The Kaval System in Colonial Tamil Nadu

THE KAVAL SYSTEM IN COLONIAL TAMIL NADUTHESIS SUBMITTED TO MANONMANIAM SUNDARANAR UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BY S. RAVICHANDRAN (Reg. No.0763) Department of History Manonmaniam Sundaranar University Tirunelveli DECEMBER 2008 ii Dr A.R. VENKATACHALAPATHY Professor Madras Institute of Development Studies, Chennai CERTIFICATE This thesis entitled “THE KAVAL SYSTEM IN COLONIAL TAMILNADU” submitted by Mr S. Ravichandran for the award of Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History of Manonmaniam Sundaranar University is a record of bonafide research work done by him and it has not been submitted for the award of any degree, diploma, associateship, fellowship of any University / Institution. Chennai Date: December 2008 (A.R. VENKATACHALAPATHY) vi CONTENTS LIST OF MAPS ix LIST OF TABLES x GLOSSARY xvi - xx COINS-DENOMINATIONS xxi CHAPTER I CHAPTER II INTRODUCTION 1 - 25 Historical Background Theories on Crime Terms Defined Aims of the Study Relevance of the Study Methodology Organisation of the Thesis Source Materials 3-9 9 - 17 17 - 18 19 - 20 20 20 - 21 21 - 23 24 - 25 KAVAL SYSTEM 26 - 59 Functions Categories Men Kavalkarars and Kudi Kavalkarars Sthalam Kaval or Kudi Kaval Desa Kaval Other Kaval Systems Kaval Fee: Mode of Payment Thuppu Cooli Regional variations Arasoo Kaval Men Kavalkarars 30 - 33 33 – 39 33 33 - 34 34 – 36 36 - 39 39 - 42 43 - 47 47 - 49 47 - 48 48 - 49 Kaval Deeds 49 - 51 Caste and the Kaval System 51 - 59 vii CHAPTER III CONFRONTATION WITH THE BRITISH EAST INDIA COMPANY 60 - 92 Company and the Kavalkarars - Early Experiences 62 - 81 CHAPTER IV Sivarama Thalaivar 62 - 64 Periya Waghaboo 64 - 72 Maravars of Tirunelveli 73 - 78 Kallars of Madurai 78 - 81 Abolition of Desa Kaval 81 - 92 THE COLONIAL STATE AND THE KAVAL SYSTEM 93 - 134 New Criminal Justice System 93 - 110 Regulation of 1802: Introduction of Darogha Police and the Kavalkarars 93 - 105 Regulation of 1816 and the New Police Establishment 106 - 110 The Colonial State and the Kavalkarars, 1816-1859 110 - 116 The Colonial State and the Kavalkarars, 1859-1896 116 - 134 CHAPTER V ANTI-KAVAL MOVEMENTS 135 - 191 Anti-kaval Movements in Madurai and Tirunelveli 136 - 144 CHAPTER VI CHAPTER VII Anti-kaval Movement in Madurai District, 1896 145 - 171 Anti-kaval Movement in Tirunelveli District 171 - 191 THE CRIMINAL TRIBES ACT AND THE DECLINE OF KAVAL SYSTEM 192 - 219 Criminal Tribes Act, 1871 192 - 200 Kallar Reclamation Scheme 200 - 212 Criminal Tribes Act in Tirunelveli and Ramnad 212 – 219 CONCLUSION 220 - 228 viii BIBLIOGRAPHY 229 – 238 APPENDICES 239 - 264 Appendix I : Statement showing the number of Cavilgars and Poligors in the District of Chidambaram with Former and Present Revenue 239 Appendix II : Petition of the Inhabitants of Sirkali Appendix III : Notification to the Maravars of Nangunery 20th September 1801 Appendix IV : : 245 - 248 Notification to the Maravars of Kalakad 15th October 1801 Appendix V 240 - 244 249 - 250 Statement showing the Number & Classes of various officers employed in the Kaval Police in the Province of Thanjavur and Thiruchirapalli 251 - 252 Appendix VI : Statement of the Present Public Police Establishment sanctioned by the Government of Zillah of Madurai 253 Appendix VII : Statement of Cattle Thefts (true cases) committed in Tanjore, Thiruchirapalli, Madurai and Tirunelveli Districts during 1892, 1893 and 1894 254 - 257 Appendix VIII : Notices issued by J. Twigg District Magistrate Madurai both in English and Tamil during anti-kaval movement. 258 - 262 Appendix IX : Compromise deed regarding Kaval in the village of Giriammalpuram 263 - 264 iv PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis presents the results of my research undertaken with the guidance of Dr A.R. Venkatachalapathy, former Lecturer in History, Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli, and at present Professor, Madras Institute of Development Studies, Chennai. His constructive criticism has given shape to this study. I remain beholden to him. I thank the late Dr S. Kadhirvel, former Professor of History, University of Madras, Chennai who was a constant source of inspiration and encouragement in my research endeavours. My thanks are due to Thiru A.A. Subbaraja, President of College Committee and Secretary Thiru V.K.Subramaniya Raja, President of our College Governing Council Thiru P.K.R. Vijayaragava Raja and Secretary Thiru N.R. Subramaniya Raja and the Principal Dr V. Venkatraman for their constant encouragement in my research endeavours. My heartfelt thanks to Prof. V.Suresh Taliath, HOD, Department of English, Rajapalayam Rajus’ College, Rajapalayam for having patiently gone through the manuscript and making necessary corrections. I thank Dr K.A. Manikumar, Professor of History, MSU who kindly went through the manuscript at the final stage and made valuable suggestions. v I am thankful to Thiru S. Venkatesan, well-known Tamil writer and Joint Secretary of Tamilnadu Murpokku Eluthalar Sangam (Tamilnadu Progressive Writers’ Forum) who shared his knowledge of Piramalai Kallars of the Madurai region and their Kaval system. I gratefully thank the Commissioner and staff of the Tamilnadu Archives, Chennai for permitting me to consult the records available there. My thanks are also due to those who responded positively when I interviewed them during my field study. I thank Mr. P. Sundararaj of Devi Computers, Rajapalayam for the neat execution of typing this dissertation. S. RAVICHANDRAN x LIST OF TABLES Table 2:1 : Palayakarars and Kaval Collections Table 3:1 : Statement of Desa Kaval Collections in the District of Tirunelveli, 1800-1805 Table 3:2 : 41 - 42 87 Statement of Allowances Annually paid to Men Kavalkarars by the Collector of Zillah of Chittor [Extract] 90 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Kaval system was an ancient and indigenous system of policing in Tamilnadu. The functionaries of this system were known as Kavalkarars. Protecting the people and their properties was the primary duty of the Kavalkarars. Apart from this duty watching the movements of strangers, particularly during festivals, and protecting the travellers were the other responsibilities of the Kavalkarars. In return for their services they were paid by the inhabitants either in cash or in kind, mostly the latter. As the traditional custodians of the village they were bestowed with well defined rights and duties. The Kavalship was hereditary. Most of the Kavalkarars were from the martial communities of Tamilnadu with a long history of recruitment in the army, such as the Maravars, Kallars, Agamudaiyars, Naickers, Padayachis and Udayars though the participation of other communities like the Kuravars, Valayars and Parayars cannot be discounted. As protectors of people and their belongings these Kavalkarars tended to enjoy special privileges and considerable power. As a consequence of political changes through the centuries, these Kavalkarars over a period of time gained political power and occupied a tertiary position next to the kings and the Palayakarars in the immediate pre-colonial political power structure of Tamilnadu. As minor partners of political power they made common cause with the Palayakarars during their struggle against the 2 Nawabs of Arcot and the British East India Company (1780-1801). In the non-Palayakarar tracts they were rather powerful and behaved often like independent rulers which explains their fairly frequent violation of the socially accepted norms of Kaval system. For the Kavalkarars, Kavalship was not only a source of income. It was considerably more than that. They considered it as their traditional right, a symbol of political power, prestige, social status and an instrument of social dominance. Hence any challenge from within or out to the Kaval system was vehemently resisted and violently responded by the Kavalkarars. When the British East India Company emerged as the superior power in the South Indian Politics in 1801 the Kavalkarars were a power to reckon with. The British East India Company, after a prolonged armed struggle against the power centres of Tamilnadu, had established its firm control over Tamilnadu by the turn of the nineteenth century. In consolidating their position the British started to replace the native form of administration with modern models borrowed from the west. But the transplantation met with much resistance from the premodern Kaval system. Any move on the part of the native people to resist was branded as crime. The colonial state abolished the different forms of Kaval system through its regulations. In 1802, the Desa Kaval system was abolished and a new police establishment was introduced. Similarly in 1816, the Kudi Kaval system was abolished and in its place a new police system came into being. Finally in 1859, 3 the modern police administrative machinery was introduced. The tax-free lands allotted to the Kavalkarars were also appropriated by the colonial state in the name of new land revenue policies. Despite these stringent measures the Kavalkarars were tenancious in safeguarding their rights and resisted every move of the colonial state. Having failed in all its attempts, as a last resort, the colonial state implemented the infamous Criminal Tribes Act. In consequence of the anti-kaval measures adopted by the colonial state, the traditional power and status enjoyed by the Kavalkarars were at stake and their avenues of income were also closed. These circumstances prompted the Kavalkarars to indulge in crime. They started preying on the inhabitants who were formerly under their protection. Historical Background Nilakanta Sastri in his celebrated work The Colas (1935) based on his extensive study of Chola inscriptions made a brief and value loaded description of Kaval system in ancient Tamilnadu. The most interesting observation made by him is as quoted below. The term Padi-Kaval occurring more than once in the list of taxes and dues deserves more attention than most of the other items mentioned; for it refers to a universally prevalent system of safeguarding property from theft, especially at night. This was the system by which each village maintained its own Kaval-karan who, in return for certain regular payments to him, held himself 4 responsible for the security of the property in the village to the extent of either recovering lost property or making it good; this system survived in some measures almost till the other day in the Tamil country, and it seems to have been indeed of very ancient origin.1 Natana Kasinathan, in his article, “History of Kaval System in Tamilnadu from 300 A.D. to 1600 A.D” (1973) traced the history of Kaval system in Tamilnadu upto 1600 A.D. Based on literary and inscriptional source materials this article is more narrative than interpretative in nature. In S.Kadhirvel’s, A History of the Maravas (1977) which deals elaborately with the history of the Maravar community in the eighteenth century and its relation with the Nawabs of Arcot and the British East India Company, there is a separate chapter, on the Kaval system of pre-colonial period. This work provides detailed information regarding the differences between Desa Kaval and Kudi Kaval systems, the duties of the Kavalkarars, and the payment made to the Kavalkarars. However all these details are pertaining to the Kaval system in Tirunelveli district that too of the Nanguneri and Kalakad region. Moreover since the author himself belonged to a Desa Kaval chief’s family one could feel a touch of hyperbole in his treatment. In addition to these works cited above there are some other works like K.Rajayyan’s Rise and Fall of the Poligors of Tamilnadu (1974) providing little 1 K.A.N.Sastri, The Colas, 2 Vols, 1935 & 1937; revised edition in one volume, University of Madras, Madras, 1955, p.533. 5 and general information regarding the Kaval system since their main thematic interests are different. Another category of works such as The History of The Madras Police, published by Government of Madras during the centenary of the Madras Police (1959) and Law and Order in Madras Presidency 1850-1880 by P.Jegadeesan which extensively deal with the genesis and development of modern police administrative machinery and incidentally provide a brief discussion on Kaval system. Another important work in Tamil which deals with Kaval system is V.Manickam’s Pudukottai Varalaru (up to A.D.1600). The major objective of this work is to trace the history of Pudukottai region. However in this work there is a separate chapter on the Padi-Kaval system, in which the author has made an analytical study over the socio-economic and political circumstances which favoured the genesis of the Padi-Kaval system in Pudukottai region during the later part of 12th century, and traced the development of this system upto 1600 A.D. He also elucidates the nature of the system and changes it underwent during the process of its development through the centuries with critical outlook, and justifies his arguments by citing number of inscriptional sources. Apart from other things the most important observation made by him was the sale of Kaval rights. During the times of economic crisis and inability to withstand the frequent raids of Muslim invaders the Kavalkarars of a particular villages sold and handed over their Kaval rights to other Kavalkarars who were more powerful. He also 6 records that in some cases, Kaval system was nothing but setting a thief against a thief. Yet another important secondary source material in Tamil which deals with the Kaval system in Tamilar Salbhu (Sanga Kalam) (1980) by S.Vidyanandhan of Jaffna, Sri Lanka. Based on Sangam literature, he provides a vivid picture about the Kaval system during the Sangam period (200 B.C-200 A.D) and how the cities, villages and streets in them were protected by the Kavalkarars. His portrayal about the physical appearance and vigilant nature of the Kavalkarars is very interesting. However his work is confined to Sangam period. Apart from these works there are some other works in Tamil like Kallar Charitram (1928) of N.M.Venkatasamy Nattar, Maravar Charitram (1938) by Asirvatha Udaya Thevar and Muventarkula Thevar Samuga Varalaru (1976) by Muthu Thevar. The main objective of these works seems to be provide a parochial history of the castes and therefore they only superficially touch upon Kaval system. Among the works on Kaval system by western scholars “The Kallars: A Tamil ‘Criminal Tribe’ Reconsidered” (1978) an article by Stuart Blackburn occupies a prominent place. It traces the early confrontation between the British and the Kallar community of Madurai region and tries to dismantle the thievish image of the Kallars. The opening paragraph of this article cited below is self explanatory about the aim of the author. 7 This article examines the history of a south Indian caste, the Kallars of Tamilnadu, in order to re-assess their identification as a thieving caste and a “Criminal tribe”. I wish to demonstrate that this is distorted and that the roots of the distortion lie in the early British military contact with the Kallars. It will be shown, furthermore, how this image continued to underpin the British administrative policy in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.2 However this scholarly article of Blackburn though dealing with the Kaval system of the Kallars of Madurai region its concentration is more on the implementation of ‘Criminal Tribes Act’ and its aftermath. Another interesting work is the recent unpublished Ph.D thesis of Anand Sankar Pandian entitled “Landscape and Redemption: Cultivating Heart and Soil in South India” (University of California, Berkeley 2004). Basically an anthropological work it exclusively deals with the Piramalai Kallars of the western parts of Madurai region. It also deals elaborately with the anti-kaval movement which broke out in Madurai region against Kallar Kaval and the implementation of Criminal Tribes Act over the Kallars and the consequences. In his opinion it was the agrarian elite who with the support of the colonial state were behind the antikaval movement in the northern and western part of Madurai region. The monumental work of Louis Dumont, A South Indian Sub Caste (1986), an ethnography on Piramalai Kallar, concentrates on the social organization and 2 Stuart H.Blackburn, “The Kallars: A Tamil ‘Criminal Tribe’ Reconsidered”, South Asia, Journal of South Asian Studies, New Series, Vol.1, No.1, March 1978, p.38. 8 religion of Piramalai Kallar of selected villages. Little reference is made to the Kaval system in his study. However the commanality between all these three works mentioned above is that all of them have explained how the colonial state, having failed in its attempts against the Kallar Kaval, branded them as criminals and brought the entire community under the infamous Criminal Tribes Act. David Arnold in his scholarly article “Dacoity and Rural Crime in Madras 1860-1940” (1979) and in his book Police Power and Colonial Rule in Madras 1859-1947 (1985) [especially chapter 4, ‘The Policing of Rural Madras’] provides a vivid picture of the problems related to Kaval of the colonial period. Approaching the subject matter from the dimension of crime, his welldocumented studies make a thorough analysis of various kinds of crimes prevailing in the Madras Presidency and classifies them into four major categories such as i) famine crimes; ii) professional crimes; iii) Kaval related crimes and iv) Dacoity as a prelude to insurrection. Regarding Kaval-related crimes his period of coverage commences from 1859 (the year in which the modern police administration based on Irish and British constabulary was introduced). A brief academic survey over the works and their contribution cited above indicates the important fact that there is an ample scope for an exclusive research study on the Kaval system in colonial Tamilnadu that too from the dimension of crime. 9 Reconnaissance of the problem of Kaval from the dimension of crime inevitably involve the study of law, police, judiciary and punishment of the period concerned, because all of them are closely related to crime and interlocked with each other and they are different links in the same chain. Hence the study about the Kaval system automatically involves the study of the other related areas mentioned above. An insight into different ideas of crime will enable us to have a better understanding of the relation between the Kavalkarars and the colonial state. In this connection, two things are essential for any researcher working in the domain of Kaval system. The first one is the familiarity with the changes related to approaches to the historical study of crime in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. This will help to understand how the colonial officials were influenced by these theories and how the measures adopted by the colonial officials in tackling crimes were conditioned by them. Secondly, an understanding of the major theories regarding crimes propounded by scholars during twentieth century is necessary. This aids re-examination of the prevailing notions of crime, in a proper perspective. Hence a discussion of some of the major theoretical frameworks related to the field of crime is attempted in the following pages. Theories on Crime During the eighteenth century, in general, the criminologists were of the opinion that rationality and freewill determined the acts of the criminals. So they 10 approached the problem from the dimension of costs and benefits.3 Based on this the penologists used to impose cruel punishment, with the hope that, it would make the criminals realize that the cost of violating the laws was greater than the benefits they received from indulging in crime and induce them to refrain from criminal activities. Influenced by this approach the officials of the colonial state in the Madras Presidency implemented the same kind of punishments, such as whipping, pillorying and hanging in public places. The following report made by Thomas Harris a British official regarding the hanging of a prisoner, to the magistrate of Madurai district, demonstrates the above said fact. According to your instruction I, this morning proceeded to put into execution the sentence of the prisoner Vellayan which was performed with every necessary attention to the solemn occasion in the midst of thousands of spectators. It is my duty to report the apparent impressions the death of the criminal had on the surrounding multitude…. It would have especially as no such public execution had taken place in the district of Madurai (sic) forty years.4 Anand Yang emphatically suggests that, “The surveillance of crime and criminality by social historians begins by rejecting the ‘givens’ of modern 3 Sumanta Banerjee, Crime and Urbanisation Calcutta in the Nineteenth Century, Tulika Books, New Delhi, 2006, p.x. 4 Thomas Harris to District Magistrate, Madurai, 28 May 1804, Madura District Records, Vol.1190, pp.73, 74. 11 criminology”.5 Surface level views of crime as aberrant behaviour should not be accepted at their face value, otherwise there is a danger of even important kinds of social protest being labeled as crime. With the emergence of the ideologies of socialism and anarchism in Europe, crime was redefined. Rationality and freewill were replaced by socioeconomic factors as the reasons behind crime. Karl Marx viewed crime as an offshoot of competition for jobs in a market economy dominated by capitalist run factories. He suggested that the extension of factory system is followed everywhere by an increase in crime. When Marx was writing this, the traditional oriented occupational structure of the European society was suffering under the problem of occupational change due to the emergence of capital intensive mode of production. The factory system could not accommodate all the people. A section of them got employment in the factories, others in a long run took to crime. In his final analysis Marx said ‘Crime, too, is governed by competition’ and ‘society creates a demand for crime which is met by a corresponding supply’.6 On the other hand, Max Stirner, representing the anarchist camp, viewed crime as the assertion of the individual self against the legal code of the state which tends to violate his / her free existence and movements. While Marx and Max Stirner were of the same opinion regarding the socio-economic factors 5 Anand A.Yang (ed.), Crime and Criminality in British India, The University of Arizona Press, Tuscon, 1985, p.2. 6 Karl Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1977, pp.190, 191. 12 which were controlled and governed by all powerful state as the causes behind crimes, Max Stirner attached added importance to the freewill of individuals and their acts and viewed them as their protest against the state.7 Diverging considerably from the view points of Marxist-oriented British historians, Michel Foucault, who was a professor of History and Systems of Thought at the College de France, provided another major theoretical framework in studying crime. Among other things his views regarding the birth of prisons and the changes in the forms of punishments between 1750 and 1850 - i.e. when Europe was becoming a modern, capitalist society - is fascinating. He explains that during this period torture as a form of punishment was replaced by incarceration. He argues that this change had taken place not because of human consideration but with the motive of disciplining the human body. Incarceration aimed at disciplining and controlling the human body while the former punishments were directed towards torturing the body. Finally he extended this theory and applied it to schools, hospitals and asylums, etc.8 However, he was criticized by others for not accounting for the forces which opposed and resisted it. Notions of crime were not only located and developed in the socioeconomic spheres; sometimes they were located and developed in the sphere of science too. Parallel to the theoretical framework of socio-economic explanation 7 Sumanta Banerjee, Crime and Urbanization, Calcutta in the Nineteenth Century, Tulika Books, New Delhi, 2006, pp.x, ix. 8 Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of Prison, Trans. Alan Sheridan, Vintage Books, New York, 1995, pp.293-308. 13 of crime in the nineteenth century Europe, another novel theoretical stream rooted in biological determinism, registered its growth. This concept explained that crime was a genetic trait transmitted from one generation to other in a family. Francis Galton the founder of this concept gave a name to it as “Eugene” (good genes). This view was shared by the Italian physician Cesare Lombroso. This theory emphasized that some individuals are born with anti-social tendencies that were inbuilt in their minds, handed over from the barbaric stage of human evolution. The developing disciplines of anthropology and anthropometry were brought in to rationalize this view. Accordingly the physical features of prisoners were measured and the bodies of hanged convicts were postmortemed and a list of common physical features was prepared to prove that they hailed from a common criminal stock. The horrible and astonishing consequence of this theory of biological determinism was that, all over the world including England, criminals in prisons were forcibly sterilized in order to avoid passing on the gene for crime to the next generation.9 Regarding the impact of the above said theory over the Indian Penologists Sumanta Banerjee observes that, The Indian Penal Code enacted in 1860 embodied, in a large measure, the theoretical propositions on crime that were current in contemporary England. The English administrators in India who drafted the code adopted the methodology designed by those theorists of criminology in the west who, while explaining crime, 9 Sumanta Banerjee, Crime and Urbanization Calcutta in the Nineteenth Century, Tulika Books, New Delhi, 2006, pp.xi, xii. 14 were inclined towards concepts like biological determinism rather than socio-economic rationale.10 This development ultimately paved the way, for the enactment of ‘Habitual Criminal Act of 1869 in England and ‘Criminal Tribes Act of 1871’ in India. In the second half of the twentieth century inspired by Karl Marx, E.P.Thompson and others associated with the then Centre for Study of Social History at the University of Warwick, started re-examining the given concepts of crime in the light of Marxism. They located crime and criminality in the wider context of the evaluation of an economic order and its social class relation. In particular they viewed ‘law’ as an instrument in the hands of the state or the ruling elite to serve their needs. According to them the prevailing notions of crime and contemporary value judgement should be approached with utmost caution and critical outlook, otherwise there is a danger of becoming prisoners of the assumptions and self image of the rulers. If not, free labourers will branded as spontaneous and blind, and important kinds of social protest become lost in the category of ‘crime’.11 They viewed crime as rational behaviour, closely related to the character and will of the ruling class and the defence and priorities of the capitalist system.12 The concluding remarks of E.P.Thompson regarding the ‘rule of law’ in England is that, 10 Ibid, p.xiii. 11 E.P.Thompson, “Eighteenth Century English Society: Class Struggle Without Class?” Social History, 3, 3, 1978: 150 cited in Anand A.Yang (ed), Crime and Criminality in British India, p.2. 12 David Jones, Crime, Protest, Community and Police in Nineteenth Century Britain, London, 1982, p.31, cited in Anand A.Yang (ed) Crime and Criminality in British India, p.3. 15 Thus the law (we agree) may be seen instrumentally as mediating and reinforcing existing class relations and ideologically as offering to these a legitimation. But we must press our definitions a little further. For if we say that existent class relations were mediated by the law, this is not the same thing as saying that the law was no more than those relations translated into other terms, which masked or mystified the reality. This may quite often be true but it is not the whole truth. For class relations were expressed, not in any way one likes, but through the forms of law; and the law, like other institutions which from time to time can be seen as mediating (and masking) existent class relations (such as church or the media of communication), has its own characteristics, its own independent history and logic of evolution.13 Another interesting observation is made by David A. Washbrook regarding the functioning of Anglo-Indian Law. Its main purpose, so far from protecting private rights of subjects, may be better seen as providing a range of secondary services for the company, both as ‘state’ and a ‘shield’ for European business interests, which helped to translate political power into money.14 13 E.P.Thompson, Whigs and Hunters: The Origin of Black Act, New York, 1975, p.262, cited Anand A.Yang (ed), Crime and Criminality in British India, p.3. 14 D.A.Washbrook, “Law, State and Agrarian Society in Colonial India”, Modern Asian Studies, Vol.15, No.3, 1981, p.668. 16 Yet another school of sociologists derived their inspiration from Emile Durkheim and elaborated his theme of anomie. He argues that anomie develops when modern societies fail to provide suitable occupational avenues to the people according to their talents and traditional skills. This theory was further developed and applied by Robert Merton in his analysis about deviance and crime. According to him whenever there is such an anomic disjuncture between the culturally defined goals and the socially approved means to achieve them available to the individuals or groups the later resort to four types of behaviour i) ritualism, or following the approved means in mechanical way without any hope of reaching the goals; ii) retreatism, or opting out from the struggle; iii) rebellion, or desire to redefine goals and means, and change the entire socially approved system and iv) innovation or devising new means-outside the socially approved framework to achieve the socially approved goals, which include crimes.15 The problem related to Kaval system and the Kavalkarars fits well into this theoretical framework. When the colonial state abolished the Kaval system and replaced them with modern police administrative machinery the demand for traditional Kaval system shrank. There was no suitable occupational avenue available to suit the traditional skills of the Kavalkarars. Hence they took to crime. Another important area of study, intimately associated with the field of crime is the institution of police, an administrative mechanism by which authority 15 Sumanta Banerjee, Crime and Urbanisation, p.xv. 17 and control is maintained by the state. Many works have already been undertaken probing its nature and functions in the West. Majority of them viewed that, “The police and its functions are always determined by the nature of state which they serve and the theory upon which such a state is based”.16 From the above discussion it is clear that at the international level there is a considerable and growing body of literature on crime in the pre industrial societies at the verge of modernization. In the Indian context Anand Yang’s Crime and Criminality in British India (1985) occupies an important place by providing valuable information. Radhika Singha’s A Despotism of Law (2000) deals with the link between knowledge and power in the colonial context. Another recent work of Meena Radhakrishna, Dishonoured by History ‘Criminal Tribes’ and British Colonial Policy (2001) deals with the Kuravar Community in Madras Presidency; how the economic policies of the colonial state affected their occupation and later on they were branded as Criminal Tribes and covered under Criminal Tribes Act. Terms defined Kaval was an ancient and indigenous system of policing in Tamil Nadu. Tamilnadu is one of the federal states located at south-eastern corner of India. During the British administration this was a part of Madras Presidency. The Presidency of Madras had some territories which are at present in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Orissa, Karnataka and Kerala. For the present study the word 16 Anand A.Yang (ed.), Crime and Criminality in British India, p.19. 18 Tamilnadu means the present day geographical and administrative entity. This study covers a period of one hundred and forty six years starting from 1801 to 1947. The year 1801 is a significant year because in that year the Palayakarar Wars against the British East India Company had come to a conclusion and Tamilnadu was brought under the firm grip of the Company’s government. The year 1947 is the year of Indian independence. However it does not mean that the Kaval system was completely suppressed by 1947. In spite of all the efforts taken by the colonial state the Kaval system managed to survive even after 1947 particularly in Madurai and Tirunelveli districts; however it is sporadic and considerably less vibrant. The Presidency of Madras was one of the most extensive territories of the British colonial state. Tamil and Telugu were the principal languages spoken by majority of the people. After attaining independence in 1947 with the formation of the state of Andhra Pradesh in 1953 and with the linguistic reorganization of states the size of Madras Presidency was reduced to considerable extent. Some areas of Kannada-speaking population adjoining the district of Dharmapuri and Nilgris were ceded to the newly formed Mysore state. The areas with the Oriya speaking people went to the state of Orissa. Madras state got the Tamil speaking regions of Kanyakumari district and Shenkottai from Tiruvancore kingdom. The name Madras State was changed into Tamilnadu in 1969. 19 Aims of the Study Kaval system was an ancient system of policing in Tamilnadu and the Kavalkarars were the functionaries of the Kaval system. In the modern history of Tamilnadu the Kaval system and the Kavalkarars as an interesting and vital area of historical investigation continued to remain as an unexplored area for reasons unknown. As shareholders of political power at the tertiary level, the Kavalkarars played a major role, in the socio-economic and political spheres of Tamilnadu. They also made common cause with other anti-colonial forces, during their struggle against the colonial state. Hence this study aims at tracing the history of Kaval system confining to the colonial period and tries to locate the place of the Kavalkarars in the modern history of Tamilnadu. This study also aims at analyzing the prolonged struggle for power between the colonial state, the new-comer, and the Kavalkarars, the yester masters of political power. It traces the efforts taken by the colonial state to eradicate Kaval system through enacting Regulations and Acts and by establishing modern police administration, and the consequent response of the Kavalkarars who were driven gradually, over a period of time, towards the world of crime. This study also identifies and analyses the various factors responsible for the failure of the colonial state in suppressing the Kaval system including the mindset and psychological underpinnings of the Kavalkarars. Another important aspect on which this study concentrates is the examination of the factors responsible for the outbreak of anti-kaval movements 20 in Madurai and Tirunelveli districts towards the closure of nineteenth century and in the early decades of the twentieth century, and its consequences. Yet another important aim of this study is to evaluate the circumstances which shaped the enactment of the famous Criminal Tribes Act in 1871 (CTA); how it originated in the minds of scientists and administrators in England, how it was imported and implemented in the north Indian provinces, reaction of the Madras provincial administrative circles and how it was implemented in Tamilnadu and its impact. Relevance of the Study Much research has already been carried out and secondary sources dealing with different aspects of the history of Modern Tamilnadu are also available. So far there has been no such exclusive study undertaken on the problem of Kaval system during the colonial period focusing from the viewpoint of crime. Thus there is amble scope for research. The Researcher has made a sincere attempt to probe further the problem of Kaval. Methodology Kaval system was an ancient and indigenous system of police in Tamilnadu which survived through the ages and was in practice to a very limited extent even after 1947. So, tracing and presenting a brief narration of the Kaval system and its salient feature is essential. method is adopted. In attempting this, a descriptive 21 In assessing the nature of the colonial state, the conflict between the colonial state and the Kaval system from 1800-1947, the anti-kaval movements in the last decade of the nineteenth century and in the early decades of twentieth century, the analytical method is adopted. Regarding the genesis and development of modern police system and its prolonged struggle against the Kavalkarars a chronological as well as analytical method is followed. As far as the enactment of the Criminal Tribes Act of 1871 and its implementation in India in different phases analytical method is followed. Organisation of the Thesis The thesis has been organized into seven chapters including the introductory and concluding chapters. In the introductory chapter an academic survey has been attempted at on the available secondary works contributed by eminent scholars of both Indian and foreign origin, which have direct or indirect bearing over the central theme of this study. It also maps the theoretical frame works employed by scholars and philosophers like Karl Marx, Max Stirner, Michel Foucault, Emile Durkheim and E.P.Thompson in their studies on crime. The thrust area of this study is indicated in this chapter. The second chapter is entitled as ‘Kaval system’. In this chapter, the history of the Kaval system right from the ancient period is narrated. Following 22 this the functions of the Kavalkarars, their duties and rights, the categories of Kaval system and the Kavalkarars are explained in detail. Moreover the traditional rights and powers enjoyed by the Kavalkarars and their position and status in the society are elaborately discussed. Besides the condition of Kaval system during the early stages of the British rule is also described. It also briefly explains a peculiar form of crime committed by the Kavalkarars, closely associated with cattle theft and popularly known as Thuppu Cooli. The third chapter entitled “Confrontation with the British East India Company” deals elaborately with the relationship between the Kavalkarars and the Company in the last quarter of the 18th century which was marked by open confrontations and rebellions of the Kavalkarars against the Company, the emerging new power. It also deals with the abolition of Desa Kaval and Men Kaval by the Company in 1802 and the reasons for the caution exercised by the Company with regard to the abolition of Kudi Kaval. The fourth chapter is “The Colonial State and the Kaval System”. For a better understanding of the subject matter, this chapter has been divided into three divisions i.e. from 1802-1815; 1816-1859; 1859-1896 wherein each phase marked a specific development. In 1802 the colonial state abolished the Desa Kaval and Men Kaval system through its Regulation of 1802 and a new police administrative structure with Daroghas and Thanadars as important police officials was introduced. This system was replaced in 1816 by another new system of police operating under the direct control of Collector, at the district level and Village Munsiff at the village level. In 1816 the Kudi Kaval system was 23 also abolished. The new police establishment of 1816 continued to operate until 1859 and in that year the modern police system with officials like Superintendent of Police at the district level was introduced and the police administration was completely separated from revenue administration. It also discusses how the new measures undertaken by the government broke the traditional occupational structure of the Kavalkarars and pushed them into the world of crime. The year 1896 was a turning point in the history of Kaval system because it was marked by violent anti-kaval movement in Madurai district. The fifth chapter deals with “Anti-Kaval Movements in Madurai and Tirunelveli districts”. It examines the causes for the outbreak of anti-kaval movements in the background of changing political and socio-economic scenario effected by the British rule. The sixth chapter is “The Criminal Tribes Act and the Decline of the Kaval System”. Here an attempt has been made to evaluate the circumstances which gave shape to the Criminal Tribes Act, the response of the officials of the colonial state and explains how it was implemented in Tamilnadu. The reasons for the failure of CTA and the gradual decline of the Kaval system are analyzed in this chapter. The seventh chapter is the concluding chapter in which the researcher has recorded his observations and justified them. 24 Source Materials Source materials related to the topic of this study are available with Tamilnadu State Archives at Chennai in the forms of consultations, proceedings, reports, correspondence and letters pertaining to different administrative departments of the Government of Madras. District Records and Manuals are available in volumes contain so much of valuable informations regarding particular districts. Madurai District Archives at Madurai is a repository of source materials connected with the topic of this study, pertaining to anti-kaval movement in Madurai district. ‘Kummi on Sivarama Thalaivar’, a folk song is another important source material having much bearing on the central theme of this study and about its early history before 1800. The folk song deals with Sivarama Thalaivar, the Kaval chief of Thirukkurungudi in Tirunelveli district. It traces the history of its hero Sivarama Thalaivar, right from the migration of his ancestors from Ramnad to Tirunelveli region. It was a period of political instability caused by the efforts taken by Nawab of Arcot against the turbulent Palayakarars with the help of British East India Company. It narrates the disputes related to Kaval rights among the different group of Kondayamkottai Maravars of southern Tirunelveli region and the exploits of its hero against the forces of British East India Company and end with his death in a Kaval dispute. Right from K.A.N.Sastri’s outstanding work The Colas, secondary materials in the form of books, periodicals and journals are available in good 25 number. Though their thematic interests were different they throw occasional light on the central theme and other aspects of this study. An important Secondary study - basically an anthropological study on the Piramalai Kallar community of Madurai district - is an unpublished Ph.D., thesis by Anand Sankar Pandian entitled as “Landscapes of Redemption: Cultivating Heart and Soil in South India” submitted to the University of California, Berkeley, (1999). It was of much help to understand the Piramalai Kallar community and their Kaval system. Apart from these materials mentioned above during the field study, the researcher interviewed notable personalities and collected useful informations pertaining to the study. Some of them were descendents of former Kaval chiefs. CHAPTER II THE KAVAL SYSTEM The word Kaval means “watch”. It is also used to denote the functionary who performs this duty.1 It was an ancient and indigenous institution of Tamilnadu. This was a hereditary village police office bestowed with well defined rights and responsibilities. Ample references are available regarding Kaval system in Sangam literature, and in the inscriptions of Pallava, Chola and Pandia kings. The terms like Ur Kappar (Protector of the Village) in Purananooru, (Sangam literature)2 and Nadu Kaval (nadu means bigger or wider territorial division), Padi Kaval3 (Padi means village or land) and Perum Padi Kaval (Perum means bigger or wider) in the inscription of ancient kings of Tamilnadu proved the existence of Kaval system in Tamilnadu right from the sangam period. Those who were engaged in this duty were known as Kavalkarar4 (guardian or protector). 1 S.Kadhirvel, A History of the Maravas, Madurai Publishing House, Madurai, 1977, p.17; Natana Kasinathan, “Kaval System in Tamilnadu from 300 A.D-1600 A.D”, Damilica, Journal of Tamil Nadu State Department of Archaeology, Part-3, Madras, 1973, p.65. 2 S.Vithyananthan, Tamilar Salpu (Tamil), Kumaran Puthaga Illam, Colombo and Chennai, 1980, pp.37-40. 3 There are many villages with the word Padi as suffix in their names. Eg. Chandra Padi, Kannam Padi, Kanal Padi, Mahendra Padi, Pudhu Padi, Pullam Padi, Tamil Padi, Tharangam Padi, Vala Padi, and Vaniyam Padi. 4 Natana Kasinathan, “Kaval System in Tamilnadu from 300 A.D-1600 A.D”, Damilica, Journal of Tamil Nadu State Department of Archaeology, Part-3, Madras, 1973, p.65. 27 Regarding Padi Kaval, K.A.Nilakanta Sastri had made the following observation which provides a clear picture about the Kaval system in ancient (200 B.C. – 900 A.D) Tamil Nadu. The term padi kaval occurring more than once in the list of taxes and dues deserves more attention than most of the other items mentioned; for it refers to a universally prevalent system of safeguarding property from theft especially at night. This was the system by which each village maintained its own kavalkarar, who in turn for certain regular payments to him, held himself responsible for the security of property in the village to the extent of either recovering lost property or making good; this system survived in some measure almost till the other day in Tamil country, and it seems to have been indeed off very ancient origin. A special staff of officials entrusted with this duty, and maintained from the proceeds of a special cess ear-marked for the purpose of the padikaval-kuli as it is sometime called, formed a regular feature of the Cola administrative system. In the later Cola days we find these duties increasingly falling in the hands of the over-grown vassals whose rise was a symptom of imminent dissolution of the empire. Humbler men in charge of relatively restricted area also carried on their work more quietly and with less detriment to the well-being of the central administration… The terms perum padikaval and merpadi-kaval are sometimes employed and these are perhaps to 28 indicate the wider sphere of their police duties or their higher status as compared to the ordinary padi-kaval of the village.5 Nilakanta Sastri’s description of the Kaval system fits neatly into his ideal vision of a centralized state as the epitome of civilization. During the times of political instability, it has been suggested by historians such as Y.Subbarayalu, these Kavalkarars of different categories grew more powerful in their regions and became practically independent of the higher level power centres.6 This process of development of the Kavalkarars becoming more powerful and independent in their respective regions, during the times of political instability and administrative weakness, was a common phenomenon, finding expression throughout the history of Tamilnadu. Kaval system as a power to reckon with, continued its existence during the reign of Vijayanagar Empire, Madurai Nayaks and the Nawabs in Tamilnadu. Nicholas B.Dirks observes that, Below the regional kings of three great mandalams – ranged from Ramanathapuram and Pudukkottai on the one hand to the tiny estates of certain Tirunelveli Palaykarars on the other. At an even lower level, the developmental process of becoming a little king probably includes certain kavalkarars (protection chiefs) as well for 5 K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, The Colas, 2 Vols, 1935 and 1937; revised edition in one volume, University of Madras, 1955, pp.533-534. 