Charles Becher
(1777-1842)
CHARLES BECHER, the sixth child and 5th son of Richard Becher and Ann Haselby, was born 5th February 1777 at St Marylebone, London.
He was nominated for the HEIC and became a Cadet in 1793 and went out to India on 25th September the following year. He was promoted to Cornet on 1st December 1794 the same year, according to the records, that he was appointed Salt Agent for Cuttack. He decided to resign on 25th November 1795 having also been appointed as a Writer with the Bengal Civil Service that year.
Before he took up the office of Salt Agent he had, as was normal procedure, to swear an Oath of Office whereby 'he solemnly bound himself not to derive, either directly or indirectly, any Profit or Emolument from his Public Situation excepting such as then was or might thereafter be authorised by the Governor General in Council.'
In February 1803 he and his brother, George, sailed from Calcutta to England aboard the Asia.
In due course he became a Senior Merchant and a Collector of Customs at Balasore and, from 6th February 1829, Commercial Resident at Radnagore.
Before then, in 1826, and to his horror, he was 'charged with corruption and violation of his public duty, in having at different times, during the last five or six years, demanded a sum or sums of money from Mr Richard Becher (his nephew, the son of John Becher), in consideration of the latter individual being allowed to contract for the Exportation of Salt from Cuttack to Calcutta, and in having received from the said Mr Richard Becher, during the period aforesaid, a certain sum of money in pursuance of the above agreement made between them.'
This contract ran from 1819 to 30th April 1824 and Charles Becher duly received 17,000 rupees arising from the profits accrued on the contract from his nephew. In the handwritten financial accounts of 1824 this item in the current account appears as a cash credit on account of a 'Gratuity'. It transpired that in early 1825 Richard Becher threatened to bring forward charges against his uncle and to disclose the above transaction. Charles Becher then repaid to Richard Becher the 17,000 rupees together with another unconnected 9,000 rupees which he had received from his nephew prior to the date of the contract.
Charles Becher's defence rested on his claim that the money received by him was the repayment of a just debt and that his nephew applied the term 'gratuity' to the payments made by him as a way of escaping from his claims against his nephew. Another part of his defence was that he acquiesced in the form of entry used in the accounts in the belief that the use of the term 'gratuity' to his payments in instalments of a debt could never alter the nature of the transaction and that by his admission of the account furnished by his nephew, which included a term suggesting prima facie evidence of guilt, must be considered as proof of his innocence.
The debt in question arose from the business of an Indigo factory at Hobrah, Bengal, in which Charles Becher was a partner with others. His nephew Richard Becher was interested in joining the partnership and after negotiations had taken place he was admitted. Some years later in 1814 the factory closed with debts of more than 70,000 rupees and one aspect of the case in 1826 revolved around whether Richard Becher, on his admittance to the partnership, received any deed of conveyance or was finally or formally admitted into the partnership, 'so as to render him legally responsible for any part of the debt in question.'
After seven months of investigations and proceedings Charles Becher was acquitted of the specific charge brought against him, the evidence being insufficient to substantiate it, but His Lordship in Council was of the opinion that under the facts stated he must have been guilty of a most serious dereliction of duty to Government. He also opined that 'Mr Charles Becher's conduct must be considered as still more seriously culpable in as much as the legality of the debt in liquidation of which he alleges payments my Mr Richard Becher to have been made, was always disavowed by that person. There is therefore the strongest ground of presumption that Mr Charles Becher used his official authority and influence in the recovery of a claim which he could not otherwise have enforced. There remains the further question, how far Mr Charles Becher can be considered worthy of that degree of confidence, which would justify Government in reinstating him in his Office, or in employing him in another situation of equal trust and responsibility.'
His Lordship went to state that on the whole he felt compelled to record his opinion that 'he could not consistently with a due regard for the public interest, allow Mr (Charles) Becher to continue in an Office so responsible and so open to abuse as that of Salt Agent. The Governor General did not, at the same time, see sufficient reason for the absolute exclusion of Mr Charles Becher from Public Employment...and that Mr Becher with impropriety be appointed to an Office of inferior trust, and over the operation of which there exist more direct and efficient checks.'
