Full Monty on the Connemara Divorce,part II

Continued from part I

For almost a year Lady Connemara had confabulated with legal luminaries on the grounds for divorce. There had been frank discussions on the Connemaras’ private life and, based on certain proclivities of his, it was agreed that there were sufficient grounds for divorce on the charge of technical cruelty to the partner. But what clinched the decision to pray for annulment of the marriage was the confession of Hannah Moore, a maid-in-waiting, that she had committed adultery with Lord Connemara while in Madras in 1886.

Hannah Moore’s testimony was taken on commission, which meant she deposed in private to officers nominated by the Court. Her story was that she had been in the service of Lady Connemara from 1880 and in 1886 had accompanied the Governor and his wife to Madras. While there, Lord Connemara had committed adultery with her on more than one occasion. In 1887, she had informed Surgeon-Major W. H. Briggs about the matter. Lord Connemara, on being confronted by Dr. Briggs, confirmed that it was the truth and requested the latter to hush it up. Hannah Moore was then sent back to England and had subsequently found employment elsewhere.

The testimony of Surgeon-Major Briggs was, therefore, of vital importance and he sailed for England. In any case it became impossible for him to stay on in Madras for Lord Connemara had spread the story that his estranged wife had committed adultery with Briggs. The latter confronted the Governor over this and managed to obtain a written apology but, sick at heart, he decided to go on home leave. From far away Madras, Lord Connemara began using the official machinery to intimidate him. Threats and blandishments were held out to get him to leave England before the trial. He was posted to Ireland. Surgeon-Major Briggs then met the Director General of the Army Medical Department and informed him in detail of the necessity for his having to stay back in England. He was posted to Woolwich from where he regularly travelled to London to meet Lady Connemara’s lawyers.

A few days before the divorce case, however, he was ordered to leave for India. It was clear that someone high up wanted him out of the way. Dr. Briggs decided to resign his commission with the army and stay on. Realising that the game was up, Lord Connemara went on leave on November 8, 1890, proceeding to England immediately.

The visitors’ gallery of Divorce Court No II was bursting at the seams on November 27, 1890, when Sir James Hannen sat to hear the case of Connemara vs Connemara. The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs was present at the behest of the Government. The trial was without a jury. Lady Connemara was present, heavily veiled and clad, rather appropriately, in black. A battery of Queen’s Counsel represented her – Sir Frank Lockwood, A. F. Bayford and G. Tahourdin. Lord Connemara was neither present nor represented. The case began with a summing up of the family backgrounds of the two parties and the distressing events that had followed. Doctors who had attended to the Connemara couple as far back as 1875 were summoned and they deposed on the nature of illnesses that they had treated. From what was said, it was surmised that Lady Connemara had suffered ‘cruelty’ at the hands of her husband almost since the early days of marriage.

The deposition of Hannah Moore was then read out. Dr. Briggs was asked to vouch for the veracity of it, which he did. He was then questioned as to whether he had committed adultery with Lady Connemara, which he denied. When Lady Connemara came up for questioning, there was considerable excitement. She slowly lifted her veil and mounted the stand, where she was allowed to sit. She detailed her version of the story, and when asked, said that there was not a word of truth in the canard that she had had a liaison with Dr. Briggs. Further evidence was to be called but the judge ruled this unnecessary as the respondent “had not thought it proper to appear”. The two charges had been established and a decree nisi with costs was granted.

Dr. Briggs then lobbied to get himself reinstated in the army. The Secretary of State for War, the Hon. Edward Stanhope, promised assistance and, in 1891, Dr. Briggs was taken back in the army. To his shock, however, he realised that he had been demoted by several ranks. He refused to accept the offer. Negotiations were opened once again. Questions were raised in the House of Commons, with Lockwood, Lady Connemara’s lawyer being an MP, taking up the matter. Stanhope assured the House that Briggs would be reinstated in full. The assurance was, however, never followed up with a gazette notification.

In the meanwhile, interests inimical to Briggs planted a letter in the Army and Navy Gazette. Signed by ‘Veritas’ it questioned the need for reinstating a man who had been a witness in a divorce. Dr. Briggs was quick to take offence. He wrote a long and detailed letter to the same publication, in which he accused the Director General of the Army Medical Department of succumbing to pressure from higher quarters and doing his very best to scuttle the career prospects of Dr Briggs. The letter was published and brought to the attention of Prince George, the Duke of Cambridge and Commander-in-Chief of the British Army. He ordered that reinstatement proceedings of Dr. Briggs be dropped at once as he had made serious allegations against senior officials.