6 Y.Subbarayalu, interviewed by A.R.Venkatachalapathy, Kalachuvadu, Tamil Monthly, 2004, Nagercoil, p.21; V.Manickam, Pudukkottai Varalaru (Tamil), Clio Publications, Madurai, 2004, pp.375-395. 29 example the maravar kavalkarars of kalakkatu and Nankuneri regions of Tirunelveli.7 Pamela G.Price in her discussion of the political structure of Ramnad Kingdom records that “Eighteenth Century Ramnad was a collection of numerous domains, those of warrior chiefs of various designation (Palaiyakkar or aracu 8 Kavalkar)… Before the establishment of British supremacy in Tamilnadu, Kaval system was in operation throughout the Tamil speaking districts as well as other parts of Madras Presidency. In Telugu speaking regions Kaval was known as Kavili. 9 After the downfall of the Nayak kingdom of Madurai and before the establishment of British East India company’s rule, when the Nawab of Arcot was struggling with the Palayakarars to establish his supremacy, when there where many conflicts between various contending parties for political power, these Kavalkarars became a power to reckon with in their areas of control. Specifically in the non-Palayakarar tracts they were highly independent, powerful and extraordinarily influential. A few of them even had their own fortifications and armed retainers. Some examples are Sivarama Thalaivar, the Kaval chief of 7 Nicholas B. Dirks, The Hollow Crown: Ethno History of an Indian Kingdom, Orient Longman, Bombay 1987, pp.154-155. 8 Pamela G.Price, “Raja-dharma in the 19th Century South India”, Contributions to Indian Sociology, Vol.13, No.2, July-December 1979, Institute of Economic Growth, New Delhi, p.210. 9 Even today among the Telugu communities of the southern districts of Tamilnadu this usage is in vogue. 30 Tirukkurungudi in Tirunelveli District10 and Periya Wagaboo the Kaval chief of Sirkali in Thanjavur district, during the closing decades of eighteenth century.11 Functions The primary function of a Kavalkarar whether, Men Kavalkarar or Kudi Kavalkarar, was to protect the grain, cattle, standing crops and other domestic properties of the inhabitants in the villages under their Kaval control from thieves and petty plunderers and to guard the public places like temples, highways, markets, tradefares, choultries and to keep an eye over the strangers and travellers. If any robbery occurred, it was the responsibility of the Kavalkarars to trace the culprit and recover the stolen properties, failing which he had to compensate the loss.12 Rous Peter, Collector of Madurai district while reporting about the functioning of Kavalkarars to the District Magistrate in 1811 made the following observation: The duties of a Cawolgar have always been considered, to watch over the Crops on the Ground, to guard them when reaped, and when threshed, the produce is measured in his presence, and delivered over to his charge entirely; after which whatever loss is 10 Sivarama Thalaivar Kummi (unpublished); Bishop R.Caldwell, A History of Tinnevelly, Asian Educational Services, New Delhi, 1881, p.144. 11 A.L.Grant, Collector of Thanjavur in his letter dated 30th September 1799 to Major Inns Commanding Thanjavur - Judicial Consultation, Vol.No.6A, pp.552-555. 12 S.R.Lushington, Collectors Report Regarding the Tirunelveli Poligors and Sequestered Pollams 1799 - 1800, Tirunelveli 1916, pp.2-3. 31 sustained, he is considered the accountable person for it. To protect the Village to which he belongs, and should any of the inhabitants be robbed, he is obliged to make good from his own Mauniam Lands, the value of whatever Articles may have been stolen unless he can deliver up the offenders to Justice, and in that case he is absolved from all responsibility. This method in the first instance compels him to guard the village with the utmost caution and in the latter occasions his being alert in the apprehension of the people who had been guilty of the Theft. He is also to watch over the Circar (Government) Grain wherever it may be deposited within the range of his Cawol, to be a guide to Detachments passing through the Country if required, and to protect all Travelers as long as they continue within his village. These are considered the principal duties of a Cawolgar, there are others of a Minor nature, which it would be useless to mention.13 It was the responsibility of the Kaval chief or the Men Kavalkarar to see to it that it was enforced. The Men Kavalkarar with the assistance of his Kudi Kavalkarars launched an investigation and tried to find out the culprit and recover what was stolen. In case of failure, they had to compensate the loss. In this way, the head Kavalkarar assumed both police and judicial powers.14 13 Rous Peter to District Magistrate, 28 November 1811, Madurai Collectorate Records, Vol.1158. 14 S.Kadhirvel, A History of The Maravas, Madurai Publishing House, Madurai, 1977, p.18. 32 Frederick S.Mulally of the Madras Police made the following observation regarding the function of rural police system in Tirunelveli district towards the closing decades of the nineteenth century. There were three classes of village police in the Tirunelveli district.15 a) Taliyaris – These are the government village police paid by the government at rates of ranging from Rs.2/- to Rs.4/- per mensem from the village cess fund levied at the rate of one anna per rupee on land revenue assessment. b) Kavalgars – Zamindar and Devasthanam village Police. These receive no regular pay for their services. Some receive ‘Sutantrams’ fees and emoluments at intervals, others enjoy maniems or inam lands, which are supposed to support countless relations, and connections termed pangalies (share holders) while nearly all receive some payment in kind at harvest. c) Kudi Kavalgars – These are private watchmen employed by villagers on their own account for the greater safety of their property. They are usually paid in kind in the understanding that they return an equivalent in values for anything stolen. An agreement to this entered into when the Kudi Kavalgars are appointed. The popular method of investigation followed by the Kavalkarars to find out the offenders was by tracing and following the footprints of the offenders and locating their whereabouts. In case the footprints of the offenders crossed the 15 Frederick S.Mullaly, Notes on Criminal Tribes of The Madras Presidency, Government Press, Madras, 1892, pp.113, 114. 33 borders of a particular village or villages, it became the responsibility of the Kavalkarars of those villages to trace the offenders.16 Another method was to pass the information to the fellow Kavalkarars of the neighbouring villages. By using this Kavalkarar network, they were able to monitor the movement of the offenders and locate their hiding places. Categories Men Kavalkarars and Kudi Kavalkarars Towards the closing decades of the eighteenth century, there were two important categories of Kavalkarars i.e. Men Kavalkarars also known as Mel Kavalkarars or Mer Kavalkarars and Kudi Kavalkarars. Men Kavalkarar was the superior one who had many villages under his control. Kudi Kavalkarars were of the second category appointed by the Men Kavalkarars. They were to perform their Kaval duties as per the direction given by the Men Kavalkarars.17 Sthalam Kaval or Kudi Kaval Like the Kavalkarars the Kaval system too was also of two important categories. They were known as Sthalam Kaval also known as Kudi Kaval, and Desa Kaval.18 Sthalam Kaval (or) Kudi Kaval was the Kaval system operating at the village level or at the most in a cluster of villages having one Men Kavalkarar and 16 Tirunelveli District Records, Vol.No.3591, p.102. 17 Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Vol.No.8B, p.1879. 18 Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report) Vol. No.2A, p.59. 34 few Kudi Kavalkarars as functionaries. Each Kudi Kavalkarar was assigned a particular village, or a portion of a village as his zone of operation by the Men Kavalkarar.19 In some regions these Kudi Kavalkarars were assisted by Visarippukarans, Koolapandis and Talayaris, a set of servants of lower order in discharging Kaval duties. These Kudi Kavalkarars were usually transferred from one village to the other or from one portion of the village to the other periodically by the Men Kavalkarar. In the case of big villages having extensive tract of wet land with irrigation facilities from reservoirs, the Kavalkarars were deployed according to the number of water channels in the reservoir and the extent of land under cultivation.20 Thus the number of Kavalkarars was directly related to the economic affluence of the villages. Desa Kaval The second category of the Kaval system was Desa Kaval. Here the word Desa means district or country consisting of many villages. This institution of Desa Kaval denotes country watch in which a number of villages would be under the control of a leader and he would be the head of the head Kavalkarars of these villages.21 The Desa Kaval chief commanded the respect and loyalty of the Sthalam or Kudi Kaval chiefs. Monitoring the boundary regions, jungle tracts, mountain pass, highways and settling the disputes between villages were the important function of the Desa Kaval chiefs.22 The decisions and judgement of 19 S.Kadhirvel, A History of the Maravas, p.17 20 Interview with S.Kadhirvel of Tirukkurungudi on 5th November 2003. 21 S.Kadhirvel, A History of the Maravas, p.19. 22 Ibid. 35 these Desa Kaval chiefs appear to have been implicitly accepted.23 These two institutions were functioning side by side all over Tamilnadu, especially in the southern districts of Tamilnadu. In the Palayakarar region in general the Palayakarars were also invariably the Desa Kaval chiefs. All the villages within a Palayam were directly under the Desa Kaval control of the Palayakarars. Apart from that depending on their power and influence these Palayakarars had Kaval control over the Circar villages too. As per Table 2:1, it is evident that the Palayakarars were regularly collecting Desa Kaval fee from the Circar villages and a share from the Kudi Kaval fee collected by Kudi Kavalkarars operating in the Circar villages. These factors indicate the power and influence exercised by the Palayakarars over Circar territories. The encroachment of the Palayakarars over Circar territories and the huge amount collected by them in the name of Kaval fee were unacceptable to the British. The income through the Kaval fee was directly related to the extent of the territory under the control of the Palayakarars. Every one of them was keen in extending his area of control. It resulted in mutual conflicts. This was the same with non-Palayakarar Desa Kaval chiefs also. In the non- Palayakarar tracts there were several powerful chiefs who exercised this function. The striking example was the Arupangu Nadu Maravars of Nanguneri taluk of Tirunelveli district.24 23 Towards the closing decades of nineteenth century and in the following years, the power and authority of the Kavalkarars were challenged by the people on many occasions. 24 G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897. 36 Arupangu Nadu25 was a Desa Kaval unit consisting of six villages namely Marugalkuruchi, Manchankulam, Kannimarmalai, Pudur, Thennimalai and Nedunkulam. All these villages had their own Men Kavalkarars with dependent Kaval villages and Kudi Kavalkarars. But the office of Desa Kaval chief was invariably from Marugalkuruchi.26 In Thanjavur district Periya Wagaboo and Chinna Wagaboo the Kaval chiefs of Sirkali regions were the other Desa Kaval chiefs who exercised control over several villages.27 In the Karur region though the Kallars and Kuravars shared the responsibility of Kaval, it was the Kallars who were the Desa Kaval chiefs exercising control over several villages unlike the Kuravar Kavalkarars who had control over single villages.28 Other Kaval Systems Apart from these two general categories of Kaval - Sthalam (or) Kudi Kaval and Desa Kaval - there were a few other special categories of Kaval like Kondi Kaval, Thesai Kaval, Kovil Kaval or Dharma Sthapana Kaval and Pathai Kaval. Kondi Kaval was a peculiar system of Kaval widely prevalent in the southern districts of Tamilnadu. Kondi Kaval meant watching the fields 25 Arupangu in Tamil means six shares or six divisions. 26 S.Kadhirvel, A History of the Maravas, p.19. 27 Judicial Consultations, Vol.No.6A, pp.564-569; Vide Appendix I. In Tamil ‘Periya’ means elder and ‘Chinna’ means younger; Kuravars whose occupation was Kaval were known as Kaval Kuravars. 28 37 particularly when the crops were ripening to harvest. It was indispensable to a cultivator in a land almost devoid of hedges and fencing. Here the primary duty of the Kavalkarars was to protect the ripening crops from both cattle and thieves.29 Thesai Kaval meant protecting a particular area or region infested by robber gangs or prone to frequent dacoities.30 Kovil Kaval or Dharma Sthapana Kaval meant protecting the properties of a particular temple for which the temple had to make payments to the Kavalkarars. There is evidence that the Kallar were Kavalkarars at Kanchi, Srirangam and Alagarcoil in addition to several other small temples.31 The Arupangunadu Maravars in the Nanguneri region of Tirunelveli district were the Kavalkarars of the Vaisnavite temple and the religious mutt (which controlled vast tracts of land) at Nanguneri.32 Similar was the case with Nambiandavar temple at Tirukkurungudi of Tirunelveli district which was under the Kavalship of a Maravar family of Nambi Thalaivan Pattayam, a village very close by.33 The Kaval of Murugan temple at Tiruparankuntram and Alagarkovil was again the 29 In “A Note on the Marava oppression in Tirunelveli District” - by G.H.P.Bailey Esqi.p., District Superintendent of Police, Tirunelvely; Kondi in Tamil means robbery. 30 A.Ramasamy (ed), Tamilnadu District Gazetteer: Ramnad, Govt. of Tamil Nadu, Madras, 1972, p.671. 31 Stuart H.Blackburn, “The Kallars: A Tamil ‘Criminal Tribe’ Reconsidered” in South Asia: Journal of Asian Studies, New Series, Vol.1, No.1, March 1978, p.46; A.V.Asirvatha Udaiyar, Maravar Charitram, Devarkulam, 1938, p.65. 32 David Ludden, Peasant History in South India, Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1993, p.50. 33 Even today a Maravar family of Nambi Thalaivan Pattayam is the Kavalkarar of the Nambiandavar temple at Tirukkurangudi. 38 responsibility of the Kallars of Madurai region.34 Moreover the Kaval chiefs who was incharge of the temple Kaval were honoured by the temple authorities during important festivals. Pathai Kaval implied protecting the highways. Occasionally it referred to providing escort to the highway travellers as well. Long distance travellers, merchants, family members of rich families, Christian missionaries and bullock carts loaded with goods were usually escorted by armed Kavalkarars.35 While escorting the travellers especially during the night the Kavalkarars use to talk in raised tone always so that it was expected that the robbers hiding on the roadside would recognize the voice of the Kavalkarar and dare not to attack. When Burma and Sri Lanka came under the control of the British there was mass scale of migration of people of Tamil Nadu seeking economic opportunities to both the countries. Among them the Nattukottai Chettiyars and Vanika Chettiyars (Merchant Communities) of Karaikudi and Thirpathur regions were prominent. The male members of these families when returning home with their hard earned money and valuables used to employ Kallars and Ambalakarars as Kavalkarars usually after reaching Karaikudi or Madurai from 34 Stuart H.Blackburn, “The Kallars: A Tamil ‘Criminal Tribe’ Reconsidered” p.46; Interview with th S.Venkatesan, a Tamil writer and a native of Tiruparankundram on 10 January 2004. When Criminal Tribes Act was imposed on the Piramalai Kallars of Madurai district, these Kallar Kavalkarars were given exemption. 35 J.H.Nelson, The Madura Country A Manual, Asian Educational services, New Delhi, 1989, Part No.III, p.169; also see Stuart H.Blackburn, “The Kallars: A Tamil ‘Criminal Tribe’ Reconsidered”, p.47. 39 Chennai or Tuticorin by train. From there, they were accompanied by Kallar Kavalkarars during their journey to their villages.36 Kaval Fee: Mode of Payment The services of the Sthalam Kavalkarars or Kudi Kavalkarars were generally rewarded by a fee which consisted mostly of a portion of the crop that they protected or monetary payment or allocation of agricultural land. J.W.Cochrane, Collector of Tirunelveli district has recorded the mode of payment of Kaval fee then existed in Tirunelveli region as mentioned below: 1. An allowance in grain taken from the gross produce before the division of the crop take place between the Sircar and the inhabitants. 2. The enjoyment of certain portion of land as Enam (tax free). 3. Fee in money from the inhabitants upon their ploughs, bullocks and homes. 4. Fee in money from merchants at a certain rate of per bullock and cooly load of goods. 5. An allowance of certain number of sheep and other articles in kind from the inhabitants upon the performance of certain religious ceremonies. 36 As the payment of this fee from the Interview with S.Somasekar, Professor of Physics, Rajus’ College, Rajapalayam, Native of Tirubuvanam, Madurai District, 20 January 2004. 40 inhabitants and merchants is made directly by them to the Cauwelgars, it is difficult to form a conclusion of the exact amount of these allowances.37 Like the Sthalam Kavalkarars or Kudi Kavalkarars the Desa Kaval chiefs were also rewarded by fees of different kinds.38 1. Wumbalam or certain allotment of Punja (dry land) and Nanjah (wet land) in every kaval village, from which the poligor draws his share. 2. The second one was Vadikkai Venduhole (Solicitation of the inhabitants) consisting of certain fixed annual payment from the villages. 3. The last one embrace the fees on plough, a few Maracalls of paddy from the village Nanjah land, Suncooms (excise duty) levied in kaval districts, taxes on looms, market places etc. 4. Apart from these they also received a share from the kaval dues collected by the kudi kavalkarars of Circar villages.39 The fee collected both by the Kudi Kavalkarars and Desa Kaval chiefs in return of their services amounts to one fifth of the total revenue collection in a district as per the rough estimate of the Company’s servants. (See Table 2:1) 37 Collectors Report Regarding the Tinnevelly Poligors and Sequestered Pollams 1779 - 1800, Collectorate Press, Tinnevelly, 1916, pp.3-4. 38 J.W.Cochrane to Secretary of Police Committee, 7 November 1805, Tirunelveli District Records, Vol.No.3600, p.184. 39 Board of Revenue Consultation, Vol.No.264, p.8779, Also See Table No.2:1. 41 Table 2:1 Poligors and Kaval Collections Statement of the Revenue of Tesha Kaval in the Tirunelveli Province and part of Madurai in Fusly 1209 (A.D.1800). Sequested Pollams Amount of Desa Kaval from Amount of Sthalan or Kudi the Circar Villages to the Kaval from the circar villages Poligar by the Sthalam Cauvilgars to the Poligar Chuly Panam Casu Chukkram 1. Panchalam Kuruchi Chuly Panam Casu Chukkram 15517 6 21 2645 3 45 - - - - - - 3. Nagalapuram 538 8 6 83 2 - 4. Kadalkudi 135 9 30 40 - 42 5. Yellayarampannai 852 1 03 49 9 45 6. Kolvarpatti 1960 - 36 37 3 39 7. Shaptoor 3095 - 30 40 - - 22099 6 30 1890 - 27 1. Sivagiri 4980 9 - 324 6 15 2. Shethur 86 5 42 - - - 3. Kollamkondan 353 4 12 - - - 4. Alagapuri 522 4 39 7 - 36 5. Chokampatti 5756 5 9 9 - - 2. Kulathur Total Poligors in Possession 42 6. Surandai 328 9 33 16 1 24 7. Naduvakuruchi 441 - 21 45 - - 8. Talaivankottai 337 5 45 - - - 9. Avudaiyapuram 384 6 18 - - - 10. Wootumalai 3306 4 15 - - - 11. Woorcaud 431 6 42 2121 8 15 12. Singampatti 132 3 9 251 7 89 13. Ettayapuram 1199 4 21 15 8 12 14. Kadamboor 141 1 24 46 3 42 15. Maniyachi 501 3 45 119 2 36 16. Attankarai 204 - - 4 5 21 17. Melmandai 3 7 18 - - - 18. Pauvely 867 - 27 75 3 1 19. Manarkottai 332 8 6 9 6 0 20. Colvarpatti - - - - - - 21. Chennelgudi 107 1 - - 5 - 22. Peraiyur 1764 5 9 152 - 38 23. Sandaiyur 823 6 39 31 2 4 24. Yelumalai 297 4 36 12 - - 23245 - 12 366 7 12 Total (One Chukkram = Rs.2 – 1 ana – 11¼ paise) Tiruchendur 5th October 1800 Signed / S.R.Lushington Source : Board of Revenue Consultations, Vol.264, p.8779. Note : This table shows the collections made by the respective poligors previous to the assumption of the Cauvel subsequently made by the collector of the Southern Peshcush together with the balance outstanding in money and grain at the time of surrender to the Nawab. 43 Thuppu Cooli Thuppu Cooli was an important and integral part of the Kaval system closely associated with the crime of cattle theft committed by the Kavalkarars or by others in connivance with the Kavalkarars, which was quite common and great in number. This was the crime which agonized the authorities the most and invariably occupied a prominent place in the colonial discourse. Moreover it was the worst form of crime much feared by the people because in an agrarian society, cattles occupied a pivotal place in the day to day economic life of the farmers. For some communities in Tamilnadu cattle were their only property and cattle rearing was their traditional occupation. Cattle theft was committed for two important reasons. It was the weapon frequently used by the Kavalkarars against those who refused to accept their Kaval rights or to pay the Kaval fee. The other reason was earning money by illegal means. The monetary benefit enjoyed by the persons who committed this crime was known as Thuppu cooli.40 Thuppu in Tamil means information or clue. Cooli means the payment to be made to the person for the work he has rendered. (e.g) B’ steals A’s bullocks or property, C, B’s friend goes to A’ and promises to recover the bulls or the property on payment of a certain sum. A’ consents, D’ a friend of C’ shows A’ where to find the property. The amount paid by A’ was known as Thuppu cooli, which is shared by others.41 Invariably Kavalkarars play an important role in this 40 In the southern districts of Tamilnadu particularly in Madurai and Tirunelveli Thuppu Cooli system is prevalent even today. 41 E.Stevenson, Deputy Inspector General of Police to the Inspector General of Police, G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897, p.37. 44 operation and receive his share. The amount to be paid as Thuppu cooli normally amounts to half of the value of the property stolen. In the Tiruchirapalli District Gazetteer Thuppu cooli is described in the following terms. Tuppukuli means restoration of stolen property on payment of a price. Kavalgars acted as intermediaries between the victims of the robbery and perpetrators of crime to whom Mullikuli or thorn payment and Kattukuli or payment for the upkeep of stolen cattle were to be paid. Kavalgaras received kulukuli or the fee ordinarily a quarter of the total amount paid.42 Here the term Mullu cooli or thorn payment means the payment made to the person who actually robbed the cattle and drove the animal to a safer place through jungles during nights facing the task of crossing thorny bushes. In many cases the actual robbers do not keep the stolen animals with them, instead they leave the animals under the custody of any one of their relative or associate. During such times the animals were looked after and fed by them in a nearby village. The payment made for the upkeep of the animal is known as Kattu Cooli. H.Tremmenheere, District Magistrate of Bellary served in the southern districts earlier in his report to the Chief Secretary to Government dated 20th November 1885 provided a statistical data regarding the cattle theft as furnished below. 42 Madras District Gazetteers, Thiruchirapalli District, Government of Madras, 1907, pp.256, 257. 45 …It appears that the whole value of the cattle stolen, 42 per cent pertains to the three districts of Coimbatore, Madura and Tirunelveli, their figures being as follows: Rs. Coimbatore … 9031 Madura … 8219 Tinnevelly … 6229 Total … 23479 Of this value only Rs.11421/- was recovered, giving a net loss to these three districts of Rs.12058/- a loss which probably largely understates the truth.43 In the Madurai and Tirunelveli regions the problem of cattle lifting was a big headache to the police machinery. As the police could not make any headway regarding the complaints made on cattle lifting, many cases went unreported. Regarding this the following observation was made by the Inspector General of Police. Taking cattle thefts first these crimes constitute, as every Magistrate of the south knows, the popular form of crime to which maravas and kallars are addicted. But the point is of course not the crime comes to light but the mass of unreported crime of this kind which is never reported to the police. It is of course impossible to estimate this at all accurately, but every police officer who served in Madura and Tirunelveli tells the same story, that we actually 43 G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1893, p.13. 46 register but a small portion of the crime against property which occurs.44 F.Fawcett, Superintendent of Police, Malabar in his report to the Inspector General of Police went one step further and commented that: Black-mail and Tuppukuli are in no way repressed by the law because they are stronger than the law. The law has had practically no effect on them, and so long as the law is not more forcible than it is, it will not affect them, for we have seen that they are not the things of modern growth, but genuine expression of racial feelings and therefore of an intensity not easily put aside. Cattle are being stolen from the road, from the yard, from the pen, from the house. The large cattle fair, which is a feature of the great yearly festival in Madurai town, is invariably the scene of many thefts, although it is difficult to imagine circumstances under which cattle-stealing would be more nearly possible. Then comes in “tuppukuli”, clue hire. In this way cattle are lost. It is known, of course, that they have been stolen. Presently a kallar gives information, he has a clue; he does not know where the animals are, or who stole them, but he thinks that if so much is paid perhaps he can manage to find out the thieves, bring them to justice and get restoration of animals. The money is paid, it is not 44 M.Hammick, Inspector-General of Police to the Chief Secretary to Government, Ootacamund 24 April 1896, G.O. No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897. 47 long before the beasts are found grazing quietly in an adjoining field and then the affair may be explained as an unfortunate mistake.45 With the establishment of British rule in 1802, stringent anti-kaval measures were undertaken by the colonial state in stages to annihilate the Kaval system. Desa Kaval and Kudi Kaval systems were abolished in 1802 and 1816 respectively. In their place, new police establishments were introduced. The land grants enjoyed by the Kavalkarars were also confiscated by the colonial government in the name new revenue polices. Consequently, a major section of the Kavalkarars were rendered jobless. In proportion to the anti-kaval measures of the colonial state, the crimes committed by the Kavalkarars also increased and among such crimes, the most frequent and greater in number was Thuppu Cooli. Regional Variations In the nomenclature of Kaval system and the Kavalkarars, there were many regional variations, though there was considerable uniformity in the purpose and way of functioning of the system. The officers of the Kaval system of police were distinguished by different appellations each signifying the rank or duty of the persons on whom it is confirmed. Arasoo Kaval (Royal Kaval) In the princely states of Ramnad, Pudukkottai and Thanjavur the kings themselves were the Kaval chiefs and their office was named as Arasoo 45 F.Fawcett to M.Hammick, G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897, p.32. 48 Kavalagam. The same was the case with the Palayakarars of Ariyalur, Thuraiyur and Udaiyarpalayam who were directly incharge of the Kaval system. Hence in this region the Kaval system was named as Arasoo Kaval (Royal Kaval).46 While the kings and the Palayakarars occupied the top position in the administrative hierarchy of the Kaval system, there were others in the descending order like Men Kavalkarars (Superior Kavalkarars), Kudi Kavalkarars, Visarippukarars and Koolapandis or Talaiyaris at the lowest level.47 Men Kavalkarars Men Kavalkarars was a popular term in Thanjavur and Tiruchirapalli districts signifies the head or chief Kavalkarars corresponding to the Palayakarar and non-Palayakarar Desa kaval chiefs of Tirunelveli district. The Men Kavalkarars of the Melur region of Madurai particularly of the Kallar community were known as Ambalakarars.48 The ordinary Kudi Kavalkarars of Thanjavur region had some men under their supervision to share their work. They were called Visarippukarans (person incharge of investigation) and Koolapandi or Thalaiyaris. We don’t come across such offices related to Kaval system in Madurai and Tirunelveli region. But there were village level servants known in the name of Thalaiyaris in Tirunelveli region too. The Kudi Kavalkarars of the northern districts were known by a different 46 Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Vol.2A, pp.710-714. 47 Ibid. 48 Stuart H.Blackburn, “The Kallars: A Tamil ‘Criminal Tribe’ Reconsidered”, p.47. 49 name altogether as Tookeris in Chengalpat and Chennai region.49 The same person was called as Kattubadi in South Arcot region.50 In the Thanjavur region the Kaval system was much more concerned with cattle theft than crops and other properties.51 This is not surprising considering that it was the most important rice-producing wet zone of Tamilnadu: having farm operations throughout the year. In such a situation the need of cattle both for natural fertilizer and farm work was always felt. Moreover Kavalkarars who had Kaval jurisdiction over coastal villages and ports also collected, apart from their usual fee, Magumai i.e. import and export tax on goods.52 Kaval Deeds While assuming the responsibility of Kavalship of a particular village or villages oral agreements were made between the village elders and the Kavalkarars. In some cases agreements were executed by the villagers and the Kavalkarars specifying the names of the elders of the village and the Kavalkarars, names of the villages to be covered under the Kaval and the fee to be paid in detail. These kind of deeds were known as Muri.53 N.M.Venkatasamy Nattar, distinguished Tamil scholar and author of a history of the Kallar caste provides one such Muri that reads as follows: 49 Ibid., pp.749-750. 50 B.S.Baliga, Madras District Gazetteers, South Arcot, Govt. of Madras, Madras, 1962, p.378. 51 F.R.Hemingway, Madras District Gazetteers Thanjavur, Vol.1, No.1, Govt. of Madras, 1966, p.206. 52 Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Vol.No.58, Serial No.7411, pp.307-311. 53 Venkatasamy Nattar, Kallar Charitram (in Tamil), Jekam & Co, Thiruchirapalli, 1928, p.125. 50 We Lakshmana Reddiyar, Nallappa Reddiyar, Kalathi Reddiyar, Erama Reddiyar, Poosari [Priest], Chinnathambi Udaiyar, Kalitheertha Udaiyar and Rettai Patchai Udaiyar of Thuraimangalam village and Kondaiah, Narasaiah, Lingaiah, Mannakkon, Maravakon and Perumsinga Kon of Akaram have executed a Men Kaval agreement [Muri] with Karutha Kankeyar and Velayutha Cholagar of Erimangalam Nadu on 7th of month Thai of Akshaya Varusam [Jan.21, 1806]. We accept to pay a fee of ten Madurai gold coins every year; five to Karutha Kankeyar and another five to Velayutha Cholaganar, witness Nallappa Reddiyar of Thiruvachi, Nallappa Reddiyar of Perumayilur and Renganatha Pillai the accountant.54 Even after the establishment of Company’s rule, such agreements (Muri) continued to be in vogue. The following is such an agreement executed by a Kavalkarar by name Narasa Udaiyan.55 Whereas the Circar having fixed certain allowances to be granted for my maintenance, I engage that I will be careful and use my endeavours to prevent thefts in the villages within the limits of my kaval and that I will assist the Darogahs of police subject to the authority of the judge, whenever called by them on account of Circar business should a 54 Ibid., p.126. 55 Translation of an agreement executed by Narasa Udaiyan of Gramam a village in the district of Thiruvennainallur on 2 November 1807, Judicial Consultations (Sundries), Vol.58, pp.672, 673. 51 robbery or theft be committed within the bound of my kaval. I will endeavour to detect and apprehend the thieves and deliver them over the charge of the Darogah with the property stolen. But in case where I fail to apprehend the persons who have committed robberies within the limits of my kaval, I shall become culpable and the liable to any punishment which the circar may inflict upon me. I have executed this on my own consent. Signed / Narasa Wodaiyan Witness Signed : Namasivayam Toppy Padaiyachi Yet another feature of the Kaval system was that it was not necessary on the part of the Kavalkarar to be Kavalkarar of his own village. He could be a Kavalkarar of a village at some distance from his own village. If the village was faraway it was not uncommon to send one of his male family members to stay in that village to look after the Kaval works and to collect the Kaval dues. Caste and the Kaval System It is interesting to note that the Kaval system in Tamilnadu was dominated by some traditionally martial castes such as the Maravars, Naicker, Kallars, Agambadiyars, Padyachis and Udaiyars, although the participation of other communities was also not unusual. A major section of the above said communities were either serving in the army of local rulers or Poligors as soldiers or were functioning as Kavalkarars. 52 In Tirunelveli and Ramnad regions it was the Maravar community particularly the Kondayamkottai branch which dominated the scene.56 In Ukkirankottai and Thenkasi regions, in the Nadar dominant villages usually Nadars were the Kavalkarars. In very few villages around Sankarankovil, Parayars looked after Kaval works. Parayars. Even today they are known as Kaval In Sankarankovil, there is one Parayar family popularly known as Kaval Paraiyar Kudumbam. In recognition of one of the ancestors of this family who was a Kavalkarar a stone image has been erected inside the Siva temple at Sankarankovil. In the villages in and around Naicker Palayams usually Kambalathu Naickers were the Kavalkarars.57 The Kavalkarars of Madurai, Thanjavur, Pudukkottai and Tiruchirapalli regions were predominantly from Kallar community of different subsects followed by Padaiyachis, Agambadiyars and Naickers in some pockets. In Virudachalam, Vilupuram and Chidambaram regions, the Kavalkarars were mostly drawn from the Udaiyar and Padayachi communities. In Salem and Karur region, while the Kaval over agricultural fields were looked after by the Kallars, the Kuravars were incharge of protecting the cattle.58 In Coimbatore, Konars, Valaiyars and Kuravars were the prominent communities in the Kaval system.59 56 David Ludden, Peasant History in South India, p.128. 57 Interview with C.Chandravanan, Curator, Government Museum, Kuttralam, State Department of Archaeology, Government of Tamilnadu, 20 November 2004. 58 The History of The Madras Police, Centenary Volume (1859-1959), Govt. of Tamilnadu, Chennai, p.215. 59 Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report) Vol.5A, pp.525-526. 53 In Madurai region, it was the Kallar community which dominated the Kaval system as Men and Kudi Kavalkarars. However in the western and north west regions of Madurai district, there were some Kavalkarars belonged to Valaiyar and Kuravar communities. The Kallar community of Madurai region may in general be divided into two categories.60 1) Keelnattu Kallar or Esanattu Kallar or Melur Kallar inhabiting in the territories lying east of Madurai concentrating more in the Melur region. 2) Melnattu Kallar otherwise known as Piramalai Kallar whose core region was Tirumangalam taluk of Madurai district. From their core region the Piramalai Kallar extended their Kaval sway over a vast region touching, the borders of Coimbatore and Salem districts. Another feature of the Kallar Kaval was that they even extended their Kaval sway over urban centres like Madurai and Thiruchirapalli.61 The common feature encompassing all the regions was that everywhere the offices of the Men Kavalkarar and the Kudi Kavalkarar was hereditary. Another common factor was that the offices like Arasoo Kavalkarar, Men Kavalkarar and Desa Kavalkarar were invariably held solely by the people of locally dominant communities such as Maravars, Kallars, Naickers, Udaiyars and Padayachis while the office of subordinate Kavalkarars like Kudi Kavalkarars, 60 P.Muthu Thevar, Muvendarkula Thevar Samuga Varalaru (Tamil), Kakaveeran Publication, Karumathur, 1976, pp.91-94. 61 Madurai District Records, Vol.1176, p.220. 54 Visarippukaran, Koolapandi and Tookeri were held by persons belonging to the dominant as well as subordinate communities such as Kuravars and Paraiyars.62 For the functionaries of the Kaval system whether Men Kavalkarars or Kudi Kavalkarars their office was simply more than an avenue of income. It was a source of power, a symbol of social status, prestige and privilege. Kavalship was considered by them as a traditional right and they zealously protected this right at any cost. Any challenge or encroachment whether from inside or out was vehemently opposed. This often resulted in murder and arson. On one occasion there was a dispute among the Maravars of Tirukkurungudi, Elavankulam and Manad over the Kaval right on Valliyur (all in Tirunelveli district). When Sivarama Thalaivar was the leader of the Maravars of Tirukkurungudi and Elavankulam, the Manad faction was led by Veerakutti and Kathakutti. The Manad Maravars deputed some of their men to collect Kaval fee from the inhabitants of Valliyur. The Maravars of Elavankulam considered it as an open challenge. Consequently those deputies of Manad Maravars were captured and beheaded. Then their heads were tied to the neck of some dogs 62 Though Kaval rights were held by many communities, it is the Maravars and the Kallars who are prominently identified with Kaval system. The first reason was their numerical preponderance. In the southern districts of Thiruchirapalli, Madurai, Ramnad and Tirunelveli a majority of the Kavalkarars were from these castes. Numerical supremacy itself was a reason for their illegal imposition of Kaval and other forms of oppression. Another reason was that the other communities associated with Kaval rights, partly due to their inability to cope with the anti-kaval measures undertaken by the Company and partly due to their ability to accommodate themselves with the changing socio-economic trends, changed their occupation. On the other hand, the Maravars and the Kallars were largely unable to change their occupation, started to prey upon the people who were supposed to be under their Kaval. When the oppression of the Maravar and Kallar Kavalkarars became unbearable the common people started retaliating by organizing anti-kaval movements in Madurai and Tirunelveli districts. (See Chapter V). Moreover most of the criminals notified and registered under CTA were from these two communities. An element of fear and acrimony was always there in the heart of other communities over the Maravars and Kallars. 55 and the dogs themselves were paraded in the villages where from victims hailed.63 As guardians of the people and their belongings these Kavalkarars enjoyed some special privileges apart from the customary Kaval fee. During the temple festivals in the villages the right to ritually sacrifice the goats and consequently appropriating its head rested with the village Kavalkarars.64 During festival seasons like Tamil New Year Day, Pongal and particularly the festival in the Tamil month of Aadi the inhabitants are expected to provide the Kavalkarars with certain things than what was usual and routine.65 The shepherds were expected to supply some goats beside milk and ghee in specific quantities. The same was the case with oil millers, weavers, jaggery makers and others. Moreover the Kavalkarars received temple honours too. In an agrarian society where the will of the state did not extend to the farthest reaches, these powers and privileges were often misused by the Kavalkarars and their family members. While reporting about the demerits of the Kaval system invariably all the British officials pointed out the misuse of power by the family members and relatives of the Kavalkarars.66 On one occasion an old man of the Kavalkarar family of Nambi Thalaivanpattayam of Tirunelveli district, accompanied by a petty Kavalkarar met 63 Sivarama Thalaivar Kummi (unpublished). 64 H.R.Pate, Tirunelveli District Gazetteer, Madras, 1917, p.117. 65 Madurai District Records, Vol.1176, pp.232-233. 66 Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Vol.58, pp.335-336. 56 a Konar (shepherd) on their way. The old man asked the Konar to bring a lamb to his house for a feast to the guests. Realising that he could not demand any money, the Konar hesitated for a moment and answered politely that he had no lamb with grown up member [Pudukku Molaikala] and parted away after taking permission. (The growth of the member is a sign to decide whether the animal is mature enough for slaughter or not). The petty Kavalkarar immediately understood that the shepherd was lying. That night he paid a visit to the Konar’s cattle yard and in the next morning he came to the Kaval chief’s house carrying a handful of dismembered penis. Within an hour the Konar came weeping to the house of the Kaval chief and reported the matter.67 On another occasion, a girl closely related to Kaval chief’s family got married and the couples were staying in the house of the bride for few days. One evening when the bridegroom was about to go out, the bride asked him what she shall prepare to him for the supper. The answer came in a sarcastic tone. What you are going to prepare? Are you going to prepare a meal with mutton? The bridegroom left the house, after asking this question. Hearing the conversation from the next room the bride’s father took the matter very seriously. Within a short time the matter was passed to a local Kavalkarar who in a short time came with a lamb (of somebody else).68 The power and influence enjoyed by the Kaval chiefs were shared by the women members of their families too. It was an usual practice during those days 67 Interview with S.Kadhirvel, Tirukkurungudi on 6 November 2003. 68 Interview with S.Navaneetha Krishna Pandian, Tirukkurungudi on 7 November 2003. 57 that the owners of the toddy shops were expected to supply specific quantities of toddy to the petty Kavalkarars free of cost. The quantity to be supplied was decided over by the elderly women member of the Kaval chief’s family. By using her right thumb nail she would make some marks on the betel leaves signifying the quantity of toddy to be supplied and these leaves were distributed among the petty Kavalkarars. This practice of making nail marks over betel leaves was known as killakku.69 If the Kaval chief planned for a pilgrimage with his family members and relatives it was the responsibility of the people of the villages under his Kaval control on the way to feed them.70 As can be expected, the relations between the Kavalkarars and the inhabitants they were meant to protect were not always marked by cordiality. On occasions Kaval was imposed on the inhabitants. If there were any resistance on the part of the inhabitants such attempts were crushed by the Kavalkarars by means of violence resulting often in murder and arson. There were instances in which the Kavalkarars who were unable to track down the culprits who had committed robbery in their Kaval villages, themselves indulged in robbery and dacoity in order to compensate the loss as agreed upon earlier. These kind of thefts were committed in connivance with the Kavalkarars of the neighbouring villages or professional robber gangs. A Kavalkarar could be a sincere Kavalkarar in his own Kaval village and at the same time be an active 69 Interview with Mr.Pandian Pillai of Tirukkurungudi on 7 November 2003. 70 Interview with S.Kadhirvel, Tirukkurungudi, 6 November 2003. 58 thief in the villages of other Kavalkarars. Regarding this factor the observation made by Cochrene, Collector of Tirunelveli is worth mentioning here. I have already stated that the Cawelgars are bound to make good all losses by thefts, which obligation, I am induced to recommend, should be done away with for in order to answer these demands, they obliged to have recourse to robbery and theft and as they connive at the robberies each other…. Thus one theft generally produces another and a regular system of robbery of the most dangerous tendency is carried on.71 Likewise it was not that easy for the inhabitants to change their Kavalkarars who proved inefficient. Any attempt on the part of the people to change their Kavalkarars resulted in armed clashes between the former and newly nominated Kavalkarars and consequent loss of property for the inhabitants. So there was every possibility for the Kaval system to become a mechanism of oppression extortion and exploitation. Inspite of all these drawbacks Kaval system as a whole proved to be an institution guaranteeing peace and security to the people at large. Before the establishment of British political supremacy over Tamilnadu and the creation of its own police machinery, the Kaval system, the native system of police administration, a powerful machinery was functioning throughout Tamilnadu, guaranteeing protection to the people and their belongings.72 The Kavalkarars and the Kaval system was an inevitable integral part of the society whether urban or rural. 71 Cochrene to the Police Committee, 7 November 1805, Tirunelveli District Records, Vol No.3600, p.185. 