[176] “I was much annoyed,” says Pottinger, “and told him he had probably prevented the English ambassador interfering, and he excused himself by saying that he acted so to make the Persians think he was not solicitous for the English to interfere.”—[MS. Journal.]

[177] “A horse,” says Pottinger, “was also given; but Major Todd was as anxious not to accept presents, as the Afghans were to make them—so he would not wait for the horse, notwithstanding they set about cutting away the parapet of the fausse-braie, and making a ramp up the counterscarp to get the nag out. The Wuzeer was obstinately bent upon sending out the horse; but as there was no use in destroying a parapet in the only entire work left, or making an easy road across the ditch, when there were four practicable breaches.

* * * As soon as the Persians were gone, my people led the horses off in another direction, and I told the workmen to stop and repair the damage done, so that the Wuzeer did not know of the ruse till late in the afternoon, when his master of the horse reported the return of the horses. He immediately sent them to me, saying he had given them to the English and would not take them. I told him I had not enough of grain to keep them: and suggested that if he did not like to keep them, they might be eaten. The people present, on the receipt of the message, highly approved of the latter part; and Yar Mahomed gave to the most clamorous the horse intended for the Persian, which was duly roasted. I believe the other one underwent the same fate a few weeks subsequently.”—[MS. Journal.]

[178] “I was a good deal surprised on awaking at half-past six to see the Envoy already up and busy writing. At seven, according to engagement, I sent to let the Wuzeer know that his Excellency was ready to receive him. Yar Mahomed was asleep when the message arrived; but they awoke him, and he joined us in a short time with a whole posse of chiefs. On my meeting him at the door he asked me was it customary for our ministers not to sleep at night, declaring that he had scarcely closed his eyes when he was told that Mr. M’Neill was waiting for him; and further remarked, ‘I do not wonder your affairs prosper when men of such high rank as your minister plenipotentiary work harder than an Afghan private soldier would do even under the eye of the Shah.’”—[Eldred Pottinger’s MS. Journal.]

[179] Mr. M’Neill to Yar Mahomed—Published Correspondence.

[180] Pottinger explained to Kamran the manner in which Mr. M’Neill had been deceived. “On the 24th,” he says, “I had an audience of Shah Kamran to explain the manner in which the Persians had deceived the British Envoy. His Majesty said that he never expected anything else—that the Kajars have been noted for their want of faith ever since they have been heard of—that his father and himself had several times tried their promises, but always been miserably deceived.”—[MS. Journal.]

[181] Pottinger’s MS. Journal.

[182] Yar Mahomed to Mr. M’Neill—Published Correspondence.

[183] Mr. M’Neill to Lord Palmerston—Published Correspondence. Intelligence of Simonich’s movements soon reached the beleaguered garrison. “We were told,” says Pottinger, “that Count Simonich had reconnoitred the city, and had examined with a telescope from the top of the Masula, and given his opinion that all the points attacked were too strong to be taken; and that the only vulnerable side was the eastern side.”

[184] “Notwithstanding,” says Pottinger, “that I might then be considered a doubtful friend, it was never contemplated that I should be kept out of their assembly.”—[MS. Journal.]

[185] Published Correspondence relating to Persia and Afghanistan.

[186] The Gholam’s own account of the treatment he received from Hadjee Khan is worth quoting:-“Hadjee Khan then turned to me, and threatened me with instant death. I demanded the reason, but he gave me no other answer than abuse, calling me a traitor and a rascal, and said that he himself would be my executioner. He then began to unbutton his coat sleeves, threatening me all the while, and every now and then half unsheathing his dagger, ‘I will be your executioner myself,’ said the Khan. ‘If there be an enemy to the English, I am the man—you are a traitor and a rascal—your eyes shall be plucked out; the Shah has ordered me to kill you; I will first cut off your hands. You must have papers from Herat, and unless you instantly deliver them up, you shall be cut to pieces.’ Hadjee Khan went on in this strain for a long time, during which I was stripped nearly to my skin, the air being so cold that water, on being exposed, instantly froze. I was silent under all these threats and demonstrations, merely observing that, having such a noble executioner as Hadjee Khan, I was content to die, and I hoped the office would remain in his family.”—Statement of Ali Mahomed Beg.—Published Correspondence relating to Persia and Afghanistan.

[187] Mr. M’Neill to Lord Palmerston: Meshed, June 25, 1838.

[188] The Jew’s synagogue had been devoted to this unholy use; but they had contrived to accomplish its redemption.

[189] An amusing illustration of the unsavoury condition of the city at this time is given in Pottinger’s Journal. He had made the acquaintance of a magician, and wished to have a specimen of his art. “People of his class,” he writes, “are very careful of exposing themselves; and are excessively suspicious and bigoted. It was therefore a long time before I could venture to request a turn of his art. However, I at last did so, but was disappointed at finding he was not a regular practitioner; and as we had got now intimate he told me that he as yet had not commenced the practice; that he wanted to pursue the science allowed by the Hudyth; not the accursed magic—Sihr Malown; that he wished but for power to summon the gins and angels to his aid. Though this was not exactly what I wanted, I should have been most happy of an introduction to either of these classes; and, therefore, not to lose my labour, I used my utmost endeavours to get my friend to commence his incantations at once. He made many excuses. First, he had not got clean clothes to change, as the scarcity had obliged him to part with everything extra to buy grain whilst it was tolerably cheap. This and sundry other excuses were easily overcome; but he evidently wished to avoid the employment, or to make excuses for use when he failed. As soon as one objection was overruled another was raised; but I overcame all except that the stench of the dead bodies from the city would prevent these spirits from venturing, except under extraordinary strong incantations, within its walls; as angels and gins are said to be particularly fond of sweet odours, and excessively angered by the contrary. The argument was a clencher, and no ingenuity could overturn it, for certainly the smell was abominable, and in a calm, or when the wind came from the southward, in which direction the greatest number had been buried, the human kind could scarcely withstand the horrible effluvia of putrid flesh.”—[Eldred Pottinger’s MS. Journal.]

