for connecting the port of Moulmein with Western China. There is no doubt that in the distant future the route they advocate may be of importance; but for the immediate development of trade with Western China I would earnestly urge on the committee of your influential Chamber, and through it the mercantile community of this country, the expediency and necessity of giving full and hearty support and encouragement to the views of the Indian Government, influenced, of course, by the local government of Burmah, which, in the interest of that province, as well as of the Imperial Exchequer, is desirous of opening up the China trade through our own province via Mandalay. Too much stress has been laid on the report – in rather extravagant language of Mr Baber on the difficulties to be met with on the Bhamo route, which was the original trade – route, and which, without full knowledge of the country, was long advocated as the route par excellence for trade with China. That was when, under the Burmese native Government, we were unable to explore the country so fully as we can now that we have it in our own hands, a circumstance which has completely altered the aspect of the whole question.

As your are aware, the railway is now open from Rangoon to Mandalay. Is it, you think, at all likely that our Government, either in this country or in India, will forego the advantages they possess in this railway, or will listen to any scheme for the development of trade by which there was a possibility that such trade would in part or in whole be diverted from our own province, or rather, which would prevent the full utilisation of our own line of railway traversing the whole length of our province? Again, since your meeting previously referred to, the Siamese have taken action, and the concession granted (Then believed to have been granted.) to Sir Andrew Clarke is solely with the view of directing trade to their chief port, Bangkok. Is it likely the Siamese Government will look with anything but jealousy at any attempt to arrest this course of trade by deflecting it to Moulmein, which Messrs Colquhoun and Hallett’s scheme would do? Under these changed conditions, without any disparagement of their exertions and advocacy for the development and extension of trade, I would emphatically say that for the present their scheme must be held in abeyance, if not considered quite exploded. Your committee may be disposed to agree with the ‘Scotsman,’ when criticising my brochure, that the “write is desperately in earnest.” I am so; and considering that this vexed question of the Burmah-China trade-route has been agitated for nearly fifty years, it is time some real action on the part of the mercantile community should be taken, if they are at all in earnest in their desire to extend their trade to Western China.

The Secretary of State for India, it is well known, is very anxious to promote railway work in our Eastern empire, and in a recent address thus expressed himself. This was addressed to the manufacturers of Oldham, and should be taken to heart by all in other manufacturing districts.

I will only add, with all due deference, the suggestion that the action of your Chamber should be in the direction of urging the mercantile community, anxious for the extension of our relations with Western China, to avail of the Secretary’s present desire to further railways, and generously comply with his request for help – substantial help. The Government without this cannot go on so quickly as the neccessities of commerce demand. The old saying must be well considered, “Providence will help those who help themselves.” If the merchants and manufacturers of Britain wish the trade-route to Western China opened up, they must do more than discuss, pass resolutions urging it on Government, they must give the “sinews of war”; and what would this amount to if all the Chambers of the manufacturing cities were to combine to provide the required amount? A bagatelle to each! To be returned manifold to each in increased demand for their productions.

It might be well if your Chamber took the lead in bringing a renewed discussion of the subject before the next meeting of the Associated Chambers, giving timely notice so that it might be previously well considered by other Chambers. It has often been before the Association with but the result of a “resolution.” I am, &c.

LEETER to Same.

London, 4^th October 1889.

I have to thank you for your promised attention to my letter of 1^st inst. Doubtless you are aware there is much undeveloped wealth in Upper Burmah, but to supplement what I have already stated on the subject, I think it might be well to attach to my letter the following paragraph, in which our former political agent at Mandalay concluded a report he made to Government on the metals and minerals of Upper Burmah : -

“Upper Burmah, with its metals and minerals, its forests, natural resources, productiveness of soil, and from its geographical position, situated as it is close to the teeming population of the Chinese empire, ought to be the richest country in Asia. The product veness of the soil as regards cereals and other crops is wonderful. The indigo plant, which is prolific in its growth, gives three crops per annum, and the dye would equal that of Bengal, with careful and proper treatment in its manufacture. Paddy, wheat, cotton, cutch, grain, sesamum, sugarcane, tobacco, tea, coffee, each has its own soil in abundance. Teak and other useful trees abound; and taking all in all, Upper Burmah would seem to have a grand future in store for it, as civilsation advances, and old prejudices give way to new and enlightened ideas.”

Here seems a grand country to work upon, and the mercantile community of Britain should see it in their own interest to encourage its development. – I am, &c.

P.S. – Lord Dufferin’s remarks at your dinner the other day should induce your body to action.

Memo. – The question considered by committee, but no action taken – deferred! Laissez faire policy!