72 This is evident from the reports sent by Collectors of Southern districts of Madras Presidency to the Police Committee at Madras from 1802-1809; C.D.Maclean, Manual of the Administration of the Madras Presidency, Vol.I, Asian Educational Services, New Delhi, 1885, p.187. 59 It was true that in the Palayakarar area the Kavalkarars were controlled by the respective Palayakarars and in the non-Palayakarar tracts they were directly under the supervision of the Circar (Nayaks of Madurai or Nawab of Arcot). When the Circar and the Palayakarars became weak these Kaval chiefs became rather powerful and asserted independence. Unlimited power always leads to misuse of power. Next to the kings and Palayakarars these Kaval chiefs proved to be the power bases at the tertiary level. The warrior qualities, daring nature, skill in tracing the criminals and long association with weapons earned them great respect and fear among the common men. However there were Kavalkarars of honest nature who carried on their work more promptly and never been a hindrance to the people who were under their protection. Thus in the social structure of pre-colonial Tamilnadu the Kaval chiefs had occupied a prominent and pivotal place. He was the protector, he was the police and he was the judicial oracle. He protected the properties of the temples, for which he was paid by the temple. By donating that amount to the same temple for the performance of a particular pooja he became a patron of the temple and in turn he received the temple honours during annual festivals. In consequence of these factors his status in the society and the power he enjoyed got reinforced and legitimized. CHAPTER III CONFRONTATION WITH THE BRITISH EAST INDIA COMPANY The Carnatic Wars (1746-48, 1749-54, 1758-63) paved the way for the British to have a strong foothold in the politics of Tamilnadu. As an ally of the Nawabs of Arcot, the British East India Company waged a series of wars against the kingdoms of Madurai, Ramanathapuram, Sivagangai and Thanjavur, and against the Palayakarars and ultimately reduced them to submission. While subjugating the powers who were unwilling to accept the overlordship of the Nawab, the Company was very keen on its own gains. In the meantime the Company had fought four important wars against Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan of Mysore. During the course of the wars, and after the death of Tipu Sultan in the fourth Anglo-Mysore war (1799) a major portion of his territories was taken over by the Company. While assisting the Nawab, the Company had engineered its own design of becoming master of Carnatic. Though the Nawab was well aware of these designs, he could not check the growing power and influence of the Company. Unable to withstand the pressure exerted by the Company, the Nawab surrendered his possessions one after another by signing a series of treaties with the Company. After the suppression of the uprising of 1800-1801, on 31st July 1801 a fresh treaty was concluded between the Company and the 61 Nawab by which the Nawab had surrendered all his territories to the Company and became a pensioner. The British East India Company became the virtual master of Tamilnadu.1 By the end of 1801 the process of the transformation of the British East India Company, a commercial organization basically, into a political power came to a successful completion in Tamilnadu. This rendered the transfer of power inevitable. With the acquisition of Kongunadu from Mysore, Thanjavur from the Marathas, Madurai from Khan Shahib and the Carnatic from the Wallajah Nawabs the Company gained possession of the entire Tamil country.2 Right from the beginning the relation between the Company and the Kavalkarars was marked by confrontations and conflicts. The policies adopted by the Company against the Kavalkarars of Tamilnadu were considerably influenced by the bitter experiences it had with them during its operations against the revolting Palayakarars. The Kavalkarars as a local base of political power had made common cause with the Palayakarars during their struggle against the Company in 1800-1801 and even earlier. Consequently the Company considered the Kaval system as a threat and convinced that it should be annihilated soon. Towards the last quarter of the 18th century when the Company was collecting taxes from the Palayakarars on behalf of the Nawab of Arcot it faced stiff resistance not only from the Palayakarars but from the Kaval chiefs too. 1 Lord Edward Clive in Council, 1 October 1801, Letter, S.D to England, Vol.2, p.116. 2 Ibid., 62 Company and the Kavalkarars: Early Experiences According to the treaty concluded between the Company and the Nawab on 2nd December 1781 the Nawab had accepted for the transfer of the revenue of Carnatic to the Company for a period of five years.3 Collecting revenue from the subordinate powers was not that smooth. But it was in Tirunelveli that the Company witnessed stiff resistance especially from the Maravar Kaval chiefs of Nanguneri and Kalakad regions. Sivarama Thalaivar In the Tirunelveli region Jackson, a British military officer was entrusted with the work of subduing the rebel chiefs. Among the Maravar chiefs the most important was Sivarama Thalaivar, the Kaval chief of Tirukkurungudi in the Kalakad region.4 Probably he was the first among the Kaval chiefs to resist the British attempts to usurp their power. He was powerful enough to have his own fort and armed men and appointed one Sudalaimuthu Pillai of Panagudi to collect taxes.5 Declaring himself as the Circar he plundered the Nawab’s treasury and granary and fought with the Nawab and British forces. The Company from its base at Palayamkottai dispatched a British force under Jackson against Sivarama Thalaivar. His fort at Thirumalapuram situated 3 C.Atchinson, A Collection of Treaties, Engagements and Sanads, Government Press, Calcutta, Vol.5, p.181. 4 In Tamil the word Thalaivar means Chief, head man and leader. 5 Sivarama Thalaivar Kummi (Unpublished). 63 at Dalavaipuram near Thirukkurungudi was attacked by cannons and destroyed. Regarding this Bishop Caldwell has stated that, In 1782 a poligor named Sivarama thalaivar had erected a fort near Thirukurungudi and was plundering the neighbourhood. The commandant sent a detachment which took the fort and destroyed it. ‘Sivaramathalaivar’ is the hereditary name of the head of a powerful Marava family in that place.6 During this attack among those who were killed on the side of Sivarama Thalaivar there was one soldier by name Sudalaimuthu. His family members built a small temple at Tirukkurungudi in memory of the deceased soldiers. Even today his descendants from the neighbouring villages are performing poojas once in a year.7 When the fort at Thirumalapuram was destroyed by the British forces, Sivarama Thalaivar constructed another fort at Kombai a place situated in the western ghats adjoining Tirukurungudi and continued to plunder the Circar granaries. Though some more attempts were made by the Company it could not suppress Sivarama Thalaivar completely. After few years there was a dispute between the Maravars of Manad and the Maravars of Elavankulam over the collection of Kaval fee from the inhabitants of Valliyur, in which Sivarama Thalaivar took side with Elavankulam Maravars. Towards the end Veerakutti and 6 Bishop R.Caldwell, A History of Tinnevelly, Asian Educational Services, New Delhi, 1881, p.144. 7 Sivarama Thalaivar Kummi (Unpublished). 64 Kathakutti the leaders of the Maravars of Manad bribed the bodyguard of Sivarama Thalaivar and treacherously killed him.8 Periya Waghaboo Periya Waghaboo Muthukumarasamy Nainar, popularly known as Periya Waghaboo, was a Kaval chief of Sirkali in Mayavaram, Subha of Thanjavur district. Along with another Kaval chief known as Chinna Waghaboo (who might have been his brother or a close relative) he had joint Kaval control over sixty eight villages in Sirkali region. The annual gross receipt as Kaval dues collected by him was 1024 chuli chakrams 9 fanams and 67 casues.9 The first name Periya Waghaboo is a Muslim name but the second name Muthukumarsamy Nainar is a Hindu name causing confusion. Further in the British records he is described as a close relative of one Thondaimanpadayatchi, a Kavalkarar of Kumbakonam. Thondaimanpadayatchi is also a Hindu name. However in the same material his son’s name is recorded as ‘Subbaraya Ravutta Muhaideen’ a mixture of both Hindu and Muslim names. In all probability we may assume that Periya Waghaboo might have been a convert to Islam or this may be an instance of fluid identity.10 As per the treaty signed by the Maratha king of Thanjavur with the British East India Company in 1796 two subhas of the kingdom, Kumbakonam and 8 Ibid. 9 “Statement showing the number of cavilgars and poligors in the district of Chidambaram with the former and present revenue”, Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Vol.5B, p.7533; Vide Appendix – I. 10 Benjamin Torin, Resident, Thanjavur to F.A.Grant, Collector, Mayavaram, 3 October 1799, Judicial Consultations, Vol.6A, pp.570-571. 65 Mayavaram respectively, were brought under the temporary management of the Company.11 Sirkali was a sub divisional administrative unit of Mayavaram subha. Consequently, the Kaval chiefs of these two subhas were expected to obey the orders of the Company and to surrender their Kaval rights, and they were deprived of their traditional right to collect Kaval dues. However the development was contrary to the expectations of the Company. Periya Waghaboo the Kaval chief of Sirkali openly challenged the authority of the Company and started revolting against the Company. For the Kavalkarars their office was not only an avenue of income. The Kavalship was a source of power, a symbol of social status, prestige and privilege. Kavalship was considered by them as their traditional right, and surrendering it to an alien power was unacceptable to them and they were ready to protect this right at any cost. Periya Waghaboo was no exception. After establishing its power over the Mayavaram region the Company’s administration started replacing the native system of administration with that of their own. Consequently the inhabitants were motivated not to pay the customary Kaval dues to their Kavalkarars. Hence the people stopped paying Kaval fee to Periya Waghaboo. Deprived of his traditional power, social status and prestige coupled with the closure of all the avenues of income Periya Waghaboo began to involve himself in extortion from the people who were nominally, under his Kavalship. To maintain himself and his army he was in 11 Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Serial No.7410, pp.64-69. 66 need of money which he collected from the people through the means of force.12 In a petition written by the affected inhabitants to Francis Alexander Grant, the then Collector of Mayavaram the following interesting observation was made which indicates under what circumstances Periya Waghaboo turned be a rebel. “…Periya Waghaboo having assembled an armed force, he from the year 1797 to this period has seized and imprisoned the inhabitants and their people in the villages, plundered houses, carried away seed grains. In the course of these three years the property which he has plundered from us amounted to 10,000 chuckrams and our losses in paddy amounts also 10,000 chuckrams making together 20,000 chuckrams… He has burnt and pulled down many houses… In our district there are two cavilcarrahs one called Periya Waghaboo, the other Chinna Waghaboo and each of them has separately his free gift lands, Varesaypattoo, Pannay bramum and watching villages, and in the enjoyment of these privileges they conducted themselves agreeable to established custom and to the satisfaction of the inhabitants until Ratchasa warcham after which Periya Waghaboo became refractor and he acted contrary to the usual custom…”.13 12 Petition submitted by the inhabitants of Sirkali district to Francis Alexander, 1 September 1799, Judicial Consultations, Vol.6A, pp.547-548, Vide Appendix II. 13 Ibid., Vide Appendix II. 67 The above description is self explanatory and it is clearly stated that Periya Waghaboo conducted himself agreeable to the people until ‘Ratchasa Warcham’ [Tamil year corresponding to 1797] i.e., one year before the take over of administration by the Company. The British East India Company was much worried about the rebellious nature of Periya Waghaboo and the frequent raids he was repeatedly conducting in the countryside because, it affected their revenue collection and prevented the farmers from cultivating their lands.14 Consequently the Company took a decision of suppressing him by destroying his fort at Woothengudi. Before the actual commencement of military operation against Periya Waghaboo elaborate arrangement were made by the Company, detachments of British military were ordered to move towards Sirkali and Mayavaram and intelligence were gathered about his movement. When they received information that Periya Waghaboo was at his fort at Woothengudi a strong detachment was dispatched under the command of one Roopsing which surrounded the fort on 29th September 1799. In the battle that ensued four soldiers of the Company, including Muhamad Sahib, the Subedar were killed, and fourteen others were wounded. Among those killed the bodies of three soldiers were collected by Waghaboo’s men and buried inside the fort.15 14 Col.A.Brown to Captain Smith, commanding a detachment to Mayavaram, dated 3 October 1797, Judicial consultations, Vol.6A, pp.578-581. 15 Subedar Roopsingh to F.A.Grant, Collector of Thanjavur, dated 29 September 1799, Judicial Consultations, Vol.6A, pp.555-559. 68 The defeat of the Company’s army in the hands of a Kaval chief was a humiliation that greatly hurt the prestige of the Company. So the Company had to put much effort to track down the rebel Kaval chief. The British army stationed at various centers were pressed in this job. The Governor in Council at Madras was appraised of each and every move. A great hunt followed. In tracking down Periya Waghaboo the Company sought the co-operation of the king of Thanjavur.16 Apart from that, the Company enlisted the co- operation of Chinna Waghaboo too in their operation against Periya Waghaboo.17 Administrative offices and treasury buildings were provided with additional guards because the British thought that they may be attacked any time and plundered by Periya Waghaboo. However all these efforts proved futile because Periya Waghaboo vacated his fort at Woothengudi after his battle with the British detachment on 29th September 1799 and retreated to the jungle. Inspite of its elaborate arrangement and extensive spy network the British army could not even locate his whereabouts. But they were successful in destroying his fort at Woothengudi after he vacated it. About 150 people were employed for many days to demolish the fort.18 Lieutinent A. Fraser commanding detachment, 2nd Battalian, 13th 16 Torin, Resident, Thanjavur to the Collector, 3 October 1799, Judicial consultations, Vol.6A, pp.570-571. 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid. 69 Regiment who led the demolition team was very much surprised the way in which the fort was cunningly constructed.19 Periya Waghaboo continued to disturb Company’s administration with his armed men even after the evacuation and destruction of the fort. With the help rendered by his fellow Kavalkarars such as Muthaiah Moopen, the Kavalkarar of Pavanasam, Thondaiman Padaiyatchi the Kavalkarar of Kumbakonam and Aundiappa Udayar, the Kavalkarars of Caddalangudi he escaped the hunt and continued his resistance.20 The Company’s administration could not gather any reliable information regarding the whereabouts of Periya Waghaboo. This might have been partly because of the respect he commanded over the inhabitants and partly due to the fear of the inhabitants regarding the impending repercussion. In order to extract information from Muthaiah Moopan, the Kavalkarar of Pavanasam and a close associate of Periya Waghaboo, Captain Smith commanding a detachment at Sirkali decided to take him under his custody. But a stern warning came from Benjamin Torin, the Resident at Thanjavur saying that “Moopan is an influential man in the society. Any attempt to apply violence to extract truth from him would create problem which will endanger collections”.21 19 Ibid. 20 Judicial Consultations, Vol.6B, pp.618-620. 21 Benjamin Torin to Captain Smith, 27 October 1799, Judicial consultations, Vol.6B, pp.648651. 70 Regarding the inability of the Company in tracking down Periya Waghaboo the Collector of Thanjavur lamented the power enjoyed by the Kavalkarars in his letter to Captain Smith in the following words. …I feel disappointed at the prospect of being unable to make an example of this offender, and though fully sensible of the eventual inconvenience which the public service may liable to form his escape. Yet being well apprized of the many difficulties you have had to contend within a country completely under dominions of the cavilcarrah and whose utmost influence will no doubt had exercised to defeat an object wherein their common interest is so materially concerned…22 The above said assessment of the British officials about the Kavalkarars indicates the respect and fear commanded by the Kavalkarars among the inhabitants. The struggle between the Company and Periya Waghaboo continued for a few more years. In the meantime the Company, in consequence of its treaty with the king of Thanjavur on 25th October 1799, brought the entire Kingdom under its direct rule.23 The king was pensioned off. With the annexation of the kingdom of Thanjavur the Company continued its hunt for Periya Waghaboo with renewed vigor. Towards the final stage of the prolonged struggle the Company finally 22 Francis Alexander Grant, Collector of Thanjavur to Captain Smith, Judicial Consultations, Vol.6B, pp.651-657. 23 Madras Council, Military Consultations, 26 October 1799, Vol.No.269, pp.6736-6796. 71 gained an upper hand over Periya Waghaboo. In the military point of view it was the Company which was more powerful. It was resourceful enough to press as many soldiers as needed. From the monetary point of view Periya Waghaboo was not a match to the Company. The Company had everything under its command. On the other hand the position of Periya Waghaboo became weak and he started loosing ground. Encircled by the enemy forces on all sides he could not mobilize funds necessary for maintaining his army and for replenishing arms and ammunitions. When he was unable to pay his soldiers many of them deserted and retired to their villages. Moreover the continuous travel as a result of the relentless chase by the Company’s army coupled with abnormal life condition in the jungles shattered his health and spirit. As a last resort the Company fixed one thousand chakrams of price money on Periya Waghaboo’s head which yielded the expected result. I.Wallace, Collector of Tiruchirapalli district, having informed of the presence of Periya Waghaboo in the woods of Udaiyarpalayam region ordered his Thasildar to arrest him. On the night of 28th September 1803 he was apprehended in a small village named Kottaikadu situated in the woods of Udaiyarpalayam. When he was arrested there was nobody to guard him and he did not offer any resistance. Thus the prolonged struggle came to an end.24 The prize money as announced earlier was distributed to eight soldiers of the Company viz. 24 I.Wallace, Collector of Trichirapally District to Charles Harris, Collector of Thanjavur, 2 October 1802, Judicial Consultations, Vol.No.6B pp.660-663; Trichirapally District Records, Vol.3662, pp.176, 177. 72 Lakshmana Singh, Bhavani Singh, Muhamad Selar, Rengapa Naick, Arunachala Naick, Alagiri Naick, Roop Singh and Kulla Appoo, who were instrumental in apprehending Periya Waghaboo.25 A few days after his arrest, on 2nd October 1803 Periya Waghaboo submitted the following explanation when he was called for26 My name is Periya Waghaboo. I was the cavilgar of the Shially district in Mr.Grants time. It is true that I shot at the sepoys that came against me. sepoys. I did not know them to be the Company’s I thought they were attached to Chinnawaggupoo my enemy. On the next day when I found them to be the company’s sepoys through fear I ran away. (signed) Periya Waggupoo The explanation is highly evasive. Following this Periya Waghaboo was kept in confinement for nearly two years and later on transported to the island of Penang for a period of seven years on the charges of rebellion and crimes committed against the government.27 Thus Periya Waghaboo’s resistance, which commenced in 1796 came to an end after nearly a decade. 25 I.Cotton, Collector of Thanjavur to the Secretary to the Government, Judicial Department, Fort St.George, 28 August 1804, Judicial Consultations, Vol.7, pp.1068-1071. 26 Judicial Consultations, Vol.6B, pp.660-663. 27 Resolution passed on the basis of the communication sent by T.B.Hurdis, The Registrar, Thanjavur on April 9, 1805 to the Chief Secretary, Judicial Proceedings, Vol.No.10, pp.225226. 73 Maravars of Tirunelveli Another striking example of the Kavaklarar’s resistance to the British East India Company was the resistance posed by the Maravar Kavalkarars of Nanguneri and Kalakad regions of Tirunelveli district. These Maravar Kavalkarars belonged to the Kondayamkottai branch of the Maravar community which formed the majority Maravar population of the Tirunelveli region. Oral history has it they were originally form Ramand and they migrated to the Tirunelvel region during 15th century in different batches. These Maravar Kavalkarars were highly independent and behaved like independent rulers in their region may be owing to the fact of the absence of any Palayakarars nearby. The Maravars of Nanguneri were popularly known as Arupangunadu Maravars. Arupangunadu comprised of six villages. The Maravars of these villages were in charge of Kaval of the neighbouring villages. In all these six villages there were Kudi Kavalkarars functioning under Men Kavalkarars. In turn, all of them were controlled by their Desa Kaval chief hailing from Marugalkuruchi. In the Kalakad region the Kaval was controlled by the Desa Kaval chief of Thirukkurungudi. While the Nanguneri Maravars had Kaval rights over the Vaisnavite temple at Nanguneri, the Maravar Kaval chief of Thirukkurungudi enjoyed Kaval rights over the vaisnavite temple at Tirukkurungudi.28 The power and influence enjoyed by the Maravar Kavalkarars of Nanguneri and Kalakad was well observed by Nicholas B.Dirks in his Hollow Crown as stated below: 28 David Ludden, Peasant History in South India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1993, p.50. 74 “Below the regional kings of three great mantalams - ranged from Ramanathapuram and Pudukottai on the one hand to the tiny estates of certain Tirunelveli Palayakaras on the other. At an even lower level, the developmental process of becoming a little kingdom probably include certain kavalkarars (Protection chiefs) as well for example the Maravar Kavalkarars of Kalakkatu and Nankuneri regions of Tirunelveli”.29 After the defeat of Panchalamkuruchi in 1801 some of the close relatives and associates of Oomaidurai namely Dalawaipillai, Veera Pandia Nayak and Muthaiah Nayak escaped from Panchalankuruchi and found asylum with the Maravar Kavalkarars of Nanguneri and Kalakad regions.30 Notifications were issued against them by the Company demanding the surrender of men from Panchalamkuruchi and directing the Kavalkarars to surrender themselves with Captain Hazard, the commander of Company’s troops at Kalakad.31 However the Maravar Kavalkarars were neither ready to surrender the men from Panchalamkuruchi nor to surrender themselves. On the other hand they continued their struggle in some form or other. This tendency of the Maravar Kavalkarars was well described by S.R.Lushington the Collector of Tirunelveli. 29 Nicholas B.Dirks, The Hollow Crown: Ethno History of an Indian Kingdom, pp.154-155. 30 ‘Notification of the Principal Maravas of Nanguneri’, by S.R.Lushington, Collector of Tirunelveli on 20 September 1801, Tirunelveli District Records Vol.No.3579, pp.160-163; Vide Appendix III, IV. 31 Ibid. 75 From the general satisfaction given by the kavalkarars in general, you are aware, that I have to except the marava kavalkarars of Nanguneri. The notorious profligacy and savageness of their character always checked any sanguine expectation of retaining them, but no effort was omitted to accomplish their reform by convincing them of the justice of the company’s Government. But their obstinate concealment and protection of the rebels proscribed by Col. Agnew and their refusal to tender any surety of their submission and allegiance compelled the exercise of that coercion which was explained in my correspondence of October…32 However at the final stage these Maravar Kavalkarars were suppressed by the Company’s forces. About eight Kaval chiefs of Nanguneri region were arrested and imprisoned at Tuticorin. It seems from the report of S.R.Lushington the Collector of Tirunelveli district that those eight Maravar Kaval chiefs might have been transported to the Island of Penang.33 Their names are furnished below: 1) Erulappa Thevan of Nanguneri 2) Madasamy Thevan, S/o Ramasamy Thevan of Marugalkuruchi 3) Narayana Thevan of Marugalkuruchi 4) Periya Pitcha Thevan of Marugalkuruchi 5) Chinna Pitcha Thevan of Marugalkuruchi 32 S.R.Lusington’s Report to Board of Revenue, 28 May 1802. 33 Ibid. 76 6) Kauthakutti Thevan of Marugalkuruchi 7) Veera Perumal Thevan of Thennimalai 8) Veera Perumal Thevan of Pudhupalaipudhur Apart from these Kaval chiefs about forty Kudi Kavalkarars were also arrested and imprisoned in a fort at Kamudhi in Ramnad district. They were banned from entering Tirunelveli District. S.R.Lushington the Collector of Tirunelveli in his communication to Col. Martin, commander of Ramnad district, directed him to take necessary steps to strengthen the Kamudhi fort.34 He also mailed a list of names of those Kavalkarars who were arrested.35 The names of the arrested Kudi Kavalkarars were mentioned below: 1) Woodaiyar Maravar Pudhur 2) Kulathuran Maravar Cunneyvetti 3) Muthumandi Maravar Pudhur 4) Vanamamalai Maravar Mayilam 5) Mandiramoorthy Maravar Cunneyvetti 6) Maligen Maravar Manchangkulam 7) Ananja Perumal Maravar Mudalaikulam 8) Rakkamuthu Maravar Mudalaikulam 9) Palavesam Maravar Sethoor 10) Veerabadiran Maravar Elanthaikulam 11) Aundy Maravar Shevalmangapuram 12) Vanniyan Maravar Kalandhaneri 13) Petchiyan Maravar Konnemarpatti 14) Woodaiyar Maravar Marugalkuruchi 15) Veerabadiran Maravar Marugalkuruchi 34 S.R.Lushington, Collector, Tirunelveli to Col.Martin, Commander, Ramnad District, 25 March 1802, Judicial Proceedings, Vol.135B, pp.3868-3871. 35 Ibid. 77 16) Subban Maravar Marugalkuruchi 17) Kuppan Maravar Dalawaipuram 18) Veerabadran Maravar Thuvaraikulam 19) Muthan Maravar Dalawaipuram 20) Petchiyan Maravar Thavanalloor 21) Muthu Maravar Shevalmugaperi 22) Sudalaimuthu Maravar Pudhur 23) Velan Maravar Marugalkuruchi 24) Veeralakutti Maravar Kadampadugai 25) Kumaran Maravar Kadampadugai 26) Thevan Maravar Kadampadugai 27) Iyam Perumal Maravar Kadampadugai 28) Aundy Maravar Cannimarpatti 29) Vanamamalai Maravar Yeerapalai 30) Chinnu Maravar Coundaperumalkulam 31) Sudalaimuthu Maravar Pallapatti 32) Tavoo Maravar Kadamparavoo 33) Sudalaimuthu Maravar Oyanery 34) Madan Maravar Manjankulam 35) Veeranan Maravar Kadamparavu 36) Velu Maravar Tennimalai 37) Veerabadran Maravar Oyanery 38) Rakkamuthu Maravar Pudhur 39) Kumaran Maravar Pudhur 40) Vanamamalai Maravar Manjankulam The Kaval privileges hitherto enjoyed by these subordinate Kavalkarars were taken over by the Company and given to local Nadars.36 36 In the opinion of the Company, the Nadars were the original custodians of the Kaval System in Nanguneri region. The Nadars of Nanguneri showed to S.R. Lushington a copper plate grant regarding their Kaval rights. 78 These Kavalkarars who were apprehended in the Nanguneri region were transported to Ramnad to be imprisoned in the fort of Kamudhi and Pamban. After a few months, as a reform measure each one of them was provided with five pagodas for the purpose of procuring cattle and rent free agricultural land.37 This programme was carried out by the Company with the hope that these steps would make them to turn towards peaceful way of life. They were also released with special orders that they should not return to Tirunelveli District. However the programme failed miserably. After some years these Maravar Kavalkarars violating the special orders of the Company regarding externment returned to Nanguneri on some pretext or other and tried to reestablish their Kaval hold and committed robberies too. Consequently there were direct confrontation between these Maravar Kavalkarars and the Nadar Kavalkarars newly appointed by the Company. In one such incident when the Nadar Kavalkarar were chasing the Maravar robbers one Nadar by name Swamikutti was killed and many others were wounded, and the Maravars took refuge in the hills.38 Kallars of Madurai Resistance of a different nature took place in the Dindugal region of Madurai district. Dindugal, Salem and Baramahal regions had been a part and parcel of Mysore kingdom. They were taken over by the Company after the defeat of Tipu Sultan in the Third Anglo-Mysore war (1790-92). 37 I.Cottan, Magistrate of Tirunelveli to the Secretary to the Government in the Judicial Department, 11 October 1808, Judicial Proceedings, Vol.135B, pp.315-318. 38 Ibid. 79 Following this development the Company introduced a new system of administration in these regions. The Permanent Land Revenue Settlement was also implemented in 1803. In consequence of these changes the tax free lands enjoyed by the Kallar Kavalkarars as Kaval grants in the villages were appropriated by the new administration.39 Kaval system was brushed aside and the inhabitants were encouraged not to pay Kaval dues to the Kavalkarars. Thus the avenue of income of the Kallar Kavalkarars was closed and their economic well being and social prestige were at stake. Inspite of the stringent measures adopted by the Company’s administration to curb the power of the Kavalkarars, they continued to exercise their powers as before. The Kallar Kavalkarars sent Olais40 to the inhabitants of the villages which were under their Kaval control previously, demanding supply of grains and cattle and other food stuffs. If there was no positive response from the villages concerned, then they would be plundered by the Kavalkarars. One such Olai sent by the Kallars of Pudur and Vellappanery and Nalluthevanpatti sent to Bodappa Naicker, the village head man of Kandamanayakanpatti and the village headmen of Kannayapillaipatti and Vadugarpatti reads as follows: It is well known to you that from the time of your forefathers we have continued to obey your commands. 39 George Parish, Collector of Madurai to the Police Committee, 10 July 1805, Madurai Collectorate Records, Vol.1148. 40 Olai means Palm leaf with message written on it. The former Kallar Kavalkarars of Dindigul region used to send such Olais to the principal inhabitants of villages demanding supply of grains and cattle. 80 It is further in the knowledge of the Poligor that you used to pay us kaval Kattanams of your villages. This also is known to you. From the time you ceased to grant us the kaval, we have received only one year profit from it. The balance due to us you have not given. Now it is well known among you that we have two of the circar Poligors with us and that we are become a proud and independent people despising and holding in contempt both the orders of the poligors and that of the Circar and as we have now occasion for money for all expenses you will accordingly be pleased to send us by some of your people forty black rusnel and twenty sheep. If you do not do so we shall consider it as a breach of faith, to avoid which, you will act as we have described and we shall ever keep in memory the favours you may grant us.41 John Ravenshaw, Assistant Collector of Dindugal while reporting about the prevailing situation to J.B.Hurdis the Collector stated that “…Sending Olais in this way is only their way of declaring war. I suspect an incursion will be made in this quarter and I am prepared to receive them”.42 The anti-British struggle of Sivarama Thalaivar, Periya Waghaboo, the Kallars of Madurai and the Maravars of Nanguneri in Tirunelveli district are a few cases to prove the stubborn nature of the Kavalkarars of Tamilnadu in their 41 Madurai District Records, Vol.1176, pp.232-233. 42 Madurai District Records, Vol.No.1176, p.227. 81 struggle against the British prior to the abolition of Desa Kaval in 1802. During the Palayakarar Wars they made common cause with Palayakarars against the combined efforts of the Nawabs of Arcot and the British East India Company. Regarding the Maravar Kavalkarars S.R.Lushington the Collector of Tirunelveli stated that “During the rebellion of Panchalamkuruchi they [Kavalkarars] fomented and aided the disturbance in every quarter”.43 It was true that by 1801 all these Kavalkarars who resisted the encroachment of the Company were suppressed by the Company. But it was not the end. The Kavalkarars continued their struggle relentlessly against the colonial state up to 1947. In the mean time the colonial government had taken much effort against the Kavalkarars by means of enacting laws against them in 1806 and 1816 and reorganizing its police machinery repeatedly to face the challenges of the Kavalkarars. However for the Company, a complete success over the Kavalkarars was always elusive and a distant dream. Of late in 1943 G.H.P.Bailey Superintendent of Police of Tirunelveli district has stated that, “It is century old skeleton for which the cupboard is the Madras Village Police Regulation Act of 1816. The bones are now exposed in their grain and dismal nakedness”.44 Abolition of Desa Kaval After the suppression of the upsurge of 1800-1801 the Company had established its virtual control over entire Tamilnadu. Those Palayakarars who were loyal to the Company were crowned as Zamindars and those Palayakarars 43 Lushington’s Report to Board of Revenue, 28 May 1802, p.7. 44 G.O. Home, No.1802, 31 July 1943. 82 who resisted were expelled and their territories were either annexed by the Company or distributed among the loyal Palayakarars. When Panchalamkuruchi Palayam was occupied it contained 104 villages. They were divided into two portions and given to the Palayakarars of Ettayapuram and Maniyatchi in recognition of their support to the Company in the time of Palayakarar War.45 In the meantime the process of consolidation which commenced earlier, parallel with the conquest was geared up further by the Company. It was during this stage that the Company had to confront the Kaval system which threatened the administrative control of the Company. During the course of consolidation the Company aimed at establishing a new and uniform system of administration resembling the western models. In this venture utmost caution was exercised by the Company’s administration. Some aspects in the traditional system of administration, if found beneficial and inevitable were incorporated in the new system and the rest were abolished.46 In the agenda of abolition the Kaval system found the first place. The Kaval system, the power and influence enjoyed by the Kavalkarars, their rebellious and independent nature were not conducive for the Company to implement its plans. Moreover the huge amount of money collected by the Kavalkarars in the name of Desa Kaval and Kudi Kaval fee was a constant irritant 45 H.R.Pate, Tinnevelly District Gazetteer, p.272. 46 George Parish, Collector, Madurai District to the Police Committee, 10 July 1805, Madurai Collectorate Records, Vol.1148. 83 to the Company. Hence the Company was determined to replace the Kaval system by a new police system of its own creation. It was estimated by the Company that the total amount of money collected in the name of Kaval fee was more than enough to maintain a new and efficient police system.47 During the course of consolidation calculated measures were adopted by the Company against the Kaval system. In the minds of the colonial administrators soon both the Desa Kaval and Kudi Kaval were equated with oppression and misgovernance. The bulky volumes of colonial records of Collectors of the southern districts of this period are almost unanimous in condemning the Kaval system as a world of criminals. Invariably all the British officials had accepted that the ancient origin of Kudi Kaval and praised it for its simplicity and transparency. But all of them in a single voice condemned the ‘Desa Kaval’ as a creation of the Palayakarars to plunder and exploit the people. In due course the Company was successful in constructing a distorted image of the Kaval system and the Kavalkarars. It described that ‘thieving’ was the traditional occupation of the communities involved in the Kaval system. The crimes committed by the Kavalkarars were exaggerated and amplified. The Kaval fee paid by the inhabitants was equated with protection fee or ransom paid to the Kavalkarar in order to prevent him from plundering the properties of the inhabitants. 47 A single incident of crime committed by a Kavalkarar was Letter from R.H.Young, Magistrate of Tinnevelly District to the Chief Secretary to the Government, 31 March 1813, Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Reports), Vol.4A, pp.51-59. 84 generalized, conceptualized, theorized and applied to the whole lot of the Kavalkarars and even to the caste he belonged to. The land revenue settlements made by the Company in the beginning of the 19th century were also targeted at closing the avenues of income of the Kavalkarars. Agricultural lands allotted to the Kavalkarars as Kaval grants were assumed by the colonial administration.48 Finally both the Desa Kaval and Men Kaval were officially abolished through the Regulation of 1802 A.D which reads as below: The establishment existing in the Zillah of Caroongooly for the purpose of police having been committed to certain poligors and cavilgars have proved by long experience under the administration of the said poligors and cavilgars to be inadequate to the prevention of crimes or the apprehension of offenders; and have by the abuse of power entrusted to the poligors and cavilgars, being converted into additional means of disturbing the order of society with impunity; Therefore the Governor in Council has resolved to abolish the office of Poligors and cavilgars and substitute a more efficient plan of police for the Zillah of Caroongooly.49 To start with these two systems were abolished in Tirunelveli and Karunkuli (Chengalpat district) in 1802. Gradually it was extended to other 48 George Parish, Collector of Madurai in his report to the President and members of the Committee investigating and reporting upon the present establishment of police, 10 July 1802, Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Vol.8B, p.1878. 49 Regulation of 1802 A.D. No.XXV; The History of The Madras Police, Centenary Volume (1859-1959) Madras, p.212. 85 districts. The Kavalkarars were asked to renounce all their claims to police authority and Kaval fee. By the regulation of 1802 the Men Kaval system was abolished by the Company and the Palayakarars and other Men Kaval chiefs were asked to renounce all their claims to police authority and collection of Kaval dues. Following this the process of consolidation commenced. It was a period of transition for the Company becoming a land-revenue financed state from that of a tribute based state. The Company felt the need to assert its legitimacy by maintaining order and protecting its subjects especially in the rural tract, the social base of the emerging land-revenue-financed state.50 Maintaining order and providing protection to the people necessitated the creation of a vast administrative network which included the establishment of a new police and judicial administrative machinery. This process if to be completed successfully needed the investment of huge amount of money. Unfortunately the Company was not in a position to meet out the necessary financial requirements. Hence it was decided to collect the Desa Kaval fee from the inhabitants through the revenue servants, to be spent for the new police establishment. The following statement made by R.H.Young, Magistrate of Tirunelveli District is pertinent here: The police of this province was formerly entrusted to Desh and Tallam cavilgars, the former having general protection of the 50 Sandira Freitag, “Sansiahs and the State: The Changing Nature of ‘Crime’ and ‘Justice’ in Nineteenth-Century British India”, in Michael R.Anderson, Sumit Guha (eds), Changing Concepts of Rights and Justice in South Asia, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2000, p.84. 86 country and high roads and the later acting under their orders as the immediate watchers of villages. The Desacavil was sequestered in the year 1800 and its revenue collected on account of government, these appear to have amounted in the first year of fusly 1209 [A.D.1800] chakrams 68635-0-3 casu a sum fully adequate to defray the expenses of efficient police.51 Table 3:1 provides details of the amount collected by the Company from the province of Tirunelveli from 1800-1805 as given by the Magistrate.52 51 R.H.Young to Chief Secretary, 31 March 1813, Judicial Proceedings (Sundries), Vol.No.4A, pp.51-54. 52 Ibid., p.81. 87 Table No. 3:1 Statement of Desa Kaval collections in the District of Tirunelvely (1800 – 1805) S.No. Year Fusly Amount Chuli Chakrams Fanam Casu 1 1800 1209 68635 - 3 2 1801 1210 58421 - - 3 1802 1211 53831 7 33 4 1803 1212 49530 1 - 5 180 1213 40402 - 10½ 6 1805 1214 32862 - 15¾ 3036682 - 14¼ Total Tirunelveli 17th December 1812 Source : Judicial Proceedings (Sundries), Vol. No.4A, 1812, 1813, p.81. 88 This method of collecting Kaval fee through the revenue administration was prevalent in other districts as well. Regarding Thanjavur district it was categorically stated in the following terms. After the abolition of Kaval system in Tanjore district, the Company collected the Kaval fee as it was before and spent it for police establishment created by Regulation I of 1816. This fee with house tax were kept in separate account till 1852 then it was incorporated in to general account. It 1854 this was intimated by the Collector suggesting the discontinuation but the government insisted on its collection due to growing expenses of police establishment.53 The abolition of Desa Kaval and Men Kaval in 1802 followed by the confistication of land grants enjoyed by the Kavalkarars rendered the Kaval chiefs jobless and closed their avenues of income. Changing occupation overnight was not that easy to any community that too in an agrarian society which is compartmentalized into many castes and each one of them bound to traditionally pursue a particular occupation. So changing occupation and at the same time relinquishing power unacceptable to the Kavalkarars. and status enjoyed traditionally were The atmosphere that prevailed then was charged with discontent and it was conducive enough for the outbreak of disturbances. 53 G.O. Judicial No.1028, 19 July 1897; G.O. Judicial No.1385, 3 September 1897. 89 On the other hand the abolition of Desa Kaval and Men Kaval system paved the way for an increasing number of crimes. This was because when these Kaval systems were abolished the Kaval chiefs withdrew the Kudi Kavalkarars employed by them and there was no machinery to look after the police functions.54 Another important development during this period was the demobilization of the armies of the Palayakarars. After the suppression of the upsurge of 18001801 the Company had ordered for the general demobilization of the armies of the Palayakarars and surrender of arms. Consequently a considerable section of the martial communities like Maravars, Naickers, Kallars and Padaiyachis who were serving in the armies of the Palayakarars were disbanded and deprived of their livelihood. Further the Company conceived that there was every possibility for an understanding and co-operation between the former soldiers and the Kavalkarars which would jeopardize its future plans. Taking cognizance of the prevailing situation the colonial state came out with a new strategy of minimum compromise of providing pension to the Kavalkarars. To cite an example the Kavalkarar of Parur of South Arcot district, Ponnambala Kachi Rao was granted a life pension of Rs.104-12-08 after his Kaval rights were resumed by the Company. He died in 1838 and the government sanctioned the continuance of half the pension to his son.55 There is a long list of Kavalkarars of Arcot, Vandavasi and Vellore of North Arcot district and the amount received by them as pension annually is found in the report submitted by the Collector of Chittoor the head quarters of North Arcot district (Table 3:2).56 54 D.Cockburn, Judge and Magistrate of the District of Dindugal, to the Secretary to the Government, Revenue and Judicial Department, 2 October 1802, Judicial Consultations, Vol.13, pp.2075 - 2076. 55 W.Francis, South Arcot District Gazetteer, Madras, 1906, pp.392, 393. 56 Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Vol.6A, pp.875-881. 90 Table No.3:2 Statement of Allowances Annually paid to Men Cavilgars by the Collector of the Zillah of Chittor [Extract] District Tiruvallam Vellore Cavilgars Amount of Allowance per Year Star Pagodas Panam Casu Siddhama Nayak 24 - - Guruvappa Nayak 24 - - Venkatachala Nayak 12 - - Paupery Perumal 24 - - Kulasagudi Ram Nayak 6 - - Pullpettai Ram Nayak 6 - - Mummalai Pettai Ram Nayak 6 - - Kanahaiya Nayak 6 - - Nelvay Rama 6 - - Kumaresa Samutram Muniya 6 - - Munangipet Venkatesa 6 - - Permaga Perumal Nayak 6 - - Senbaganallur Kulappa nayak 6 - - Alamelumangapuram Veerapa Nayak 6 - - Venkatapuram Samy Nayak 6 - - Ammapuram Perumal Nayak 6 - - Kanniyampadi Lakshmana Nayak 6 - - Kanniyampadi Dauthappa 6 - - Cholavaram Parusuram Nayak 6 - - Thuthepettai Perumal Nayak 6 - - 180 - - Total Source : Judicial Proceedings (Sundries Police Committee Report), Vol.6A, 1812, pp.875-881. 91 Regarding the abolition of Kudi Kaval the colonial state approached the matter with utmost caution. When compared with Men Kavalkarars the Kudi Kavalkarars were numerically superior and more closely associated with the people and their affairs. They were an integral part of the everyday life of the inhabitants. Kudi Kavalkarar was a person who possessed intimate knowledge of villages - its inhabitants, details of their properties, livestock and revenue particulars. For a government which was still not that familiar with the people and its knowledge about the land and people it was going to govern being narrow and limited, the service of the Kudi Kavalkarar was essential and inevitable. Regarding this, George Parish the Collector of Madurai district observed: In their present situation of restraint they are incapable of doing material injury, because whenever the kavalgar is employed, it is always in a subordinate situation acting under police officers immediately appointed by myself and in this capasity their local knowledge and general acquaintance with the characters of people under them is useful instruments in the hands of the government.57 Yet another important factor which prompted the Company’s government to think in favour of the continuation of Kudi Kaval was the numerical strength of the Kudi Kavalkarars.58 S.R.Lushington the first Collector of Tirunelveli district is one of his report has stated that “abolition of it will be a danger. They may turn to 57 George Parish to the President and Members of the Committee for investigating and reporting upon the present establishment of police, 10 July 1805, Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Reports), Vol.8-B, p.1875. 