[190] A few days afterwards, however, a party of some 600 or 700, mostly old men, women, and children, were put out of the gates. “The enemy,” says Pottinger, “opened a heavy fire on them until they found out who they were, when they tried to drive them back with sticks and stones; but Naib Dustoo, to whom the business was entrusted, liker a fiend than a man, opened a fire upon the wretched citizens from the works, and the Persians thus let them pass. From the besiegers’ fire no one suffered, as a rising ground was between, but from that of the garrison it is said several fell.”

[191] It was said that Mahomed Shah had come down in person to witness the assault; but the Royal amateur was only the Shah’s brother, who, attended by a party of idlers, and a small body of horse, was a spectator of the defeat of his countrymen.

[192] “The assault on the gate of Candahar was repulsed, and the Persians chased back into their trenches; but the danger at the south-east angle prevented them following up the advantage. At the south-west angle, or Pay-in-ab, the Persians can scarcely be said to have attacked, as they never advanced beyond the parapet of their own trenches. It was evidently a mere feint. At the western, or Arak gate, a column composed of the Russian regiment, and other troops under Samson, and those under Wully Khan, marched up to the counterscarp; but Wully Khan being killed, and Samson carried off the field wounded, the men broke and fled, leaving an immense number killed and wounded. The latter were nearly all shot by idlers on the ramparts, or murdered by the plunderers, who crept out to strip the slain. The other attack, on the centre of the north-west face, was repulsed in like manner, after reaching the counterscarp.”—[Eldred Pottinger’s MS. Journal.] Wully Khan’s body was found on the following day, and his head was brought into the city. On his person were found several letters relating to the plan of assault, which satisfactorily proved that it had been designed by the Russian officers in the Persian camp. There were two letters among them from Mahomed Shah himself—one addressed to Wully Khan, ordering him to conform to the plan of the Russian ambassador, and another to Hadjee Meerza Aghassy, directing him to give similar instructions to Wully Khan.

[193] There is nothing finer in the annals of the war in Afghanistan than the heroic conduct of Eldred Pottinger on this 24th of June. But I should as little discharge my duty as an historian, as I should gratify my inclinations as a man, if I were not to say that I have extracted, with some difficulty, from Pottinger’s manuscript journal, the real history of the service that he rendered to his country on this memorable day. The young Bombay artilleryman was endowed with a rare modesty, which made him unwilling to speak or to write about himself. In the copy of the journal before me he has erased, throughout the entire record of this day, every entrance made in the first person; and only by giving rein to a curiosity, which I should not have indulged, or considered pardonable in any ordinary case, have I succeeded in extracting the real history of an incident which has already, in one or two incorrect shapes, been given to the world. Wherever Pottinger had written in the original copy of his journal “I,” he had erased the egotistical monosyllable, and substituted the words, “the people about the Wuzeer,” or had otherwise disguised the record of his own achievements. For example, the words, “I had several times to lay hold of the Vizier, and point to him the men, who turned as soon as he did,” are altered into, “the people about abused, and several times had to lay hold of the Vizier, &c. &c.” What was thought of Pottinger’s conduct beyond the walls of Herat, may be gathered from the fact, that a few days afterwards a man came in from Kurookh, bringing some important intelligence, who immediately on his arrival, went up to Pottinger, seized his hands, kissed them, said he was indeed “rejoiced that he had made so great a pilgrimage,” and spoke with enthusiastic praise of the repulse of the Persian stormers.

[194] The loss upon the Persian side was very heavy. A large number of officers, including several chiefs of note, were killed and wounded. Mr. M’Neill wrote from camp near Teheran, to Lord Palmerston: “The number of the killed and wounded of the Persian army is variously stated; but the best information I have been able to obtain leads me to believe that it cannot be less than 1700 or 1800 men. The loss in officers, and especially those of the higher ranks, has been very great in proportion to the whole number killed and wounded. Major-General Berowski and Sirteps Wully Khan and Nebbee Khan, have been killed; Sirteps Samson Khan, Hossein Pasha Khan, and Jaffier Kooli Khan, have been wounded; and almost all the field-officers of these brigades have been killed or wounded.” There is little doubt, however, that the entire number of casualties is greatly overstated in this passage.

[195] “The Wuzeer told me the whole business hung upon me; that the Persians made a point of obtaining my dismissal, without which they would not treat. They were so pressing, that he said he never before guessed my importance, and that the Afghan envoys who had gone to camp had told him they had always thought me one man, but the importance the Persians attached to my departure showed that I was equal to an army. The Afghans were very complimentary, and expressed loudly their gratitude to the British Government, to the exertions of which they attributed the change in the tone of the Persians. They, however, did not give the decided answers they should have done, but put the question off by saying I was a guest. The Persians offered to be security for my safe passage to any place I chose to go to.”—[Eldred Pottinger’s MS. Journal.]

[196] At one of these consultations, held on the 18th of July, “Deen Mahomed,” said Pottinger, “proposed that each chief should bring what he had to the Wuzeer. The Wuzeer proposed that each chief should retain his own men. The Topshee-Bashee said: ‘As the Shah has money, and won’t give it, we cannot force him; but if you allow me to seize whom I like, and the chiefs give me their promise that they will not interfere in favour of any one, I will undertake to provide the expense of the men for two months.’ The chiefs immediately said ‘Done!’ and had an agreement made out, and those present sealed it.... They were, or appeared well satisfied with me; and the Wuzeer quoted my anxiety and efforts as an example to those who had their women and children to defend.”—[Eldred Pottinger’s MS. Journal.]

[197] Colonel Stoddart to Mr. M’Neill. Correspondence relating to Persia and Afghanistan.

[198] Eldred Pottinger’s MS. Journal.

[199] “Yar Mahomed is one of the most persuasive talkers I have met. It is scarcely possible to talk with him and retain anger. He is ready in a surprising degree, and is so patient under rebuke, that I never saw him fail to quiet the most violent of his countrymen, when he thought it worth his while. A person who disregards truth, and thinks nothing of denying what he has asserted a few minutes before, is a most puzzling person to argue with. Until you have thought over what has been said, you cannot understand the changeable colours which pass before you.”—[Eldred Pottinger’s MS. Journal.]