Charles Grant Becher was thus removed from his position as Salt Agent and was appointed to the then vacant position of Commercial Resident of Rungpore.
Two weeks later, on 10th August 1826, he sent a letter to Sir Edmund Molony, Officiating Territorial Secretary to Government, in which he stated that the findings 'are so seriously prejudicial to my character and so painful to my feelings, that I am compelled to request that you will lay before the Right Honourable the Vice President in Council the grounds on which I respectfully solicit their revision. If I felt conscious that such inferences were justly deducible from the proceedings of the Commissioners, or from any part of my conduct, prudence would dictate a silent acquiescence in the (on that supposition) lenient decision of the Right Hon'ble the Governor General in Council. I might then consider the Office of Commercial Resident at Rungpore as of more importance and higher value than I was truly entitled to hold. But as I am conscious of opposite feelings I can never cease distinctly to assert my innocence, and to court the strictest scrutiny.'
The letter continues and refutes in great detail the doubts and suspicions raised in the minds of the Commissioners. Other people to whom he showed the case papers who were wholly in agreement with him that he had disproved the charges against him, however, the Commissioners were unmoved and refused to reconsider their decision.
There is no doubt that Charles Grant Becher felt that he had been very badly treated and was innocent of the charges and libels laid against him. He felt, in particular, that his nephew, Richard Becher, had behaved reprehensibly and had abrogated his financial responsibilities in the partnership.
In a final twist, in November 1826 he wrote another letter: 'Some weeks subsequent to the date of my last letter to Mr Molony, Mr Richard Becher died at Cuttack. By his Will dated 3rd November 1825, he has bequeathed to me a legacy of Forty Thousand Rupees, to be paid as soon as possible by his Executors, besides residuary contingencies: thereby testifying in the most solemn manner, and under the most awful impressions, that through his consciousness of the validity of my claims, and of the grievous injuries he had inflicted on me, was complete; yet his repentance could prompt him to no greater effort than to make such inadequate and posthumous reparation.'
In 1838 the Court of Directors of the HEIC awarded him 5,000 rupees for 'his invention and introduction of double barsons in the Company's silk filatures whereby much fuel was saved.'
He married, firstly, 18 year old Mary Penneck Reid on 9th January 1800 at Berhampore. She was the daughter of Lt Henry Read but they had barely five years of marriage when she died soon after the birth of their second child. In the South Park Street Burial Ground, Calcutta, there is a memorial inscribed: 'Sacred to the memory of Mary, the wife of Charles Becher, Esq, who departed this life on the 10th day of August 1805, aged 23 years.'
There were two children by his first wife:
1. Lydia Pattle Becher (1804-1882) was born 8th May 1804 at Calcutta. She returned to England and by 1861 was living unmarried at 10 Carlton Place, Weston Villas, Bristol. At some point she returned to India since on 8th April 1878 she sailed from Calcutta to Southampton aboard the Australia. She died in Bristol on 19th March 1882.
2. Mary Ann Rocke Becher (1805-1879) was born on 21st July 1805 at Bangundie, Bengal. She married John Stanley-Clarke, a Magistrate and Collector of Boolundshahur, on 23rd August 2816 at Calcutta. He was born 1803 in Dorking, Surrey the son of William Stanley Clarke and Charlotte Raikes and died in 1872 in Cheltenham. Mary Ann Rocke Becher died 30th December 1879 at Brighton. There were eight children including Col. Hervey Morris Stanley-Clarke who later married Harriet Horatia Becher, the daughter of Samuel John Becher.
* * *
Charles Becher married, secondly, Charlotte Humfrays on 10th January 1807 at Calcutta.