58 Vide Appendix, V. 92 robbery which cannot be suppressed”. Later in 1808 when Woodcock, the then Magistrate of Kumbakonam when asked about his opinion regarding the abolition of Kudi Kaval he cautioned the government in the following terms: …attempting a total abolition of the institution [Kudi Kaval] in this rich and fertile province would be brought with serious danger to the country affecting as well the realization of the revenue as the property and the safety of the inhabitants.59 If this was the situation in 1808, the power of the Kudi Kavalkarars in the earlier century may well be imagined. Hence the Company decided to permit the Kudi Kaval system to continue under the supervision of the government.60 59 Fifth Report from Select Committee on the Affairs of British East India Company, Madras Presidency, Vol.II, London 1812. 60 Woodcock to Secretary to the Government, Judicial Proceedings, Vol.40, p.4368. CHAPTER IV THE COLONIAL STATE AND THE KAVAL SYSTEM Following the Regulations of 1802 which abolished the Desa Kaval and Men Kaval systems, the colonial state started introducing new judicial and police administrative structures akin to the western models periodically, to serve its needs of consolidation and its struggle against the Kavalkarars. In this process, the Kudi Kaval system also abolished in 1816, and in 1859 the modern system of police administration was implemented. Though all these measures of the colonial state were targeted against the Kaval system and the Kavalkarars, the success was not to the level expected. In the following pages an attempt has been made to elucidate the process of modernization of the judicial and police machinery by the state and the response of the Kavalkarars. New Criminal Justice System Regulation of 1802: Introduction of Darogha Police and the Kavalkarars The colonial state replaced the Desa Kaval and Men Kaval systems with a new police establishment of its own consisting of the following important officials as mentioned in the Regulation of 1802. The establishment of police shall consist of 1st of Police Daroghas who shall superintend and control an entire division; 2nd Tanahdars under the orders of Daroghas who shall superintend the stations in each division; and 3rd the peons or watchers under the 94 Tanahdars who shall execute the duties of police in roads and villages of each division; all the officers shall be subject to the authority of the judge and magistrate of the Zillah.1 Darogha was a police officer with a rank of a Superintendent had jurisdiction over an area of 20 square miles within a district. He had under him twenty to fifty armed men and was also given authority over village watchmen.2 Apart from Daroghas and Tanadars this new police machinery consisted of other officials like Naib Daroghas, Defadars and Kotawals. The designations of these officials and the payment made to them varied from one region to other. When this new police system was implemented, the colonial administration met with the problem of non availability of eligible hands. Therefore it was decided to include the former Kaval chiefs of varied status in the new system. This new institution of police was established by the colonial state for two important reasons. The first reason was that during this period efforts were taken by the colonial state and as well as by the home government in England to systematise every branch of administration in such a way as to cater to the colonial requirements as perceived by the British rulers and as it was implemented in England.3 Secondly in a situation where land revenue was of 1 A.D.1802, Regulations, XXXV, Para No.III. 2 The Imperial Gazetteer of India, The Indian Empire, Vol-IV, p.386; Ranajit Guha, Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency in Colonial India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1999, p.339. 3 David Arnold “Bureaucratic Recruitment and Sub-ordination in Colonial India. The Madras Constabulary 1859 - 1947” in Ranajit Guha (ed.), Subaltern Studies IV, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1985, p.4. 95 vital importance economically and politically, the colonial state was emphatic in bringing the rural mass under its direct subordination by removing all the intermediaries including the Kavalkarars. As per the Regulation of 1802 this new police establishment, at first came into effect in Karunkuli (Chengalpat district). In the following years, it was extended to other districts. The Kudi Kavalkarars, as decided by the government were incorporated in this new system as village watchers or peons. While accepting office they were expected to execute a deed with the government.4 Apart from their regular police work they were expected to assist the revenue servants in their work. Though they were paid by the government they were also permitted to collect their customary Kaval dues from the inhabitants. Now the Kudikavalkarars, almost reduced to the level of Talaiyari, were the employees of the colonial state working under a different master, the Tanadar. According to the Regulation of 1802 a new system of police establishment was introduced in all the districts. In the district of Madurai there were about 7 Daroghas, 49 Tanadars assisted by 7 Kurnams and 591 Kavalkarars. The total amount paid to them as salary was 1121 star pagodas per year.5 Under the new system in the district of Karunkuli (Chengalpet) 5 Darogahs were appointed receiving a monthly salary of 4 Translation of an agreement executed by Narasa Wodaiyan of Gramam a village in the district of Thiruvennainallur on 2 November 1807, Judicial Consultations (Sundries), Vol.58, pp.672- 673. 5 Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Vol.8B, p.1961; Vide Appendix-VI. 96 295 star pagodas in total.6 In the district of Tirunelveli there were 5 Darogahs, 40 Tanadars and 170 Kavalkarars and in the district of Tiruchirappalli there were 7 Darogahs, 94 Tanadars and 204 peons.7 The number of officials varied depending on the extent of every district. While the recruitment was made for the office of Darogahs and Tanadars it was decided by the colonial state to nominate former Kavalkarars who had particularly distinguished themselves with a good track record. This process was initiated for the first time by Wallace the principal collector of Thanjavur and Thiruchirappalli districts.8 Toeing his line I.G.Ravenshaw, the Collector of Virudachalam made a suggestion for the reinstatement of former Men Kavalkarars particularly those who were provided with allowances from the government, in the new police machinery if necessary.9 In the district of Thanjavur in 1813, the younger brother of a former Kavalkarar, Chinna Appoo Moopan of Kapisthalam was appointed as Darogha, and a close relative of a former Kaval chief, Muthusamy Padayachi was appointed as Tanadar of Kuthalam by B.M.Lushington, acting Magistrate of Mayavaram.10 Here the surprising factor is that these Kaval chief’s families who are recorded here were once suspected of collaborating with Periya Waghaboo, the Kaval chief of Sirkali who rebelled against the Company in 1799. 6 The History of The Madras Police, Madras, p.234. 7 Ibid., p.236. 8 Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Vol.2A, pp.732-735. 9 Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Vol.5B, pp.670-671. 10 Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Vol.8A, pp.670-671. 97 When one analyses the above the logical question that arises is what prompted the colonial administration to incorporate the former Kaval chiefs in the police establishment? There is every reason to assume that it was an instrument to appease the former Kaval chiefs and prevent them from creating disturbance. Another reason was that the Kaval chiefs were very thorough with the every administrative particulars of the villages under their control. The Company wanted to make use of their knowledge to consolidate their power, until a suitable alternative was found. In the meantime many reforms were introduced in the Judiciary as well. Zillah courts were established at the district level with a judge who also served as the magistrate. In that capacity he was empowered to have control over the district police administration. Darogahs were expected to arrest criminals and produce them in the Zillah court.11 The appeals from the Zillah courts were made to the Provincial courts of appeal established in each province. Along with Provincial courts of appeal, the colonial state had instituted a court of circuit for each division. The judges of these Circuit courts toured the district within the division and tried criminal cases. A division was a vast area encompassing many districts. The southern division for example extended from the southern coastal region upto river Palar in the north.12 11 Judicial Regulations 1816, pp.1-9. 12 Ibid., 98 The reorganization of the department of judiciary had its own defects. The courts were guided by procedures of western origin which were alien, time consuming and costly. Hence it thoroughly failed to enlist the recognition and support of the people at large.13 The new police establishment too miserably failed in its aim of establishing a social climate of peace and tranquillity. Despite the reforms carried out in the police and Judicial departments the colonial administration could not control the Kavalkarars. It was true that this new police machinery was successful in controlling Kaval related crimes in the near by villages situated around the police stations. But the former Kavalkarars reigned supreme as usual in the countryside. Meanwhile the former Kavalkarars who were neither provided with any allowance nor absorbed in the new police machinery started indulging in crimes such as highway robbery, cattle theft and extortion. Moreover a large section of soldiers of the disbanded army of the Palayakarars also joined them. When all the avenues of income of these were irrevocably lost due to the policies adopted by the colonial state they had no other go except committing crimes. The condition of Men Kavalkarars of North Arcot district after the abolition of their office and its impact was well described by the Commissioner of Rural Police in the following terms. 13 Ibid., p.257 99 Men kaval system was abolished in 1803. By this step not only many watchers lost all their emoluments ceased to serve, but the resources of the others seriously impaired. The then really influential and respected officers of the large body of village watchers were entirely set aside. The village watchers lost the support of an influential baron in recovering his dues and the people lost the guarantee of an appeal to a man who could enforce from the village watchers a punctual and effective discharge of their liabilities and duties – men in short who had been kept to work frequently by lash and by a sense of heavy pecuniary responsibility found themselves discharged alike of control and liability, while the ryot on his part withheld payment of fee for the services which was indifferently rendered. The services were neglected and the fee justly due to the village watcher less and less punctually paid, the watchers helped themselves to their neighbours good.14 The former Kavalkarars and former soldiers with their experience in the battlefield and well versed in the art of handling weapons started terrorizing the people who refused their demands. A majority of the crimes were committed with the connivance of the local Kavalkarars who were retained as per the Regulation of 1802. In many cases the criminal and the Kavalkarar happened to belong to the same community. Crime rates were reaching alarming proportions but the government was helpless. 14 The crimes committed by the Maravar Arthur F.Cox, Manual of North Arcot District, Madras, 1894, p.354. 100 Kavalkarars of Ramanathapuram and Tirunelveli, Kallar Kavalkarars of Madurai, Thanjavur and Tiruchirapali and the Kuravar Kavalkarars of North Arcot districts were greater in number and audacious in nature when compared with other districts. In the district of Thanjavur where a majority of the Kavalkarars was from the Kallar caste, several sepoys were killed in Sirkali, the police Cutcherry at Pattukottai was set on fire and the house of the Darogah burgled.15 Kavalkarars belonging to other communities were no exception to this trend. They too indulged in criminal activities. Subba Naick the Kavalkarar of Pooda Pettore, Manicka Naick, the Kavalkarar of Atore, Thyigaraja Naick, the Kavalkarar of Thuraiyur and Kanoo Padayachi, another Kavalkarar were suspended by Charles Woodcock, the Judge and Magistrate of Cumbakonam for their alleged involvement in plundering the house of a trader called Prasanna Chetti.16 In Tirunelveli district a daring dacoity was committed which demonstrated beyond doubt the weakness of the new police establishment. In this case, even the government treasury was not spared. A treasury chest at Tenkasi was robbed on 23rd March 1814 by a gang of forty men consisted of Maravars and Naickers. It was engineered by the Zamindar of Chokkampatti Zamin in Tirunelveli district. Under his orders this daring robbery was committed by his 15 The History of The Madras Police, p.242. 16 Judicial Consultations, Vol.45B, pp.2349-2352. 101 blood relatives named Udaiya Thevan and Arunachala Thevan who led the team which included his Kavalkarars too.17 This case was handled by one Sudalaimuthu Pillai, the Darogah of Tirunelveli. During the investigation, Arunachala Thevan was brought to Tirunelveli and he was enquired. During the enquiry, he accepted to cooperate with the police in apprehending all the persons involved in the crime. On the assurance given by him he was released and permitted to go to Tenkasi with Sudalaimuthu Pillai, the Darogah. A few soldiers were ordered to accompany him not only for his safety but also to arrest the other persons involved. However Arunachala Thevan was killed within a few days under mysterious circumstances. Regarding the inability of the police administration in handling this case John Cotton, the Collector of Tirunelveli, lamented in the following terms in his letter to the president of the Board of Revenue dated 25th May 1814. The papers I had last the honour to submit on the subject of robbery of the talook treasury of Tencausy no doubt will have raised the expectations of the board, that by the time I should have reported the recovery of the money and conviction of the principal offenders before the magistrate it is now therefore with great disappointment. I am still prevented from communicating such a satisfactory result of the measures adopted by the magistrate and 17 John Cotton, Collector, Tirunelvelli district to the Board of Revenue, 20 April 1814, Tirunelveli District Records, Vol.3591, pp.118-124. 102 from what had happened I am afraid the prospect of attaining it is not very favourable… Arunachala Thevan was accordingly on the 4th instant permitted by the Magistrate to go to Chokampatti under charge of the Darogah and a small sibbendy sepoys which he requested of one to secure his person, accompained by a few revenue servants and one of my Duffedars and for the particulars that happened from the time that Arunachalam left Tirunelveli to the hour he was brought back corpse...18 To assess the functioning of the new police system in the district of Thanjavur a police committee was constituted by the government consisting of Fred A.Grant, Judge of the Provincial Court, Southern Division, V.Blackbourne and J.Wallace, Principal Collectors of Thanjavur and Thiruchirapalli. The committee made the following observation, exposing the incompetence of the Darogahs, Tanadars and Kottawalls and praising the Kavalkarars as the only efficient instrument of the police. We have observed that the preservation of the internal tranquility of the province of Thanjavur and the prosperity of its numerous inhabitants are vested exclusively in the hand of the Cavilgars under the authority and control of the Magistrate. The few Darogahs, Cutwalls and other servants in the magisterial department scarcely 18 Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Serial No.7411, p.336. 103 can be said to form any exception to this rule for even at few stations where these officers are placed. The cavilgars are the only efficient instrument of police, the former being with perhaps an exception little more than a channel of communication between the magistrate and the latter.19 Besides this view, expressed by the police committee of Thanjavur district, reports were pouring in from other districts too explaining the utter inefficiency and inadequacy of the existing police system in confining the ever increasing crime rates. In 1812 the government itself sent a circular to its officials asking them to furnish their opinion on the existing law and order situation and the functioning of the police machinery. Most of the respondents including the celebrated British civil servant Thomas Munro pointed out the demerits in the existing system. Munro expressed his views in the following terms: In seeking to facilitate the administration of Justice and Police, it is not necessary to overthrow but to correct the existing system and with the view two important alterations must be adopted first confining the Judges entirely to his judicial functions and second separating the office of Magistrate and Superintendent of police from the judge and to uniting them to that of Collector as they formally were under the British government and as they always 19 The History of The Madras Police, pp.241-242. 104 under native princes. It would also be expedient to grant to the Collector and the heads of villages as limited jurisdiction over petty civil suits. The new system of police established under the judicial regulation has everything against it and nothing in its favour. It is at variance with the feeling and prejudice of the people, therefore no moral force to uphold it. It is almost exclusively on the services of a set of hired Daroghas and peons who have no connections or common interest with the inhabitants and not having like the hereditary watchman, been trained from infancy to their business having neither the requisite zeal or skill for its execution... and it thus injures the only men by whom the duties of the police can be efficiently discharged. Justice ought to be administered free of expenses according to the custom of the country, in every stage from the village potail to the Zillah Judge. It is evident that our present system is not only most expensive and vexatious but totally inefficient.20 However the ideas of Thomas Munro regarding the reorganization of police and judicial machinery were unacceptable to other British officials particularly to the judges, starting from the Supreme Court down to the District 20 Colonol T.Munro, “Memorandum on the Revision of Judicial System “Selection of papers from the Records of East India House Related to the Revenue, Police and Civil and Criminal Justice under the Company’s Government in India, Cox and Sons, London, 1820, Vol.II, p.114. 105 Court. They were of the opinion that the native system of police and judicial administration if given undue importance, the western models recently introduced by them may loose their importance.21 While collecting official opinion about the functioning of the existing police administration the colonial state had an idea of abolishing the Kudi Kaval system which was permitted to continue by the Regulation of 1802, in toto. So opinions were collected from the district level officials regarding the reaction of the Kavalkarars in case of the abolition of Kaval system. The District level officials in their reports positively responded to the idea of abolition of Kaval system, but at the same time they cautioned the higher-ups regarding the reaction of the Kavalkarars. We fear no open resistance to the commands of the Honorable the Governor-in-Council for the immediate abolition of the cavelly system, but we anticipate considerable discontent in the minds of the majority of the cavilgars not withstanding the measures which we have recommended with a view to conciliate them, and we think if not impossible that the discontent may discover itself in the encouragement if not actual commission of irregularities which can be checked and reduced by only by the exertions of vigilant active and well armed magistry.22 21 The History of The Madras Police, p.248. 22 Police Committee of Thanjavur District to the Chief Secretary, 4 April 1813, Judicial Proceedings (Sundries, Police Committee Report), Serial No.7411, pp.301-304. 106 Regulations of 1816 and the New Police Establishment After prolonged discussions and exchange of views, the colonial state enacted the Regulation of 1816 and on the basis of this regulation the police establishment was reorganized on new lines. The salient features and the important changes introduced by the regulation of 1816 are as mentioned below. The office of the Darogahs and Tanadars were abolished from the 1st November 1816.23 The whole office of Magistrate was transferred from the Judge to the Collector of the Zillah.24 At the village level the police duties were vested in the hands of the Village Headman or Munsiff assisted by watchmen and at the taluk level the Thasildar was incharge of the police establishment. At the district level, the Collector was the superior police officer with magisterial power. This new establishment was responsible for police as well as revenue administration.25 At the village level watchers by whatever local names distinguished, shall perform their customary police duties under the immediate authority of Village Headman or Munsiff of the respective villages. But these watchers (Kavalkarars, Talaiyaris, Vettis and Tukkries etc) shall not be called upon to make compensation for losses by theft.26 23 Regulation XI of 1816 in Regulations Passed by Governor in Council of Fort St.George, Part I, Madras, 1848, p.313. 24 Ibid., 25 Ibid., Section VIII, XI. 26 Ibid., Section XV. 107 The ultimate result of the Regulation of 1816 was the formal abolition of the Kudi Kaval system in toto. With the abolition of the police establishment of Darogahs and Tanadars, the Men Kavalkarars who were recruited as Darogahs and Tanadars became jobless. Moreover the Kudi Kavalkarars in thousands (whose services was retained and incorporated in the new police establishment established by the regulation of 1802) serving under these Darogahs and Tanadars also became unemployed. The former Kudi Kavalkarars who were independent, commanding respect and enjoying a social status now became jobless and a section of this former Kudikavalkarars found their jobs as watchmen with different nomenclatures under the Village Head Man or Munsiff as an ordinary government servant of the lowest rank. Thus the Company was successful in enacting Regulations against the native system of police establishments in stages. In 1802 the apex layer of the Kaval system i.e. the Men Kaval and Desa Kaval were abolished and Kudi Kaval the lower layer of Kaval system was abolished in 1816. But enacting Regulations is quite different from implementation. On the implementation front the efforts taken by the colonial state proved to be largely futile. David Arnold states that “After about 1850 those who keep Kaval alive were not the former Poligar Men Kavalgars, but lesser, poorer men for whom the 108 profits and prestige of being Kavalgar were proportionately more important”.27 But it was not so. It is true that the former Poligori Men Kavalkarars were no longer practicing Kaval and exercising their power to retain it. However there were another set of Men Kavalkarars who were not Palayakarars in the former days, like the Arupangunadu Maravar of Nanguneri, the Maravars of Kalakad, Tirukkurungudi, Poochikadu, Pidaneri and Athichanallur. Arumuga Thevar family of Marugalkuruchi was the leader of Arupangunadu Maravars. In Tirukkurungudi, Sivarama Thalaivar family [decendents of Sivarama Thalaivar -Chapter I] controlled the Kalakad region. The Thesayanvilai and Santhankulam area Maravars were under the influence of Arunachala Thevar of Poochikadu. The Maravars of Tiruchendur area were under the leadership of Veerakutti Thevar of Pidaneri. The Maravars of Srivaikuntam area were under the control of Athichanallur Ariya Thevar.28 These families were there behind all the activities of the Kudikavalkarars. The Piramalai Kallar Kavalkarars of Madurai district, who were still powerful as Men Kavalkarars in their area of control. J.Grose, Acting Secretary, Board of Revenue, in his report submitted to the government categorically stated that: The kavalkara institution has been in a most unsatisfactory condition in the district of Tirunelveli since the commencement of our rule. The Men-kaval system was never thoroughly suppressed 27 David Arnold, “Dacoity and Rural Crime in Madras, 1860-1940”, The Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol.6, No.2, January 1979, p.156. 28 S.Kadhirvel, “Sources for the History of Tamil Nadu” in Studies on Agrarian Societies in South Asia, Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo, No.5, Tokyo, 1980, pp.46-47. 109 in this district as it was elsewhere in South India and its organization and spirit still subsist.29 Moreover in Madurai District particularly in Dindigul, Vedachandur and Palani taluks many of the Kallar Kavalkarars were rich land holders.30 In the preamble to the Regulation of 1816, it was categorically stated that, “It being expedient that a system of police chiefly upon the ancient usage of the country should be established throughout the territories subjected to the Government of Fort St.Geroge”31… These words were high sounding as if the colonial government was the watch dog and custodian of the native traditions and institutions. But in practice there was a gulf between precept and practice. With the abolition of Kudi Kaval system the land grants enjoyed by the Kudi Kavalkarars and the fee paid to them by the people were also assumed. Those Kudi Kavalkarars who were deprived of the only source of subsistence, and unable to follow a new mode of livelihood immediately, turned naturally towards the world of crimes. Certain Kudi Kavalkarars who were absorbed in the new police establishment with low salary but deprived of his customary fee and land maniyams became demoralized and driven to crime, that too in a situation 29 A.Grose to the Government, 21 December 1869, Board of Revenue Proceedings Vol.No.5217, p.6291. 30 Palani Thasildar to Madurai Sub Collector, 27 June 1896, Madurai Collectorate Records, Vol.90. 31 The History of The Madras Police, p.248. 110 where he was relived from the responsibility of compensating the stolen properties of the inhabitants. The Colonial State and the Kavalkarars, 1816 – 1859 The new police establishment created on the basis of the Regulation of 1816 did not work as satisfactorily as was expected by the colonial state. Armed with a new police establishment the government anticipated that it could confine and reduce the number of crimes particularly the crimes related to Kaval system and the Kavalkarars. But in the long run it proved to be a miscalculation. Enacting laws was quite different from implementation of the same. While the Company was very good at enacting regulation, it cut a sorry figure with regard to implementation. Responsibilities related to the revenue administration were heavy. Starting from the Collector down to the Village Headman the revenue servants could not do justice to their police duties.32 The department of judiciary was also in complete pandemonium. The judges of the court of circuit could not keep their schedule in visiting the districts to conduct the trials. People continued to be detained in prisons for months together, when their conviction might have been only for one or two months. Hence the people at large lost their confidence over the department of judiciary.33 32 Ibid., p.255. 33 Ibid., 111 In 1821 another regulation was passed with the intention of making the police more efficient by providing enormous powers to the police. However this additional power only resulted in utmost corruption in the police department.34 It was true that the Kudi Kaval system was abolished once for all by the colonial state, but in reality the system was in operation everywhere as it was before, challenging its authority. The Village Headman who was vested with police powers could not take any drastic action against the Kudi Kavalkarars, because both of them were members of the same village community having mutual bonds and obligations unknown to the colonial authorities. In many villages it so happened that the Village Headmen and the Kudi Kavalkarars belonged to the same community and were often blood relatives too. In such cases, there was wanton delay on the part of Village Headmen in registering the cases and in apprising the higher ups. The colonial state framed some conduct rules for the Kavalkarars appointed (Circar Kavalkarars) to assist the Village Headmen and other revenue servants, with the aim of placing them under its constant surveillance. According to those conduct rules the Kavalkarars who were appointed by the government must pass muster night and morning before the headmen of their villages and the Karnams. If at all a Kavalkarar wanted to visit another village, he had to get a passport from the headman of his own village and to produce it before the headman of the village he had planned to visit. Those Kavalkarars, found at any 34 Ibid., p.256. 112 distance from their own residence without a passport were liable to be apprehended and brought before the magistrate. These restrictions were easily evaded by the Kavalkarars and in due course it had a natural death.35 The new police establishment which came into existence in 1816 was in operation until 1859 when the modern police system was introduced. During this period all-out measures were adopted by the government to eradicate the Kudikaval system. But the Kudi Kavalkarars were equally tenacious in keeping their ground. They were successful in maintaining their power over the people intact. Wherever there was resistance they resorted to violence and imposed their Kaval rights. For the people at large, on occasion, the Kaval system seemed relatively better than the colonial police and judiciary, which was unfamiliar, alien, time consuming and highly expensive. When the government resorted to stringent ways of controlling the Kavalkarars, they in turn took to criminal ways. In this conflict in course the Kavalkarars had an upper hand and dominated the scene. As noted in the previous pages the Maravar Kavalkarars of Nanguneri and Kalakad regions were suppressed by S.R.Lushington the Collector of Tirunelveli district and many of them were imprisoned in the fort of Kamudhi. In due course they were released and provided with financial assistance to pursue a peaceful life. At the same time, they were informed that they should not, in any case return to their native places. In the villages which were under their Kavalship, the 35 Board of Revenue Proceedings, Vol.1476, pp.13965 - 13966. 113 Kaval rights were transferred to the Kavalkarars belonging to the Nadar community, as they claimed that they were the original Kavalkarars of that region. But by 1818 most of those Maravar Kavalkarars returned from Kamudhi to their native villages and reestablished their Kaval rights over their former villages by driving away the Nadar Kavalkarars. In the ensuing conflict one Nadar Kavalkarar was killed and some others were wounded.36 Despite the regulation of the colonial state which declared the Kaval system illegal the Marava Kavalkarars of Tirunelveli district, both the Desa Kavalkarars and Kudi Kavalkarars, continued to collect Kaval dues from the farmers, shops, fairs, carriage of goods on bandis or bullocks, merchants on halting for nights, from houses, persons, cattle and looms etc, roughly to the tune of Rs.50,393-5-6 per annum, an amount that was enough to cause envy in the government.37 In the districts of Ramanathapuram and Madurai the situation was the same. Inspite of the abolition of Kudikaval system the Kallar, Maravar and Agamudaiyar Kavalkarars continued their Kaval and collected their Kaval dues. Those who could not, resorted to robbery and dacoities. In the district of South Arcot the Paraiyars, particularly those of Veppur (a village situated near Virudachalam), dominated the Kaval system. They were the former soldiers and Kavalkarars. When the Kudi Kaval system was abolished they lost their traditional occupation and gradually drifted towards house breaking, cattle lifting 36 I.Cotton, Magistrate of Tirunelveli to the Secretary to the Government in the Judicial Department, Fort St.George, 11 October 1818, Judicial Proceedings, Vol.No.135B. 37 Blackburn, Acting Collector of Tirunelveli district to the Board of Revenue, 10 September 1832, in Board of Revenue Consultations, Vol.1340, pp.9977 - 9982. 114 and gang robbery. In due course, they were branded as a notorious criminal class of the district.38 In the district of Thanjavur even after the abolition of Kaval system the Kavalkarars particularly of the Kallar community continued to levy them over a large part of the district especially in Thanjavur, Kumbakonam, Mannargudi, Pattukkottai and to some extent Thiruthuraipoondi taluks.39 In Thiruchirapalli district the situation was surprisingly different. In the town of Thiruchirapalli every house hold including that of British officials was paying Kaval fee to the Kallar Kavalkarars.40 The Europeans employed the Kallar Kavalkarars as protector of their houses and property in order to save them from the depredations of those from the same caste. With the exception of the Magistrate every officer in Thiruchirapalli use to keep one of the Kallar Kavalkarar in his pay. If at all the employer wanted to change his Kavalkarar he was compelled to employ a new one from the same caste. The police department found it very difficult to guard against the plans of these Kavalkarars.41 The Regulation of 1816 was enacted with much hope by the colonial state. It visualized that it could control the evergrowing crime rates,42 particularly 38 W.Francis, South Arcot District Gazetteer, Madras, 1906, p.253. 39 B.S.Baliga, Madras District Gazetteers, South Arcot, Madras, 1962, p.381. 40 Hall Blair, Magistrate, Thiruchirapalli to Provincial Court of Southern Division, 1 August 1835, Board of Revenue Proceedings, Vol.1476, pp.13968 - 13972. 41 Ibid., 42 Apart from the crimes committed by the Kavalkarars there were other categories crimes such as crimes committed by professional criminals and victims of famines. 115 crimes associated with Kaval system through the creation of a new establishment to look after police and revenue administration simultaneously. However in a long run it realized that it had committed a blunder. This new establishment provided with enormous powers by the succeeding regulations of 1816 proved to be an abode of corruption, terror, extortion and torture. The atrocities committed by revenue servants acting as police officers, the lackadaisical attitude of Collectors towards their police work, and the ineffectiveness of the district judges soon attracted the attention of the Board of Directors of the British East India Company. Consequently the Company ordered the Madras Government to appoint a commission to investigate and ascertain how far the system of police worked satisfactorily in terms of public interest.43 In 1854 a committee was appointed by the Madras Government which was popularly known as the “Torture Commission”. The Torture Commission, consisting of F.F.Elliot, H.Stocks and John Bruce Norton as Commissioners, after a through investigation submitted its report in 1855 which exposed the inefficiency, cruelty and thorough disregard for human beings of the police establishment. It observed that, The police establishment has become the bane and pest of society, the terror of community and origin of half the misery and discontent that exist among the subjects of the Government. Corruption and bribery reign paramount throughout the establishment. Violence, 43 The History of The Madras Police, p.261. 116 torture and cruelty are their chief instrument for deducting crime, implicating innocence and extorting money…44 If this was the nature of the police establishment of the government, there is nothing surprising to note that the people at large lost their confidence with the police department of the government and turned towards the Kavalkarars for their safety and security. In the light of the Torture Commission’s Report one could argue that the colonial state had no moral right to criticize the Kaval system. The Torture Commission which exposed the inefficient, corrupt and cruel nature of the existing police establishment also furnished some recommendations for reforming the police administration. It laid emphasis on the creation of an independent police department under European officers without revenue responsibilities. The Madras government accepted the views and recommended the appointment of a Superintendent of Police in each district and two of the same for larger districts.45 The Colonial State and the Kavalkarars, 1859-1896 In the aftermath of the Torture Commission and the events of 1857, a new police system was formed after the model of English country and Irish Constabulary administration.46 It came into existence through the Madras Police 44 Report of the Commissioners for the Investigation of Alleged Cases of Torture in the Madras Presidency, Madras 1855, pp.62-63. 45 Report of the Indian Police Commission, Simla, 1903, p.10. 46 J.H.Garstin, Manual of South Arcot District, Lawrance Asylum Press, Madras, 1878, p.205. 117 Act of 1859 which was implemented throughout the Presidency by the end of 1863. The new system incorporated many new principles. It provided for the establishment of a professional organisation independent of the control of revenue officials and responsibilities. The Government of Madras had high hopes on this new police organisation. An energetic officer W.Robinson was appointed as the first Inspector General of Police. With fond hopes, he was entrusted with the responsibility of placing this organization on a sound footing. However, the new police too failed to live up to the high expectations.47 It was true that as a result of the reorganisation of the police machinery, the Madras police was successful in controlling some extreme forms of crimes like dacoity and raiding. However it found itself ineffective against other forms of crimes. Foremost among them was the crimes related to Kaval committed by the Maravars and Kallars of southern Tamilnadu. While the company was able to contain the crimes committed by the Kavalkarars in the northern districts of Tamilnadu it failed in the southern districts of Tamilnadu, such as Thiruchirapalli, Thanjavur, Madurai and Tirunelveli. Inspite of the efforts taken by the colonial state to uproot Kaval system, Kaval was still prevalent in this region in the 1860’s as it had been half a century earlier.48 In the words of one despairing police officer in 1861, Kaval was “incompatible with a just and enlightened administration. There were as well he knew great difficulties in trying to reduce 47 P.Jegadeesan, Law and Order in Madras Presidency (1850-1880), B.R.Publishing Corporation, New Delhi, p.46. 48 David Arnold, Police Power and Colonial Rule in Madras, Oxford University Press, Madras, 1986, p.139. 118 the ‘robber police’ to controllable limits but he believed sooner or later the difficulty must be faced and overcome”.49 J.Grose, Acting Secretary, Board of Revenue in his report submitted to the government dated 21st December 1869 lamented the power and influence still enjoyed by the Kavalkarars in Tirunelveli in the following words. …It may be observed that the kavalkarar imposed assessments of this district are not confined to a tax on carts. In most parts of the district the kavalkarars levy a regular house tax without the intervention of any authorized check in its imposition or regulation and they claim the right to revise their assessment, when more valuable houses are substituted for lower rated dwellings. Other exaction of a similar character countenanced by long prescriptions are still maintained in various parts of the district and enforced by the fear of the kavalkarar inspire. As a rule no cultivator is at liberty to watch his crops. The kavalkarars institution has been in a most unsatisfactory condition in the district of Tirunelveli since the commencement of our rule. The Men-kaval system was never thoroughly suppressed in this district as it was elsewhere in South India, and its organisation and spirit still subsist.50 49 C.S.Heran, “Memo on Tirunelveli Village Police”, Judicial Proceedings, 97, 19 December 1870, India Office Records cited in Police Power and Colonial Rule in Madras (1880-1947), Oxford University Press, Madras, 1986, p.139. 50 Board of Revenue Proceedings, Vol. No.5217, 8 August 1870, p.6291. 119 Even though the colonial government had taken many a step at various stages against the Kaval system it continued to exist as before demonstrating the tenacity of the Kavalkarars, especially the Maravars of the Tirunelveli region. For example H.S.Grigg, acting head assistant to the Collector of Tirunelveli, in his report to the acting Collector of Tirunelveli dated, Kayatar 13th April 1870 gives a vivid picture about the ways by which Kaval was imposed on the inhabitants, the huge amount of money collected by them at the various centres of Tirunelveli and the crude methods adopted by them to make people who refused to pay the Kaval fee. I now come to speak of the unauthorized collections of fees by kavalgars on bandis [bullock carts] passing through the villages along the highways or by bye ways. It seems to be the universal practice for the kavalgars of this division to levy such a fee whenever a bandy halts at night. The amount realized by the kavalgar annually in this way must be very great. The fee seems to be fixed by custom and varies in different villages, but is seldom less than 6 pies per bandy and occasionally 8 and 10 paise. Half of this is charged on laden bandies and some what a lower fee on laden cattle. It might be said that this fee is voluntary; but such as clearly may not be the case. All the sub-magistrates report that where this fee is refused the kavalgar resort to all sorts of extraordinary measures to force payment such as hiding the cattle, stealing the cart pin, 120 unyoking the bullocks, dragging the bandy man before the village Munsiff on charge of theft, etc.51 As per the Police Act of 1859 the Police administration of Tirunelveli district came under the exclusive control of Superintendent of Police. These new officers in their efforts to replace the Kavalkarars appointed Talayaris and Vettiyans in 1873 and a declaration was made that payment of fees as “being due by custom to Kaval was illegal”. The result of the new system was alarming. In one year alone i.e. 1878 the amount of property lost in robberies in the Ambasamutram taluk amounted to over Rs.15,000/-.52 As far as the district of Thanjavur was concerned the situation was significantly different. The colonial administration aided by the new police machinery was able enough to bring a major section of the Kavalkarars under its control. A major section of the Kallar population settled down permanently to peaceful and lawful occupations. Regarding this breakthrough T.M.Horsefall, District and Sessions Judge of Thanjavur in his letter to the Chief Secretary dated 8th October 1895 had made the following remarks.53 If we take a broad view we shall find a distinct improvement even in the past twenty years. In this district numbers of kallars have settled down permanently to peaceful and lawful occupations and 51 Ibid., pp.6291, 6292. 52 H.R.Pate, Gazetteer of the Tinnevelly District, p.337. 53 G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897, p.7. 121 many of them (significant sign) tried to hide their origin by calling themselves ‘Pillais’.54 What more can we want? Regarding the impact of the reorganized police administration over the ryots of Thanjavur was well conceived by E.C.Rawson, the acting Magistrate of Thanjavur in the following terms. Since the introduction of an organised police force, the ryots have begun to show a certain amount of disinclination to continue paying the old fees, and the Kallars resort to extortion in order to enforce what they consider their legitimate rights and cattle lifting is the method employed.55 However this was not the case all over the Thanjavur district. There were some exceptions. In parts of Thanjavur, Pattukottai and Kumbakonam taluks the Kaval system by the Kallars continued its powerful presence. Regarding this F.R.Hemingway in his Thanjavur Gazetteer observed that, In Thanjavur the kaval system only applies to cattle. The fee being generally from four to eight annas (at Orathanad Rs.1/-) per annum for a pair of bulls. Even after the abolition of kaval system the 54 There is a proverb in Tamil. “Kallar, Maravar and Agambadiyar mella mella Pillai yanar” meaning that the Kallars, Maravars and Agambadiyars who became comparatively rich and sophisticated started calling themselves as Pillais. Pillai is the caste title of Vellalars who occupy the second position in the caste hierarchy of the Tamil society next to the Brahmins. 55 E.C.Rawson to the Chief Secretary, Thanjavur, 6 November 1895; in G.O.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897, p.9. 