李士珍：沃伦•黑斯廷斯与英国在印度早期殖民统治研究

摘要

 本文主要考察沃伦•黑斯廷斯就任英属印度总督（1774～1785）期间对英属印度政治、经济、司法和社会文化政策的调整，并结合英国国内政局的变化和殖民统治思想的转变，探讨英国资本主义发展与其殖民政策之间的关系。

　　导言部分介绍了研究的目的、意义、国内外研究现状，并对本文的创新之处以及所使用的研究方法加以说明。

　　正文共分五章。第一章介绍黑斯廷斯就任英属印度总督的时代背景以及公司殖民统治初期所遇到的一些问题，诸如公司财政危机、公司职员腐化。面对这些问题，英国国内一些政治人物展开了是否放弃印度、是否由议会取代公司直接控制印度的思想争论。本章还分析了黑斯廷斯的早期经历，说明他从东印度公司的书写员一步步升到孟加拉省督这段经历对他任期所实行政策的影响。

　　第二章介绍黑斯廷斯以及英国议会对英属印度行政体制的调整。黑斯廷斯上任之时，公司面临严重危机：在内部，职员收取贿赂，参与私人贸易，使得印度民怨沸腾；在外部，公司忙于对外扩张，导致军费飞涨，公司出现严重的财政亏空。为了维护公司利益和减轻财政负担，黑斯廷斯加强对公司职员的管理，提高职员素质，并在公司董事会的授权下取消了双头统治体制，开始由公司直接统治英属印度。与此同时，英国议会也陆续颁布了1773年《调整法》、《1781年修正法》、1784年《皮特法》和《1786年修正法》，以逐步加强对英属印度的控制。

　　第三章主要论述黑斯廷斯对英属印度司法体制的调整。黑斯廷斯就任英属印度总督之初，英属印度司法体系混乱，治安秩序不稳。基于此，黑斯廷斯和英国议会建立了由公司法院和英国国王法院构成的“二元制司法体系”，但并没有明确公司法院和英国国王法院管辖权的范围，致使他们因部分案件的管辖权产生纠纷。同时黑斯廷斯对印度本土法适用范围进行限定，并逐步引入英国法原则。为了强化对英属印度的控制，黑斯廷斯还对治安管理体系进行了调整，并收到一定成效，但英属印度的匪盗现象仍很严重。

　　第四章论述黑斯廷斯对英属印度税收政策的调整及其影响。着重阐述黑斯廷斯所实行税收政策的变化：在税收政策方面，从每年税收拍卖承包制到五年税收估算期，一直到后来又恢复到每年税收拍卖承包制；在税收机构方面，从东印度公司派监督者到黑斯廷斯建立巡回委员会，再到设立阿米尼委员会。该章还分析了黑斯廷斯税收的政策的影响，诸如资金外流、孟加拉等地的社会结构的变化。

　　第五章主要考察黑斯廷斯在邮政和文化方面所实行的政策。黑斯廷斯在邮政方面的主要措施是增加驿站，对邮件进行分类传送以及对所有邮件进行收费。在文化方面，黑斯廷斯鼓励公司职员和英国学者学习波斯语和印地语，翻译印度教文化典籍，并创办宗教学校、建立学术团体，以更好地控制印度。

　　结语部分总结黑斯廷斯任英属印度总督期间所实行调整政策的本质和影响以及与英国殖民政策的关系，并指出：黑斯廷斯作为一名殖民官员，是在牺牲印度人民利益的基础上扩大了英国的殖民势力；埃德蒙•伯克等人反对的是公司独占印度而非对印度的殖民活动；英国国内部分民众对殖民事业的反对并不妨碍英国的殖民扩张；英国人之所以没有如在北美那样在印度大肆杀戮是因为印度较高的发展水平和更强烈的抵抗；英国为了更好地统治印度虽给印度带来了一些现代西方文明成果，但更多的是灾难。

　　关键词：印度；殖民统治；沃伦•黑斯廷斯；英国东印度公司

Abstract

 This thesis mainly investigates the adjustments of Warren Hastings, the Governor-General of British India, in the field of political, economic, judicial and socio-cultural policies during his governorship (1774 – 1785). It explores the relationship between the development of British capitalism and British colonial policy in connection with the changes of British political situation and the ideology of colonial rule.