The matter was once again raked up in Parliament by the indefatigable Lockwood. But Henry Campbell-Bannerman (later to be knighted and Prime Minister of England), who had succeeded Stanhope as Secretary of State for War, refused to go against the C-in-C’s orders. Dr. Briggs lost his commission forever. It was some consolation that he had through his ardours secured Lady Connemara’s affection. The two married in 1894 and lived a happy life till her passing away in 1898.

Lord Connemara, whose public career was finished with the lurid details of the divorce, married again in 1894. His new wife was Gertrude, widow of the mining millionaire E.J. Coleman. Queen Victoria never forgave Lady Connemara. In her view, it was less of a case against an erring peer of the realm and more of a besmirching of a Governor of Madras. It was the duty of the white races to set an example to the natives and by exposing her husband to the world Lady Connemara had brought down the image of the empire. She was never received in court while Lord Connemara with his new wife was made welcome. The second Lady Connemara died in 1898. Lord Connemara passed away in 1902.

What of Hannah Moore in the meanwhile? In 1891, a year after the Connemaras had gone their individual ways, the Marchioness of Huntley sued the Brighton Hotel Company for the loss of 1000 pounds worth of jewellery at the Bedford Hotel.

The hotel decided to fight the case, accusing Lady Huntley of carelessness. It also insinuated that her maid Hannah Moore had stolen the jewellery. She denied it and, to support her claim, furnished several testimonials from former employers. Among these was one from Lady Connemara, written after the divorce. She could not speak too highly, Lady Connemara wrote, of the fidelity and trustworthiness of Hannah Moore. Was this a character certificate a wife would ever write on a woman who had had an affair with her husband?

The newspapers speculated on whether Lady Huntley would have taken on a self-confessed adulteress into her employment. Those present in court felt that Hannah was hardly the type to have foolishly involved herself with any man, no matter how highly placed he was. This led to a debate on whether Lady Connemara and Dr. Briggs had paid Hannah to confess to adultery, which Lord Connemara had never committed, at least with her.

The last word is best left to The Star, published from New Zealand. Reporting on the matter on June 10, 1891, it ended its article thus – “The law of libel being what it is, one had better not speculate further”.

Searching for Aal Thottam

Where is Aal Thottam, a journalist had asked a year ago. I had never heard of the place, I said. But it is in a movie song, he riposted. Perhaps a figment of a lyricist’s imagination, I hazarded. No, he insisted, it must be somewhere around, and there the matter rested.

The question would periodically resurface and I would half-heartedly search for it, occasionally cursing the journo for having planted it in my mind. Youtube revealed the song to be from a Vijay-Simran starrer titled ‘Youth’, and it was a raucous dance number. The first line went: Aal Thotta Bhoopathi Nanada (I am the king of Aal Garden). Now what or who was Aal?

I looked in several books about Madras. There was not a single area named Aal’s Garden or Al’s Garden. Finally, I found the answer in a 1933 streetwise directory of Madras. It was Hall’s Garden! I had been searching under the wrong letter. Hall’s Garden Street said the directory, connected Peter’s Road and Rasool Oomer Bahadur Street. It also added that the thoroughfare was 415 feet in length and 15 feet wide.

Both garden and street have now vanished. But the name still persists. Rasool Oomer Bahadur (now sadly ROB), that defiant scion of the Arcot line, has five streets named after him. The area around ROB Street, which is now a rabbit’s warren of houses and offices, is still referred to as Hall’s Garden or Aal Thottam. As to the garden, I can only speculate that the YMCA grounds and the Wesleyan church and school must all have once been Hall’s Garden.

Of Hall, there were three in Madras. The first was Joseph, a commissioner of the East India Company who came from England in 1668, to sort out differences between Sir Edward Winter and George Foxcroft, both of whom fancied themselves governor of the place. Winter had jailed Foxcroft. Hall made peace and having instated Foxcroft as governor, he withdrew. He did not stay long enough to own property here.

The second was James Stuart Hall, who arriving in Madras in 1775, became advocate, attorney and proctor at the Mayor’s Court. He later bought the city’s first newspaper – The Madras Courier, and became its editor. Among his first acts was to publish a story describing a mythical kingdom run by despotic officials. Unfortunately, several government officials of Madras saw themselves mirrored in the story and forced Hall to publish an apology.