122 kavilgars (kallars) continued to levy them and over a large part of the district do so till the day.56 In Madurai district and in the very city itself the condition was alarming. The following observation made by J.Twigg, District Judge of Madurai provides a clear picture of the power exercised by the Kallar Kavalkarars over the city of Madurai. For instance Madurai town pays blackmail under a regular organised system to the Kallars of Kilagudi, a village about five miles away. If under an Act similar to the Criminal Tribes Act, the inhabitants were all registered confined to founds and carefully watched, the Madura people might acquire sufficient confidence to refuse to pay kaval fees, but there is danger that if Kilagudi were muzzled, Madura town would become the prey of other kallars.57 In the rural belt of Madurai the condition was more horrible as per the following description made by F.Fawcett Esq. Superintendent of Police, Malabar in his report to the Inspector General of Police, Madras dated 20th November 1895. To enforce their claim for kaval fee, the kallar not only steals but he uses fire frequently. He fires houses and hay-stacks of recalcitrant 56 F.R.Hemingway, Madras District Gazetteers, Thanjavur, Government of Tamilnadu, 1966, p.206. 57 Report from J.Twigg, District Magistrate of Madurai to the Chief Secretary, 10 April 1896, G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897, p.21. 123 payees and otherwise annoys them. Those who levy black mail are not necessarily the nearest. Very often the kudi kavalgars live many miles away and merely make periodical visits to the villages they are suppose to watch for the purpose of collecting their blackmail. Say ‘A’ buys a bullock at a place several days journey from his house and it is being thither. In every village, where a halt is made the kaval fee are demanded by the kallar kavalgar or watchman and these must be paid; if they are not paid the bullock will certainly be stolen.58 The above observations clearly indicate the inability of the police administration to tackle and control the Kaval-related crimes. It also demonstrates the overwhelming power and influence enjoyed by the Kavalkarars at the local level. In the case of Thiruchirapalli district there was significant improvement in controlling the Kaval-related crimes as a result of the efforts taken by the reorganised police administration. However it was not completely eradicated. M.S.Parthasarathy Iyengar, Inspector of Police ‘B’ Division, in his report to the Superintendent of Police of Thiruchirapalli district dated 20th October 1895 described the prevalence of Kaval system in the city of Thiruchirapalli itself in the following terms. 58 G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897, p.27; Vide Appendix VII. 124 The custom of entertaining kavalgars to watch gentlemen’s [Europeans] bunglows still prevails in Trichinopoly. Generally kallars and in a few cases Ambalagars are employed and they are supposed to see that no theft occur within their respective charges. The feeling of security complete in their minds without kavalgars being employed. The gentries utilize the services of these men for some other household purposes and this affords a sort of excuse for keeping them. Some principle streets in the town have got kavalgars but they are simply nominal…59 David Arnold in his scholarly article “Dacoity and Rural Crime in Madras – 1860-1940” has made an observation that “between the Kallar and Maravar on the one side and the British and Indian antagonists on the other, Kaval and related crimes were no less than a struggle for rural supremacy”.60 But from the factors seen above regarding the condition of Kaval system in the urban centres of Thiruchirapalli and Madurai as revealed by the colonial officials it may be conceived that the struggle was not only for rural supremacy but to exercise control over urban centres also. On the basis of the above said facts it may be conceived that the newly reorganised police machinery was only partially successful in controlling the 59 G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897, p.34. 60 The Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol.6, No.2, January 1979, p.158. 125 crimes related to Kaval system. In the district of Thiruchirapalli and Thanjavur there were visible changes that the former Kavalkarars had started settling in peaceful ways of life. Contrary to this in the district of Madurai and Tirunelveli the Kavalkarars were still as powerful as they were before. The reorganised police administration introduced through the act of 1859 was better, and yielded better results when compared with the previous attempts of the colonial state. The enhanced power of the new police system, the amendments made in the act of 1859 in the subsequent years coupled with the phenomenal increase in the numbers of police personnel paved the way for new developments. In many districts including Thanjavur and Thiruchirapalli the police gradually gained an upper hand over the Kavalkarars and the crimes perpetrated by them. But in the case of Madurai and Tirunelveli regions where the institution of Kaval system was dominated by the Kallars and Maravars respectively, the police failed to make any breakthrough. The more the police tightened their grip on the Kavalkars, the more oppressive they became. As per the colonial records the reasons for the failure of the police may be accounted as follows. In a majority of the Maravar and Kallar villages the village magistrates were from the same communities. The strong caste and clannish affinity prevent the village magistrate to make complaints against the Kallar and Maravar Kavalkarars. The next important reason was the reluctance on the part of victims, who out of fear of the loss of his animals or retaliation from the Kavalkarars never 126 reported the matter to the police. Regarding these two factors F.C.Rawson, Acting Magistrate of Thanjavur made the following remarks in his report to the Chief Secretary dated on 6th November 1895. The principal difficulties that lie in the way of suppression of cattle lifting and blackmail are the disinclination of the ryots to complain against or give evidence against the kallars and the difficulty of obtaining evidence against the kallars owing to the fact that most heads in the kallar villages are kallars themselves.61 J.Andrew, District Magistrate of Thiruchirapalli was of the opinion that the number of complaints lodged with the police regarding cattle thefts forms only 1/8 of the total crimes.62 Moreover the dependency of the lower ranks of the police administration over the Kavalkarars in collecting information regarding the crimes committed was another reason for the failure of the police machinery. There is every possibility for the Kavalkarars to provide a distorted version about the crimes committed. Pertaining to this fact the Administrative Report of the Police of Madras for the year 1886 made the following remark. …there is no doubt but that the kudikavalgars have been nearly universally employed in working cases. It is a natural outcome of the kudikaval system. The police are brought up to go to the kudi 61 G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897, p.10. 62 J.Andrew to Chief Secretary, 14 December 1895 in G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897, p.18. 127 kavalgar in private life and they continue to believe in his prowess as a detective and employ him concealing the fact. Many a good case is lost through it. The kavalgar is thus the chief, the watchman, the detective, an immense power. Early endeavour is being made to stop this, but it is a practice that will take long time to eradicate.63 Another important reason was the absence of the Village Magistrates from the villages where they were posted. They used to stay in big villages where living conditions were better. This caused so much of time lag between the time of the occurrence of the crime and the Village Magistrate reaching the site. The same was the case in making report to the higher authorities too.64 For example “there are 15 Village Magistrates in Kalakad. This delays report of crime and interferes with their usefulness”.65 At this juncture an understanding about two important factors and the development associated with them is essential; one is regarding the social policies adopted by the colonial government in administering the people of India, the socio-economic and political factors which influenced and governed the formulation and implementation of such policies. The second factor was the social conflicts which broke out in Tamilnadu in the closing decades of the nineteenth century. 63 Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1886, p.25. 64 Ibid., p.23, 24. 65 Ibid., p.23 128 For the British policy makers the late nineteenth century was a difficult period both in ideological and political terms. Apart from its own problem the British empire has to face continental challenges. In the educated and administrative circles moral and ethical issues were debated afresh based on the scientific discoveries of Darwin. conceptual changes. Earlier perception of colonies underwent These developments inevitably led to the need for continual reformulation of social policy.66 In England during this period the administrators found themselves unable to solve the problem of economic depression, unemployment, strikes, poverty, alchocolism, ill health and crime, inspite of the decades of social legislation. Scientific research undertaken during this period to find out the ultimate cause for criminality concluded that it is genetical and hereditary trait. The developing disciplines of anthropology and anthropometry also contributed to the notion of hereditary criminality.67 In the Indian context too the colonial administration was facing many problems. The great upheaval of 1857, followed by armed insurrection in different tribal belts of India, the steady growth of Indian National Congress founded in 1885 were a few cases in point on the political front. On the social side it could not solve the problem of the growing crime rates committed particularly by certain specific communities of the Indian society inspite of the 66 Meena Radhakrishna, Dishonoured by History: ‘Criminal Tribes’ and British Colonial Policy, Orient Longman, New Delhi, 2001, p.1. 67 Ibid., p.3. 129 series of reforms introduced in police and judicial administration from time to time. In search of the root cause of criminality of those Indian Communities, the colonial administrators borrowed the idea already developed and incubated by the scientists in England, and applied it here in India. The British officials in India, viewed the Indian society as a conglomeration of many castes with distinct physical features, character, customs and manners completely different from each other. Meanwhile a few anthropological and sociological studies on Indian society were undertaken by the British, most of them were civil servants and military officials. To cite an example the opinion of F.Fawcett, Superintendent of Police of Malabar is furnished below. India is one country in the world in which people live together and yet apart. It is one country in which proximity does not mean intermixture infusion and complete alteration of the original. People of one caste live check-by-jowl by those of another, marrying with their own people, sacrificing to their gods, living their own lives as if they were on an island by themselves, and so we find the kallars and maravars now just as they have been for many centuries.68 The intention of these studies was to assist the British officials in understanding the Indian society, so that they could clearly demarcate the castes which could be loyal and dependable and the castes which were hostile and to be controlled. 68 G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897, p.31. 130 In general the British officials, with a few exceptions were unsympathetic towards Indians. In their view the Indians were uncivilized, and barbaric and the British rule was a god-sent one to make the Indian people civilized. In the colonial discourse the colonial officials were very generous in using derogatory remarks while describing the Indian communities particularly about the communities which were un co-operative and rebellious. J.H.Nelson’s Madura Manual of 1989 is a case in point. While describing some particular communities of Madurai region Nelson liberally uses terms like, the ‘lawless maravar’, ‘sulking kallar’, the ‘licentious paraiah’ and the ‘restless kuravar’.69 Here the irony of the fact was that these were the communities which dominated the Kaval system, and continuously resisted the move of the colonial government to control them. His resentful image about an individual or a few Kavalkarars of Maravar, Kallar, Paraiyar and Kuravar stock later on applied to the entire communities of thousands of men, women and children. The new concepts of criminality, such as genetical and hereditary criminality developed in England, were imported to India and applied here with some modification in the notion of crime. In India it was not based on the notion of genetically transmitted crime but on crime as a profession passed from one generation of criminal caste to another; like a carpenter would pass on his trade to the next generation, hereditary criminal caste members would pass this profession to their offspring.70 69 J.H.Nelson, The Madura Country; A Manual, Madras, 1989, Part III, p.16. 70 Meena Radhakrishna, Dishonoured by History, 2001, p.5. 131 The total outcome of the above seen scientific cum administrative exercise was the formulation of the infamous ‘Criminal Tribes Act’ of 1871 by the Government of India.71 The most important purpose of the 1871 Act had been to suppress the hereditary criminal section of the Indian society. To start with the Criminal Tribes Act was implemented in the North Western Frontier Province and Punjab with the sole purpose of suppressing thuggery. Later it was extended to other parts of North India. In 1897 the Government of Madras which was facing serious social problems in the closing years of nineteenth century hoped to arm itself with the same Act. Circulars were sent to district administrators to identify criminal communities and their exploits which includes Kaval related crimes and to decide whether there was any need for the implementation of Criminal Tribes Act. The response was surprising.72 A majority of the district magistrates reported that there were no such criminal communities existing in their district to the extent of inviting Criminal Tribes Act. The Collector of Thanjavur reported that there was no Kudi Kaval system in his district and the Kallar Kavalkarars who had some criminal record in the past settled down to peaceful life as agriculturists and they even changed their caste name from Kallar to Pillai.73 This opinion of the District Magistrate of Thanjavur was shared by the District Magistrates of Coimbatore, Salem, Thiruchirapalli, South Arcot and North Arcot. They were of the opinion that the prevailing situation could be managed 71 G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897, Criminal Tribes Act. 72 G.O.No.1753, Judicial, 22 August 1895. 73 G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897. 132 with the existing criminal laws. Hence they did not see the need for the introduction of Criminal Tribes Act.74 H.D.Robinson, District Superintendent of Police of Tirunelveli in his report to the District Magistrate was in favour of the implementation of Criminal Tribes Act over the Maravars of Tirunelveli district. He justified his opinion in the following words. Kudi kaval is another name for blackmail, that the blackmailers are all maravars and kallars and that the system not only exist in Tirunelveli but flourishes and thrives what further proof is wanting that stronger measure are required. I am therefore most strongly of the opinion that the maravas of Tirunelveli should be declared a Criminal Tribe under the Act. Certainly there are many maravar villages in Tirunelveli such as Marugalkuruchi, Munnirpallam, Nochikulam, etc which are perfect nest of criminals75 After reporting this he went to the extent of recommending the implementation of the Criminal Tribes Act against the Kallars of Madurai district so that the Kallars residing in the Srivilliputtur and Sattur taluks of Tirunelveli district could be brought under this Act.76 74 G.O.No.535, Judicial, 29 March 1899. 75 Robinson to the District Magistrate, 18 August 1897, G.O.No.535, Judicial, 29 March 1899, pp.9-11. 76 Ibid., 133 J.Twigg the District Magistrate of Madurai in his report dated 7th August 1897 recommended the implementation of Criminal Tribes Act on the Kallars, Maravars and Agamudaiars of his district. At the same time he suggested that this Act should not be implemented against any community as a whole, but only on those members who are proved to belong to the criminal portion of such tribes.77 However the Criminal Tribes Act of 1871 of Government of India with some amendments was finally introduced in the Madras Presidency in 1911. The reason for the implementation of this Act in 1911 was the developments which took place in the last decade of 19th century. The second factor was the social conflicts which broke out in Tamilnadu in the closing decade of the 19th century. In the social history of Tamilnadu the period starting from 1895 was marked by much social conflict stained with violence and bloodshed. The first major outbreak of social conflict was in the Dindugal region of Madurai district where armed resistance against the Kallar Kaval system was organised by other communities in 1896.78 This was the first major violent attempt against the Kallar Kaval. Following this example in Tirunelveli district too there were armed resistance against the Maravar Kavalkarars in 1900 and after.79 77 Twigg to Chief Secretary in G.O.No.573, Judicial, 19 March 1899. 78 G.E.Baudry S.P. of Madurai to I.G. of Police dated Kannivadi, in 13 April 1896, G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March, 1897. 79 G.O.No.1579, Judicial (Confidential), 31 October 1900; G.O.No.1252, Home (Confidential), 11 March 1941. 134 Another important social conflict was the outbreak of the anti-Nadar riots which engulfed the two southern districts Madurai and Tirunelveli respectively. The process of modernization initiated by the colonial state started yielding fruits. Communities which were placed at the bottom of the social hierarchy, particularly the Nadars who came up dramatically on the economic front, started claiming equal social rights which was violently responded to by the other communities, prominent among whom were the Maravars and Kallars. This consequently ended in the infamous sack of Sivakasi of 189980 followed by planned attacks on Nadar villages. When the situation turned from bad to worse the army was called to suppress the rioters. Though the anti-Nadar movement, and anti-kaval outbreaks were suppressed, tension prevailed for some years with stray incidents of violence here and there. During the suppression of these outbreaks the police and army came out heavily on the Maravars and Kallars which in one way or other initiated the process of the gradual dissolution of the Kaval system. However in some pockets of Madurai and Tirunelveli the Kaval system withstood the onslaught, and continued to exist. 80 G.O.No.2017, 2018, Judicial (Confidential), 12 December 1899, p.25. CHAPTER V ANTI-KAVAL MOVEMENTS In Tamilnadu, the last quarter of the 19th century, especially the years after 1895, were marked by social conflicts of great magnitude. The rapid transformation initiated by the British gained much momentum in the second half of the nineteenth century. The spread of Western education, introduction of railways which improved means of transport, commercialization of agriculture, promotion of trade and commerce and the extension of irrigation facilities coupled with the proselytizing activities of the Christian missionaries had a profound impact on Tamil society. The new economic opportunities which arose as a result were well utilized by some communities which were traditionally placed in the lower ranks of the caste hierarchy. The tradition-oriented, castebased and rigid occupational structure was broken up and mobility from lower to higher levels, and attaining economic prosperity became comparatively easier for them. These communities, once they became economically affluent, started demanding equal social status. It was vehemently opposed and violently suppressed by the higher castes. Some other communities which were at the margins, as a result of their exposure to western education and culture started questioning and criticized the debilitating social evils and inequalities. In the meantime, the formation of regional level political organizations had culminated in the emergence of Indian National Congress in 1885. As a cumulative impact 136 of all these development the entire socio-economic and political milieu was charged with the aspiration for transformation. A detailed discussion of all these factors said above falls out of the purview of this chapter. This chapter is confined to three important developments which took place in the social sphere of Tamilnadu which are instrumental in bringing down the Kaval system. Anti-kaval movement in Madurai region. Anti-kaval movement in Tirunelveli. Introduction of the Criminal Tribes Act. Anti-Kaval Movement in Madurai and Tirunelveli The anti-kaval movement in Madurai and Tirunelveli regions was the demonstration of the antipathy entertained by the chief agricultural communities such as the Vellalars, Gounders, Naickers, Konars, Nadars, Pallars1 and other service communities for decades together against the illegal extractions of the Maravar and Kallar Kavalkarars. Before the establishment of the British rule, Kaval as an ancient and indigenous system of policing was widely practised in Tamilnadu with well-defined rights and responsibilities guaranteed by oral and written agreements. In general this institution was functioning well, though there were violations of the agreement by the Kavalkarars which were few in number 1 Cattle rearing was the traditional occupation of the Konars. Next to that, agriculture was their prime occupation. Regarding the Nadars, Pallars and Paraiyars were concerned majority of them were farm labourers. However a tiny section of them became land owners as a result of the economic polices of the company and the efforts taken by Christian Missionaries. 137 and sporadic in nature. However with the establishment British rule over the entire Carnatic region in 1801, finding the Kaval system and the Kavalkarars as a potential competitor in the race of supremacy, the Company decided to eradicate this system. Starting from 1802 a series of Regulations was enacted by the Company with the aim of curbing the power and influence enjoyed by the Kavalkarars. A new police machinery was also introduced in 1802 replacing the Kaval system and it was reformed periodically to face the problems arising out of the abolition of the Kaval system. Since the Kavalkarars were equally tenacious a prolonged struggle started. In the caste-based social structure of Tamilnadu, both the Maravars and Kallars have occupied a middle order position i.e. below the Brahmins and the Vellalars and above the Nadars and the Scheduled Castes. In terms of population the Maravars, particularly the Kondayamkottai branch, was dominant in Tirunelveli district. Of the fourteen Palayakarars of Tirunelveli district eight were of Kondayamkottai branch.2 These Maravars were a dominant political power during the days of the Palayakarars. Both the Brahmins and the Vellalars served under the Maravar Palayakarars and Zamindars in important capacities. In Madurai, the Kallars formed the dominant section in the population. During the pre-colonial days they were the masters of Kallarnadu otherwise known as 2 Geroge W.Spencer, Temples, Kings and Peasants: Perception of South India’s Past, New Era Publication, Chennai, 1987, p.9. 138 Thannadchinadu or Thannarasunadu.3 Occupation-wise a major section of both these communities had either served as soldiers in the army of former kings and Palayakarars or as Kavalkarars. Their numerical majority, their warring nature and the nostalgia about their political power during pre-colonial days earned them a special position and respect in the society and consequently they had an edge over all other communities. An element of fear was also there behind this respect. During the course of the confrontation between the Company and the Kavalkarars calculated steps were taken by the colonial state against the Kavalkarars. Both the Men Kaval and Kudikaval systems were abolished, collection of Kaval fee was declared illegal, and the rent-free land allotted to them were confisticated. Consequently the Kavalkarars lost much of their traditional power and influence and their avenues of income. Without a guaranteed income, life became miserable to them. They started imposing the Kaval system unofficially over the inhabitants, and collected more than what was admissible. Thus they landed in the arena of crime gradually. The more the state tightened its grip over the Kavalkarars the more was the extraction of the Kavalkarars from the inhabitants. Refusal of the claims made by the Kavalkarars usually ended in the loss of property and loss of cattle on the part of inhabitants. This kind of Kaval related crimes over a period of time attained great proportions, despite the 3 Here Nadu means a cluster of many villages. All the affairs connected with those Nadus were managed by leading Kallar families 139 steps taken by the government. The people at large hesitated to resist the Kavalkarars because it may lead to further loss of property or livestock. The reasons for the failure of the colonial state in suppressing the Kaval system had been explained by David Arnold in the following terms. The British failed to create a rival police system sufficiently powerful to oust the kavalgars and protect the ryots…. Numerically weak, underpaid and corrupt, drawn from classes traditionally subordinate to the maravars and kallars the constabulary was itself in awe to the kavalgars.4 Moreover the relation between the village police and the regular police was also not smooth. The highhandedness of the regular police led to a strained relationship between them leading to the non co-operation on the part of village police. This gulf was well utilized by the Kavalkarars. Yet another factor that impacted on the illegal extraction of the Maravar and Kallar Kavalkarar was the economic factors. Wherever the opportunities for an occupational change were bright the Kavalkarars gradually drifted away from Kaval. The Keelnattu Kallars i.e. Kallars of the eastern portions of Madurai district particularly of Melur taluk and the Kallars of Thanjavur district lost their interest in Kaval soon after the waters of the Periyar irrigation project reached 4 David Arnold, “Dacoity and Rural Crime in Madras 1860-1940”, The Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol.6, No.2, January 1979, pp.155-156. 140 their land in 1896. Contrary to this the Piramalai Kallar Kavalkarars of western part of Madurai as owners of few acres of unirrigated dry land that too affected by repeated famine could not maintain themselves.5 Hence the Kavalkarars continued to forcibly impose Kaval the only avenue of their income and indulge in other crimes. The frequent and prolonged famines in Tirumangalam region also prompted the migration of Piramalai Kallar towards western and northern portions of Madurai and impose Kaval there on the inhabitants. The continuous flow resulted in increasing number of Kavalkarars operating in a limited area and minimised their income. When there was no room for imposing Kaval they turned towards robbery. Regarding the means adopted by the Kavalkarars to make the inhabitants to accept their Kaval and to pay the fee, the following interesting observation was made by G.H.P.Bailey, District Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli. Thus the marava oppression is inherited from the dominant position of this warlike community in the past and is carried on under the clock of the ancient kudi and kondi kaval systems…. common methods of oppression are, a) Extortion of kudi or kondi kaval dues in cash or in kind. b) Stealing of fowl, goats and sheep. 5 Ibid., p.156. A few 141 c) Mischief by spoiling paddy and other crops just ready for harvest by removing the grain from the stalk. d) Driving away cattle to extract money for their restoration. e) Smashing of stones supporting irrigation equipments at wells. The foregoing items do not include arson against the houses and fodder which is often reported to the police and which is committed with the same purpose wish to reduce the villager to such pressure that he has to choose between marava domination and exaction and an existence rendered intolerable by constant fear for the safety of his life and property.6 Similar kind of observation was made by a retired government servant Rao Bahadur S.Radhakrishna Iyer (Indian Audit and Accounts Service, Rtd.,) a native of Tharuvai, a village situated near Tirunelveli on the south west. He indicated the weakness of the police as an additional factor. …My residence in this village for the last two months has made me realize that unless the serious marava oppression is put down with a high hand by government, life in this village, as in other villages as well, consisting of a marava population will be intolerable. Not a day passes without some theft or other being committed by the maravas. 6 Paddy is removed from the fields before harvest, G.O.No.1802, Home, 31 July, 1943. 142 government trees cut and sold for firewood. Poor cultivators are suppressed in different ways and crimes are not reported to the police for the fear of marava reprisals. …But the police is hopelessly inadequate.7 In an interview during my fieldtrip with an elderly Maravar gentleman, Nainar Thevar8 (father of Nainar Nagendran, Former Minister for Electricity Board, Government of Tamilnadu) informed me that the Konars (shepherds) were always afraid of the Nanguneri Maravars; no Konar was ready to accept the offer of kidai9 in the neighbouring villages of Nanguneri. Having failed in all its attempts against the Kavalkarars the colonial state anticipated some short of initiative from the side of the landed gentry. Regarding this fact as early in 1886 J.Lee Warner, Superintendent of Tirunelveli had lamented that, …The remedy seems to be in the hands of the wealthy land and property holders themselves. If they are too cowardly or apathetic to put out a hand to help themselves by co-operating with the established police, the most decided efforts of the best government in the world will continue to be inoperative.10 7 S.Radhakrishna Iyer to S.V.Ramamoorthy, Advisor to His Excellency, the Governor, April 1943, in G.O.No.1802, Home, 31 July 1943. 8 Interview with Nainar Thevar at Panagudi, 10 November 2003. 9 Kidai refers to the penning of sheep and goats. This is to get natural fertilizer to enrich the soil, for which the shepherd is paid by the land owner. 10 Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1886, Vide Appendix ‘C’, p.xi. 143 The above observation was made in 1886. Exactly after ten years the anti-kaval movement broke out in the western and north-western parts of Madurai district. When the illegal extraction of the Kallar Kavalkarars become intolerable and unbearable, people started reacting to it and this reaction with the cooperation of the police developed into a movement.11 It went to the extent of driving out the Kallars to their original home in Tirumangalam taluk and at one stage it went beyond the control of the state administration. The police authorities in the core region of the movement claimed that they had not played any role in the movement either by instigating it or by cooperating with it. The district police administration had claimed that it was rendering equal protection to Kallar, and the ryots and tried to draw a picture that the movement was a sudden and spontaneous one. But the Magistrates and police openly sympathized with the ryots, advising them however to confine their movement within the boundaries of law. The subordinate officials were instructed to act only in the event the movement crossed the boundaries of law; otherwise they were advised remain passive.12 However one can understand that the invisible hands of the police was behind the anti-kaval movements from the following statement made by L.E.Buckley, District Magistrate of Tirunelveli.13 11 L.E.Buckley, District Magistrate of Tirunelveli to the Secretary to the Government, 23 March, 1904, G.O. Judicial (Confidential), 31 May 1904, pp.7, 8. 12 Anand Sankar Pandian, “Landscapes of Redemption: Cultivating Heart and Soil in South India” unpublished Ph.D thesis, University of California, Berkeley, pp.109-110. 13 Buckley to the Secretary to the Government, 23 March 1904 in G.O.No.867, Judicial (Confidential), 31 May 1904, pp.7-8. 144 This kaval system will never be thrown off unless the movement comes from the people. There are not wanting signs of such movement and whenever a desire for freedom is expressed police aid is given. The cases are not numerous at present; one success will breed another. However when the anti-kaval movements crossed the limits permitted by the colonial state, the police machinery had to intervene. Encouraged by their initial success against the Kallar Kavalkarars the anti-kaval village assemblies in Madurai started functioning like autonomous entities. It was at this juncture the government decided to check the movement. Rajagopal Chetti, the Sub- magistrate of Vedasandur records that, “The assemblies were head strong and …they overestimated their own power and action”.14 In the Tirunelveli region the nature of the anti-kaval movement was very different. The determination of the Maravars to keep the Kaval intact was a challenge to the colonial state. During the first half of the twentieth century it had to face so many challenges. In spite of that, fresh attempts were made to put an end to the Kaval system. But what came to an end was the rule of the colonial state and not the Kaval system. 14 Rajagopal to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 28 May 1986, MCR, 90. 145 Anti-Kaval Movement in Madurai District, 1896 The first major and unprecedented anti-kaval movement erupted in Dindugal, Vedasandur, Periyakulam and Palani regions of Madurai district towards the end of March 1896. Invariably in all the British records, this movement is termed as ‘anti-kallar’ movement. All the regions mentioned above are situated in the western and northern parts of Madurai district. The Kaval system in this region was dominated by the Piramalai Kallars though there were a few Kavalkarars belonging to Kuravar and Valaiyar castes as well. The Piramalai Kallars, whose core region was the Thirumangalam taluk of Madurai District, had migrated to western and northern parts of Madurai District, during the second half of nineteenth century and successfully established their Kaval sway over the inhabitants.15 Some of the leading Kallars took up the Men Kaval responsibility of many villages appointing their own relatives as Kudi Kavalkarars to look after the Kaval duties. Eventually the Kudi Kavalkaras became independent of the Men Kavalkaras and started collecting Kaval dues on their own. The migration of Piramalai Kallar from the Usilampatti region to the western and northern parts of Madurai district continued even in 1896. Regarding the migration and occupation of Piramalai Kallar A.Aiyasami Sastri, 2nd Class Magistrate of Uthamapalayam Division has made the following observation: 15 Louis Dumont, A South Indian Sub Caste: Social Organisation and Religion of Pramalai Kallar, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, pp.18-19. 146 During the last few years there has been a continuous influx of kallars into this division from the Usilampatti firka16 and within the last 6 months about 70 new kallar houses have sprung up in Gudalur alone. None of these kallars have any property; their ostensible means of livelihood is that of agricultural labourers, but most of them are kavalgars or employees of the kavalgars and live on the fees collected from the ryots.17 The outbreak of drought and famine in Thirumangalam region also served as a push factor, forcing many Kallar families to move north and west.18 As mentioned in the closing pages of the previous chapter in spite of the repeated reorganization of the police administration the colonial state couldn’t dislodge the Kaval system which continued to operate throughout the nineteenth century. This power vacuum in rural policing was well exploited by the Kallar Kavalkarars of Madurai region and Maravar Kavalkarars of Tirunelveli and Ramnad. When their illegal Kaval exaction became intolerable and the existing police machinery could not do anything concrete against them the initiative came 16 Usilampatti is an important commercial town situated on the highway running between Madurai and Periyakulam. There are a few other villages in Madurai District with the same name. 17 A.Aiyasami Sastri to G.K.Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 31 May 1896, Madurai Collectorate Records, R.Dis.No.90/Mgl, (MCA.90), Madurai District Archives (MDA). 18 David Arnold, “Dacoity and Rural Crime in Madras, 1860-1940”, The Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol.6, No.2, January 1979, p.156. 147 from the common people belonging to non-kallar communities who joined together and tried to overthrow the Kallar Kaval. This development was anticipated by the colonial government even in 1877. J.Lee Warner, Deputy Superintendent of Police of Tirunelveli, in his communication addressed to the Superintendent of Police, made a suggestion to suppress the Kaval system in the following terms: …The remedy seems to me in the hands of the wealthy land and property holders themselves. If they are too cowardly or apathetic to put out a hand to help themselves by co-operating with the established police, the most decided effort of the best government in the world would continue to be inoperative… You should with the approval of the government call a meeting of the influential native gentlemen presided by yourself as Chairman to devise the best working plan for defeating such a reign of terror.19 The reason for this effort towards collective security could be understood by the statement made by the ryots of Dindugal in their petition submitted to the Governor, Over 2 years ago, the ryots of these Taluqs, finding Police unable to put down these kallars, and their doings intolerable, started an Association called ‘The Fund’ for the purpose of Protecting 19 Lee Warner to Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli in Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1886; Vide Appendix ‘C’, p.xi. 148 themselves by all lawful means, from the offences and illegal exactions, made by this professional Thieves, scarcely any of them have other means of livelihood.20 This development was explained in detail in the following words. The anti-kallar agitation was a matter of considerable interest. It began in the spring of the year [1896] and still continues to cause considerable anxiety to the local authorities. The area of disturbance speaking generally is the country north of Madurai and West of the mainline of the South Indian Railways. These kallars ofcourse many of them are the kavalgars of villages under the kaval system which is still in force and its neighbouring districts… As is to be expected the people who suffered most at the hands of the kallars are the shepherds (Konars or Idayars). Their sheep and goats form a very convenient subject for the kallar raids. They are taken for kaval fee alleged to be overdue and also stolen against to be restored on the payment of blackmail. The anti-kallar movement was started in the year by a man of the shepherd caste, one Ammaiappakon and rapidly spread through Vedasandur and Dindigul. Meetings of the villagers were held at which thousands attended; they took oath on their plough to dispense with the services of the kallars; they formed funds to compensate such of 20 G.O.No.1496, Judicial, 14 October 1897. 149 them as lost their cattle or whose houses were burnt; they arranged for watchman among themselves to patrol the villages at nights; they provided horns to be sounded to carry the alarm in case of theft from village to village and they prescribed a regular scale of fines to be paid by those villagers who failed to turnover on the sound of the alarm.21 The historical facts associated with the origin and spread of the movement are not clear. Materials available related to this movement, whether reports made by the officials or petitions submitted either by the Kallars or by the members of the anti-Kaval movement, are by their very nature biased. Since the colonial administration was openly sympathetic with the movement the officials functioning at the taluk and village level toed the line of their superiors. On the other hand many of them, driven by the feelings of antagonism against the Kallars, either concealed or belittled the actual facts.22 Ammaiappakon, the headman of Usilampatti village in the Vedasandur division of Dindugal, a shepherd by caste, was popularly identified as the leader of the anti-kaval movement. Gounder. Another important leader was Savadamuthu On the side of the Kallars, Mayandi, popularly known as Thoratty Mayandi of Muthanampatty and Mayathevan were considered to be the important 21 Report on the Administration of the Police of the Madras Presidency, Madras, 1897, pp.3-4. 22 A.Krishnaswamy Iyer, Taluk Magistrate to G.K.Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 30 May 1896, Madurai Collectors Record (MCR), R.District No.G.O./Mgl. Madurai District Archives (MDA). 150 leaders.23 Understandably the shepherd caste was more vulnerable to Kallar depredation and therefore it is not surprising that the leadership emerged from them. But there was a popular story that the personal animosity between Ammaiappakon and one Karuppa Thevan of Aruppanpatti a village situated nearby Usilampatti was the reason for the movement. The reason for the animosity was not cattle theft but of women; Karuppa Thevan is said to have abducted Ammaiappakon’s wife and daughter.24 Whether this is true or only apocryphal is immaterial for a historical analysis. Though this movement came into existence in 1895 and gradually spread to many villages the colonial authorities learned of the anti-kaval organizations only by accident. The revenue officials on their visit to the villages in the early months of 1896 for revenue collection came to know of the ‘anti-kaval village assemblies’ and the persecution of Kallars. As per the account of A.Rajagopal Chetti, Sub Magistrate of Vedasandur, the origin of the movement may be traced to the village of Kombai way back in 1894. Kombai is a small village situated in the Vedasandur division on the edge of the hills bordering Thiruchirapalli district. There were two passes which connected this village with the hills. By using these passes the Kuravar of Thiruchirapalli made inroads into Kombai and used to steal away the cattle and other articles. As a solution to this problem it was 23 Petition submitted by some Ryots of Dindigul Taluk to Sir Arthur Elibank Havelock, Governor, 2 October 1897, G.O. Judicial, No.1496, 14 Oct.1897, TNA. 24 G.K.Batten, Joint Magistrate of Madurai to the Magistrate of Madurai, 25 June, 1896, MCR, 90 MDA; P.Muthu Thevar, Muvendarkula Thevar Samuga Varalaru (Tamil), Kakkaveeran Publishers, Madurai, 1976, p.200. 151 proposed that if anybody happened to see a theft, he should blow a horn so that people could gather and block off the hill passes and the culprits would be captured. By implementing this tactic the people of Kombai were able to prevent many thefts.25 Consequently the ryots of Nagayankottai, a nearby village, particularly the Muslims, adopted the same system in the next year against the thefts committed by the Kallars. When this movement spread to Usilampatti, Ammaiappakon played a major role in organizing the people of Usilampatti and adjoining villages into anti-kaval assemblies. He also deputed his men to faraway villages to form anti-kaval assemblies. Within a short period, the movement geared up and spread to a majority of villages of Dindugal, Vedasandur, Periyakulam and Palani regions. In the principal villages, village assemblies attended by people in thousands drawn from neighbouring villages were frequently held. In these meetings resolutions were passed regarding the steps to be taken against the Kallars. The Inspector of Police of Vedasandur division observed that three thousand people from several villages assembled at the temple near Ottanchatram and 2nd Grade Constable No.856 attended the meeting. The people took oath on the ploughs to unite themselves in anti-Kaval movements. The following resolutions were passed: 25 Rajagopal Chetti, Sub Magistrate, Vedasandur to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 31 March 1896, MCR 90. 152 1) That the villagers should not speak to Kallars and Koravars. 2) That workmen (Barbers, Washermen, Carpenter, Black Smith etc) should not do any work for the kallars and koravars. 3) That services of kallars as kavalgars should be dispensed with. 4) That if theft be committed they must blow a horn and search for the stolen property and if the property be not found the man whose property was stolen must be paid the value of the property stolen out of the common fund to which all the villagers contribute for the purpose.26 Such meetings were also held at Thumbachiapalayam Ettappanaickenpatti attended by thousands of people. and In the meeting at Ettappanaickenpatti a decision was taken to ask the Kallars and Kuravars to quit their villages. Following this an order was issued by the Inspector that if the villagers use force or violence against Kallars and Kuravars to make them quit their villages other inhabitants would be charged for rioting.27 P.Venkateshwara Iyer, taluk Magistrate of Dindugal, as per the direction given by the Joint Magistrate of Madurai submitted a report containing a long list of villages in Dindugal, Nilakottai and Vedasandur such Magistrate divisions where the anti-kaval movement had already gained foothold, and where the 26 Extract from the Vedasandur Inspector’s Diary for 15-06-1896 in MCR Vol.90, MDA. 27 Ibid. Head Constable No.438, Meenakshi Sundarampillai and 2nd Class Constable No.623 Venkatram Naidu have attended and observed these meetings. 153 movement was yet to take proper shape. The list make it clear in a majority of the villages the movement had already gained ascendency.28 From the Dindugal and Vedasandur area the movement very quickly spread into the Palani region. As per the report submitted by Magistrate of Palani, it is clear that in many villages meetings were held and similar decisions were taken against the Kallars.29 Similar meetings of the village assemblies were also convened in the Chinnamanore and Bodinayakanpatti areas of Periyakulam division.30 In all the meetings of the village assemblies discussed above, there was much uniformity in the decisions taken. 1) All the inhabitants should stop all kind of social intercourses with the Kallars and have to settle all financial transactions with Kallars within a week’s time. 2) All the farmers should dismiss their Kallar Kavalkarars. 