LETTER CCCLVII.
To BÛRHÂNÛDDEEN; dated 11th WÂSAAEY. (10th September.)

YOU write, “that you have determined to stop a month’s pay, by way “of amercement, from those concerned in the late brawl* [or disturb­ance] of the two Kushoons commanded by the Sipahdâr, Syed Hu­meed, and the Sipahdâr, Syed Ghuffâr.” You moreover state, “that “the Jowkdâr who excited the quarrel, and over whom a guard had “been placed, made his escape the second day after, being the day on “which you had the engagement with the enemy,* accompanied by his “guard, whom he had contrived to seduce.”

It is known. Where are the women, the relatives, and brethren of the persons in question? Ascertain this point, and report accordingly to us. Take a muster also of the troops, muskets, and other stores, and specify distinctly, in a memorandum to be transmitted to the Presence, the number of muskets, of men, and of cartouch-boxes. You were, some time ago, directed, and we now write again to direct you, to transmit the aforesaid memorandum.

OBSERVATIONS.

Neither the cause, nor the nature, any more than the extent of the disturbance alluded to in this letter, is any where stated: but there is no reason to suppose, that it was any thing more than a private dispute between some individuals of the two Kushoons in question, fomented by one of their officers. A mutiny of the troops would not have been expressed by the word kuziah.

But of whatever kind the disturbance was, the punishment of those concerned in it was not light; and a still more rigorous course was probably adopted in regard to the fugitives, whose offence it appears to have been the Sultan’s intention to visit, in some way or other, upon their innocent families. In this instance, however, no particular injustice is imputable to him, since similar proceedings are but too usual with all the native governments of India.

It is not quite clear, whether or not the muster, or inspection, directed to be taken in the foregoing letter, had any reference to the disturbance mentioned in the same letter; but the following dispatch, to Budrûz Zumân Khân, makes it most probable that it was unconnected with that occurrence.