The third was Hamilton Hall, who entered the service in 1781, and rose to become a general in the Army, dying in charge of the southern command in1827 in Tiruchi. Gen. Hall owned extensive properties in Madras. He had garden houses in Egmore and Kilpauk, and two roads in the city, one in each locality, are still named after him. Interestingly, there existed a Hall’s Garden in Nungambakkam too. It is likely that Gen. Hall owned gardens in Royapettah as well, making him the original Aal Thotta Bhoopathi.

From there to a movie song is a long journey.

This article appeared in The Hindu under the Hidden Histories column

The Connemara divorce

27th November 1890 saw London all agog. The final hearing of a sensational high society divorce case, of the Governor of Madras from his wife, was taking place. The petitioner, Lady Connemara, daughter of Lord Dalhousie, once Viceroy of India, was there in person. The respondent, Lord Connemara was neither present nor represented.

In 1886, Robert Bourke, a successful career politician was made Lord Connemara and posted to Madras as Governor. In the Governor’s household were his niece, Lady Eva Quinn and her husband who was ADC to the Governor. Lady Connemara suffered from the Madras heat and Lady Eva Quinn began acting as hostess at all social events, which the former deeply resented. Quarrels ensued especially when the gubernatorial party retreated to Ootacamund and Capt Quinn resigned his post and returned to England, leaving his wife to follow. Lord Connemara returned to Madras in October 1888 with his niece, leaving his wife in the hills. The Governor’s doctor, Surgeon Major Briggs stayed on to attend on Lady Connemara.

Once in Madras, Lady Eva stayed at Government House and acted as hostess to a large house party complete with several aristocrats from England. Lady Connemara arrived suddenly with Dr Briggs on the eve of a ball, and was mortified at what she saw. She left at once to stay at a hotel. Incredibly enough, barring a few of the inner circle, none knew of Lady Connemara residing at the hotel for four long months. She refused to return to Government House even after Lady Eva was sent home. In March 1889, Lady Connemara sailed for England.

In November 1889, Hannah Moore, one of Lady Connemara’s former maids confessed to adultery with Lord Connemara while at Government House, Madras. Lady Connemara immediately filed for divorce citing infidelity. Lord Connemara countered by accusing his wife of having an affair with Dr Briggs, which she hotly denied. The Governor resigned his post and returned to England but chose to stay away from the divorce proceedings. His political career was finished.

Dr Briggs testified in Court that Hannah had confessed to him about the adultery. Lord Connemara being absent, the divorce was granted at once. Shortly thereafter, Lady Connemara married Dr Briggs. Hannah Moore went on to a good position with another aristocratic family. Lord Connemara married a rich widow. In short everyone lived happily ever after. Several years later, a newspaper speculated on whether Lady Connemara had connived with the girl to stage a drama of adultery to enable a quick divorce. It cited a character reference that Lady Connemara gave Hannah in which she had praised the latter’s faith and trustworthiness.

Government House where all this happened has since made way for the new Assembly cum Secretariat now the multi-speciality hospital. As for the hotel, it changed its name to Connemara and remains so. A portrait of Lord Connemara is in the lobby. A picture of his first lady would have been more appropriate.

This article appeared under the Hidden Histories column of The Hindu dated 16th April 2013

George Town – a tinderbox waiting to explode

What price heritage like this?

The New Year began with a fire breaking out on the second floor of a modern commercial complex in the George Town area. Happily, no lives were lost, which was to the good. But the fire could be put out only after a struggle. What, however, emerged once again was the fact that new buildings in the oldest part of the city, as in several other places too, are coming up without any adherence to fire safety norms and regulations. Even if the original construction conformed, later additions put paid to such precautions. The question is, what are our regulatory authorities and planning agencies doing when these buildings are constructed and, later, modified?

The fire in the building under question broke out at 8 a.m. in a completely enclosed room with no windows. It was a good 45 minutes before the fire was detected and fire-safety personnel informed. When they arrived, they found the going tough. The windows to the office were barred with grilles and even the use of the sky-lift proved useless. Access was gained only by breaking open the front door and, by the time all this was done, the fire had spread. Fire tenders from various parts of the city had to be pressed into service to contain the conflagration. It also transpired that there was no fire-fighting equipment on the premises.