3) The village Assemblies will look after the Kaval responsibilities by appointing their own men to watch their villages instead of Kallars.31 28 P.Venkateshwara Iyer to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 30 May 1896, MCR, Vol.No.90, MDA. 29 J.Ganapathy to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 31 May 1896, MCR, Vol.90, MDA. 30 Extract from the Chinnamanore division Inspector’s (Sankaralingam Pillai) diary for 22 June 1896 and Extract from Madurai Taluk Inspector (Bangaru Naidu) for 25 June 1896, in MCR 90, MDA. This kind of meetings of the village assemblies were also convened in Thangachiyanpatti, Toppampatti, Appayampatti, Kallimandayam and Viralipatti. 31 Nilakottai Sub Magistrate to Madurai Sub Collector, MCR.90, MDA; Since the anti-kaval ryots mobilized funds the anti-kaval riot was popularly known as Pandu Kalakam (Fund riot). 154 4) For the purpose each household has to supply one able-bodied person for watch duty. One fourth of the persons thus selected to take up the duty on the village paths. 5) The guards should blow a horn to summon others for pursuit in case a theft was discovered. 6) For the purpose of compensating those who lost their houses and straw ricks to arson, a common fund to be created and every ryot to contribute towards it. In many villages, the decisions taken at the village assemblies were strictly implemented. As far as the fund was concerned each ryot contributed 12 annas per plough and poor people paid 6 annas. A treasurer was appointed for collection and maintaining accounts. The group functioning under Ammaiappakon had collected altogether a fund of Rs.250/- by the end of May 1896.32 By the middle of 1896 anti-kaval movement was reigning supreme in the western part of Madurai district. Kallar Kavalkaras were dismissed and the ryots appointed their own men to watch the villages. In all the villages, village servants like barbers, cobblers, washermen and artisans like carpenters and blacksmiths were asked by the Principal ryots not to render their services to the Kallars. Village shopkeepers were asked not to sell anything to the Kallars. In some villages Kallars were not even permitted to fetch water from common wells.33 Further the Kallars were forced to quit some villages. The report submitted by 32 Venkateshwara Iyer to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 30 May 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 33 Petition submitted by Kallars (in Tamil), MCR 90, MDA. 155 Rajagopal Chetti, Sub Magistrate of Vedasandur, explains the above in the following words: …Information received from reliable sources confirmed the rumours to certain extent. It was true that in some villages the village artisans and servants such as carpenters, blacksmith, washerman, barber and chuckler were prohibited from working for the kallars. The kallars had been simply boycotted.… Thus there was no doubt that the villagers did boycott the kallars.34 P.Venkateshwara Iyer, Taluk Magistrate in his report to the District Joint Magistrate had stated that: In the villages of Ambathurai and Keelacottai the village artisans do not work for kallars and that this is a fact. In most of the villages when the movement has been introduced the village artisans refuse to work for the kallar.35 Regarding the boycott of village artisans and servants against the Kallars the observation made by P.Venkateshwara Iyer, Sub Magistrate, Vattalagundu is worth quoting. It reflects the situation prevailing in the villages where the antikaval movement was strong. 34 A.Rajagopal Chetti to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 23 May 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 35 P.Venkateshwara Iyer to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, June 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 156 I proceeded to Kannivadi on the following day made local enquiry and found that the village artisans refuse to work for kallars. This is the case in all the villages to which the movement has extended. I asked one of the village artisans whether they refuse to work for the kallars. They admitted the fact and explained that they are unwilling to work for them in as much as they had proved treacherous, that their employment as kavalgars is productive of great hardship and inconvenience and that they do not pay them properly for their services like other ryots do.36 When the anti-kaval movement picked up, besides the Kallar Kavalkarars, Kallar farmers and rich peasants were also targeted. Apart from that, Kallar belonging to other subsects were also at the receiving end. As per the report submitted by Thasildar of Palani, there were about 141 Kallar men as inhabitants in 47 villages of the taluk. Fifty of them were land owners paying annual revenue ranging from Rs.2 to Rs.42 to the government. Apart from being tax paying farmers majority of them were functioning as Kavalkarars too. With the spread of the anti-kaval movement in the Palani region 29 Kallar families had to leave the villages and 16 of them sold their landed properties.37 The boycott of Kallar cut across various Kallar subcastes. Veerappan Servai of Markampatti who claimed to be a big pattadar (land holder) was not a 36 P.Venkateshwara Iyer to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 18 June 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 37 Palani Thasildar to Madurai Sub Collector, 27 June 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 157 Piramalai Kallar. He belonged to Veenangalainadu Kallar sub-caste of Pudukottai region. His family had migrated from Pudukkottai state to this village in a time of famine. Veenangalainadu Kallars did not intermarry with Piramalai Kallars or Melur Kallars. As he was not a Piramalai Kallar he approached the leaders of anti-kaval movement of Markampatti and Ammaippakon of Usilampatti and requested them to include himself as a member in the anti-kaval village assembly. But it was refused. The anti-Kaval ryots were not ready to make any distinction between a Piramalai Kallar and Kallar belonging to other sub-castes.38 The ryots of anti-kaval association were never ready to accept a Kallar, whether a Piramalai Kallar or a Kallar of other sub-castes, as an agriculturist or settled peasant. On the other hand many Kallar Kavalkarars considered their Kaval work as a honorable occupation of governance and pursuing farm work as below their dignity. When the Kavalkarar of Kutchenur was advised by a Magistrate in Cumbum Valley he refused by saying “How can I take to plough having done Circar (government) work so long?39 In a few cases donkeys were driven into the homes of the Kallars forcing them to vacate the villages. Sheep were also driven into their homes and charges of cattle theft were framed against them. Men belonging to lower caste 38 P.Venkateshwara Iyer to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 11 June 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 39 Aiyasami Sastri to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 6 June 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 158 like Paraiyars and Chakkiliyars were sent by the village assemblies to warn the Kallar families.40 Driving donkeys into the homes of Kallars and sending Parayars and Chakkiliyars to warn the Kallars was a way of humiliating them. Usually in the villages of Tamilnadu both the Parayars and Chukkiliars were used by the higher caste people as messengers to pass on the message of death of higher caste people to their relatives in the surrounding villages. So the unusual arrival of a Parayar or Chakkiliar symbolizes an unfortunate incident. This was more or less the same with donkeys. In the Tamil tradition, whenever a king was defeated his palace will be demolished by the enemy forces and ploughed with donkeys. There is one proverb in Tamil ‘Kaluthai Ketta Kuttisevaru’ which means that if you are in search of a donkey go near any demolished structure, it will be there. So donkey symbolizes destruction and humiliation. Though there were many cases of looting of Kallar houses by the members of the village assemblies with the connivance of the village magistrate and local police, the case handled and the observation made by A.Krishnasamy Iyer, a taluk Magistrate is worth mentioning here because it exposes the real situation. One Maya Thevan of Erumalainayakkanpatti has sent a telegram to the Secretary to the Governor at Madras, reporting that thousands of people of 40 Muthusamy Iyer, 28 May 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 159 Devandanapatti led by Village Munsiffs of ten villages had plundered ten Kallar houses with the connivance of the local police. When a compliant was made the local magistrate and joint magistrate were not ready to take any action.41 Regarding this incident Krishnasamy Iyer made enquiries at Erumalainayakkanpatti and in the adjoining hamlets and reported his findings in the following words. I think that Mayathevan’s allegation against the police is not incorrect, for the Station House Officer, Devadanapatti tells me that there was no looting. I have no doubt that looting was committed and I think that a special police Inspector should be sent to investigations.42 …I learned at night that the kallars of Erumalainayakkanpatti, Silvarpatti and Kariappanpatti had quitted their villages as their houses were looted by the villagers of Devadanapatti. From my local enquiries I find that looting was actually committed on 27th instant… The village munsiff of Silvarpatti where the looting was committed earlier on a large scale totally denies the occurrence. I have no doubt that his statement is utterly false and that he has failed in his duty by not reporting the occurrence…. 41 Telegram given by Maya Thevan to the Secretary, Governor in Council, 27 May 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 42 A.Krishnasamy Iyer to Joint Magistrate of Madurai, 20 May 896, MCR 90, MDA. 160 I do not at all believe their story. I made enquiries of using very young children of different castes and they tell me that looting actually took place on the 27th.43 In response to the anti-kaval movement of the village assemblies the Piramalai Kallar Kavalkarars and inhabitants, inspite of the fact that a considerable number of them started migrating towards their native places like Usilampatti and Tirumangalam region, started consolidating and prepared themselves to face the ordeal. Meetings were held in Kallar dominated villages to decide the measures to be adopted against the anti-kaval movement. In these meetings funds were also mobilized. The following observation made by Vaithiyalingam Pillai, Inspector of Police of Periyakulam division is worth quoting here. 4th grade Head Constable No.818 Shanmugam Pillai of Devadanapatti station in his report of 24th instant reports that the kallars of several villages adjoining Devadanapatti convened a meeting in Kathirappanpatti village on 24th headed by Mayathevan of Erumalainaikkanpatti, that he and his station police with village magistrate of Devadanpatti went there and found that 100 or 150 kallars had collected there and were discussing and that when questioned by him, they stated that because the villagers dismissed them from their kaval works they are going to raise a subscription to 43 Ibid. 161 appeal to government and that the subscriptions were actually collected there. The station house officer reports that a similar meeting was held on 22nd instant and that a third meeting is going to be held on 29th instant.44 A similar meeting was also convened in Pathupatti near Cumbum by the Kallars “to make arrangements for the collection of one Rupee per Kallar household and that this collection is intended for making a complaint to the High Court against the vigilance committees”.45 The Kallars of Kulayanur, Uppukottai and Upparpatti and adjoining villages of Uttamapalayam had collected about Rs.190/- for the same purpose.46 Another interesting development took place in Pappapatti village near Kannivadi. About 1200 Kallars of Pappapatti village and the neighbouring villages had marched towards Kannivadi in order to meet the Zamindar of Kannivadi with a copper plate grant issued several years before by the then Zamindar of Kannivadi bestowing Kaval rights to the Papapatti Kallars over the neighbouring villages. As the villagers had dispensed with the services of the Kallar as Kavalkarars, the Kallars of Papapatti decided to re-establish their Kaval rights with the help of the Zamindar of Kannivadi. As a police force had gone before the arrival of the Kavalkarars for watching them the Zamindar of Kannivadi 44 Extract from diary of Inspector of Police, Periyakulam, 25 May 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 45 Extract from the diary of Sankaralingam Pillai, Inspector of Police of Chinnamanoor, 4 June 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 46 Ayyasami Sastri to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 13 June 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 162 warned the Kallars to keep themselves aloof and directed them to go back to their villages. The Kallars accordingly returned to their villages without causing any disturbance at Kannivadi.47 In the following days too the Kannivadi Zamindar purposely avoided of meeting the Pappapatti Kallars fearing the displeasure of the administration. There was also a rumour regarding an even more alarming proposal of the Kallars of Pappapatti. Muthusamy Iyer 2nd class Magistrate of Usilampatti wrote: …I learn that the kallar in Pappapatti quarter are said to have considered the question of rooting out other caste people from this kallar Nadu, but dropped it for the present seeing that it presented a difficulty in case they carried their objects.48 By evicting the non-kallars from the villages, the Kallars were trying to pay the anti-kaval assemblies in their own coin. However the practical difficulties prompted them to drop the idea because Nadars were needed to provision the bazaar, Nattukottai Chettiyars to lend money and village servants like carpenter and blacksmith to make ploughs, leather menders, barbers, washermen and so on.49 47 Inspector of Police, Usilampatti to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 27 May 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 48 Muthusamy Iyer to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 30 May, 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 49 Ibid. 163 In the meantime in the Kallar dominated villages, meetings of the Kallar Kavalkarars and rich farmers were organized on the same lines as anti-kaval assemblies of the non-Kallar ryots. Funds were raised to meet out the legal expenses. Telegrams were sent and a number of petitions were submitted to the officials, regarding their sufferings at the hands of anti-kaval assemblies. Some powerful, influential and rich Kallar landlords started taking active participation in organizing their caste men.50 However, since the district administration and the taluk and village level officials were sympathetic towards the anti-kaval movement, the anti-kaval ryots had an upper hand. Regarding the impact of the anti-kaval movement, Rajagopal submagistrate of Vadasandur recorded as follows: The cessation of theft is simply miraculous. A man may in the dead of night go now from one part of the division to another with valuable properties in his possessions without the least fear of encountering any thief. The shepherds sleep soundly in their sheep folds, cowherds don’t care to go to their cattle folds in the nights. Nobody goes and watches his crop during nights. Gardeners leave their leather bucket and other implements in the garden itself with perfect surety to find them safe next morning. Ryots do no more have sleepless anxieties during nights.51 50 Extract from the Diary of Sangaralingam Pillai, Inspector of Police, 22 June, 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 51 Rajagopal to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 23 May, 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 164 Yet another important and interesting observation regarding the impact of the anti-kaval movements was recorded by Vythilingam Pillai, Inspector of Police of Vedasandur: Crimes have considerably diminished in my division. Since the organization of the anti-kallar movements cattle and sheepyards are left unwatched during rights. Sale of goats skins at the several weekly markets in this division also considerably diminished as the kallars cannot steal goats. Villagers state that they are saved from all losses by them since their organization.52 During the early stage of anti-kaval movement the district administration was more than sympathetic towards it. Considering the difficulties, it had with disciplining the Kavalkarars, it viewed the movement as the outcome of a long felt resentment of the ryots and as a collective security mechanism. At the taluk and village level the police personnel and magistrates openly supported the cause of the ryots. It intervened in this affair only to the extent of confining the movement within the bounds of existing law and order. By June 1896, however, the Sub Collector of Madurai issued a notice prohibiting the meetings of the village assemblies, and circulars were issued specifying their approach towards the movement: 52 Extract from the Diary of Vythilingam Pillai, Inspector of Police, Vedasandur, 5 June 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 165 The people are within their rights in dispensing with the services of kallars in the detection of crime and refraining from paying them kaval fees. The Sub-Magistrate of course will not encourage them in doing so, he will simply remain neutral, but prevent them going further.53 However, when complaints regarding the forceful boycott and evacuation of Kallars from villages and plundering of their houses mounted, the colonial administration was compelled to intervene. The district administration issued printed notices both in Tamil and English. The notices prohibited the meetings of the village assemblies and blowing of horns. They advised both the Kallars and the ryots not to take law and order in to their hands and warned them of the deployment of punitive police force in case of violation. Village magistrates were ordered to exhibit the notices in the village choultries, and make the people know the content by the beating of tom tom.54 When the colonial government tried its level best to keep the movement within the bounds of law and order and trying to show itself to be neutral, the antikaval assemblies encouraged by their success in evacuating the Kallar population began to overstep its limits. Consequently violent incidents occurred leading to the loss of lives and properties. The fatal riot at Nellore and Muthanampatty were the two important cases in point. 53 Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, to Aiyasamy Sastri, 2 June 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 54 Notice issued by Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai District, MCR Vol.90, MDA. Appendix VIII for the various notices. See 166 Nellore was a small hamlet of Aiyampalayam village situated near the Palani Hills exclusively inhabited by Kallars. A Kallar of Nellore had been caught red-handed while stealing a few bullocks from Periyur village in the lower Palani Hills. A large number of hill ryots came down to the plains chasing the robber. On their way they blew the horns inviting the people of other villages. Consequently the ryots from Periyur were joined by the ryots of Sithayankottai, Sithurevu, Aiyampalayam and other villages, reached Nellore by the evening of 8th June 1896.55 By the morning of 9th June 1896 Nellore was surrounded by a crowd of several thousand people with arms and they demanded the surrender of the stolen bullocks by the Kallars of Nellore. The village Munsiff of Aiyampalayam and the station house officer of the same place with two constables went to Nellore to prevent the breach of peace but they were utterly powerless to prevent what happened.56 Soon an armed clash broke out in which four lives were lost and eight houses were burnt down.57 Those who got killed were Ravi Nayak of Sithurevu, Pallamayan of Aiyampalayam on the side of ryots and Periya Karuppa Thevar and Bhagava Thevan of Nellore. The ryots and the Kallars blamed each other for what happened. However the Joint Magistrate stated that, 55 Communication from the acting Joint Magistrate of Madurai to the District Magistrate of Madura in G.O.No.1067, Judicial, 25 June 1896. 56 Ibid. 57 Telegram given by Narasaiah, 2nd Class Magistrate to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 9 May 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 167 Whoever actually began the fighting there is no doubt that the anti kallars were the original aggressors and that the riot was provoked by their unlawful assembly… As far as I can judge there does not seem to have been any provoked action on the part of the people of the plains. The Periyur people seem to have been the instigators.58 Following this incident many were arrested and cases were filed against both the Kallars and the members of the anti-kaval movement. Soon the incident earned state level notice. Newspapers particularly The Hindu started publishing letters and articles criticizing the colonial state for its inability to maintain law and order.59 In the meantime, in the rural regions of Madurai district, there were wild rumours regarding the plans of Kallar retaliation. Moreover the village assemblies arrogate more power to themselves and started functioning independently setting aside the warnings of the administration. Cattles impounded by government servants on the charge of grazing on the cut stalks of government avenue trees were rescued by men of the village assemblies.60 It was reported that the village assemblies assumed the power of civil and criminal courts in their areas, passing judgments over disputes and took violent efforts to drive the Kallars.61 58 G.O.No.1067, Judicial, 25 June 1896. 59 The Hindu 8 May 1896 and 13 June 1896 cited in Anand Sankar Pandian “Landscapes of Redemption: Cultivating Heart and Soil in South India” unpublished Ph.D thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 2005. 60 Rajagopal to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 28 May 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 61 Palani Thasildar to Batten, Joint Magistrate, Madurai, 27 June 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 168 On one occasion the police registered a case of cattle theft against some leading men of the anti-kaval movement. This invited a sharp reaction from the people of Thangachiyammapatti. In the presence of some police constables, the following conservation took place. They will see how the police men will do their work at this Station House that there are only 4 or 5 police men and even if they are killed who will give evidence to prove the offense, that they must prevent the bazaar men from selling things to police men and also prevent barbers and dhobis from rendering any service to them in the same way as they have done in case of kallars. If constables who go on beat singly be killed, who will give evidence. If the police arrest defendants in cattle dacoity case 5/20 they will blow horn to assemble a large crowd of villagers and punish the policeman. They talked about many other things.62 When the news about the violent incident at Nellore was still lingering in the air another incident rocked the village of Muthanampatti on 18 September 1896 resulted in the death of three anti-kaval Goundar ryots.63 It seems that Thoratty Mayandi, an important leader of Kallar, with other two Kallars of Muthanapatti set fire to the house of Veera Goundar and 12 other houses in the 62 Report of Vythilingam Pillai, Inspector of Police, Vedasandur, 17 August 1896, MCR 90, MDA. 63 Petition submitted by some ryots of Dindugal Taluk to Sir Arthur Elibank, Havelock Governor in Council, Madras in G.O.No.1496, Judicial, 14 October 1897. 169 adjacent villages by 2 pm on 17 September 1896. However they were chased away by the ryots and Muthanampatti village was surrounded by the anti-kaval ryots by the morning of 18th September 1896. In the ensuing clash one Pommalu Goundar was killed on the spot and two others, Thiruma Goundar and Muthu Goundar, succumbed to injuries. Both the Kallar and the anti-kaval leaders accused each other for causing the riots.64 It was at this juncture that the government began to fear that the situation was rapidly slipping out of its control and felt that its authority was being challenged by the anti-kaval village assemblies which were functioning as an autonomous authority away from the arms of the colonial government. It was true that the colonial government needed the support of the agrarian elite as political allies, but at the same time it had to contain them from threatening and challenging the authority of the state. Consequently drastic steps were taken by the government. About fifty seven men who were considered to be leaders of the anti-kaval movement including Ammaiappakon were arrested, tried and punished by the end of November 1896. With the arrest of the ring leaders the movement gradually faded away. Within a few years the Kallars once again established their Kaval control over all the villages which were previously under their sway but less vibrant than earlier. The confrontation between the Kallars and the anti-kaval village assemblies was not merely a caste conflict. 64 Ibid. It was a question related to 170 occupational change, a struggle between settled or sedentary communities with that of a community which was struggling to accommodate itself with the changing situation, whose major earlier occupations were either serving in the army of local Rajas and Palayakarars or serving as Kavalkarars. Here the mindset of both the Kallars and other communities involved in the anti-kaval movement has to be taken into account. The Kallar Kavalkarars felt that tilling the soil to be below their dignity. To them to be a Kavalkarar meant saviour of the people and their belongings, so it was considered by them a more prestigious and honourable occupation. They had internalized an image about themselves, an image of a soldier carrying arms and fighting against the enemy troops in the battle field, or a Kavalkarar safeguarding the people and their belongings in the odd hours after sunset, an image which was continuously reinforced and strengthened not only by oral tradition and household stories but also by colonial ethnographers and administrators as well. When their occupational avenues were closed once far all by the colonial administration they tried their level best to retain their past position but failed. Finally they turned to the world of crime. On the other hand the ryots at large never accepted the Kallars as pure cultivators, because even many landholding Kallars worked also as Kavalkarars. They considered the Kallars to have been inborn with thieving propensities.65 65 Palani Thasildar to Madurai Sub Collector, 27 June 1896, MCR 90. 171 However, after the collapse of the anti-kaval movement, the Kallars were successful in re-establishing their Kaval control over the western and northern parts of Madurai district. The colonial state failed to strengthen its law and order machinery even during the absence of the Kallar Kavalkarars. In the meantime in other parts of Madurai district the Kavalkarars continued to be powerful. As late as 1920, a group of Naicker cultivators explained to a native officer the reasons for their making a Kaval arrangement with the Kallar Kavalkarars of a village near Usilampatti in the following terms – “the British Raj was unable to suppress the Kallar Raj or protect them from the Kallars so they had been forced to submit to Kallar Raj”.66 Anti-Kaval Movement in Tirunelveli District Following the anti-kaval movement in the Western parts of Madurai district in 1896 and the Sivakasi riots in 1899 the colonial administration had to face further problems in the southern region of Tirunelveli district in the form of antikaval movement and growing rate of crimes committed, particularly by the members of Maravar community. These Maravars took an active part in the sack of Sivakasi in 1899 and in the subsequent attacks of Nadar villages.67 In consequence of these developments the police administration came down heavily on the Maravar population and successfully restored peace. Hundreds of 66 Statement of K.Srinivasagachari, 7 April 1920, G.O.No.1315 Home (Judicial), 26 May 1920. 67 M.Hammik, Special Commissioner in Madurai and TIrunelveli to Chief Secretary to the Government, 15 August 1899 in G.O.Nos.2017, 2018, 12 December 1899. 172 Maravars were arrested, tried and convicted. However the peace restored was temporary. Within a year, the crime rates in the district increased when compared with previous years. Every attempt of the colonial state to minimize the crime rate and to bring the Maravar community and Maravar Kavalkarars under its control ended in failure. Every British official who served in the Tirunelveli district in his reports made some remark or the other about the bitter experience they had undergone with the Maravars and Maravar Kavalkarars of southern Tirunelveli. For a better understanding of this problem it is imperative to understand the social setting of the Maravar community, prior to the anti-kaval movements. The observation of Frederick S.Mullaly of Madras Police and Acting Assistant to the Governor of Madras is pertinent in this regard. The Maravas of present time ofcourse retain a shadow of power which their ancestors wielded under the poligors who commenced the kaval system. Still the marava of today as a member of a caste which is more numerous and influential as a man of superior physique and bold, independent sprit thief and robber, village policeman and detective combined is an immense power in the land.68 Regarding the Maravars associated with the Kaval system Mullaly had more to say. 68 Frederick S.Mullaly, Notes on Criminal Tribes of the Madras Presidency, Government Press, Madras, 1892, p.112. 173 The maravars furnish nearly the whole of the village police (kavalgars watchmen) and are at the same time the principle burglers, robbers and thieves of Tinneveli district. Very often the thief and watchman are one and the same individual. Except on principle of setting a thief against a thief this appears an anamolous arrangement but it is by no means confined to Tinnevelly.69 It is thus estimated that a very large proportion of the Marava population is intimately associated with the kaval system in the Tinnevelly district and as these three classes of village watchmen are generally more or less related or connected with each other. In Tinnevelly, the kudi kavalgars are in many cases either directly or indirectly the criminals of the district and the difficulty in detecting crime committed by them is greatly enhanced owing to the widespread relationship between them and taliyaris and kavilgars who except spite or enimity exist never incriminate one another.70 The understanding of Stevenson, Deputy Inspector General of Police, regarding the Maravar Kudikaval system of Tirunelveli will enrich further our understanding of the problem. In his communication to the Inspector General of Police, he made the following remarks: 69 Ibid. 70 Ibid., p.113, 114. 174 The villages in Tinnevelly, which is a very litigious district, are full of factions; and each faction often employs its own kavalgars in order to annoy the other party; these kavalgars who, although they appear outwardly to be enemies, are really united, the consequence being greater ill-feeling between the two factions the greater the profit of the kudi kavalkars and an increase of crime in that locality. There are in this district about 150,000 maravars from whom, some 10,000 kudi kavalkars are drawn of whom about 30 percent from time to time have been in jail, and of this number (10,000) there are about 1500 Government taliaries, besides several vettians.71 From the above one could understand the social position of the Maravar population. It is also clear that most of the crimes in the Tirunelveli were committed by the members of Maravar community and that too with the connivance of the Maravar Kavalkarars. From the British official point of view there was no line which divided the crimes committed by the Maravars and that of the Maravar Kavalkarar. They are closely interlocked with each other. As stated earlier it was true that following the Sivakasi riots, due to the stern actions taken by the government, peace was restored in the district which prompted the Inspector General of Police to make a statement with confidence that “The marked improvement in Tinneveli is due in the main to the conviction of 71 Stevenson to the Inspector General in G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897, pp.36, 37. 175 a number of anti-Shanar (Nadar) cases pending from the previous year”.72 However the peace restored was short lived. After a brief interval the number of crimes increased to unmanageable limits. A good number of Maravars who participated in the Sivakasi riots, against whom warrants were issued, never returned to their villages. They were freely roaming in the countryside, indulging in highway robbery and dacoity. The family members of those Maravars who were convicted, when they could not run their families without their bread winners, in order to make ends meet, turned towards house breaking and petty theft. Anticipating this kind of development many hundreds of warrants were withdrawn by the administration.73 Despite of the best efforts taken by the police administration, there was an increase in criminal occurrences. The police machinery was geared up to conduct a thorough investigation regarding the actual reason for the continued presence of turbulent situation in Tirunelveli and to evolve strategies to contain them. Officials ranking from the Inspector General of Police down to the local Inspectors were involved in this task and an intensive study coupled with field study was carried out. The study revealed, apart from the general character of the Maravar community and the Kaval system, the inefficiency of the police machinery. Some of the observations are furnished below. Given the gravity of 72 Administrative Report of the Madras Police of the Madras Presidency, 1900, p.9. 73 J.P.Bedford District Magistrate, Tinnevelly to the Chief Secretary, 9 October 1900 in G.O.Nos.1578, 1579, 31 Oct.1900. 176 the situation, H.A.Stuart, Inspector General of Police, made a tour in the Tirunelveli district to have a sense of the ground reality. The first thing that attracted my attention was the failure of the police to keep control over the registered known depredators. In one notorious village Marugalkuruchi (abode of the desa kaval chief of Arupangunadu), consisting of about 100 marava houses there are not less than 65 known depredators. I examined the return for two days selected at random the 2nd and 28th May; on the earlier date I found that out of the total of 65 not less than 45 were absent from the village and their whereabouts was not known to the police…. The next failure in the police administration of Tinnevelly that attracted my notice was the large number of persons charged with dacoity and robbery who were evading arrest… The divisional officers and taliaries must be asked to impress on the village magistrates and police that it is their duty to afford prompt information of the movements of these fugitives from justice. They have certainly failed to do so in the past and I find it is not from them but to private informers that the police look for assistance. This want of cooperation between the regular and village police is a very grave evil.74 74 “Note on the State of Crime in Tinnevelly”, Report submitted by H.A.Stuart to the Government (Confidential), August 1900, pp.1-3. 177 Consequently the Inspector General of Police submitted a proposal to the government requesting sixty two additional police personnel to be posted in the crime prone localities of Tirunelveli district. His proposal was accepted, but only for duration of a year.75 J.P.Bedford, Acting District Magistrate of Tirunelveli in his report to the Inspector General of Police regarding the causes for the problems prevailing in the district exposed how far the police machinery depended on or feared the Kavalkarars. Nearly all the men are I believe, at present recruited from the District and presumably hope on retirement to settle down here. It is notorious that almost every inhabitant of the District pays the maravas a tax known as kudi kaval, by which he insures (or tries to ensure) himself against robbery and violence. Clearly therefore the bulk of police force look forward to paying the same tax on retirement. The attitude of mind which this system causes in the minds of the ryot is admittedly one of the chief stumbling blocks in the way of deduction, but I would lay stress on, is the fact that the local police, who start as ryots and end as ryots cannot be expected as a class to divest themselves to any appreciable extent from maravar influences. Three out of every four Divisional Officers lay stress on the fact that the police as a whole are widely 75 G.O.No.1459, Judicial, 6 October 1900. 178 supposed to be in league with criminal classes… The marava organization is unshaken; and this organization can only be overthrown by an organization entirely independent of it.76 While the colonial state was pondering over the ways and means to tackle the extraordinary law and order problems, in the villages of Srivaikuntam and Nazareth in the Tirunelveli district attempts were made by local ryots to throw off the yoke of the Maravar Kavalkarars. But they were not as violent as that of antikaval riots of Madurai district in 1896. Srivaikuntam is a taluk headquarters situated on the northern bank of Tamiraparani river well known for its fertile lands watered by a small dam constructed across the Tamiraparani river. The leading inhabitants of Srivaikuntam, in the middle of 1900, sternly refused to pay the usual Kaval fee to the local Maravar Kavalkarars. The anti-kaval riots of the ryots of Madurai District and the repressive measures undertaken by the government in the aftermath of Sivakasi riot could have served as contributory factors for this development. But in course of time, the ryots of the Kottai Pillaimar77 caste complicated the issue by trying to make a compromise with the Maravar Kavalkarars. This was averted by the timely intervention of the Joint Magistrate Vibert and Assistant Superintendent of Police, Srinivasagachari.78 On the other 76 Bedford to Stuart, 9 September 1900, G.O.No.1527 Judicial (Confidential), 17 October 1900. 77 Kottai Pillaimar is a sub sect within the Vellalar Community. It is found only in Srivaikuntam. Kottai means fort. This community constructed a fort at Srivaikuntam and living within the fort. Hence they were known as Kottai Pillaimars. 78 Bedford to Chief Secretary to the Government, 9 October 1900 in G.O.Nos.1578, 1579, 31 October 1900. 179 hand the Maravar Kavalkarars tried their level best to break the solidarity of the ryots but failed. Bedford, the District Magistrate, was of the opinion that “The Srivaikuntam movement seems to be a genuine attempt on the part of the leading inhabitants of the union to throw off the Kaval yoke. The movement will need careful watching”.79 However tension continued to prevail for a few more years with sporadic incidents of destruction of crop committed by the Maravar Kavalkarars as retaliatory measures against anti-kaval movement. Following Srivaikuntam the anti-kaval moment picked up in the town of Nazareth and adjoining villages. This movement was Rev. Margoschis of the Church Mission Society of Nazareth. lead by Like every inhabitant of that region he was also paying the Kaval fee regularly. But on one occasion two servants of Church Mission Society were robbed near Nazareth of Rs.2000 sent by the mission authorities at night. Fr.Margoschis tried to retrieve the money for the Church Mission Society through his Kavalkarars.80 When there was no proper response from the Kavalkarars he mobilized the inhabitants of Nazareth and four other neighbouring villages and stopped the payment of Kaval fee, and made an appeal to the Collector: I have the honour to inform you that in consequences of the increasing lawlessness of the maravas of Vellarikavoorani, the Chief men of Nazareth and four adjacent gramams [villages] have 79 Ibid. 80 Bedford to the Chief Secretary, 9 October 1900, in G.O.Nos.1578, 1579, Judicial, 31 October 1900, p.5. 180 recently arranged for the public safety and protection of the inhabitants of these five combined gramams and the kudikaval of the maravars has been stopped. In consequence of these new arrangements the maravar are causing a threatening attitude and from the last week stone throwing at nights has taken place at Nazareth, Valaiyadi and Pillaiyarmani, the agents being probably the disappointed Maravas. I suggest that the headmen of Vellarikavoorani Maravas viz. 1) Ponniah Thevar (Headman of all); 2) Sellaperumal Thevar, S/o Narayana Thevar; 3) Arunachala Thevar, S/o Udaiya Thevar; 4) Kathapillai Thevar; 5) Narayana Thevar (all of Vellarikavoorani) should at once be bound down to keep the peace and the sooner action is taken the less likelihood there is of a further more serious disturbances. …We are not panic stricken and protect ourselves but there may be some broken heads.81 To start with the police considered the case as false and deferred it. Later the five Maravar Kavalkarars of Vellarikavoorani, mentioned in the appeal of Margoschis, were arrested and a case was filed against them in the Joint Magistrate Court, Tirunelveli.82 It was at this juncture that a letter written by 81 Margoschis to Bedford, 3 July 1900, in G.O.No.1578, Judicial (Confidential) 31 October 1900. 82 Calendar Case No.21 of 1900, Joint Magistrate Court, Tirunelveli, 5 October 1900; in G.O.No.1578. 181 Rev Margoschis, entitled as “Lawlessness in Tinnevelly, Hindu women purchasing revolvers” appeared in the newspaper, Advocate of India dated Bombay on 1st September 1900. In this letter Margoschis criticized the deplorable condition of law and order situation in Tirunelveli district, detailed the illegal exploits of the Maravar Kavalkarars, inefficiency of the police and the helpless condition of the inhabitants at large.83 Consequently the condition prevailing in a district situated in the southern tip of British India attracted the wider attention and gained importance overnight. H.J.Macintosh, Deputy Secretary to the Government, Home Department (Police) in his communication to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Madras Presidency asked him to furnish a report on the allegation contained in the newspaper.84 With the publication of his letter Rev Margoschis too attained popularity which frightened the Maravar Kavalkarars of Vellarikavoorani. Afraid of the consequences they worked out a compromise with him and finally the stolen money was paid through a third person. Once his aim of recovering the money was achieved Rev Margoschis did not appear as a prosecution witness in the case, holding the position that he knew nothing about the five men. When he was subsequently appeared for the defence he deposed that they were men of generally good conduct to whom he 83 G.O. Judicial (Confidential) 31 October, 1900. 84 H.J.Margoschis to Chief Secretary of Government of Tamil Nadu, 25 September 1900 in G.O.Nos.1578, 1579, Judicial, 31 October 1900. 182 was paying Kaval fee for the past twenty four years. It is essential to record his words about the irony of the fact seen above that run as follows: I know the three accused Ponnaiah Thevan, Chellaperumal Thevan and Narayana Thevan. They have been kavalgars a long time for ever since I have been at Nazareth 24 years. Before the recent incidents complaints had been brought against them from time to time against Ponnaiah Thevan for instance. He was a kavalgar… He was I believe arrested once. against them. Personally I can say nothing I was interested in the kaval matter. I pay kudi kaval on my belongings. We paid to these men. Their character was fairly good…85 However those Maravar Kavalkarars were bound over on other evidences inspite of Rev Morgoschis’s favourable evidence. What prompted Rev Morgoschis who was instrumental in mobilising the leading inhabitants and stopping the payment of Kaval fee, to change his mind. Was he, as an ordinary inhabitant, satisfied with the recovery of the money dacoited? Or was he afraid of earning the enimity the Kavalkarars? Probably both. But Bedford the District Magistrate felt that Rev Margoschis had made the district administration to serve his own purpose.86 85 Calendar Case No.21, 5 October 1900, Joint Magistrate Court, Tirunelveli in G.O.No.1578 Judicial (Confidential), 31 October 1900. 86 G.O.Nos.1578, 1579, Judicial (Confidential), 31 October 1900. 183 In the meantime an anti-kaval movement broke-out in Ambasamudram, Kadayam and Cheranmahadevi regions of Tirunelveli district. Like Srivaikundam and Nazareth the ryots of these regions stopped payment of Kaval fee to their Maravar Kavalkarars.87 The weakness of the Maravars in the aftermath of Sivakasi riots, mainly due to the stern steps taken by the police administration, might have been instrumental in bringing these ryots together to free themselves from the Maravar Kaval yoke. In response to this open challenge the Maravar Kavalkarars started mobilizing with the objective of re-establishing their Kaval rights. Taking cognizance of the volatile situation prevailing almost throughout the district and to meet out any emergency the district administration chalked out an elaborate plan marking out sensitive centres which needed opening up of new police stations, villages which needed more patrolling, about the number of additional police force needed, the arms and ammunitions for the additional force and the expenditure to carry out the plan.88 In the list thus prepared, among the sensitive villages which had a track record of crimes, Marugalkuruchi situated near Nanguneri, the taluk headquarters occupied the top most place. About Marugalkuruchi the following statement was made by the Inspector General of Police. …every child in South Tinnevelly knows that it is Nanguneri which furnishes most criminals. Within a short distance of the head- 87 G.O.No.1252, Home (Confidential), 11 April 1941. 88 Additional Police Force in the Tinnevelly District, G.O.No.23, Judicial, 11 January 1901. 