　　The introduction describes the purpose and significance of this investigation, makes a survey of the related academic studies, and illustrates the innovations and research methods.

　　The main body of this thesis is divided into five chapters. The first chapter examines the background of Warren Hastings as Governor-General of British India, and the problems in British India after the British East India Company’s rise to colonial state-formation, such as company’s financial crisis and the corruption of the company servants. Confronted with these problems, some political figures in Britain held debates as to whether Britain should give up India or whether the Parliament should take over the direct rule over India from the East India Company. It also looks into the early experience of Hastings from writer to Governor-General in India and analyzes its effects on his later policies.

　　The second chapter examines the adjustments made by Hastings and the Parliament to the administrative system of British India. At the beginning of Hastings’s governorship, the company was in crisis. Internally, the staff secretly took bribes, and also conducted private trade, which made Indian boiling with resentment; and externally, the company was busy with expansion, which made military expenditure surging and resulted in heavy debt. In order to safeguard the interest of the Company and lift its financial burden, Hastings strengthened the Company control over the staff, focusing on improving the quality of the staff, and cancelled the dual government under the order of the Board of Directors of the East India Company, and then the company took over the direct rule over India. At same time, the British Parliament promulgated the Regulating Act of 1773, the Amending Act of 1781, the Pitt’s India Act of 1784 and the Amending Act of 1786, so as to gradually strengthen the control of British India.

　　The third chapter focuses on Hastings’s reform of the judicial system in British India. At the beginning of Hastings’s governorship, judicial system and public security were in chaos. Therefore, Hastings and the Parliament set up the Calcutta Supreme Court and Sadar Diwani Adalat and Sadar Nizamat Adalat which constituted the binary judicial system. However, the two courts quarreled with the jurisdiction of some cases because of lack of a clear division of authority. At the same time, Hastings confined the scope of application of India’s indigenous law, gradually introducing British legal principles. This chapter also explores Hastings’s reform of the public security administration system, which was intended to strengthen control over British India. The reform had some effect, but the problem of “dacoity” was still serious.

　　The fourth chapter expounds Hastings’s reform of the revenue policy of British India and its impact. It mainly focuses on the changes of revenue policy during his governorship: in the respect of revenue policy, from annual revenue auction contracting system to the quinquennial settlement, and then to the restoration of annual settlement; in the respect of revenue administration, from company detachment supervisor to Hastings’s establishment of the Committee of Circuit, then to the establishment of Amini Commission. This chapter also expounds the impacts of Hastings’s policies, such as the outflow of capital and the changes of the Bengali social structure.

　　The fifth chapter expounds Hastings’s policies in the postal and cultural aspects. In the postal sphere, Hastings adjusted the Postal Communications, such as extension of Post Offices, categorizing the mail and charging for all the mails. In the cultural sphere, Hastings encouraged the staff of the company and British scholars to study Persian and Hindi, to translate Hindu cultural books, to set up religious schools, as well as to establish academic societies in order to strengthen colonial rule in India.

　　The conclusion analyzes the nature of Hastings’s policies, their impacts, and their relations with British general colonial policies. The main point is as follows: Hastings as a governor expanded the British colonial power on the basis of sacrificing the interests of the people of India; Edmund Burke and others were against the company’s exclusive rights of rule in India rather than its colonial activities in India; the opposition of some people in Britain to the colonial cause did not impede British colonial expansion; British colonialists did not massacre lots of people in India as they did in North America, because of India’s higher level of development and stronger resistance. Although the British brought some elements of modern western civilization to India for the purpose of strengthening rule, colonial rule did bring more disasters to the people of India.

　　KEY WORDS: India; Colonial Rule; Warren Hastings; British East India Company