Considering that every building in the city is to be built/modified only after the CMDA/Corporation approves the plan, how are such fire accidents repeatedly taking place? Adherence to fire-safety norms is one of the criteria on the basis of which approval is given. If so, how is it that such buildings are allowed? It is well known that, in our city, the plan submitted for approval is often entirely different from what is finally constructed. This is why our civic authorities are supposed to visit building sites while work is in progress and ascertain compliance with what has been approved. And when the work is completed, they are supposed to inspect the site once again before issuing a compliance certificate. The same holds true for the water supply and electricity authorities as well. What happens in reality is that such inspections are rarely done and approval is more of a bureaucratic procedure rather than subjecting to actual inspection. This speaks volumes of the attitude builders, developers and civic authorities have towards public safety. What matters most to the builders and those who connive with them is the commercial success such projects make possible.

Planning for such structures in George Town (or, for that matter, in any of the older areas of the city) requires greater sensitivity. The indiscriminate approval for high-rises in the same locations could result in enormous possibilities for such fire accidents to occur. Ducting of cables is often never done and the wires are simply pulled from junction boxes and taken to the building where they are to be terminated. This is by itself a hazard. Secondly, access to all parts of a building from the street is next to impossible considering that most of the streets were planned originally with buildings sharing common walls.

If this be the problem with the new buildings, the older ones in these areas are prone to fire too. They contain enormous quantities of dry timber, which is perfect fuel for fires to spread. Moreover, because of issues of ownership in many of these buildings, poor maintenance and neglect result. It is, therefore, all the more necessary for civic authorities to keep an eye on them through periodic inspections.

What is being demanded is not something extraordinary. Any international city needs a proactive civic body that issues compliance certificates only after due-diligence processes are completed. Chennai, which at least on paper claims to be a world-class city, need not and cannot be an exception.

Season Vumboid 2012 # 10

Like the Golden Raspberry, it is high time Carnatic music had its recognition for worst performances. Some titles could be Isai Perkolaignar, Sangita Kaalanidhi, Sangita Kaala Shikhamani, Isai Komaali, Not-a-Brahmam, Vani Kala Kolakara etc.

Season Vumboid 2012 # 5

Most lec-demmers have just one topic which they flog for life. These are 99% their PhD theses!

The father of Indian Cricket in Madras

Buchi Babu at the crease

To the citizens of 19th Century Madras, Modhavarappu Dera Venkataswami Naidu was something of a wonder. Tall and aristocratic in mien, he had migrated from Nellore and became dubash of Parry & Co., in which capacity he amassed enormous wealth. This he invested wisely and well. Most of the present-day industrial area of Kakalur was his, as were entire streets in Triplicane. In fashionable Luz in Mylapore he acquired 20 acres and built Lakshmi Vilas. When he retired from business in the 1850s to lead a life of leisure, the position of dubash went to his son-in-law, B. Ramaswami Naidu. The latter and Venkataswami’s only daughter had five sons.

The eldest of these children was Venkatamahipathi Naidu, or Buchi Babu, born in 1868. He and his four brothers were brought up in the best English tradition, thanks to Venkataswami Naidu bringing from England the best governesses. These women would take their wards to Chepauk to watch the English play cricket. Soon cricket developed as a pastime at the vast grounds at home. The tennis courts of Lakshmi Vilas and the long verandah of Luz House, the second of the family residences within the compound, served as pitches. Syces were asked to throw the cricket ball accurately and with good length and direction and thus the boys acquired good practice against pace bowling.

Venkataswami Naidu, having no male offspring, adopted Buchi Babu and, on VN’s death, 65 per cent of his estate was bequeathed to the latter, the remaining going to the other grandsons. Thus at a very young age, Buchi Babu was an enormously wealthy man. He had graduated from Presidency College and, for a brief while, had worked as dubash at Parry’s. But soon he severed all links from business and became a gentleman of leisure. The post of dubash went to his brother B. Ramaswami Naidu.

Buchi Babu’s decision to retire was to pay handsome dividends for Indian cricket. He realised that Indians could only organise scratch teams to play but had no clubs to raise teams to meet other teams. He organised a meeting of several young men from well-to-do families of Madras and explained to them the need for a club. Not waiting for their support, he secured a site on the Esplanade. The ground was levelled at Buchi Babu’s expense and was converted into an ideal space for cricket. That was in 1888 and, thus, was born what Buchi Babu christened the Madras United Cricket Club, the MUCC, or the MUC as it would later become. It marked the birth of Indian cricket in the city.

Most of the members were boys from poor families. Parents considered cricket a waste of time and very reluctantly allowed the boys to play the game. Orthodoxy was another factor, for cricket did not recognise caste barriers. It was common for players to slink away from home in dhotis and then change to trousers at the venue, for leaving home wearing trousers was a sure sign of going out to play. Opposing teams were invariably from schools and colleges. And it was from them that Buchi Babu selected promising youngsters. He imported shirts, trousers, cricket boots, bats, balls, gloves and other equipment for his players and encouraged them in every way. Over time, the MUC became known for its six perfect pitches, all better than those of the Chepauk-based, English-only Madras Cricket Club (MCC). And it was Buchi Babu’s dream that his MUC would one day be invited to play against the MCC.