184 quarters of that taluk there is a group of villages known as Arupangunadu or the district of six shares, so called from the fee received by the maravars for the performance of kaval duties divided into six principal portions. The chief of these villages is Marukalkuruchi, and the most influential of the six headmen are two notorious residents of that village… by means of their kinship, control is exercised over a great part of South Tinnevelly… These men are not active criminals, but they are largely responsible for much of the crime of the district. Whenever a considerable dacoity is committed these two leaders received their share; whenever the unfortunate victim is determined to make the effort to recover his property it is to these men that he goes for assistance; and whenever a marava is in trouble it is to them that he turns for help in defence. They have, I am sorry to say, had the most intimate relation with the police.89 This statement shows the power enjoyed by the Maravar Kavalkarars of Arupangunadu region. Following Marukalkuruchi and other constituent villages of Arupangunadu, a few other villages such as Poolam, Munnirpallam, Taruvai, Karungulam and Pudugramam were identified as notorious villages having close ties with Arupangunadu. These villages are situated within the Tirunelveli taluk 89 H.A.Stuart, Inspector General of Police to Chief Secretary to Government in G.O.No.23, Judicial, 11 January, 1901, p.3. 185 to the west of Palayamkottai-Nanguneri Road.90 As the Maravars of these villages were blood relatives it was easy for them to move from one village to other after committing a crime evading the police. If necessary they could hide themselves in the Western Ghats by passing through Nambithalaivan Pattayam and Kalakad, both Maravar villages. The proposal of the Inspector General of Police for the establishment new police stations and enhancement of the police force was accepted by the government. Accordingly new police stations were established at Marukalkuruchi, Poolam and Munnirpallam each having a jurisdiction over a cluster of Maravar villages which need close surveillance. Additional police force was also sanctioned to man these stations and others for five years. As for the finance to maintain the additional force it was decided that the cost be defrayed by the inhabitants of the villages. To this effect a proclamation was made by the Chief Secretary to the government. Whereas from the conduct of the inhabitants of the areas described in the scheduled hereto attached it has been found expedient to increase the number of police stations in them, it is hereby notified under section 15 Act V of 1861 as amended by Act VIII of 1895, that for five years from the coming into force of this proclamation a police force in addition to the ordinary fixed complement quartered in the said areas shall be entertained in those areas, and that the 90 Ibid., pp.3 and 4. 186 cost of the force shall be defrayed by the inhabitants of those areas according to such apportionment as may be made by the Magistrate of the District.91 G.Stokes Chief Secretary Towards the closing months of 1900, anticipating the possibility of Maravar disturbances in Srivaikuntam and Cheranmahadevi regions coupled with the arising necessity of extra police patrols, sixty two additional police force was sanctioned by the government.92 The deployment of additional force to patrol the dacoity-prone highways produced good results. The number of highway crimes substantially decreased. The exception was Srivaikuntam. The Inspector General of police in his communication addressed to the Chief Secretary reported that, The result of the employment of these special men had been very satisfactory, as the crime on the high road has almost ceased… of this number 18 are required for patrols and the balance contains of 10 men sanctioned for the purpose of strengthening the Srivaikundam station where there is still some danger of disturbances owing to kaval disputes.93 91 Ibid., pp.5-6. 92 G.O.No.1459, Judicial, 6 October 1900. 93 G.O.No.1742, Judicial, 5 November 1901. 187 Following the deployment of special police force, it was true that, there was some improvement in law and order situation in Tirunelveli particularly in the southern parts of Tirunelveli. This improved situation coupled with anti-kaval movements in Srivaikuntam and Nazareth against Maravar Kavalkarars gave the colonial administration a breathing space and it started believing that the problem would be solved in one or two years. The Maravar Kavalkarars of Srivaikuntam, deprived of their income through Kaval because of the efforts of the ryots, and the Government were frantically trying to reestablish their Kaval rights again by whatever means possible. The Inspector General of Police in his letters to the Chief Secretary to the Government seeking permission for the retention of the special force deployed in Tirunelveli for 1904 and 1905 highlighted the Kaval problem as the major reason for the retention of the special force. In his communication he recorded that: The kaval dispute in Srivaikundam is still acute. The Kottai Vellalas are reported to be intriguing again with the maravars with the object of giving them back the kaval. The disturbed state of villages round Srivaikundam renders strong patrols very necessary.94 Kaval disputes are still rife and crime very heavy, in consequence constant vigilance should therefore be maintained to prevent the 94 G.O.No.1456, Judicial, 1 October 1903; Since the Kottai Vellalars are numerically very week they might have been pressurized by the Maravars. 188 kavalgars from terrorizing the villagers in the attempt to regain the kaval.95 For the colonial state the years that followed the Sivakasi riots were quite challenging. Despite the special police force deployed in Tirunelveli district and the ameliorative measures undertaken to reduce the inefficiency of the police administration, the number of crimes committed by the Maravars once again reached new heights. The Nadar-Maravar conflict was still simmering and posed a potential danger to the uneasy calm that prevailed over the southern districts of the Presidency after 1899. The Piramalai Kallars were successful in reestablishing their Kaval control again over the villages in the northern and western regions of Madurai district, and in that process a dacoity and murder was committed by the Kallars in the Utthamapalayam division of Madurai district.96 In Tirunelveli too the Maravar Kavalkarars were straining every nerve to assert their Kaval power again. Besides these problems from outside, the police administration had a few potential problems of its own. The gap between the regular police and the village police proved to be ever-widening. For collecting information quite often the police depended on the Kavalkarars, which naturally resulted in corruption. Moreover the taluk level police official and the village magistrates were biased and approached the problem with a partisan attitude. Fear was also a factor. 95 G.O.No.1547, Judicial, 13 October 1904. 96 Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1906, p.9. 189 They had intimate connection with the criminal gangs. If at all any special police force or a reserve party entered a village in search of a culprit, setting aside the local police, they were confronted with mob resistance.97 Yet another important and developing factor which added a new dimension to the existing problems and tended to consume the energy and time of the police was the programmes of the nationalists against British imperialism. With the partition of Bengal in 1905 there emerged a group within the Congress known as the ‘extremist section’ which advocated Swadeshi movement in response to the partition of Bengal. V.O.Chidambaram Pillai, Subramania Siva and Subramania Bharathi, the most important leaders of the Congress in Tamilnadu, particularly of the extremist faction, faithfully implemented all the programmes of the Congress. During the Swadeshi movement, under their leadership Tirunelveli and Thoothukudi became hot-beds of anti-British agitational politics. During the course of the anti-British programmes of the Congress most of the cities and towns of Tamilnadu turned to be the centres of active anti-British programmes. This period also witnessed the emergence of militant and revolutionary nationalist who believed in armed rebellion and attack over individual British officials. Neelakanda Brahmachari a revolutionary nationalist of Tamilnadu came to Nanguneri area in Tirunelveli district with the intention of getting help from the Maravar leaders of Poolam and Marugalkuruchi for recruiting Maravar youth for forming a revolutionary army. 97 Ibid., 1904, pp.8-9. Poolam 190 Periyasamy Thevar whom he wanted to meet was in the police custody at Poolam police station. Then he approached Pitchandi Thevar of Marugalkuruchi on February 15, 1908. It seems that Pitchandi Thevar promised him that he would help him in recruiting three thousand Maravar youth.98 The colonial state felt that it was loosing its grip over urban centres like Tirunelveli and Thoothukudi dominated by western educated elites and the emerging mercantile class. This situation was well captured by Sandria Freitag: …At the same time support for an agrarian elite became ever more important, as the British faced challenges emerging in the cities and among the new western-educated elite. Supporting the hegemony of the rural elite and demonstrating the contribution of the state to suppress those who preyed over an agrarian society became necessary concomitants of imperial ideology during the period of high empire.99 As a cumulative effect of the factors discussed above the colonial administration of the Madras Presidency was frantically in search of a new weapon to manage the situation. At this juncture the Criminal Tribes Act (CTA) 1871 of the Government of India which was already in operation in some of the North Indian Provinces came in handy. One thing to be remembered here is that 98 R.A.Padmanabhan, Puratchi Veerar Neelakanda Brahmachari, Bharathi Nilaya Tamil Veliyedu, Vilupuram, 1978, p.64. 99 Sandria Freitag “Sansiahs and the State: The Changing Nature of Crime and Justice in the Nineteenth Century British India” in Michael R.Anderson, Sumit Guha (ed), Changing Concepts of Rights & Justice in South Asia, OUP, New Delhi, 2000, p.93. 191 this was the same Act about which the Government of Madras had called for the opinion of the various district administrations, on the question whether there was any condition prevailing in their district inviting the implementation of CTA in 1878. All the District Magistrates, except those of Tirunelveli and Madurai, were not in favour of this Act and a few of them even tabulated the negative features of this act. However, in the light of the new developments, the government of Madras decided to implement the CTA of 1871 with necessary amendments in 1911 to suit the local needs. Chapter VI THE CRIMINAL TRIBES ACT AND THE DECLINE OF KAVAL SYSTEM Criminal Tribes Act, 1871 The ostensible purpose of the Criminal Tribes Act (CTA) of 1871 had been to enhance the power of the police administration to suppress the ‘hereditary’ criminal section of the Indian society. This Act originated from the fact that the courts declined to accord legality to some of the practices followed by the police, like restricting the movement of certain communities and confining them to specific areas. This led to authorizing by the law the same practices. The police administration of the North Western Frontier Province (NWFP) used this practice for decades. But in the 1860’s this practice was declared illegal by the court. Following this the provincial governments of NWFP and Punjab approached the Government of India seeking legislative enactment which would make registration of all itinerant communities compulsory and breach of this rule a penal offence. The Government of India in order to have a better understanding of this problem, approached all the provincial governments including Madras, seeking their opinion regarding whether such a legislation was necessary. However in the midst of opposition from the courts the Criminal Tribes Act of 193 1871 was instituted by the Government of India and came into force in NWFP, Punjab and Oudh.1 Later it was extended to Bengal too. After the implementation of CTA in some North Indian Provinces, in the early months of 1897, the Government of Madras as per the direction of the Government of India, prepared a circular and circulated it among the higher officials of divisional and district administration asking them about the presence of hereditary criminal communities and their criminal exploits in their district or in the districts where they have served earlier, necessitate the implementation of CTA. While A.W.B.Higgens, the District Magistrate of Tirunelveli, and J.Twigg, the District Magistrate of Madurai, welcomed the implementation of CTA against the Maravars and Kallars in their districts, officials of other districts firmly rejected it on the ground that no such communities inhabited their districts and that the existing laws were sufficient to tackle the prevailing problems.2 The provincial level police administration of Madras too rejected this proposal on the ground that it was impossible to implement the CTA and monitor it with a low paid police force. It was also pointed out that oppression and misuse of power would follow. Moreover the Government of Madras viewed the formation of rehabilitation settlements as a statutory obligation for those who would be covered under this act as impracticable. It also feared that this Act would only drive these communities into the neighbouring princely states.3 1 Meena Radhakrishna, Dishonoured by History, pp.27-29. 2 G.O.No.473, Judicial, 31 March 1897. 3 Meena Radhakrishna, Dishonoured by History, p.30. 194 This kind of thinking of the colonial officials of the Madras Presidency underwent a significant change during the first decade of the twentieth century due to the new developments which took place in the political and socioeconomic spheres of the province. The outbreak of anti-kaval movements in Madurai and Tirunelveli districts, the sack of Sivakasi in 1899 and the determination of the Kallars and Maravars to re-establish their Kaval rights in the southern districts of the Presidency prompted the provincial administrators to seek a more scientific explanation of crime. Consequently they came out with the idea that it was the loss of the means of livelihood by a large number of people during the nineteenth century because of the wrong economic policies of the colonial state in the nineteenth century which made the people to adopt the criminal way of life. The famines which broke out in the Madras Presidency, particularly the famine of 1876-1878,4 were also taken into account as a factor which pushed the people towards crime.5 However, whatever may be the causes of crime, it became more important to the colonial state to support the agrarian elite against the challenges posed by the western educated elite in the urban centres and to suppress those who preyed on the agrarian society. Consequently the idea regarding the 4 David Arnold “Famine in Peasant Consciousness and Peasant Action” in Ranajit Guha Subaltern Studies III, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1984, p.68. 5 The 1876-1878 famine was unusually widespread as well as exceptionally persistent. Of the 21 Madras districts 14 were badly affected. They represented 83,000 square miles and (according to 1871 census) a population of 19 million. It was officially estimated that atleast 3.5 million died in the famine in Madras. 195 implementation of CTA was widely articulated in the administrative circles of Madras Presidency. Finally, the Criminal Tribes Act was introduced in 1914 in the Madras Province in an amended form. The Criminal Tribes Act of 1871 provided enormous powers to the police administration over a large number of people. Under this Act, individuals from communities who were identified and declared as criminals were to register themselves and their family members with the police. They were not permitted to leave their villages without getting a temporary license or pass from the police which permitted their movement within the district only. This license was to be shown to all police stations during travel to other villages. If an individual registered under CTA was found absent from a village without a license for a second time he was liable to three years rigorous imprisonment. In the Zamindari tracts, it was the responsibility of the Zamindars to look after the effective implementation of this Act. Another interesting and important provision of this Act was that the administration could not proclaim a community as criminal and register it unless its members were settled first and provided with a means of livelihood by the government. This obligation on the part of the government was ultimately removed when the Act was amended in 1911. Thus the government was empowered to use the Act against larger communities as a whole. The Criminal Tribes Act of 1911 was more comprehensive than the previous Acts. The 1911 Act widened the powers of the local governments regarding the implementation of the act. It enabled them to declare any tribe, 196 section or class of people to be a criminal tribe. They could order for the registration of criminal tribe members and the taking of their fingerprints6. Refusal of registration of fingerprints was a criminal offence punishable by six months imprisonment or a fine of Rs.200 or both.7 There were severe restrictions on mobility too. Members of the criminal tribe were permitted to be absent from their home villages at specified times and only allowed to reside at places approved by the authorities. Persons notified under this Act were asked to report to the nearby police stations and should stay there for fixed hours.8 The reporting time was fixed at 11 p.m. and 4 a.m. to prevent them from committing crimes. According to a provision of this Act the legal courts had no jurisdiction over the operation and could not question the validity of notification issued by the government. Previous crime records were not necessary to notify a community as criminal. A ‘reason to believe’ that the community was addicted to crime was in itself considered sufficient.9 In the Madras Presidency, among the communities which were intimately associated with the Kaval system, Ambalakarars (a branch of Kallar community) 6 Since fingerprints of all those who were declared Criminals were taken, the Criminal Tribes Act, in Tamil was popularly known as ‘Rekai Chattam’. Rekai means fingerprints and Chattam means Act. 7 The Criminal Tribes Act 1911: A Collection of Acts passed by the Governor General of India in Council in the year 1911, Calcutta, 1912. 8 Ibid. 9 Meena Radhakrishna, Dishonoured by History, pp.37, 38. 197 of Tiruchirapalli district, Piramalai Kallars of Madurai, Tiruchirapalli and Thanjavur districts, Maravars of Sembinadu, Appanadu and Kondayankottai branches in Ramnad and Tirunelveli, and Valayars of Madurai and Coimbatore districts were notified as Criminal Tribes.10 To start with, in May 1914, the Piramalai Kallars of Keelakuilgudi a village situated very near to Madurai on the western side, popularly known as ‘Keelakudi Kallars’, who had a strong Kaval control over the inhabitants of Madurai town were declared as a Criminal Tribe.11 In the next year itself the Piramalai Kallars of Sorikkampatti, Mela-Urappanur and Poosalapuram villages in Tirumangalam taluk of Madurai district were notified under the Act.12 Later on it was extended to the Piramalai Kallars as a whole.13 By March 1921 the names and fingerprints of 23,642 Kallars belonging to 848 villages were registered on local police station rolls.14 Among them those who were registered under Section 10(i)A were expected to report to a roll call every night at the nearest police station at both 11 pm and 3 am. Those who were registered under section 10(i)B could not move out of their villages between sunset and sunrise without proper passport. 10 “List of ‘Criminal Tribe’ communities, Bhasha San Shodhan Prakasan Kendra”, cited in Meena Radhakrishna, Dishonoured by History, Appendix-I; G.O.No.1023, Judicial, 4 May 1914; G.O.No.2233, Judicial, 16 September 1915. 11 G.O.No.1023, Judicial, 4 May 1914. 12 G.O.No.2233, Judicial, 16 September 1915. 13 G.O.No.1331, Judicial, 5 June 1918. 14 G.O.No.596, Law (General), 16 June 1921 cited in Anand Sankar Pandian, “Landscape of Redemption: Cultivating Heart and Soil in South India” unpublished Ph.D thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 2004. th 198 By 1923, 32054 Kallars were covered under this piece of legislation.15 The number of Kallar men registered increased further in the coming years. Thousands of Kallar men, instead of travelling twice a day in the odd hours of the night, spent every night sleeping in the verandas of the police stations. When the Criminal Tribes Act was rapidly implemented by the British administration it was considered by the Piramalai Kallar community as a social humiliation of the first order. Committees were formed by them consisting of prominent inhabitants of different villages to workout a plan to overcome this humiliation. Telegrams were sent by them to the Government pleading to exempt them from this Act since they were peaceful peasants paying all the taxes regularly. In some villages only after repeated warnings of “dire consequences” did Kallars come forward and register their names. The Kallars of Perunkamanallur strongly resisted the registration move, particularly section 10(i)A of the Act, which ended in a violent clash between the Kallars of Perunkamanallur and the police leading to the death of sixteen Kallars including one woman in the police firing on 3 April 1920.16 15 Deputy Magistrate of Madurai to L.Davidson, on 14 July 1920, in G.O.2307, Home (Judicial), 15th September 1920, India Office Records cited in David Arnold, Police Powers and Colonial Rule, p.253, Ft.No.158; Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1924, p.24. 16 E.T.H.Stevenson to Inspector General, 8 April 1920. G.O.1315, Home Judicial (Confidential), 26 May 1920, cited in David Arnold ‘Dacoity and Rural Crime in Madras’, The Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol.6, No.2, January 1979, p.158, Foot Note No.36; P.Muthu Thevar, Muvendarkula Thevar Samuga Varalaru, Kakaveeran Publication, Karumathur 1976, pp.285286. 199 Before declaring the Kallars of a particular village as a criminal tribe, elaborate statements were prepared regarding the name of the gang or tribe, professed mode of their livelihood, character of the crimes committed by them and the criminal methods adopted by them. This was one of the ways of the colonial administration, to justify the application of the Act. Under the heading of ‘professed mode of livelihood’ of the Kallars of Mela-Urappanur it was stated that In addition to a professed mode of livelihood derived from agriculture, 14 of the families comprising 251 adult males collect kaval fee from certain villages in the Madura and Thirumangalam taluks of the Madura District and in the Aruppukottai taluk of the Ramnad district, each family having its well defined area from which the kaval fees are collected. This kavalship is only a form of blackmail; it involves no responsibility as regards residence or patrolling in the localities.17 Regarding the Poosalapuram Kallar’s professed mode of livelihood the following description was made: …In addition 85 individuals are known to collect kaval fees from the villages of Anaikoottam (Sattur taluk, Ramnad District), Tulukkapatti (Sattur taluk, Ramnad District), Sinnakampatti, Keelappanaickanur, 17 G.O.No.2233, Judicial, 16 September 1915, p.9. 200 Kadaneri, Ammapatti (Thirumangalam taluk, Madurai District), Sithanatham and Metupatti (Nilakottai taluk, Madurai District)18. In addition to the implementation of the Criminal Tribes Act over the Kallars, the colonial state was pondering over some programmes for the socioeconomic development of the Kallar community which could be the only permanent solution for the century old problem of Kallar criminality. Suggestion were invited from Christian missionary establishment who gained some experiences in this field by managing some criminal settlements or through voluntary services. The changes which were taking place among the Kallar population of Melur taluk located on the eastern side of the district also served as a catalyst. The final outcome was the “Kallar Reclamation Scheme”. Kallar Reclamation Scheme The most important and significant measure which accompanied the implementation of the Criminal Tribes Act against Piramalai Kallar was the implementation of a scheme popularly known as the “Kallar Reclamation Scheme”. This scheme was a liberal and modified version of another programme called as “Criminal Tribes Settlement”; a wider strategy of the colonial government to deal with ‘extreme cases’ among those notified and registered under Criminal Tribes Act. This strategy of establishing separate settlements for ‘extreme cases’ of criminals, to start with, was attempted by the 18 Ibid., p.20 201 Thuggee and Dacoity department of the colonial state in north Indian provinces as early as in 1830’s.19 When the Criminal Tribes Act was enacted in 1871 this settlement strategy was incorporated in the provisions of the Act and consequently many ‘Criminal Tribes Settlements’ were established in different parts of north India. In managing such settlements the colonial government invited the help of Christian missionary organizations who were considered to be more appropriate and experienced for this task.20 As a result, with the financial help extended by the government, missionary organizations particularly the ‘Salvation Army’, was managing many Criminal Tribes Settlements in north Indian provinces.21 The ‘Criminal Tribes Settlements’ were established with the principle of ‘Reclamation and Rehabilitation’ of the so-called incorrigible sections of the criminal tribes notified and registered. As per this strategy ‘Settlements’ were established in different parts of north India both in the rural regions and urban centres, and the registered criminals were settled there either forcibly or by voluntary means. The major objectives of these settlements were to inculcate in the criminals a taste for civilized way of life and through this wean them from criminal habits, to make them to understand the dignity of labour by forcing them to work in agricultural farms and in industrial units, and ultimately making them fit for the mainstream of social life. However, though high sounding in principle, 19 Meena Radhakrishna, Dishonoured by History, p.17. 20 G.O.No.2233, Judicial, 16 September 1915. 21 Meena Radhakrishna, Dishonoured by History, pp.75-78. 202 many of these ‘Settlements’ whether functioning directly under the government or managed by missionary organizations, were worse than prisons, reminding us the theory of Michel Foucault regarding prisons, schools, reformatories and asylums. With the introduction and implementation of Criminal Tribes Act in the Madras Presidency from 1911 ‘Settlements’ were also established in different places for different groups of Criminal communities notified including the Kuravars and Yerkulars, the nomadic and itinerant communities of the Madras Presidency. The following settlements were functioning in the year 1917.22 Sitanagaram Stuartpuram Guntur Guntur district Kala Chedu Kavali Nellore district Aziznagar Stuartpet South Arcot district Bhumannagadda Chittoor district Pallavaram Chengalpet district Perambur Madras city Pillaiyarpatti Tanjore district Kulasekarapatnam and voluntary settlements of Tirunelveli district Siddapuram Kurnool district The Kallar Settlement [Gudalur] Madurai district 22 The History of The Madras Police, p.529. 203 Of these settlements, Pillaiyarpatti in Thanjavur district and Gudalur in Madurai district were meant for the Piramalai Kallars. The other settlements were for the criminal tribes other than the Kallars such as the Kuravars, Yerkulars, Korchas and Dommaras. Many factors were at play in prompting the colonial government to plan for the reclamation of the Kallars. It sincerely felt that it was obligatory on its part to undertake some sort of social reform measures for the Piramalai Kallars who were covered under the CTA and subjected to unusual sufferings. Besides they were very much inspired and motivated by the remarkable changes which took place in the social life of the Kallars of Melur regions with the availability of water for irrigation from Periyar project. The Periyar dam construction commenced in 1887 and John Pennycuick was the Chief Engineer.23 The first waters passed through the tunnel in 1895 to reach the lands around Melur region. The Melur Kallars were motivated and offered with irrigated lands. They held a full caste meeting, discussed at length, and brought out some changes in their caste rules and accepted the offer.24 By 23 Regarding John Pennycuick and his personal involvement in constructing the Periyar dam, much information packed with emotion are available from the colonial records. Every section of the population of Madurai district benefited by Periyar water loved him. Pennycuick too exceeding the boundaries of his official responsibility considered the dam construction work as his life time service to the people. He always identified himself with the people. Even today he is remembered by the common people, and in the Cumbum valley regions in every house-hold there is a child named after John Pennycuick. Two years ago, when one of the great grand sons of Pennycuick with his family came to Cumbum region to visit the dam constructed by his great grand father; he was given a carpet welcome by thousands of people. He was astonished and emotionally moved to see many a children with his greatgrand father’s name and many wall posters adorning the streets carrying his great grand father’s image. 24 Gilbert Slater, Southern India: Its Political and Economic Problems, George Allen and Unwin Ltd., London, 1936, p.36. 204 1901 about 132000 acres of paddy fields, mostly in the drought-prone Melur Taluk of Madurai district dominated by Kallar population were watered by the Periyar river project.25 This development in turn brought out major changes in the life style of Melur Kallars. The impact of the Periyar water project over the Melur Kallars has been described in the Madurai District Gazetteer thus:Hope for the reformation of the Kallar has now recently arisen in quite another quarter. Round about Melur the people of the caste are taking energetically to wet cultivation to the exclusion of cattle lifting, with the Periyar water which has lately been brought there…. The department of public works may soon able to claim that it has succeeded where the army, the police and the magistracy have failed and made a honest man of the notorious Kallars.26 The District officials of Madurai very much inspired by this development, decided to undertake some socio-economic reform measures for the Piramalai Kallars too. Another important factor was that with the implementation of CTA on a wide scale against them, the Piramalai Kallar community became highly antagonistic and presented a belligerent posture against the government. This 25 Anand Sankar Pandian, “Landscapes and Redemption: Cultivating Heart and Soil in South India”, unpublished Ph.D., thesis, p.248. 26 W.Francis, Madura District Gazetteer, pp.92-93. 205 boiling situation was accelerated further when eleven Kallars were killed in a police firing at Perungamanallur village on 3 April, 1920, when the community resisted the state’s attempt to register their fingerprints under the provisions of the CTA. The situation resulted in a violent outbreak of a riot of great magnitude remembered to this day in popular memory.27 Besides these factors the Congress party which was organizing the people towards the non co-operation movement took initiative in politicising the CTA issue. If it was permitted to develop further, the government feared that there was every possibility that the entire Kallar community could rally round the Congress. Any delay on the part of the government in undertaking ameliorative measures, it was further feared, could invite serious problems. Such were the circumstances which forced the colonial government to implement the ‘Kallar Reclamation Scheme’ on a war footing. The outline of the ‘Kallar Reclamation Scheme’ was prepared and given proper shape by Loveluck, the Superintendent of Police of Madurai district. As a man of vision he was very meticulous in preparing the scheme. The scheme was so comprehensive that it incorporated all the essential ingredients for the overall development of the Kallar community.28 The formal Kallar Reclamation Scheme was formally initiated in the 1920 in the Madurai district. The colonial authorities in their analysis of Kallar 27 Muthu Thevar, Muvendarkula Thevar Samuga Varalaru, p.289. 28 The History of The Madras Police, p.535. 206 criminality came to the conclusion that pressure on land was the most important reason. Consequently even before the Kallar Reclamation Scheme was given the final shape, they decided to establish agricultural settlements for the land-less Kallars in uncultivated government lands. Finally it was proposed to establish a compulsory settlement at Gudalur under the supervision of the police officials with a propertied Kallar as overseer.29 However, with the intervention of the provincial authorities in Madras, the settlement became a voluntary one and the management of the settlement was also vested in the hands of one Edward P. Holton of the American Madura Mission. American Madura Mission was working among the Kallar population of Madurai region right from 1833 and was involved in civilizing activities through establishing boarding schools, medical dispensaries, industrial training centres and model farms.30 Before the establishment of the settlement at Gudalur the district authorities held many meetings and discussions with the missionaries.31 However, contrary to the expectation of the colonial government the Kallar settlement venture at Gudalur proved to be a failure. Problems erupted from unexpected quarters. The local ryots of Kulappa Goundenpatti a village situated very near to the settlement were antagonistic towards the Kallar settlers. A portion of the land reserved for the settlement was already in their temporary 29 Anand Sankar Pandian, “Landscapes and Redemption: Cultivating Heart and Soil in South India”, unpublished Ph.D., thesis, p.202. 30 Ibid., p.203. 31 G.O.No.2233, Judicial, 16 September, 1915. 207 enjoyment under a different scheme and they were paying an annual tax to the government as per the government norms. They considered the settlers as their competitors. Coupled with this problem an epidemic of malarial fever broke out which killed one child and forced several other settlers to leave the settlement. By July 1919, the Gudalur settlement had become moribund. Another attempt was made to open another compulsory settlement in the Melur Taluk of Madurai district but was soon given up because the authorities realized that this strategy was not suitable for the Kallars. Consequently in its place a panchayat approach was introduced which proved to be more successful.32 Elaborate administrative arrangements were made by the colonial government for the successful implementation of the Kallar Reclamation Scheme together well in advance in 1920. A special administrative wing was created consisting of staff drawn from both the police and revenue departments. Almost all the administrative departments were instructed to render their co-operation to the scheme. The team of Reclamation staff consisted of one Inspector, seven Sub-Inspectors, fifteen Head Constables, thirty nine Constables, one Deputy Thasildar, three Revenue Inspectors, six supervisors of schools, one Scout Master and four Co-operatives working under one Kallar special officer whose rank was raised to that of a Superintendent of Police.33 32 Anand Sankar Pandian, “Landscapes and Redemption: Cultivating Heart and Soil in South India”, unpublished Ph.D., thesis, pp.212-213. 33 The History of the Madras Police, p.534. 208 The Kallar Reclamation Scheme was formally sanctioned by the Government of the Madras Presidency on 24 February 1920 and one A.K. Raja Ayyar, known for his sincerity and hard work, was appointed as special officer of the scheme on 6 November 1920. The Kallar Reclamation Scheme was a package of multi-faceted programmes which could be listed as follows.34 1) Mass Education to the Kallar children. 2) Industrial Training Centres for Kallar youth. 3) Agricultural Loan facilities to the Kallars. 4) Establishment of Kallar Co-operative Societies. 5) Improving Transport facilities. 6) Panchayat system in Kallar villages. In order to popularize the scheme and to enlist the co-operation of the people at large mass meetings were organized in the villages which were attended by thousands of people. District level officials addressed the gatherings and explained the principles of the scheme. In every village they personally met the principal inhabitants and enlisted their co-operation.35 “Nowhere else in the Presidency was such a comprehensive scheme undertaken”, comments David Arnold.36 34 P.Muthu Thevar, Muvendarkula Thevar Samuga Varalaru, pp.291-294. 35 Ibid; The History of the Madras Police, p.533. 36 David Arnold, Police Power and Colonial Rule in Madras 1859-1947, p.145. 209 The implementation of the Kallar Reclamation Scheme commenced with much enthusiasm and expectation soon gained much momentum. A.K. Raja Ayyar and some other higher officials personally visited many Kallar villages met the leading inhabitants and other explained the purpose of the scheme. As a striking innovation Kallar caste Panchayats were established in many villages consisting of leading Kallar inhabitants as members. These Panchayats were made responsible for destroying the levy of Kaval fee and Thuppucooli for reporting crime, for reporting absences, for surrendering and excommunicating the guilty, for sending children to schools and for encouraging the Kallar youth to emigrate to tea estates.37 By 1921 A.K. Raja Ayyar, successfully established Panchayats in 501 Piramalai Kallar villages and with their assistance many warrants which were long standing were executed.38 Here it is possible that by this strategy of creating village Panchayats the colonial state was trying to win over the rural Kallar elite to its side and driving a wedge between the richer and poorer sections of the Kallar community. Within two months of the implementation of the scheme 28 schools for Kallar children were opened and education was made compulsory for the Kallar children in the age group of 5 to 12. Parents were also warned with punishments if they failed to send their children to school. In course the number of schools 37 Louis Dumont, A South Indian Subcaste, 1986, p.27; The History of the Madras Police, p.533. 38 The History of the Madras Police, p.533. 210 and schools with boarding facilities increased. By 1925 there were about 321 schools functioning and among them four were for the girls.39 In the meantime industrial training centres were established at Tirumangalam, Sathangudi, Poosalpuram, Chekkanoorani, Puliankulam and Cumbum. Usilampatti, Keelakudi, They imparted training to Kallar youth in spinning, weaving, tailoring, carpentry, rope-making and basket-making. During the training period they were provided with stipend.40 Besides the above efforts the government concentrated on popularizing co-operative movement in Kallar villages and distribution of lands to landless Kallar families. Within a short span of time about 3013 acres of land was distributed and 90 co-operative stores were established. Loans for buying bulls and sinking wells were provided by these societies. In the meantime, employment was found for about 5000 Kallars in the tea estates. Regarding the success of the programme and the man behind the programme J.F. Hall, the District Magistrate wrote in 1922. A.K. Raja Ayyar’s work as Kallar Special Officer was little short of all wonderful and I could not speak too highly of it. This scheme for the reclamation of Kallars has passed beyond that outlined by Mr.Loveluck in 1920. The expansion of the work and was very largely bound up with his own personality. He had acquired extraordinary hold over the Kallars and it was essential 39 P.Muthu Thevar, Muvendarkula Thevar Samuga Varalaru, p.291. 40 Ibid. 211 that for a considerable time he should remain in personal charge of the work.41 During the early years of the implementation of Kallar Reclamation Scheme there were hectic activities and the entire district administration was geared up to ensure the proper implementation of the scheme. Thanks to the sincere efforts taken by special officers like A.K. Raja Ayyar and his successor K.D. Janardhana Rao, the Kallar Reclamation Scheme yielded considerable positive results. The extraction of Kaval fee and Thuppu cooli system started to lose ground gradually. Louis Dumont has assessed the scheme in the following terms: It is true on the whole that the Kallar use the advantages which the government has put at their disposal. It is also true that their mode of life became more normal. Nevertheless the second objective of the reform policy, that of opening new horizons for Kallar initiative and activity has not been realized….42 However in a long run many problems creeped in. The functioning of the special officer of Kallar Reclamation Scheme in addition to the local Superintendent of Police caused some frictions in the administrative circle. While the special officer insisted more on reform programmes the police officials emphasized on repression. The co-operation from other administrative 41 The History of The Madras Police, pp.533-534. 42 Louis Dumont, A South Indian Subcaste, 1986, p.30. 212 departments was also not to the excepted levels. This bureaucratic rift was well utilized by the Kallars and the crime rates once again soared. In the agricultural settlements many Kallars violated the regulation, by either mortaging or selling out their land allotted to them. In course of time the District Police Superintendents were made responsible for the implementation of the scheme. Gradually the scheme lost its earlier spirit, which was reflected in the increasing crime rates.43 In the meantime, in the political front pressure for the repeal of Criminal Tribes Act mounted up. Finally the legislative Assembly of the Madras Presidency repealed the Criminal Tribes Act on 17 April 1947,44 but only replaced by All India Habitual Offenders Act by the central government in 1948. Criminal Tribes Act in Tirunelveli and Ramnad In Tirunelveli and Ramnad the implementation of the CTA was not as systematic and thorough when compared to Madurai. Though the Kondayamkottai, Appanadu and Sembinadu branches of the Maravar community in both the districts were brought under CTA only individuals of the clan were notified as criminals and not the entire community. Moreover in these regions the administration, for the purpose of initial notification and confirmation of the criminality of an individual depended more on the information of the village 43 The History of The Madras Police, p.536. 44 Anand Sankar Pandian, “Landscapes and Redemptions: Cultivating Heart and Soil in South India”, unpublished Ph.D., thesis, p.299. 213 headman and principal inhabitants of the villages. So when the CTA came into practice the village headmen and the local landlords found themselves with enhanced power. This was mainly due to the recommendation of the Indian Police Commission.45 This feature was more prominent in Tirunelveli and Ramnad than in other districts. The village headmen of the Madras Presidency were considered to be in a more efficient state by the Police Commission because they combined in their duties many functions such as village magistrate, police officer and revenue head. The enlarged powers enjoyed during the implementation of CTA proved to be a powerful weapon in the hands of the village headmen. In the long run it was utilized by them as an instrument to seek vengeance, to extract money and free labour by threatening people. Ultimately poor members of the Maravar community who were unable to fulfill the demands of the village headmen became the victims while the rich and influential but real criminals escaped. The non-co-operation already existed between the rural police and the regular police reinforced the power already enjoyed by the village headmen. In Madurai district the implementation of CTA over the Piramalai Kallars coupled with Kallar Reclamation Programme, which provided a wide range of economic opportunities for the Kallars, yielded good results. In Tirunelveli and Ramnad when CTA was applied over the Kondayankottai, Appanadu and 45 Christopher Baker, ‘Madras Headmen’ in K.N.Chaudhry and Clive Dewey (eds), Economy and Society: Essays in Indian Economic and Social History, Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1979, p.35. 214 Sembinadu Maravars, it was not accompanied by any programme resembling the Kallar Reclamation. The government was not in favour of such a programme because of its previous experience at Madurai which involved considerable official workload and huge financial commitment.46 Thus a legal measure, not accompanied by a rehabilitation programme for those who would be affected, whose implementation was vested in the hands of a police administration known for its inefficiency, corruption and partisan attitude, was deeply marred by problems. Consequently the implementation of CTA in Tirunelveli and Ramnad districts failed to fulfill the anticipation of the colonial state. While the Nadar-Maravar conflict was still lurking in the background, the crimes related to Kaval reached new heights. When the colonial state was busy with the implementation of the CTA a riot broke out on 17 September 1918 at Kamudhi in Ramanad district. The reason was the long standing antagonism between the Nadars and the Maravas. On the morning of 17 September Maravars of the neighbouring villages in large numbers entered the town of Kamudhi with the intention of attacking the Nadars. When the police warned them they too were attacked and two policemen were killed. Following this the mob passed through the bazaar street setting fire to the shops and houses. Twenty one houses and sixteen shops were destroyed and damage to the extent of Rs.15,000 caused. With the arrival of additional police force the mob was fired upon resulting in the death of a few Maravars. However, after a few weeks, the 46 G.O.No.293, Home, 20 October 1942. 