[200] Eldred Pottinger’s MS. Journal.

[201] “It is my firm belief that Mahomed Shah might have carried the city by assault the very first day that he reached Herat, and that even when the garrison gained confidence, and were flushed with the success of their sorties, he might have, by a proper use of the means at his disposal, taken the place in twenty-four hours. His troops were infinitely better soldiers, and quite as brave men, as the Afghans. The non-success of their efforts was the fault of their generals. We can never again calculate on such, and if the Persians again return, they will do so properly commanded and enlightened as to the causes of their former failure. Their material was on a scale sufficient to have reduced a powerful fortress. The men worked very well at the trenches, considering they were not trained sappers, and the practice of the artillery was really superb. They simply wanted engineers, and a general, to have proved a most formidable force.”—[Eldred Pottinger’s Report on Herat: Calcutta, July, 1840. MS. Records.]

[202] It will have been perceived that I have described the operations of the siege of Herat, almost entirely as from within the walls. I have done this partly, because I believe that the interest of such descriptions is greatly enhanced when the reader is led to identify himself more particularly with one contending party; and partly because the outside movements of the Persian army have been already detailed in the published letters of Colonel Stoddart and Mr. M’Neill, whilst no account has ever yet been given to the public of the defensive operations of the Heratees. I have already stated that my information has been, for the most part, derived from the Manuscript Journals of Eldred Pottinger.

[203] Draft of a Note to be presented by the Marquis of Clanricarde to Count Nesselrode. Published Papers.

[204] It is not very clear, however, that the Russian Government, though doubtless discredited by the failure, regarded it as “a fatal enterprise.” Russia had a double game to play. In the familiar language of the turf, she “hedged.” Whether the Persians won or lost, she was sure to gain something. The views of Russian statesmen have been thus set forth, not improbably in the very language of one of them:

“Russia,” it is stated, “has played a very successful, as well as a very safe, game in the late proceedings. When she prompted the Shah to undertake the siege of Herat, she was certain of carrying an important point, however the expedition terminated. If Herat fell, which there was every reason to expect, then Candahar and Caubul would certainly have made their submission. Russian influence would thus have been brought to the threshold of India; and England, however much she might desire peace, could not avoid being involved in a difficult and expensive war, in order to avert more serious dangers. If, on the other hand, England interfered to save Herat, she was compromised—not with the mere court of Mahomed Shah, but with Persia as a nation. Russia had contrived to bring all Persia to Herat, and to identify all Persia with the success or failure of the campaign; and she had thus gravelled the old system of partisanship, which would have linked Azerbijan with herself, and the rest of the nation with her rival.”—[Calcutta Review.]

[205] Count Nesselrode’s Instructions to Count Pozzo di Borgo: November 1, 1839.

[206] Sir John Hobhouse’s answer is worth giving. “Very probably, Baron; but however much I should regret the collision, I should have no fear of the result.” I give this on the authority of a distinguished writer on “Our Political Relations with Persia,” in the Calcutta Review.

[207] For a very interesting and ably written summary of the progress of Russia in the East, and an elaborate investigation of the question of the possibility of a Russian invasion of India, see Mr. Robert Bell’s excellent “History of Russia.” It was written before the British crossed the Indus—before Russia entangled herself in the steppes, and England in the defiles of Central Asia. Neither country now, remembering these disasters, thinks of the meeting of the Sepoy and the Cossack without a shudder.

[208] I may as well mention here that the chasm between Persia and Great Britain, created by the events narrated in this chapter, was not bridged over until the spring of 1841, when Ghorian was given back to the Heratees. Before the close of that year, Mahomed Shah was collecting a great army, and contemplating extensive operations, the object of which, according to Sir John M’Neill, though disguised under the name of operations against Khiva, was another assault upon Herat.—[Sir John M’Neill to Sir Alexander Burnes: January 5, 1842. MS.] This letter was written more than two months after Burnes had fallen a victim to the policy which I am now about to elucidate. Sir John M’Neill wrote: “I have now to inform you, that since the arrival of Count Medem, the new Russian Minister, about a month ago, the Shah has given orders for collecting an army in the spring, about two months hence, which is intended to be numerous, and to be accompanied by two hundred pieces of Artillery; and he announces his intention to march in the direction of Meshed, for the purpose of attacking Khiva. The advance of the Shah with such an army to Meshed, may produce some commotion in Afghanistan, as you will no doubt hear of his proposing to go to Herat; and I conclude, therefore, that you will be prepared to put down any movements that may be caused by the rumour of his approach, and for any ulterior measures that may be necessary.” But in a postscript, dated January 6, the very day on which the British commenced their lamentable retreat from Caubul, he added: “Since writing the preceding lines, some circumstances which have come to my knowledge, lead me to think it quite possible that the Shah may not follow out his intention of going with an army into Khorassan, and it is even possible that no army may be sent in that direction; but I am still of opinion, that it is considerably more probable that a force will be sent, than that it will not; and if a large army should march to Meshed, its objects will, I think, have reference rather to Herat than to Khiva.”—[MS. Correspondence.]

[209] Mr. M’Neill to Captain Burnes. MS. Records.

[210] Id. ibid.

[211] Count Simonich’s letter was intercepted, and taken to M’Neill by one Meer Mahomed, whom M’Neill subsequently placed at the disposal of Burnes.

[212] “Captain Wade to J. R. Colvin” Esq., June 27, 1837. MS. Records.

[213] Private Correspondence of Sir A. Burnes.

[214] See Harlan’s account of the reception of these presents. I see no reason to question its veracity.

[215] Lord William Bentinck is said to have exclaimed, “What! Lord Auckland and Macnaghten gone to war! The very last men in the world I should have suspected of such folly!”

