Tempo:
HISTORY OF THE SIKHS
226 J842.
chap, viii
The Sikhs were sufficiently f\ sirous of adding to their dominion another Afghan district; but the terms did not satisf}^ Gulab Singh, nor did Sher Singh see fit to come to any conclusion until he should know the final
views of the English with regard to the recognition of a government in Kabul. The death of Shah Shuja and his suspicious proceedings were held to render the re-occupation of the country unnecessary, and the tripartite treaty was declared to be at an end;- but the policy of a march on the Afghan capital was stronglj'urged and wisely adopted.-' There seemed to be a prospect of wintering in Kabul, and it was not until the victorious troops were on their return to India ^
that it was believed the English would ever forgo the possession of an empire. The Sikhs then consented to take Jalalabad, but before the order transferring it could reach General Pollock,^ that commander had destroyed the fortifications, and nominally abandoned the place to the king whom he had expediently set up in the Bala Hisar.'' It is probable that Sher Singh was not unwilling to be relieved of the invidious gift, for his own sway in Lahore was distracted, and Dost Mr. Clerk to Government, 18th May 1842. Government to Mr. Clerk, 27th May and 29th July 1842. In the treaty drafted by the Sikhs to take the place of the tripartite one, they put forward a claim of superiority over Sind, and somewhat evaded the question of being parties only, 1
-
instead of principals, to the acknowledgement of a ruler in The treaty, however, never took a definite shape. Even the Sikhs talked of the impolicy, or, at least, the disgrace, of suddenly and wholly withdrawing from Afghanistan in the manner proposed. (Mr. Clerk to Government, 19th July 1842.) Mr. Clerk himself was among the most prominent of those who at first modestly urged a march on Kctbul, and afterwards manfully remonstrated against a hasty abandonment of the country. (See his letter above quoted and also that of the 23rd April 1842.) 4 The order was dated the 18th Oct. 1942. Lord Ellenborough himself was not without a suspicion that the victorious generals might frame 'excuses for wintering in Kabul, and the expedition of Sir John M'Caskill into the Kohistan was less pleasing to him on that account than it would otherwise have been. ' The Calcutta Review for June 1849 (p. 539) points out that the king. \-i;^. Shahpur, son of Shah. Shuja, was rather set up solely by the chiefs at Kabul than in any way by Sir George Pollock, who had no authority to recognise any sovereign in Afghanistan. My expression has, indeed, reference mainly to the prudent countenance afforded to a native prince by a foreign conqueror about to retrace his steps through a difficult country, inhabited by a warlike people; but as it may misleat. as to Sir George Pollock's actual proceedings, I gladly insert
Kabul. "'
this note.
226 J842.
chap, viii
The Sikhs were sufficiently f\ sirous of adding to their dominion another Afghan district; but the terms did not satisf}^ Gulab Singh, nor did Sher Singh see fit to come to any conclusion until he should know the final
views of the English with regard to the recognition of a government in Kabul. The death of Shah Shuja and his suspicious proceedings were held to render the re-occupation of the country unnecessary, and the tripartite treaty was declared to be at an end;- but the policy of a march on the Afghan capital was stronglj'urged and wisely adopted.-' There seemed to be a prospect of wintering in Kabul, and it was not until the victorious troops were on their return to India ^
that it was believed the English would ever forgo the possession of an empire. The Sikhs then consented to take Jalalabad, but before the order transferring it could reach General Pollock,^ that commander had destroyed the fortifications, and nominally abandoned the place to the king whom he had expediently set up in the Bala Hisar.'' It is probable that Sher Singh was not unwilling to be relieved of the invidious gift, for his own sway in Lahore was distracted, and Dost Mr. Clerk to Government, 18th May 1842. Government to Mr. Clerk, 27th May and 29th July 1842. In the treaty drafted by the Sikhs to take the place of the tripartite one, they put forward a claim of superiority over Sind, and somewhat evaded the question of being parties only, 1
-
instead of principals, to the acknowledgement of a ruler in The treaty, however, never took a definite shape. Even the Sikhs talked of the impolicy, or, at least, the disgrace, of suddenly and wholly withdrawing from Afghanistan in the manner proposed. (Mr. Clerk to Government, 19th July 1842.) Mr. Clerk himself was among the most prominent of those who at first modestly urged a march on Kctbul, and afterwards manfully remonstrated against a hasty abandonment of the country. (See his letter above quoted and also that of the 23rd April 1842.) 4 The order was dated the 18th Oct. 1942. Lord Ellenborough himself was not without a suspicion that the victorious generals might frame 'excuses for wintering in Kabul, and the expedition of Sir John M'Caskill into the Kohistan was less pleasing to him on that account than it would otherwise have been. ' The Calcutta Review for June 1849 (p. 539) points out that the king. \-i;^. Shahpur, son of Shah. Shuja, was rather set up solely by the chiefs at Kabul than in any way by Sir George Pollock, who had no authority to recognise any sovereign in Afghanistan. My expression has, indeed, reference mainly to the prudent countenance afforded to a native prince by a foreign conqueror about to retrace his steps through a difficult country, inhabited by a warlike people; but as it may misleat. as to Sir George Pollock's actual proceedings, I gladly insert
Kabul. "'
this note.
©
2026
Lehal.net