She was born 11th July 1790 in India the daughter of Richard Humfrays and Margaret Ursula Kiernan. Once again, their married life together was short – she died 26th September 1816 at Jagganath, India, and was buried in the Gora Kabar (or Odia Baptist Church) Cemetery, Cuttack.
She was born 11th July 1790 in India the daughter of Richard Humfrays and Margaret Ursula Kiernan. Once again, their married life together was short – she died 26th September 1816 at Jagganath, India, and was buried in the Gora Kabar (or Odia Baptist Church) Cemetery, Cuttack.
The group of photos, left, show the memorial erected by Charles in 1816 as it looks today in Gora Kabar Cemetery and I must extend my thanks to Rajeev, a retired Indian Army Colonel, who arranged for the photos to be taken for me.
Her headstone, which is partially legible in the photo, reads in full:
Sacred to the memory of Charlotte the wife of Charles Becher Esq of the Honourable Company’s Civil Service who departed this life at Juggernaut on the 26th of September 1816 at the age of 25 years. In life she was distinguished for the affectionate benevolence of her heart adorned with every virtue that can dignify nature. In the character of wife, parent and friend. She was beloved by all who knew her, and in death deeply lamented by her disconsolate Husband (who erects this monument) Children and Relatives.
Charles Becher died 16th July 1842 at Nice, Cote d'Azure, France aged 65.
**With his second wife there were six more children but only the first three and the fifth have their details below. To find the last three, Charles Grant Becher James Young Becher, and Samuel John Becher, please click on their names to take you to their respective pages.
1. CHARLOTTE MARGARET BECHER was born 22nd December 1807 at Calcutta. At some point she sailed to England and later returned to India from London on the HCS Minerva arriving in 1827 along with her sisters Louisa and Harriet Jane and her husband-to-be Lt. James Colley Tudor. She married George Gough (1802-1889) on 8th July 1858 at St Luke's, Cheltenham. He was a Judge with the Bengal Civil Service, on 11th June 1829. He was the son of the Very Rev Thomas Bunbury Gough and Charlotte Bloomfield. She died 2nd October 1862 at Frankfurt am Main, Germany. There were six daughters and four sons of whom two became Generals, both were knighted, and both awarded a VC.
2. LOUISA BECHER was born 7th December 1808 at Madras. She married Russell Morland Skinner, a Judge in India, on 6th October 1830 at Keepoy. He was born 11th April 1809 in Madras the son of Samuel Skinner and Mary Routledge. By the 1871 Census they were living at 8 Westbourne Crescent, Paddington with one son and one daughter and ten years later they were living at 70 Gloucester Crescent, Hyde Park, Middlesex. He died in 5th February1884 at Kensington and Louisa died on 27th January 1890 at Orsett Terrace, Hyde Park, Paddington, London.
3. HARRIET JANE BECHER was born 8th December 1809 at Calcutta. She married Lt. Col. James Colley Tudor CB, 46th Regiment Native Infantry and later the 1st Bengal Fusiliers, on 28th July 1830 at Calcutta Cathedral. He was born 9th May 1801 at St James, Toxeth Park, Liverpool the son of John Kindersley Tudor and Catherine Parkinson. Harriet died on 9th May 1848 at Simla. At some point he sailed to South Africa for he died 5th August 1854 in Cape Town aged 52. A local newspaper reported that 'This distinguished officer, attached to the Bengal Army, who has been for some time resident at the Cape, in hope of recovering his health, expired on the 5th August. His remains were interred on the 7th, and every mark of respect was shown to his memory.' There were five children.
The fifth child of Charles Becher and Charlotte was FREDERICK BECHER who was born 6th December 1812 at Balasore. He died in infancy and was buried at Gora Kabar Cemetery, Cuttack. The inscription on his headstone reads: 'Sacred to the memory of Frederick the infant son of C. Becher Esq who departed this life on 5th July 1813.'
* * *
**The last three children of Charles Becher and his second wife were: Charles Grant Becher, James Young Becher and Samuel John Becher. To reach their biographical notes please click on their names to take you to their respective pages.