[216] In the preceding year he had written to Sir Charles Metcalfe, “You are quite right in believing that I have not a thought of interference between the Afghans and the Sikhs. I should not be sorry to see strong, independent, and commercial powers established in Afghanistan; but short of Persian or Russian occupation, their present state is as unsatisfactory as possible, with national, family, and religious feuds so inveterate as almost to make one party ready to join any invader against another. It is out of the question that we can ever gain direct power or influence amongst them.”—[Life of Lord Metcalfe, vol. ii. p. 307.] It was upon the basis of this assumption that he subsequently reared the delusive project of re-establishing “the integrity of the Douranee Empire.”

[217] “Of plans, of this nature, that of granting our aid or countenance in concert with Runjeet Singh, to enable Shah Soojah-ool-Moolk to re-establish his sovereignty in the Eastern division of Afghanistan, under engagements which shall conciliate the feelings of the Sikh ruler, and bind the restored monarch to the support of our interests, appears to me to be decidedly the most deserving of attention. Shah Soojah-ool-Moolk and Maharajah Runjeet Singh would probably act readily upon such a plan, it being similar to that in which they were before engaged, but which failed principally from the want of pecuniary aid, and the absence of our active sanction and support. In such an enterprise (which both from past experience, and from the circumstance that it would be undertaken in resistance of an attempt to establish Sheeah supremacy in the country, would, we believe, have many partisans in Afghanistan) Runjeet Singh would assist by the employment of a portion of his troops, and we by some contribution in money, and the presence of an accredited agent of the government, and of a sufficient number of officers for the direction of the Shah’s army.”—[Minute of Lord Auckland’s, Simlah, May 12, 1838—MS. Records.] A portion of this minute is given in the published correspondence. The passage quoted, and indeed, all the latter and more practical portion of it, is omitted.

[218] Minute of Lord Auckland—Unpublished portion: MS. Records.

[219] It is worth while to quote some passages from this letter of instructions; only a grandiloquent passage setting forth generally the pacific views of Lord Auckland, and the power of the British Government having been inserted in the Blue Book. “You can then, as you observe the disposition of the Maharajah, listen to all he has to say, or, in the event of his showing no disposition to commence the conference, you can state to him the views of your own government—that two courses of proceeding had occurred to his lordship—the one that the treaty formerly executed between his Highness and Shah Soojah should be recognised by the British Government—that whilst the Sikhs advanced cautiously on Caubul, accompanied by British agents, a demonstration should be made by a division of the British army occupying Shikarpoor with Shah Soojah in their company, to whom the British Government would advance money to enable him to levy troops and purchase arms, and to whom also the services of British officers should be lent, that the same opportunity should be taken of securing to the Maharajah what it had been customary for him to receive from the Scindhians, and that with regard to Shikarpoor, the supplementary article in the treaty now proposed (and which with a second supplementary article relating to Herat is annexed to this despatch) should be substituted for Article IV. in the former treaty—that in the event of his Highness agreeing to this convention, the Governor-General would be prepared to ratify it, unless circumstances should intermediately have occurred to induce his Lordship to alter his views as to its expediency, and that in the event of the convention being ratified by his Lordship, the descent on Shikarpoor, for temporary occupation, should be directed as soon as due preparations could be made, and the season will permit. If his Highness also approved of this convention, and agreed that the operations of the allies should be conducted in concert with each other, by means of British agents in the camp of each, the Governor-General would be prepared to enter into a general defensive alliance with his Highness against the attacks of all enemies from the westward.

“You will, at the same time, propound the only other course of proceedings which, in the opinion of the Governor-General, the case admits of, which is to allow the Maharajah to take his own course against Dost Mahomed Khan without any reference to us. Should his Highness show a decided preference for this course, you are authorised to tell him at once, that he is at liberty to follow it; but you should point out to him the possibility of defeat, by the combined army of the Persians and Afghans, and you will, as far as you can consistently with propriety, impress upon him the necessity of caution, and of using Afghan rather than Sikh influence or agency. Should he wish to make an instrument of Shah Soojah, you will apprise him that the Governor-General attaches too much importance to the person of the ex-King to admit of his going forth, otherwise than with the almost assured certainty of success; but that the ex-King will be permitted to proceed to Caubul with a view of being re-instated in his sovereignty, should the Sikhs succeed in taking Caubul, and that arrangement be desired by his Highness.

“Of the relative advantages which may be derived from these two plans, you will be better able to judge after you shall have fully opened them, with the consideration which each has to recommend it to the Maharajah. His Highness may possibly be unwilling to commit his troops in the passes of the Khybur, and he may strongly feel the difficulty which religious and natural animosity will oppose to any measure mainly resting on Sikh power and Sikh influence. He may not, therefore, reject the plan that stands first in this paper; and there can be little doubt that, for ultimate efficiency, and for bringing greater weight and greater strength to bear in concert upon the objects in view, that this plan should have the preference; but it is cumbrous, and a considerable time may elapse before it can be set in motion; and if it might conciliate Afghan opinion on one hand, on the other it might impair with the Sikhs that cordiality which would be so essential to the success of co-operation. His Lordship, on the whole, is disposed to think that the plan which is second in order is that which will be found most expedient.”—[MS. Records.]

[220] Captain Osborne, Lord Auckland’s nephew and military secretary Captain George Macgregor, of the artillery, one of his aides-de-camp, whose name has since become associated with some of the most honourable incidents of the Afghan war; and Dr. Drummond, accompanied Macnaghten.

[221] MS. Records.

[222] Lieutenant (since Colonel) Mackeson was one of the assistants to the Governor-General’s agent on the north-west frontier. Whilst Burnes was at Caubul he was directed to remain at Peshawur; a place with which his name has since become historically, and now most painfully, associated. Some two months before the arrival of Macnaghten’s Mission, he joined Runjeet Singh’s camp and travelled with the Maharajah through different parts of the Sikh Empire. Runjeet conversed freely with the young officer regarding the progress of Burnes’s negotiations at Caubul, the mission of Vickovich, and other matters connected with the politics of Afghanistan. Rumours had then reached him of the designs of the British Government to invite him to co-operate in measures for the overthrow of the Barukzye Sirdars. He discussed the subject with little reserve; and it was evident that the project had little attraction for him.