That came about when his friend P.W. Partridge of the legal firm of King & Partridge suggested it. Partridge was then captain of the MCC team. Buchi Babu agreed, provided his team was allowed to lunch at the MCC pavilion. Till then the practice had been that when MCC played against Indians, its team members would eat in the pavilion while the Indians would make do under trees. Agreeing to Buchi Babu’s terms was a major step and it took all of Partridge’s convincing powers to get his fellow members of the MCC to agree. But give in they did. As the Indians were by and large unfamiliar with occidental table manners, a separate table with Indian food was arranged for them, but under the same roof as the MCC members. It was a quiet revolution that Buchi Babu achieved. Soon, the same facilities were extended to all Indian teams playing against the MCC.

Thanks to Buchi Babu, several Indians made a name in Madras cricket. Apart from his three sons, M. Venkataramanjulu (Bhatt), M. Baliah and C. Ramaswami, there were R. Chari (“the greatest of all left-arm bowlers that Madras produced”), Subbarayalu (a fast bowler, a punishing batsman and a good slip fieldsman), Narayan Rao (“the first to adopt the orthodox forward play in batting”), K. Seshachari (wicket keeper who went with the Maharajah of Patiala as part of the All India team in 1911 to England), and B. Subramaniam (lieutenant to Buchi Babu in cricket matters and a fine opening batsman). Buchi Babu himself turned out regularly to play though, according to his son Ramaswami, he was heavily built and so got tired after scoring 50 to 60 runs and would throw away his wicket. He had “an upright stance, and his strong points were full-blooded off-drives and powerful square-cuts.”

In 1907, encouraged by the success of the MCC vs MUC matches which had become a regular fixture by then, Buchi Babu and Partridge decided on an annual Europeans vs Indians match to be played during Christmas Week. This soon had the blessings of everyone and the hunt began for suitable players to make up from the whole Presidency, a representative eleven for each side. The Europeans contacted clubs in the mofussil and military while the MUC worked in tandem with the South Indian Athletic Association. In the event, the two sides were to be dominated largely by the MCC and the MUC respectively. And by December 1908, the teams were ready.

All was set for the match when Buchi Babu died suddenly on December 19, 1908. It was the culmination of a series of grim tragedies that had struck the house of Dera Venkataswami Naidu since the beginning of that year. In 1906, Buchi Babu and his wife Bangaru Ammal had married off their eldest daughter Narasamma, aged 12, to her maternal uncle (Bangaru Ammal’s brother). The young man died in 1908. Bangaru Ammal’s father adopted her youngest son and he became Cotah Ramaswami, taking his grandfather’s initials. But the early widowhood of her daughter was too much to bear for Bangaru Ammal who died in September 1908. Buchi Babu felt her loss keenly for, apart from a wife, he had lost a wise adviser and capable administrator of his vast estates. The sorrow and subsequent worries broke him and caused his early death. It was a grievous blow to his eight children who came under the loving care of his brother Chitti Babu. But his larger family, that of cricket fans and budding players, felt his loss even more. The annual Presidency Match of 1908 was almost abandoned, but thanks to B. Subramaniam it did take place on December 31, 1908 and January 1, 1909. Heavy rains, however, led to the match being abandoned.

Buchi Babu’s family itself was to produce sportsmen and sports women for several generations. His finds on the fields were to keep his name aloft and ensured that cricket became a part of Indian tradition. Over the years, the MCC Indianised and with indepen-dence India came to be among the foremost cricketing nations, with several from Madras adding to the glory. Buchi Babu would have been delighted. His MUC, of course, is now no longer a major player, what with its vast grounds having been taken over by the Government to build a bus-stand. But the success of the game is undis-puted. Ramachandra Guha claims that cricket is one of the factors that binds India and in bringing that about Buchi Babu was among the pioneers.

Season Vumboid 2012 # 4

Many musicians now send e-invites for their concerts during the season. Will they give take away gifts also?

Season Vumboid 2012 # 3

Most musicians court the press. Dancers write, about themselves.

Season Vumboid 2012 # 2

Carnatic music was and is dominated by I, Iyer and Iyengar. Now we see a number of i-pads and i-pods on stage and off it as well.