Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The policy is most commonly associated with Dalhousie, who was the East India Company's Governor-General of India of British India between 1848 and 1856. However, the doctrine was articulated by the Court of Directors of the Company as early as 1834, and several smaller states had already been annexed under this doctrine before Dalhousie took ...
The Doctrine of Lapse (1847): Lord Dalhousie, the Governor-General of India, introduced this policy, allowing the British to annex Indian princely states if their rulers died without a male heir. [1] Annexation of Punjab (1847): The British East India Company annexed Punjab after the First Anglo-Sikh War.
Wood's despatch is the informal name for a formal despatch that was sent by Sir Charles Wood, the President of the Board of Control of the British East India Company to Lord Dalhousie, the Governor-General of India. Wood's communique suggested a major shift to popularising the use of English within India.
The code contained significant provisions governing, policing and judicial and civil administration. Its best known provision was the Permanent Settlement [1] (or the zamindari system), which established a revenue collection scheme that lasted until the 20th century.
The most controversial and tainted 'reform' developed and implemented under Dalhousie was the policy of taking all legal (often illegal too) means possible to assume control over "lapsed" states. Dalhousie, driven by the conviction that all India needed to be brought under British administration, began to apply what was called the doctrine of ...
big.assets.huffingtonpost.com
The note recorded by Lord Dalhousie was as under: “The organization of the Department of Public Works in the Indian Empire will be incomplete unless it shall be provided for the Supreme Government itself come agency by which it may be enabled to exercise the universal control confided to it over public works in India with the best of ...
cial safeguards violated the Geneva Conventions and U.S.law.The Supreme Court also insisted that a prisoner be able to be present at his own trial. In response, the White House prepared a bill that “simply revokes that right.”The New York Timeseditorial page warned, “It is especially frightening to see the administration use