[223] I should not have thought that the drift of this passage could be misunderstood. And yet it has been said with reference to it [Hume’s Memoir of Henry Torrens] that although I have “emphatically denounced the disgraceful act of mutilating official papers,” I have “no single word of censure for diplomatic falsehoods,” but have declared that “diplomacy should not be subjected to the test of truth.” I said that it “is not intended to be,” not that “it should not be,” subjected to such a test. Every writer must be permitted to choose his own weapons of attack. At one time he may employ invective; at another, sarcasm; and the latter may express as strong a detestation of falsehood and baseness as the former. Both in a previous and a subsequent chapter I have expressed my opinion of the manner in which Lord Auckland and his ministers misrepresented the conduct of Dost Mahomed; and in the present passage I do not seek to exculpate Macnaghten, by insinuating my belief that diplomacy is, in its general intent and practice, shamefully destitute of honesty and truth.

[224] The greater part of the proposed treaty was substantially and literally the same as that negotiated in 1833—but some supplementary articles were added to it. One of these recognised the independence of the Ameers of Sindh (Runjeet thereby withdrawing all claims on Shikarpoor), in consideration of the payment by them of compensation-money to the amount of twenty lakhs of rupees; and another recognised the integrity of Herat.

[225] Runjeet was always doubtful whether his soldiers would not shrink from attempting to force the Khybur Pass. He told Mackeson, before the arrival of Macnaghten’s Mission, that the Khalsa entertained very strong prejudices against that kind of warfare, of which it may be added, both he and his chiefs had the vaguest possible idea. He believed that to force the Khybur Pass was to push a column of troops into it, somewhat as you would push them over a narrow bridge, the men in the rear stepping over the bodies of their slaughtered comrades. He had no notion of turning the pass by flank movements—of crowning the heights on each side—and accomplishing by skilful dispositions what could not be done by brute force without a dreadful sacrifice of life. Subsequently, at his interviews with the officers of the British Mission, he reverted to this subject. He said that he had never tried the Khalsa at such work; that he doubted whether they could be induced to march over the corpses of their countrymen; and asked whether British troops could be depended on for such service. He added, that the Sirdars whom he had sent to command his troops at Peshawur, had often urged him to suffer them to move through the Khybur upon Jellalabad; but that he had uniformly refused to listen to their proposals.—[MS. Notes.]

[226] Runjeet put in a claim for more than a moiety of the tribute-money of twenty lakhs of rupees that was to be wrung from the Ameers of Sindh and divided between him and the Shah; and he asked also for the transfer of Jellalabad to his own rule. The latter demand was steadfastly refused; but an arrangement was effected with regard to the former, at the expense of the Ameers of Sindh; Runjeet receiving a larger amount without detriment to the Shah.

[227] Mr. Macnaghten to Government. Camp, near Lahore, June 20 1838: MS. Records. Captain Cunninghame [History of the Sikhs], says that Runjeet was informed that the expedition for the restoration of Shah Soojah would be undertaken, whether the Maharajah chose to share in it or not. “That Runjeet Singh,” the author adds in a note, “was told he would be left out if he did not choose to come in, does not appear on public record. It was, however, the only convincing argument used during the long discussions, and I think Major Mackeson was made the bearer of the message to that effect.” But this is stated somewhat too broadly. Runjeet Singh was not told that the British, in the event of his refusing to co-operate with the Shah, would undertake by themselves the restoration of Shah Soojah, but that they might be compelled to do so in self-defence. Mackeson told Runjeet, as Macnaghten had before told the Fakir Aziz-ood-een, that in order “to guard against any reproach of reserve or concealment, hereafter,” it was right “to inform him now of the possibility that might occur of our being compelled, in self-defence, to take our own measures to ward off approaching danger, and use our own troops to restore Shah Soojah to the throne.” The Maharajah, receiving this communication as though he had not been prepared for it by the Fakir Aziz-ood-een, told Mackeson at once to prepare the treaty. “Not immediately understanding,” says Mackeson, in his memorandum of this interview, “to what treaty he might allude, I asked the Fakir whether that with the supplementary articles presented by Mr. Macnaghten to the Maharajah’s approval was the one alluded to. The Maharajah observed, ‘That one;’ and the Fakir recalled his attention to the point by asking how the question of Jellalabad was to be settled; to which his Highness replied, that if the Sikhs could not be allowed to hold possession of Jellalabad, some other arrangement could be made, which would have the effect of making the Khalsa-jee act in cordial co-operation—that the friendship between the Sikhs and the British was great, and had lasted many years—that the British and Sikh Governments had no care, and were both able to act independently, but that they had a care for the mutual friendship which had lasted so long. The Fakir hinted to me to suggest some other mode to supersede that of the Sikhs holding possession of Jellalabad. I observed that it now rested with the Maharajah to suggest any plan that might have occurred to his mind. After some further conversation, Runjeet Singh said that an annual tribute of two lakhs of rupees from Shah Soojah would satisfy him for the non-possession of Jellalabad; and this granted, he was willing to co-operate for the restoration of the Shah. The British agents objected to the payment of tribute, as it would be an acknowledgment of inferiority on the part of the Shah; but they consented that the two lakhs should be paid, in the shape of a subsidy, Runjeet Singh undertaking to keep up a force on the frontier, at the call of the Afghan monarch.”—[Lieutenant Mackeson’s Memorandum of a conversation with the Maharajah, Runjeet Singh, at Lahore, 23d of June, 1838: MS. Records.]

[228] Mackeson was the general messenger on the part of the British agent, as was the Fakir Aziz-ood-een, or Kishen Chund, on the part of the Maharajah. These functionaries were constantly going backwards and forwards, in the frightful heat, to communicate the suggestions or replies of their respective chiefs.

[229] It is probable that the demand for Jellalabad was intended to be refused, in order that the refusal might strengthen Runjeet’s claims to increased pecuniary compensation; for before the arrival of the Mission he was in the habit of speaking of Jellalabad as a possession not to be coveted by the Khalsa.

