I Am of opinion that the measures proposed by the Governor-General in His Lordship’s despatch to the Court of Directors, dated IGth Pebruary IS 19, are wise and politic, and are not open to the charge of injustice to any one.

 

I believe that these measures might be carried out, on theoccasion and in the manner propo.scd by the Governor-General in his letter above referred to, witb.out creating any general sensation. I concur with the Governor-General in considering it of very great importance that the Palace at Delhi should no longer be in the anomalous position in respect to the Civil power which it has hitherto occu])icd, and that it should be in the hands of the Eritish authorities.

The exemption of the idle and j>rofligate host of Si'llilmi from the operation of our laws and their immunity within the Palace precincts have long been grievous evils, and shoidd not be allowed to continue.

The discontinuance of tlie titular distinction of tlie head

of the family is of less importance, but its continuance is the perpetuation of a farce which few people unconnected with the family care much about.

If the King dies leaving the cpiestion of succession in dispute between the youth to whom he desires to bequeath his honors, &c., and the legal representative of the family, it will be very easy, without force, to an-ange for the party whom the Government may recognize leaving the Delhi Palace and residing henceforth at the Kootub.

The exemption of the Sullafeen from the operation of our laws should certainly not he continued after the death of the present King. I think that the discontinuance of the title need not be pressed if its abolition is very distasteful to the next heir, or if it is viewed with uneasiness or alarm by others. I concur therefore in the jiropriety of the mode in which the Governor-General proposes to act, as set forth in His Lordship’s minute of the 2nd instant.