215 Maravars carried on a campaign of terrorism and extortion in other villages. Peace was restored only after the army was deployed.47 In the Tirunelveli district nine Maravar Kavalkarars were arrested for levying Kaval fee in 1917. In 1918, eleven Kavalkarars were bound over for the same reason.48 This was only the tip of the iceberg as most of the criminal exploits of the Marava Kavalkarars went unreported. In 1933, Sivanthipatti, a small village situated on the eastern side of Tirunelveli, became the epicentre of Kaval disputes. Among the different communities of Tirunelveli district the people belonging to the scheduled castes, particularly the Pallars and the Parayars were the worst affected by the Kaval extortion of the Maravars.49 On one occasion, some of the Marava Kavalkarars were caught red-handed in a theft by the Pallars and produced before the village Munsiff. During the initial enquiry the Maravar denied the charges. But during the enquiry of the higher British officials the crime was proved and the culprits had to confess it. When the Collector of Tirunelveli was informed of this crime he ordered the arrest of those Maravas under CTA. This episode created a lasting enmity between the Maravars and Pallars.50 47 Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1918, pp.13-14. 48 Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1919, p.25. 49 G.O.No.124, Public (Police), 8 March 1933. 50 K.Ragupathy, “Dalith Thaneluchium Odukkumurai Olippum” (in Tamil) in Puthu Visai, Hosur, October-December, 2007, p.4. 216 The serious situation prevailing in Tirunelveli district has been well described by the Bishop of Tirunelveli in his communication addressed to the Collector of Tirunelveli entitled “Memorandum on the Marava Problem in the Tirunelveli District of South India”. A very large percentage of Marava crimes arise out of disputes about the kaval payment… It cannot be denied that the situation in Tirunelveli district is very serious. Within three or four miles of any large Marava village, no one can feel that life and property are in any way secure. The heavy hands of the Maravars falls of-course mainly on the poor and helpless, but many others suffer and the area covered by their depredations is widespread. The problem is so serious that only a very resolute attempt by the government cope with it is likely to have much effect. Perhaps it is the difficulty of the task that has led the Government for more than a century to postpone the time for attempting it.51 When the colonial government was pondering over the ways and means for the effective implementation of CTA particularly in Tirunelveli district the problem of illegal Kaval exaction by the Marava Kavalkarars occurred in the villages of Griammalpuram, Hari Kesavanallur and Manapuranallur which were under the jurisdiction of Sermadevi police station. 51 About sixteen Maravar “Memorandum on the Marava Problem in the Tirunelveli District of South India” submitted by the Bishop of Tirunelveli, to the Secretary, Government of Madras, 30 April 1932, Notes leading to the G.O.No.626, Home, 24 April 1945. 217 families of Karikesavanallur had Kaval control over these villages. In return for their services the Maravar Kavalkarars were allotted four acres of land which was listed officially as ‘Gramma Samuthayam’ or the village common land. However the Maravars assumed complete control over it and styled the land as Kaval manyam. In 1920 there was a legal dispute regarding the ownership of this plot. In course of time this land was brought under his complete control by an individual named Sundara Thevan. Consequently a factional fight ensued among the Maravars.52 From 1939 onwards frequent clashes took place between these factions. Apart from this the Kavalkarars of both factions compelled the inhabitants of these three villages to pay the Kaval fee to them. When the ryots refused to pay the Kaval fee to one faction they were attacked and looted by the members of the other gang. Besides illegal extraction were also made by both the factions. Consequently violent incidents took place on 27th December 1939, 3rd January 1940 and 8th January 1940 in which the properties of the ryots particularly of the Pallars were looted.53 The affected ryots made complaints with the police official against nineteen Maravars who in turn elaborately narrated the developments from the beginning to the Joint Magistrate M. Ananthanarayanan. On 15th January 1940 Ananthanarayanan accompanied by the police officials personally visited the 52 Letter from District Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli to the Inspector General, Madras, 2 July 1940 in G.O.No.1252 Home (Confidential) 11 April 1941, TNSA. 53 Ibid. 218 villages and conducted an enquiry. Seventy Adi Dravidas appeared before the Magistrate eloquently represented the sufferings they had undergone owing to their refusal to contribute Kaval exactions demanded by the nineteen Maravars mentioned in the complaint. Though informed well in advance, out of the nineteen Maravars only five belonging to one faction appeared for the enquiry. Towards the end, Joint Magistrate instead of initiating legal proceeding against the culprits, asked the Maravars to mend the differences existing among themselves within a period of ten days. He believed that if a compromise was worked out between the two factions of the Maravars all problems would be solved. This chance was well utilized by the Maravars who appeared before the Magistrate with a compromise deed regarding collection of Kaval fee setting forth the terms of their agreement.54 This was accepted by the magistrate who informed the inspector on 1st February 1940 that he had dropped further action in this matter. This decision of the joint magistrate was highly criticized by the higher police officials as unwarranted, failure to recognize his duties and tacit recognition of the principle of Kaval.55 Thus the Marava Kavalkarars were permitted to escape by M. Ananthanarayanan, the Joint Magistrate. The above seen decision taken in favour of the unruly Marava Kavalkarars, that too in a situation where the Criminal Tribes Act was in operation, indicate the crucial lapses on the part of the colonial administration. It 54 Vide Appendix, VIII. 55 J.Beckett, Dy.Inspector General of Police to Inspector General, 13 July 1940, G.O.No.1252, Home (Confidential), 11 March 1941. 219 exhibits the ambivalent nature and failure of the colonial state to utilize the opportunity of ‘people’s resistance’ to suppress the Maravar Kavalkarars. It also exposed the void that existed between the higher and lower ranks of officials in the administrative structure. Yet another important underlying factor brought to the light was the prevalence of caste nexus and compromising tendency of some of the higher caste like the Brahmins and the Vellalas with the Maravars. For instance the roll of the Kottai Vellalas in the anti-kaval movement in Srivaikuntam. This may be due to the numerical inferiority and less militancy of these communities. However, in consequence of the stern measures undertaken against the Maravars in general during anti-Nadar riots and against the Marava Kavalkarars in particular during the anti-kaval movements in Tirunelveli, the Kaval system in general lost its former vigour and influence. But in some pockets of southern Tirunelveli, it continued to survive even after 1947. CHAPTER VII CONCLUSION Right from the beginning of the British rule over Tamilnadu, the policy followed by the colonial state against the Kaval system was extremely ambivalent in nature. Conditioned by its early experience with the Kavalkarars during the Palayakarar Wars, in which the Kavalkarars made common cause with the Palayakarars the colonial state had an antagonistic relation with the Kavalkarars. Kaval system was considered by the Company as a stumbling block in the path of its consolidation, and a tough competitor in establishing its mastery over rural and urban regions. Consequently the colonial state abolished the Desa Kaval and Men Kaval in 1802 and Men Kavalkarars were forbidden from collecting Kaval fees. The first decade of the nineteenth century was a period of transition for the Company - a transition from a tributary based state to a land-revenue based state. For a smooth transition a relatively problem free political climate was imperative. A full fledged administrative machinery and a meaningful rapport with the people were not yet established. These were the factors which compelled the colonial state to review its policy of antagonism and soften its stand on the Kaval system. Consequently some of the former Men Kavalkarars were incorporated in the new police establishment as Daroghas and Tanadars and some others were provided with pension. The same the case of the Kudi 221 Kavalkars too. The thorough knowledge of the Kudi Kavalkarars about village administration with the added value of their numerical strength prevented the colonial state from abolishing the institution of Kudi Kaval. A section of the Kudi Kavalkarars were accommodated in the new police establishment of 1802. But a close look would reveal the fact that not all the Kavalkarars of both the categories were provided with the opportunity of joining the new police establishment. A major section of them became jobless. Their rent free landed properties allotted to them by the inhabitants as a form of Kaval fee too was confisticated by the colonial state during the implementation of new land revenue settlements. By 1815 the Company found itself in a relatively secure position and abolished the Kudi Kaval system throughout the Presidency in 1816. However a section of them was accommodated in the new police establishment introduced in 1816. Thus the Kavalkarar became a Company’s servant serving under the village magistrate as a low paid Talayari. Whenever reforms were introduced a major section of the former Kavalkarars were rendered jobless. In a social situation where occupational change was not that easy, they were pushed towards a criminal way of life. But whatever may be the efforts taken by the colonial state Kaval system continued to operate unabated. Major changes were introduced by the colonial state in the police establishment in 1859 by which the modern police system was introduced based on the model of the Irish Constabulary. Here again the attempt proved to be a half- hearted one. In terms of number of the police force, it was less 222 proportionate to the total population. Moreover the colonial state was not ready to invest sufficient money in the police establishment though it was the need of the hour. The newly appointed police constables, particularly in the southern district of Tamilnadu, were mostly from subordinate castes to the Maravar and Kallar Kavalkarars; and they could not achieve anything substantial. The irony of the situation was that the police machinery actually depended on the Kavalkarars to gather information regarding crime. Regarding the Kaval system and the Kavalkarars two different opinions running parallel to each other from the beginning prevailed in the administrative circle of the colonial state. One group of officials, highly antagonistic towards the institution of Kaval and Kavalkarars, recommended a complete annihilation of the system. Another faction, though small in number and feeble their voice, were pragmatic and were sympathetic towards the Kavalkarars falling in line with the view point of Thomas Munro. They were of the opinion that it was the policy of the colonial state which turned the Maravars and Kallars into criminals. In this connection the opinion of Broad Foot, Acting session Judge of Tiruchirapalli, is worth mentioning. In his report to the Chief Secretary, he recorded that “The Marava is a fighting man, who owing to Pax Brittanica, was degenerated into a thief, and he is of recognized caste”.1 1 Broad Foot to Chief Secretary to the Government, 19 September, G.O.No.1828, Judicial, 31 March, 1897. 223 Even after a prolonged struggle for more than a century the colonial state could not achieve anything substantial against the Kavalkarars in Madurai and Tirunelveli district. Contrary to the opinion of David Arnold, even after 1850 Men Kavalkarars were there in Tirunelveli and Madurai regions and enjoying Kaval rights. Moreover the struggle between the Colonial State and the Kavalkarars was not only a struggle for rural supremacy as conceived by David Arnold, but a struggle to exercise control over urban centres and towns. As a last step the colonial state resorted to the Criminal Tribes Act which yielded good results, though not to the level expected. With great hope the CTA was implemented in Tirunelveli district. The colonial administration having failed in gaining an upper hand over the pestering problems of Kaval system and the crimes in the past expected good results out of CTA, the most powerful weapon they ever handled. When CTA too failed to produce the anticipated results the officials became disgusted and were engulfed by the fever of pessimism. In Tirunelveli district, during the implementation of CTA, village vigilance committees were constituted in many villages to help the police in the matters related to surveillance and notification. However it was observed that “the large number of village vigilance committees in the district give some help to the police but they can be of comparatively little use in Kaval ridden villages terrorized by the Maravars”.2 2 Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1941, p.71. 224 Overcome by pessimistic and helpless circumstances the colonial officials once again started to tabulate the causes for their failure, which proved to be a stereotype description. The non-cooperation that existed between the regular and village police, inadequacy of the police force, the century-old gulf between the police and the public, the long distance between the police station and the villages which discouraged lodging complaints, poor transport facilities, the dependency of the lower grade police on Marava Kavalkarars for collecting information regarding incidents of crime and the illicit relations prevailing between them were the facts rediscovered and recorded by the police as general causes for its failure.3 The police station is six miles away. There are six men there, anyway they are all very busy. There is no road. There are eight of our good Kondayamkottai brethren who are kavalgars. The village headman is an inoffensive Pillaimar, the Talayari is one of us; so it is maravar raj in Umayathalaivanpatti. …The police in recent years have applied the CT Act to the Marava in circumstances due to the lack of men which made its proper operation very largely impracticable. I need not mention the evil results on the lawless marava when he finds that the CT Act may be trifled with, because there is none to enforce it.4 3 Confidential report No.D.C.216/41, dated 24 February 1942 from G.H.P Barley Dt.Supdt. of Police, Tirunelveli to the Inspector General of Police, Madras through the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Southern Range, Madurai. 4 Ibid. 225 Another interesting factor often cited by the British officials and which finds a prominent place in the colonial discourse of this period, as the most important cause for the failure of the police against Kaval system and the Maravar problem in Tirunelveli district, was the economic factor about which G.H.P.Bailey observed. The Marava problem is a human one, deep rooted in history and economics and these are stubborn things. It is forceful in its practicalness, in its reality and in the magnitude of its challenge and opportunity. It is century old skeleton for which the cupboard is the Madras Village Police Regulation Act of 1816. The bones are now exposed in their grim and dismal nakedness, may be long overdue obsequies be carried out with sympathy and generosity.5 In his confidential report entitled ‘A Note on Marava Oppression’ he categorically stated that “To attempt to abolish Kaval without filling the economic gap which this would entail would be to repeat history and to produce results in crime which can well be imagined”.6 5 G.H.P.Bailey to Inspector General of Police, 31 January 1943, G.O.No.1802, Home, 31 July 1943, p.110. 6 Ibid.; G.O.No.626 Home 24 April 1945. 226 It was at this juncture that the administration started thinking of a reclamation programme for the Maravars of Tirunelveli on the line of Kallar reclamation programme being carried out in Madurai district. But it was too late and was at best a half-hearted attempt. Regarding this reclamation programme of the Tirunelveli Maravars the following comment was made by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Southern range, Madurai. We are all agreed that the Marava problem is large, an economic one, and that mere repression, without reclamation can never be a solution…. The Marava is far more dangerous than the Kalla and one is at a loss to understand why for more than a generation vast efforts and amounts have been spent on Kallar reclamation whereas practically nothing has been ever attempted towards the reform of the Maravas. It is evident that a scheme of Marava reclamation is long overdue and it is high time, that it be undertaken, with the realization that it must go on for one or more generations and that will cost considerable sum of money.7 It was at this juncture that the British Empire had to focus its complete concentration and to divert all its energies towards conducting war operations against the axis powers in different theatres of Second World War. At the national level the freedom movement was nearing culmination and the Indian National Congress was frantically engaged in organizing the people for yet 7 Ibid. 227 another mass struggle, the ‘Quit India Movement’. Under the pressure of these development at the national and international levels the colonial state might have decided not to proceed immediately with the reclamation programme of the Maravars of Tirunelveli which require diversion of more time, energy and money. However fresh efforts were undertaken by the police authorities to tackle the Maravar problem. The entire police network in the district was geared up to gather detailed information regarding the Marava oppression in Tirunelveli district including the Kaval system. To facilitate this task a questionnaire was prepared by the Superintendent of Police of Tirunelveli. Inspectors and sub inspectors were warned not to be easily carried away by the false informations about Kaval system in the police records housed in the stations8. Apart from this survey programme, another programme to tighten the police grip over the Maravar was also planned which included, a) A wider application of CTA. b) Security work of an increased scale. c) Increased police patrol and checking d) Increased village visiting by Gazetted officers and Inspectors.9 Regarding this programme G.H.P.Bailey the District Superintendent of Police of Tirunelveli has made the following emphatic statement with high hopes. 8 G.H.P.Bailey, District Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli, “Marava Oppression in Tirunelveli District” Intelligence Bureau, Palayamkottai, 20 January 1942, G.O.No.1802, Home, 31 July 1943. 9 Ibid. 228 A state of war has existed between the police and the criminal and oppressive Maravar since the inception of police force in 1816. It is now proposed to wage that war with more system and with steady pressure.10 However in the war waged with more system and steady pressure the British Raj failed pathetically. “By then it was the end of colonialism rather than Kaval which was in sight”.11 L.E.Buckley, District Magistrate of Tirunelveli in his report had made a thought provoking remark that, This kaval system will never be thrown off, unless the movement comes from the people. There are not wanting signs of such movement and whenever a desire for freedom is expressed police aid is given. The cases are not numerous at present, but one success will breed another. Success is not an unmixed joy for the administrator, for it will be a long time after the loss of this rich kaval fees that the Maravar will settle down to a honest life, and he is certain to take to crime in the interval.12 But it seems that the interval could be a year or a few decades or even a century! 10 G.O.No.1802, Home, 13 July, 1943. 11 David Arnold, “Dacoity and Rural Crime in Madras”, The Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol.6, No.2, January 1979, p.157. 12 Buckley to the Secretary to the Government, 23 March 1904, G.O.No.867, Judicial (Confidential) 31 May 1904 pp.7 & 8. BIBLIOGRAPHY PRIMARY SOURCES Government of Madras Records (Tamilnadu Archives) Manuscript Records Judicial Consultations Vol No 2A, 1805. Vol No 6A, 1799. Vol No 6B, 1799. Vol No 7, 1804. Vol No 8, 1804. Vol No 8B, 1804. Vol No 13, 1802. Vol No 14, 1806. Vol No 15, 1806. Vol No 19, 1806. Judicial Consultations (Sundries) Vol No 4B, 1812. Vol No 3, 1799. Vol No 45B, 1809. Vol No 58, 1807. Vol No 139, 1818. Judicial Proceedings - Police Committee Reports Vol No 2A, 1805. Vol No 4A, 1813. Vol No 5A, 1806. Vol No 5B, 1807. 230 Vol No 6A, 1812. Vol No 8A, 1813. Vol No 8B, 1805. Vol No 10, 1805. Vol No 40, 1808. Vol No 135B, 1802. Board of Revenue Consultations Vol No 264, 1800. Vol No 1340, 1832. Vol No 1476, 1835. Vol No 5217, 1869. Military Consultations Vol No 269, 1799. Government Orders G.O. No 1753, Judicial, 22 August 1895. G.O. No 1067, Judicial, 25 June, 1896. G.O.No 473, Judicial, 31 March, 1897. G.O.No 1828, Judicial, 31 March, 1897. G.O.No 1385, Judicial, 3 September 1897. G.O.No 1496, Judicial, 14 October 1897. G.O.No 573, Judicial, 19 March, 1899. G.O.No 535, Judicial, 29 March, 1899. G.O.No 3579, Judicial, 16 June, 1899. G.O.Nos 2017, 2018, Judicial (Confidential), 12 December, 1899. G.O.No 596, Judicial, 26 April, 1900. G.O.No 1459, Judicial, 6 October, 1900. G.O.No 1527, Judicial (Confidential), 17 October 1900. G.O.Nos 1578, 1579, Judicial (Confidential), 31 October 1900. G.O.No 23, Judicial (Confidential), 11 January 1901. G.O.No 1742, Judicial, 5 November 1901. 231 G.O.No 1456, Judicial, 1 October 1903. G.O.No 867, Judicial, 31 May 1904. G.O.No 1547, Judicial, 13 October 1904. G.O.No 1023, Judicial, 4 May 1914. G.O.No 2233, Judicial, 16 September 1915. G.O.No 1331, Judicial, 5 June 1918. G.O.No 1315 Home (Judicial, Confidential), 26 May 1920. G.O.No 1252, Home (Confidential), 11 March 1941. G.O.No 293, Home, 20 October 1942. G.O.No 1802, Home, 31 July 1943. G.O.No 626, Home, 21 April 1945. G.O.No 596, Law (General), 16 June 1921. G.O.No 124, Public (Police), 8 March 1933. Printed Records Regulations Judicial Regulations of 1802 Judicial Regulations of 1816 Reports Aitchinson, C.U. A Collection of Treaties, Engagements and Sanads, Government Press, Calcutta, 1958. Bailey, G.H.B. A Note on the Marava Oppression in Tirunelveli, 1943. Cox, F.Arthur, Manual of North Arcot District, Madras, 1894. Neels, Report on the Marava Problem in the Tirunelveli District of South India, 1932. Fifth Report of the Select Committee on the Affairs of the British East India Company, Vol.II, London, 1812. 232 Garstin, J.H. Manual of South Arcot District, Lawrance Asylum Press, Madras, 1878. Lushington, S.R. Report to the Board of Revenue, 28 May, 1802. Lushington, S.R. Collector’s Report Regarding the Tirunelveli Poligors and Sequestered Pollams, Tirunelveli, 1916. Maclean, C.D. Manual of the Administration of the Madras Presidency, Vol.I, Asian Educational Services, New Delhi, 1885. Munro, R. Memorandum on the Revision of Judicial System, Selection of papers from the Records of East India House Related to Revenue, Police and Civil and Criminal Justice under the Company’s Rule in India, Vol.II, London, 1820. Mullaly, Frederick S. Notes on Criminal Tribes of Madras Presidency, Government Press, Madras, 1982. Nelson, J.H. The Madura Country A Manual, Asian Educational Services, Delhi, 1989. Report of the Commissioners for the Investigation of Alleged Cases of Torture in the Madras Presidency, Madras, 1955. Police Reports Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1886. Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1889. Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1897. Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1899. Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1900. Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1902. Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1904. Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1918. Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1939. Administrative Report of the Police of the Madras Presidency, 1941. 233 Madurai Collectorate Records, Vol No.90, Madurai District Archieves. Report of the Indian Police Commission, Simla, 1903. The History of Madras Police, Madras, 1959. Madras District Manuals and Gazetteers District Manuals and Gazetteers Coimbatore, 1887. Madurai and Thanjavur, 1878. North Arcot, 1894. South Arcot 1878. Salem, 1883. Tirunelveli, 1879. Trichi, 1878. Baliga, B.S. Madras District Gazetteers, Madras, 1960. Baliga, B.S. Madras District Gazetteers, South Arcot, Madras, 1962. Francis, W. South Arcot District Gazetteer, Madras, 1906. Francis, W. Madura District Gazetteer, Madras, 1906. Hemingway, F.R. Madras District Gazetteers, Thanjavur, Government of Tamilnadu, 1966. Madras District Gazetteers, Trichirappalli District, Government of Madras, 1907. Pate, H.R. Tinnevelly District Gazetteer, Government Press, Madras, 1917. The Imperial Gazetteer of India, The Indian Empire, Vol.IV, Administrative, Oxford University Press, London, 1909. District Collectorate Records Madurai, Vol.No.90. -----------, Vol.No.1148. -----------, Vol.No.1158. -----------, Vol.No.1176. 234 Thiruchirapalli, Vol.No.3662. Tirunelveli Vol.No.3579. -----------, Vol.No.3591. -----------, Vol.No.3600. Folklore (Unpublished Ballad) “Sivarama Thalaivar Kummi”. Manuscripts in the custody of the family of S.Kadhirvel, Tirukkurungudi, Tirunelveli district. SECONDARY SOURCES Books Anderson, Michael R., Sumit Guha (eds), Changing Concepts of Rights and Justice in South India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2000. Arnold, David. Police Power and Colonial Rule in Madras 1859-1947, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1986. Baker, Christopher J. “Madras Headmen”, in K.N.Chaudhry, Clive Dewey (ed), Economy and Society: Essays in Indian Economic and Social History, Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1979. Banerjee, Sumanta. Crime and Urbanisation Calcutta in the Nineteenth Century, Tulika Books, New Delhi, 2006. Caldwell, Robert. A History of Tinnevelly, 1881. Chandler, John S. Seventy-five Years in the Madura Mission, American Madura Mission, Madurai, 1913. 235 Dirks, Nicholas B. The Hollow Crown: Ethno History of an Indian Kingdom, Orient Longman Ltd., Bombay, 1987. Dumont, Louis. A South Indian Sub Caste, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1986. Gopal, S. British Policy in India, Orient Longman Ltd., Madras, 1975. Guha, Ranajit. Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency in Colonial India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1999. Hardgrave, Robert. The Nadars of Tamilnad, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1969. Hobsbawm, Eric. Bandits, Abacus Publications, London, 2000. Jones, David. Crime, Protest, Community and Police in Nineteenth Century Britain, London, 1982. Kadhirvel,S. A History Of The Maravas, Madurai Publishing House, Madurai, 1977. Kerans, J.T. Panchalam Courchey Polegar, Palayamkottai, 1873. Ludden, David. Peasant History in South India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1993. Mannickam,V. Pudukottai Varalaru (Tamil), Clio Publication, Madurai, 2004. Marx, Karl. Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, Progress Publishers, Mascow, 1977. Metcalf, Thomas R. Ideologies of the Raj, Cambridge University Press, New Delhi, 2005. 236 Muthu Thevar, P. Muvendarkula Thevar Samuga Varalaru (Tamil), Kakkaveeran Publication, Karumathur, 1976. Nattar, Venkatasamy N.M. Kallar Charitram (Tamil), Jegam & Co., Trichirapalli, 1928. Nilakanta, Sastri, K.A. Colas, University of Madras, Chennai, 2000. Padmanaphan, R.A Puratchi Veerar Neelakanda Brahmachari, Bharathi Nilayam Tamil Veliyedu, Vilupuram, 1978. Radhakrishna, Meena. Dishonoured by History: ‘Criminal Tribes’ and British Colonial Policy, Orient Longman Ltd., New Delhi, 2001. Rajayyan, K. Rise and Fall of the Poligars of Tamilnadu, University of Madras, 1974. Singha, Radhika. A Despotism of Law, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2000. Slater, Gilbert. Southern India: Its Politics and Economic Problems, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., London, 1936. Sobhanan, B. Temple Entry Movement and the Sivakasi Riots, Raj Publications, Madurai, 1985. Spencer, George. Temples, Kings and Peasants; Perception of South Indian Past, New Era Publications, Madras, 1987. Thompson, E.P. Whigs and Hunters: The Origin of Black Act, Pantheon Books, New York, 1975. Thruston, Edgar. Caste and Tribes in Southern India, Government Press, Madras, 1909. 237 Udaiyar, Asirvatha, A.V, Maravar Charitram (Tamil), Devarkulam (Tirunelveli District), 1938. Vanamamalai, N. (ed), Tamilar Nattu Padalkal, New Century Book House, Chennai, 1964. Vidyanathan, S. Tamilar Salbhu (Tamil), Kumaran Puthaka Illam, Colombo and Chennai, 1980. Yang, Anand A. (ed), Crime and Criminality in British India, The University of Arizona Press, Tucson, 1985. Articles Anthony, Good. “The Car and the Palanquin: Rival Accounts of the 1895 Riot in Kalugumalai, South India”, Modern Asian Studies, Cambridge University Press, 1999. Arnold, David. “Famine in Peasant Consciousness and Peasant Action: Madras”, in Ranajit Guha (ed), Subaltern Studies, III, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1984. ------------. “Bureaucratic Recruitment and Sub-ordination in Colonial India, The Madras Constabulary 1859-1947”, in Ranajit Guha (ed), Subaltern Studies, IV, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1985. -------------. “Dacoity and Rural Crime in Madras 1860-1940”, The Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol.6, No.2, January 1979. Blackburn, Stuart. “The Kallars: A Tamil ‘Criminal Tribes’ Reconsidered”, South Asia Journal of Asian Studies, New Series, Vol.1, No.1, March 1978. 238 Kadhirvel, S. “Sources for the History of Tamilnadu”, Studies on Agrarian Societies in South Asia, Institute for the Study of Languages and Culture of Asia and Africa, Tokyo, 1980. Major, Andrew J. “State and Criminal Tribes in Punjab: Surveillance, Control and Reclamation of the ‘Dangerous Classes’”, Modern Asian Studies, Vol.33, Part 3, July 1999. Natana Kasinathan. “Kaval System in Tamilnadu from 300 A.D.–1600 A.D”, Damilica, Journal of Tamilnadu State Department of Archaeology, Part 3, Madras 1973. Price, Pamela G. “Raja Dharma in the 19th Century South India”, Contribution to Indian Sociology, Vol.13, No.2, July-December 1979, Institute of Economic Growth, New Delhi. Thompson, E.P. “Eighteenth Century English Society: Class Struggle Without Class?”, Social History, Vol.3, No.2, 1978. Ragupathy, K. Dalith Thaneluchium Odukkumurai Olippum” (Tamil), Puthuvisai, October-December, 2007. Washbrook, D.A. “Law, State and Agrarian Society in Colonial India”, Modern Asian Studies, Vol.15, No.3, 1981. Unpublished Thesis Pandian, Anand Sankar, “Landscapes of Redemption: Cultivating Heart and Soil in South India”, University of California, Berkeley, 1999. 239 240 APPENDIX II Petition of the Inhabitants of Sirkali To Francis Alexander Grant Collector in the subah of Mayavaram The humble petition of the inhabitants of Shially District. 1. That whereas Periya Vagoopoo having assembled an armed force, he from the year 1797 to this period has seized and imprisoned the inhabitants and their people in the villages of warshaputto plundered houses carried away the seed grain paddy and so that we have been not able to carry on cultivation in the proper season and through his oppressions and vexation we have sustained great losses. 2. In the course of these three years the property which he has plundered from us amounted to 10,000 chuckrams and our losses in paddy amounts also 10,000 chuakrams making together 20,000 chuckrums. 3. He has burnt and pulled down many houses in our villages, which we beg may be rebuilt and delivered to their proper owners. 4. He has forcibly taken from us some of our villages, houses, lands, topes which he now enjoys. We beg these may be restored to us. 5. Some of the puddacarars have been carried away by him violently and treated in the most injurious manner. 241 6. In our district there are two cavalcarars, one called Periya Vagapoo the other Chinna Vagoopoo and each of them has separately his free gift lands, Varesaypattoo, Pannay gramum and watching villages and in the enjoyment of those privileges they conducted themselves agreeable to established customs and to the satisfaction of the inhabitants until Rachasa warsham after which Periya vagoopoo become refractory he acted contrary to the usual custom. You were pleased to send both to him and Chinna vagoopoo a cowle under the seal of the honorable company pointing out of them the manner in which they have to conduct themselves, but now Periyavagoopoo has taken into service 500 colleries and having procured cannon grape shot and other ammunitions and constructed a mud wall round his house he by means of the armed force prevents the inhabitants from cultivating their lands and the water from flowing into the paddy fields, he catches and carries off the inhabitants from each of whom he extorts 40 to 50 chuckrums, he has caused all the bazaars to be shut and prevents the usual ceremonies being performed in the pagodas beside which he has forbid barbers and washermen to attend upon the inhabitants and is guilty of many other excesses and violence. 7. Your petitioners, therefore must humbly emplore your honour to intercede with the honourable company in order that your petitioner may carry on the cultivation of the present year in tranquility, and at the same time to compel the said cavilcarrah to make good all the losses we have sustained as above stated. 242 8. In doing this act of equity your petitioner as in duty. Shall ever pray Signed Valoorputtukkum - Vedialingam Shially caval - Appoo Pandaram Shuttanadapoorum - Appausamy Arpaukum - Aya Shumbungoody - Vedialingam Teroocaroocavoor - Coolandy Yagarajapoorum - Ramasamian Teerooneelacundum - Swaminadan Terropungoor - Teyagarajan Cunniacoody - Moothiapillai Canjanagaram - Iyavian Curoovashacarray - Runganadhan Maharajapoorum - Cundadra panditt Maroodoor - Ramasameyan Manniapullam - Ramalingam Nundia Nulloor - Nulla verean Aulunchary Puttakkum - Kattaya Moopan Thambiapillai Cooan Puttukkam - Ragoopady Iyer 243 Cooan Puttukkam - Annasamy Iyer Nuttam - Aroonachala Pillay Madala Vabor - Ramaian Vadarungam - Vencapian Moopadooma Cuttalay - Ramaien Munganadum Coopa Tuchader - Coodavasal Subbaiahn Cauviripattnam - Ayyasamy Nungoor - Letchmanen Thenpaudy - Cooparean Moovaly - Cooparean Sembadavarayaneeropoo - Alagappan Vulluvacoody - Soovadaranian Dadasancovil - Tumpapillai Cayveelanchery - Aiyavien Yalaymoodoocoadam - Royan Teeroonagary - Covil iyengar, Namisivayam Putchaperumal Nalloor - Appacooty Cootumputti - Opilamnia Pillay Condauthor - Ayyapillai Sayamungulan - Appoovien Nyniapuram - Mootean Malayoor - Thandavarayapillai Theroovencodu coil - Appoopandaram Kulachutanapuram - Vedialingam 244 Theroovengadu - Corpogam Anoomandapoorum - Coondachariar Kulachela - Venkataaiengar Manigramam - Ambalavanun Aroogoor - Ramareddiyar Narasasolapoorum - Royappan Varavoody - Coopiapillay This petition in Tamil was translated and enclosed with a letter sent by F.A Grant, Collector of Tanjore, to William Patric, President and member of the Board of Revenue on 1st October 1799 from Nagore. Judicial Consultations, Vol.6A, 1799, pp.564-569. 245 APPENDIX III Notification to the Maravars of Nangunery To the principal Maravars of Nangunery Erulapan Thevan of Nangunery Madasamy Thevan Son of Ram Narraen Thevan of Marugalkuruchi Periya Pitcha Thevan Marugalkuruchi Chinna Pitcha Thevan Marugalkuruchi Cautakooty Thevan Marugalkuruchi Veera Perumal Thevan of Thennimalai Veera Perumal Thevan of Puttapolay Poodoor Nambi Talaiven, Sewa Rama Talaivan, Chokku Talaivan of Tirukurungudi Kattaboma Naigue the poligar of Panchalamkuruchi, having rebelled against the company suffered an ignominious death for his crime. His relatives knowing what befell him had not the sense to be warned by his example and to place their hopes upon the acknowledged mercy of the company but rebelliously rising in arms against the government provoked their own destruction (sic) of that iniquitous family. The anger of the company was therefore scarcely lift a vestige. 246 Perumal Naigue the poligar of Cadulgoody having rebelled against the company was expelled from his pollam, the lands he had enjoyed were declared sequestered to the state and himself died miserably in excile. Lingama Naigue having since appeared in arms against the company committed various acts of outrage and hostility whilst their troops were assembling but (sic) by the slaughter of the rebels of Panchalankuruchil he fled (sic) from the punishment that was prepassed from him. Ammaya Naigue, poligar of Colatoor having confederate himself with the rebellious Catabomma naigue was with his son seized and imprisoned and his pollam confiscated. In like manner another of his turbulent offspring having taken arms against the company had been punished with death. Caumia Naigue, poligar of Sapatoor rebelling against the company was deprived of his pollam and a price just upon his head (sic) he wandered miserably in the jungles and mountains for four years, but the company whose vigilance never ceases in pursuing and punishing the guilty paid a reward of 5,000/- chuckrams for his person and he was accordingly taken and hanged with his confederates in January last at Shevelapatur. In like manner the poligar of Nagalapoor and Yellayrumpunni having proved refractory were seized and have been banished beyond seas. 247 Ramalingam Sethupathi of Ramnad having also rebelled against the Company was seized and imprisoned six years ago and for ever deprived of his inheritance. He still remains in at Trichinapalli, better by repenting his former folly. Lastly Chinna Murdoo and Vella Murdoo of Shevaganga lived in security and were treated with indulgence so long as they possessed their obedience. But having gained with those who had rebelled against the company that country has been conformed upon a relative of the ancient zamindari and a large army is employed to place under his authority and to punish the rebellious Murdoos with death. These examples of punishments must have convinced the people of the country that no rank or condition can shield from chastisement those who rebel against the company hereto face a vicious and licentious mode of life found some palliation in the oppression and irregularity of the nobobs servants-but the known justice of the company’s government now deprives you of every shadow of excuse. It is my sincere wish that by returning to proper thoughts of your situation you may live in the peaceable enjoyment of all the rights to which you are entitled and as a proof of your obedience I request the immediate surrender of Dalavoy Pillai, Veerapandia and Mootiah naigue, you will duly consider what advantage you can drive from a connection with the rebels and in what miseries you will be plunged by persisting in it. 248 Captain Hazard the officer commander of the troops at Calacaud will regulate his movements by your proceedings. While the sword of punishment is unsheathed – I exhort you to consider seriously the inevitable consequences of provoking further the company’s displeasure for though slow to anger they never lay down their arms until they have eradicate the seeds of future disobedience. Tinnevelly (Signed) S.R.Lushington 20th September 1801 Collector of Tirunevelly Tirunelveli Dist. Records Vol.No.3579, pp.160-163. 249 APPENDIX IV Notification to the Maravars of Calacaud In the proclamation published by the right honorable the governor in council dated 31st July last making known to the people of the country the transfer of Tinnevelly in perpectuity to the company, the inhabitants were invited to a cheerful obedience to the authority of the company in the confident assurance of enjoying under the protection of public and defined laws, every just and ascertained civil right with a free exercise of the religious institutions and domestic usages of the ancestors – From that period no (sic) have been spared to convince the inhabitants of every description of the justice. I (sic) of the British Government and there is happily no exception to the general confidence and tranquility of the province, but in the single Magaun of Nanganchery dependent on Calacaud-so the Maravar Cauvalagars of that Muganum-every means of persuasion and means have been used to lead them to proper thoughts of their condition, but those having failed to reclaim them, it has become necessary to apprehend and confine the principals a punishment to themselves and as pledged for the obedience of the Cauvalgars dependent on them – Some of those cauvalgars whose names are here under specified having neglected to declare to the Thasildar in person their submission Allegiance, the Collector has firm motives of humanity went to the spot to invite and receive the acknowledgement of their obedience. Hitherto none has attended and a last warning is therefore given to them, that if they do not proceed to captain Hazard commanding the troops at 250 Calacaud three days from the date of this advertisement, they will be represented as Rebel against the company’s authority, their cauvel privileges will be sequestered and given to another and they will be punished with death whenever they are apprehended. Calacaud (Signed) S.R.Lushington 15th October 1801 Tirunelveli District Records, Vol.3579, pp.174-76. Collector 251 252 253 254 APPENDIX VII 255 256 257 258 APPENDIX VIII NOTICE WHEREAS an agitation against the Kaval system is now going on in certain taluks of this district, and whereas some of the villagers joining the movement do not content themselves with simply dismissing the Kallar Kavalgars and refusing to pay them fees, but proceed to boycott and molest the Kallars as a body, and drive them from their villages, the following notice is published for the information of all-Kallars and anti-Kallars alike. 1. The villagers have a perfect right to dispense with the services of Kallar Kavalgars and to discontinue the payment of Kaval fees to Kallars, but they have no right to molest and drive the Kallars out. They are hereby warned that any thing in the shape of intimidation or violence towards Kallars will be promptly and sternly repressed. 2. On the other hand any such offences committed by Kallars will be dealt with in the same way; both sides being treated absolutely impartially, and all offences against law and order, by whomsoever committed, punished with the utmost rigour of the law. 3. A Special Police Officer has been deputed to watch the movement and secure equal justice for both parties. 4. Meetings are not prohibited; but those who take part in them; and especially the leading men, are warned that they will be held strictly responsible if any unlawful resolutions are passed, or any unlawful action is the result of such meetings. No meeting may be hold within village site, or without due notice given to the nearest Police Station. These orders apply to meetings held by both parties alike. J.TWIGG District Magistrate 259 NOTICE In consequence of the serious Anti-Kallar riots that have recently occurred in the Sub-Division the District Magistrate considers it advisable to issue the following warning. No private person (Section 59 of C.P.C) may arrest an offender unless he actually sees him committing a non-bailable and cognizable offence. The assembling of villagers by the blowing of horns for the purpose of arresting known or suspected offenders is therefore unlawful, and will in future be severely dealt with under the Penal Code. If offences are committed the Police must be informed, and villagers must not take the law into their own hands. If this warning is disregarded and such acts of lawlessness as have recently occurred are repeated the District Magistrate will be compelled to move Government to proclaim the disturbed area under Section XV of Act V of 1861, and to quarter therein a punitive Police force at the cost of the inhabitants. J.TWIGG District Magistrate 260 261 262 263 APPENDIX IX Translation of the compromise deed regarding Kaval in the village of Giriammalapuram. 1115 Thai 10th The Mahajanams, (Villagers) Harikesavanallur. The Yadast of the partners of Kudi Kaval of the aforesaid village respectfully showeth:1. In respect of the disputes relating to the Kaval, we have entered into a compromise before you and we will be bound by the terms hereunder and we signify our consent to the following terms and we have subscribed our signature hereto. 2. The annual produce derived from the two crops in the nanja which has been allocated as village manyam for the aforesaid service of Kaval is to be distributed amongst the kavalgars after payment of Kist thereon to the Government. The sundry thefts should have to be accounted for by us out of the afore-said produce the remainder of the annual produce is to be distributed with common consent according to their proportionate share. If any thefts were committed by any of the Kavalgar he should be bound by the decision of Pangalis or before the villagers. 3. For the Kaval Rs.400/- should be deposited in the Post Office Savings Bank for 16 shares, the value of each share being Rs.25/- only. 4. We are only liable for the liabilities arising from the Kaval. If any trouble arises on account of individual actions, the persons alone actually responsible for that is liable for that. 5. The customary two heads of our kaval are to take and enjoy the income derived from half share as usual. 6. If any of the Kaval pangalis getting rights annually to the Kaval or if any of the respective Pangalis were to misbehave by committing thefts etc. in respect of the Kaval, they should not only indemnify the loss incurred; but also they should forfeit their shares or rights in the Kaval. 264 7. The fees pertaining to the kaval should be collected by the 16 pangalis jointly without any dispute; they should not be collected by the 16 pangalis individually. Account should be maintained for the collections and if necessary an Accountant should be employed and his salary is to be defrayed. 8. The kaval fees emoluments and fines and the produce derived from common Nanja should be collected in common and gathered in a house, and after meeting the expenses, the remainder should be distributed in that house. If there is any breach, the common land is to be proceeded against. 9. Before the assemblage of villagers, as often as occasion arises, we will set our conduct by the aforesaid terms. Signed by the following persons. 1. Sundara Thevan 2. Seeni Thevan 3. Sudalayandi Thevan 4. W.Kuthalinga Thevan 5. H.S.Pagya Thevan 6. V.Adhimoola Thevan 7. Dhalavoy Thevan 8. B.S.Piramuthu Thevan 9. Pattamuthu Thevan 10. Kandasami Thevan 11. C.Venkateswara Thevan 12. Pechimuthu Thevan 13. Solamuthu Thevan 14. Pichandi Thevan 15. Solamuthu Thevan 16. Mooka Thevan Inspr.Genl. of Police