[230] Moollah Shikore was at this time the Shah’s agent and confidential adviser in exile. Further mention will be made of him in a subsequent portion of the narrative.

[231] Memorandum, by Lieut. Mackeson, of Mr. Macnaghten’s Interview with Shah Soojah-ool-Moolk, at Loodhianah, on the 15th of July, 1838; MS. Records.

[232] Lieutenant Mackeson’s Memorandum: MS. Records.

[233] “Who would, however,” it was added, “not interfere with the full exercise of his authority over his subjects.”

[234] “He mentioned having a few days before sent an emissary to Kamram to conjure him, for the honour of the Afghans, to hold out for two short months, and he would hear of miracles worked in his favour.”—[Lieutenant Mackeson’s Memorandum: MS. Records.]

[235] Some anxiety was expressed by the Shah lest Prince Timour should be consigned entirely to the guidance of the Sikhs, but he was assured that the presence of British officers in his camp would effectually prevent this.

[236] It will be more convenient for purposes of reference to append, as a note to each article, Macnaghten’s replies to these several points, as given at the subsequent interview: “With regard to the first article,” he writes, “I told the Shah that he might make his mind perfectly at ease, as the British Government had no intention or wish to interfere between his Majesty and his family and dependents.”—[Mr. Macnaghten to Government, July 17, 1838: MS. Records.]

[237] “With regard to the second article, I pointed out to the Shah, that the conquest of Shikarpoor would be directly opposed to one of the articles of the treaty. To the rest of the article I could only say that it would be naturally the wish of the British Government to witness the consolidation and extension, to their proper limits, of his Majesty’s dominions.”—[MS. Records.]

[238] “On the subject of the third article, I observed that, of course, the Shah did not mean to include the territories ceded to Runjeet Singh by the new treaty, and that the mention of Shikarpoor was inadmissible.”—[MS. Records.]

[239] “The fourth article I stated would doubtless be approved by the Governor-General.”—[MS. Records.]

[240] “The wish, I said, expressed in the fifth article would be scrupulously attended to.”—[MS. Records.]

[241] “With respect to the objection urged in the sixth article, to making money-payments to Maharajah Runjeet Singh, I reiterated the arguments formerly used, to show the distinctions between a tributary and a subsidiary obligation. These arguments, it will be observed, had due weight with his Majesty, for in the written article he brings forward the objection as one that may occur to the world, not as one to which he himself attaches any importance. Ultimately, however, his Majesty admitted that it would be impossible to satisfy all unreasonable objections, and that to those who understood the subject, and whose opinions alone were to be valued, the reciprocal nature of the subsidiary obligation would be sufficiently obvious. With regard to the objection specified in this article, founded on the anticipated want of means, I gave his Majesty encouragement to hope that the British Government would not permit him to be in distress for the means of discharging his necessary pecuniary obligations.”—[MS. Records.]

[242] “The seventh article, I observed, was at variance with the proposed provisions in the new treaty regarding Shikarpoor. His Majesty, after some conversation, agreed to expunge the article, as well as to exclude the mention of Shikarpoor in other places where it had been introduced from his paper of requests; but he seemed to set great value on his claim to Shikarpoor and the Sindh possessions generally. The Ameers, he observed, had no legitimate title to their dominions but what they derived from him. Shikarpoor, he said, he was particularly desirous to obtain possession of, as being an appropriate place of refuge and escape for his family in case of reverses; but he ultimately admitted that the object would be sufficiently secured to him so long as the British influence prevailed with the Ameers.”—[MS. Records.]

[243] “On the very delicate subject introduced into the last article, I observed to his Majesty that its connexion with the treaty generally did not seem to me to be obvious, but that I would nevertheless bring it to the notice of the Governor-General, who would, I felt persuaded, take it into consideration with the same anxious desire to gratify his Majesty in this as in all other matters.”—[MS. Records.]

[244] MS. Records.

[245] Mr. Macnaghten to Government, July 17, 1838: MS. Records.

[246] Many of these letters were promptly responded to, and in some instances voluntary tenders of service were made by chiefs discontented with the Barukzye rule. Among others, Khan Shereen Khan, chief of the Kuzzilbashes, wrote to Shah Soojah declaring his intention to join his standard. “Since we have been so unfortunate,” said the chief, “as to be far from your royal household, it is only known to God how wretchedly we pass our days. We have now resolved, as soon as the troops of your Majesty arrive on the frontier, to lose no time in waiting upon your Majesty and proving our fidelity by sacrificing ourselves in your service. For God’s sake do not make this letter public.” Even before it was known that there was any intention on the part of the Shah to attempt to regain his kingdom, many of the chiefs, either offended by Dost Mahomed’s alliance with the Persians, or warned by the failure of Burnes’s Mission of the danger of clinging any longer to a falling house, wrote to the Shah, beseeching him to return. “The faggots,” it was said, “are ready. It merely requires the lighted torch to be applied.” It is remarkable that one of the first to tender his services to the Suddozye Prince was that very Abdoollah Khan, Achetzkye, who was the prime mover of the insurrection at Caubul, which brought about the restoration of the Barukzyes.—[Captain Wade to Mr. Macnaghten, June 5th, 1838: MS. Records.] At this time the Shah was restricted from corresponding with his Afghan friends; but Captain Wade, whilst reporting to government the receipt of the letters from Abdoollah Khan and others, recommended that the restriction should be removed. The Shah seems to have laid before the British agent, in perfect good faith, all the letters he received from Afghanistan whilst a pensioner on the British Government.

[247] Mr. Macnaghten to Government, July 17, 1838: MS. Records.

[248] It was, as I have shown, the first wish of the Governor-General that the Sikhs should undertake, single-handed, the invasion of Afghanistan (see Lord Auckland’s Minute and instructions to Mr. Macnaghten in the preceding chapter). Macnaghten, on his way to Runjeet’s Court, wrote to Mr. Masson: “You will have heard that I am proceeding on a mission to Runjeet Singh; and as at my interview with his Highness it is probable that the question of his relations with the Afghans will come on the tapis, I am naturally desirous of obtaining the opinion of the best-informed men with respect to them. Would you oblige me, therefore, by stating what means of counteraction to the policy of Dost Mahomed Khan you would recommend for adoption; and whether you think that the Sikhs, using any (and what?) instrument of Afghan agency, could establish themselves in Caubul?”—[Masson’s Narrative, vol. iii.] A letter, with a similar suggestion, was sent to Captain Burnes, of whose reception of the project I shall speak more in detail. The matter is further noticeable as an indication of the unwillingness of Lord Auckland to interfere more actively in the politics of Afghanistan.

[249] In this revised edition of the present work, I am bound to state that Mr. Henry Torrens, whose early death, in 1852, is an event to be deplored far beyond the circle of his own private friends, emphatically denied, on reading these statements, and the comments made upon them by the local press of India, his participation in the evil counsels which led Lord Auckland astray. I am bound to give currency to Mr. Torrens’s explanations, which will be found in the Appendix to the present volume, with such comments of my own as they seem to demand.

[250] Mr. Masson says (Narrative, vol. iii., p. 495) that Burnes told him that the expedition across the Indus “had been arranged before he reached Simlah, and that when he arrived Torrens and Colvin came running to him and prayed him to say nothing to unsettle his Lordship; that they had all the trouble in the world to get him into the business, and that even now he would be glad of any pretext to retire from it.” I was for a long time, very sceptical of the truth of this story; and I do not now vouch for it. But I know that some men, with far better opportunities than my own of determining the authenticity of the anecdote, are inclined to believe it.

[251] Runjeet was very anxious to obtain Burnes’s private opinion regarding the state of politics in Afghanistan, and the course which it was expedient for the Maharajah to adopt. The Fakir Noor-ood-deen had two or three conferences with Burnes upon these points. The whole history of the negotiations with Dost Mahomed were gone over and reported, from notes taken down at the time, by the Fakir to the Maharajah. Runjeet declared himself very grateful for this information; and sent again to ask Burnes to tell him, not as a public functionary, but as a private friend, whether the restoration of Shah Soojah would be really to his advantage. Burnes’s answer was in the affirmative; and Runjeet seems to have been, to some extent, influenced by it.—[Captain Burnes to Mr. Macnaghten, Lahore, June 20th, 1838: MS. Records.] I do not know whether this letter has ever been made public from any private source. Like almost everything else relating to the proceedings at Lahore and Loodhianah in June and July, 1830, it was studiously suppressed by government.

[252] To Mr. Macnaghten, June 2, 1838.

[253] Burnes had originally written, “Of Shah Soojah-ool-Moolk, personally, I have, that is as ex-King of the Afghans, no very high opinion;” but he had scored out the words. I quote the passages in the text from a copy, the accuracy of which is certified by two Justices of the Peace at Bombay. This letter was cited by Sir John Hobhouse in the House of Commons, in verification of the assertion that Burnes had recommended the course adopted by Lord Auckland. That I may not be myself accused of garbling, I give the letter entire in the Appendix.

[254] With reference to the final offers of Dost Mahomed to hold Peshawur, conjointly with Sultan Mahomed, tributary to Lahore (Jebbar Khan acting as the Ameer’s representative), Captain Wade wrote: “They seem to be in some accordance with the overture made by Runjeet Singh to Dost Mahomed before Captain Burnes’s arrival at Caubul, as reported in my despatch of the 8th of August last, and appear, as far as I can judge of them at present, to be more reasonable than his former overtures, though the Maharajah’s opinion of their operation on the Peshawur branch of the family remains to be disclosed. I am ready, with the sanction of the Governor-General, to communicate the proposition now made to Runjeet Singh, and to support by every argument that I can use the expediency of its acceptance by him.”—[Captain Wade to Mr. Macnaghten, March 3, 1838.]

[255] Captain Wade to Mr. Macnaghten: MS. Records. Captain Wade’s letters have been garbled almost as shamelessly as Captain Burnes’s.

[256] In 1837, he had written to Sir Charles Metcalfe, “Every advance you might make beyond the Sutlej to the Westward, in my opinion adds to your military weakness.... If you want your empire to expand, expand it over Oude or over Gwalior, and the remains of the Mahratta empire. Make yourselves complete sovereigns of all within your bounds. But let alone the Far West.”—[Life of Lord Metcalfe, Vol. ii. p. 306.]

[257] The 2nd, 5th, 16th, 27th, 28th, 31st, 35th, 37th, 42nd, 43rd, 48th, and 53rd regiments.

[258] The principal staff-officers were Major P. Craigie, Deputy Adjutant-General; Major W. Garden, Deputy Quartermaster-General; Major J. D. Parsons, Deputy Commissary-General; Major Hough, Deputy Advocate-General; and Major T. Byrne, Assistant Adjutant-General of Queen’s Troops.

[259] Captain Wade to Mr. Macnaghten, Loodhianah, September 23rd, 1838: MS. Records.

[260] “We are now planning a grand campaign,” he wrote on the 22nd of July, “to restore the Shah to the throne of Caubul—Russia having come down upon us. What exact part I am to play I know not, but if full confidence and hourly consultation be any pledge, I am to be chief. I can plainly tell them that it is aut Cæsar aut nullus, and if I get not what I have a right to, you will soon see me en route to England.” On the 23rd of August he wrote: “Of myself I cannot tell you what is to become. The commander-in-chief wants to go and to take me—but this will not be, and I believe the chief and Macnaghten will be made a commission—Wade and myself political agents under them. I plainly told Lord Auckland that this does not please, and I am disappointed. He replied that I could scarcely be appointed with the chief in equality, and pledged himself to leave me independent quickly, and in the highest appointment. What can I do when he tells me I am a man he cannot spare. It is an honour, not a disgrace to go under Sir Henry; and as for Macnaghten, he is secretary for all India, and goes pro tem. Besides, I am not sorry to see Dost Mahomed ousted by another hand than mine.”—[Private Correspondence of Sir A. Burnes.] These letters were written to his brother. In another letter addressed to Captain Duncan, also on the 23rd of August, Burnes wrote: “Of my own destinies, even, I cannot as yet give an account. I go as a Political Agent with the Shah, but whether as the Political Agent remains to be seen. I find I bask in favour, but Sir Henry Fane is to go, and he must be the Agent; but it is even hinted that they will place a civilian with him, and employ me in advance. Be it so. I succeed to the permanent employ after all is over.... The chief wishes to go, and to take me with him, and I am highly obliged for his appreciation.”—[Private Correspondence of Sir A. Burnes: MS.]

[261] See Burnes’s correspondence, quoted in a preceding note.

[262] Lord Auckland, with characteristic kindliness, exerted himself to allay any feelings of mortification that may have welled up in Burnes’s mind; and the latter wisely revoked his determination to be aut Cæsar aut nullus. The extracts from Burnes’s letters, given in a preceding note, explain the motives that induced him to forego his original resolve; and the following passage, from another private letter, shows still more plainly the feelings with which he regarded the considerate conduct of the Governor-General, of whom he writes: “‘I mean, therefore,’ continued he (Lord Auckland), ‘to gazette you as a Political Commissioner to Kelat, and when the army crosses, to regard you as an independent political officer to co-operate with Macnaghten.’ Nothing could be more delicately kind, for I have permission, if I like, to send an assistant to Kelat. I start in a week, and drop down the Indus to Shikarpoor, where, with a brace of Commissaries, I prepare for the advance of the army and the disbursement of many lakhs of rupees. I care not for the responsibility; I am firm in the saddle, and have all confidence. I think you will hear the result of my negotiation to be, that the British flag flies at Bukkur.”—[Private Correspondence of Sir A. Burnes.]

[263] I do not mean that the entire Press of India and England condemned it; but I believe that, at the time it had very few genuine supporters: and I know that now it has fewer still.

[264] Among others the Duke of Wellington, who wrote to Mr. Tucker: “I don’t know that while the siege of Herat continued, particularly by the aid of Russian officers and troops, even in the form of deserters, the Government of India could have done otherwise than prepare for its defence.”—[Life and Correspondence of Henry St. George Tucker.]

[265] The facts may be briefly repeated in a note. M’Neill recommended the consolidation of Afghanistan under Dost Mahomed. Burnes recommended the same course. Wade recommended the government to rely upon the disunion of the Barukzye Sirdars, and was opposed to consolidation of any kind.

[266] The responsibility of this famous manifesto belongs to Lord Auckland, though some of his colleagues in the government at home have declared themselves willing to share it with him. Sir John Hobhouse, in 1850, told the Official Salaries Committee, in reply to a question on the subject of the Afghan war, that he “did it himself;” and so far as the announcement went entirely to acquit the East India Company of taking part in the origination of the war, it is to be accepted as a laudable revelation of the truth; but although Lord Palmerston and Sir John Hobhouse saw the expediency of extricating the British Government from the difficulties into which the conduct of Mahomed Shah had thrown them, by encouraging a demonstration from the side of India, the expenses of which would be thrown upon the Indian exchequer, they are to be regarded rather as accessories after, than before, the fact. The truth is, that Lord Auckland had determined on the course of policy to be pursued, not before the India Board despatches were written, but before they were received. Sir John Hobhouse stated in the House of Commons (June 23, 1842) that Lord Auckland “must not bear the blame of the measure; it was the policy of government; and he might mention that the despatch which he wrote, stating his opinion of the course that ought to be taken in order to meet expected emergencies, and that written by Lord Auckland, informing him that the expedition had already been undertaken, crossed each other on the way.” When the Whig ministry went out of office in the spring of 1839, it was believed that the Peel cabinet would repudiate the Simlah manifesto, and direct a considerable modification of the measures which were to follow the declaration of war. The bedchamber émeute arrested the formation of the Peel ministry; and it was at least surmised, that it was in no small measure to save Lord Auckland, and to escape the disgrace of a public reversal of their Indian policy, that the Whigs again took the reins of government. After this, Sir John Hobhouse never neglected an opportunity of publicly identifying himself with Lord Auckland’s policy, and was not deterred, even by the disastrous termination of the war, from bravely declaring that he was the author of it.

[267] In a despatch from the Court of Directors to the Governor-General, dated September 20, 1837, there occurs this remarkable passage:-“With respect to the states west of the Indus, you have uniformly observed the proper course, which is to have no political connection with any state or party in those regions, to take no part in their quarrels, but to maintain so far as possible a friendly connection with all of them.”

[268] A general assurance had been given to Runjeet Singh, in reply to a difficulty started by himself, that if the allies met with any reverses, the British Government would advance to their aid; but he had failed to elicit from Macnaghten any more specific promise of co-operation.

[269] Shah Soojah himself said that there would be little chance of his becoming popular in Afghanistan, if he returned to the country openly and avowedly supported, not by his own troops, but by those of the Feringhees. Even the less overt assistance of an infidel government was likely to cast discredit upon the undertaking in the eyes of “true believers.” The Shah talked about the bigotry of the Mahomedans; but it was plain that he had his misgivings on the subject. “During a visit,” says Captain Wade, “which I paid to the Shah, the day before yesterday, he informed me that some Mahomedans of Delhi had been writing to him, to inquire how he could reconcile it to his conscience, as a true believer in the Koran, to accept the assistance of a Christian people to recover his kingdom. The Shah said that he contemplated with pity the bigotry of these people, and began to quote a passage of the Koran to prove their ignorance of its doctrines with reference to the subject on which they had presumed to address him. Having a day or two previously received information that the Newab of Bhopal had made a particular request of his Lordship to be permitted to place a party of his kinsmen and retainers at the service of the British Government on the present occasion, from the desire which he had to testify his deep sense of gratitude to it for the manner in which it had watched and protected the interests of their family in every necessitude of their political existence, I mentioned the circumstance to his Majesty, to show the different views that prevailed among the followers of the faith, both with regard to their duty to the state and to their religion.”—[Captain Wade to Mr. Macnaghten, October 5, 1838: MS. Records.]