UPON receipt of the Imperial Mandate, [my] glorified head touched the summit of honour. The special gifts of ennobling quality [or virtue], which your Majesty, in your boundless favour, graciously bestowed [on me], by the hands of Râo Bâl Mukn Doss, also arrived in the most auspicious conjuncture, and put [me] in possession of the wealth of distinction and pre-eminence. In acknowledgment of this magnificent donation, [I] respectfully offer [my] most humble obei­sance.

This stedfast believer, with a view to the support of the firm religion of Mahommed, undertook [some time since] the chastisement of the Nazarene tribe; who, unable to maintain the war [I] waged against them, solicited peace [of me] in the most abject manner. This is so notorious a fact, as not to require to be enlarged on. With the divine aid and blessing of God, it is now again [my] steady determination to set about the total extirpation and destruction of the enemies of the faith.

In token of [my] sincere attachment [or devotion] to your Majesty, [I] send, by way of Nuzr, a hundred and twenty-one gold Mohrs to your resplendent Presence: let them be [or may they be] honoured by [your Majesty’s] acceptance. [I] am humbly hopeful, that [I] may continue to be honoured and distinguished by the receipt of your ennobling commands. More would exceed the bounds of respect.

Notwithstanding the apparent air of humility, which may be thought to pervade the first paragraph, in particular, of the foregoing letter, it is nevertheless remark­ably deficient in the forms of respect, invariably observed in all addresses to the Emperor of Hindostan (even though “fallen from his high estate”) from those acknowledging him as their sovereign. The writer here does not once style himself, as is customary, “the slave,” “the devoted servant,” or even “the dependent” (in any respect) of Shâh Allum. The very manner in which he offers his Nuzr is lofty, and unsuitable to the occasion; but is still less offensive and affronting than the Nuzr itself, as will be seen by the following letter. In short, the address is marked throughout with a strong and visible repugnance to any direct or express acknowledgment of the imperial authority. This is more especially shown in the studied omission of the nominative case, the use of which would have reduced him to the necessity of employing some of the ordinary terms of respect appropriate to similar occasions; such as, “this slave,” or the like. The nominative, in fact, occurs but once in the course of the letter; and then it is not “this devoted “servant,” but “this stedfast believer” in Mahommed.

There can be no doubt, that by the Nazarenes, mentioned in the second paragraph, the English are meant; and that the peace alluded to is that of Mangalore, concluded in March 1784, or about fifteen months previously to the date of the letter under consideration. Here, then, we have an indisputable proof, that it was “the steady determination” of the Sultan, as early, at least, as June 1785, to seize the first favourable occasion of “utterly extirpating and “destroying” us. It is highly probable, however, that this resolution was taken long before it was announced to Shâh Allum, and, in short, that it was coeval with the very treaty by which he bound himself to maintain the relations of amity with us. Unfortunately, his instructions to the first embassy which he dispatched to Europe (via Constantinople) and which I conceive to be that alluded to in Letter VII, have not been preserved, or, at least discovered; otherwise, there is abundant reason to suppose, that this document would have fully shown, that a vigorous prosecution of the war against us, was an object which never ceased to occupy his chief attention, from the moment of his accession to the Musnud. Subsequent events, indeed, compelled him to suspend, for some time, but not to abandon, his hostile purposes; nor would he seem to have ever taken any particular pains to conceal them. In his own Durbâr he certainly did not: and there is sufficient ground for concluding, that he was not more reserved on the subject, in his occasional communications to other foreign or independent powers, than tothe Emperor of Dehli. It is not unlikely, indeed, that he wrote with less freedom than he spoke of his intentions, or than he authorized his diplomatic agents to speak of them. Oral declarations could be easily disclaimed, and would be difficult to prove; while written ones, unless very cautiously expressed, might lead to premature discovery. Accordingly he has not, in the present letter, distinctly and explicitly stated, that the English were “the enemies of the faith,” whom he was determined “to extirpate;” although few persons will entertain any doubt on the subject. Still, however, if the letter had been intercepted, or communicated to the British government, and he had been questioned regarding it, he might have pretended that he meant the Koorgs, or Nairs, or Mahrattahs; all of whom being infidels, as well as the English, might be equally considered as “enemies of the faith.” It is not to be denied, that the Sultan, all this while, kept up a cold and formal intercourse, by letter, with the British government in India; but there can be little question that this was a constraint, to which he submitted with reluctance; and only because he could not have waved such a correspondence, without manifesting, thereby, to that government itself, and in a manner more direct and explicit than he was yet prepared to do, the hostile spirit by which he was actuated towards it. In fine, though he either did not deem it necessary, or was unable, from the violence of his hatred, to conceal his designs against us from his own dependents, or from some of the foreign princes and states with whom he was in correspondence, still it is not to be supposed, that he was absolutely indifferent to our being apprized of them; since, no doubt, he would rather have taken us by surprise, than have found us prepared to resist him: he, therefore, continued to maintain an outward show of distant civility towards us, till weary of waiting for the assistance he had been led to expect from the French, and no longer able, perhaps, to restrain the rancour which animated him against us, he at length gave full vent to it; and by an open attack on our ally, the Râjah of Travancore, plunged into that war from which he had hitherto abstained, only because he hoped, by delay, to prosecute it to greater advantage. But with his impetuous feelings, delay, beyond a certain point, was intolerable; and, therefore, yielding to those feelings, he willingly incurred the hazards of a contest, to which, though standing alone, he doubtlessly thought him­self more equal than the event proved him to be.

The only remaining observation, suggested by the foregoing letter, relates to the professed object of the last war waged by Hyder Ali Khân against the English; for the war alluded to in the second paragraph must, of course, have been that of 1780, though the Sultan, on this occasion, has thought proper to sink the name of his father. This war is said to have been undertaken “with a “view to the support of the Mahommedan religion.” This may serve as a clue to the real, however covert, meaning of Mahommedans, and particularly bigotted ones, whenever they talk of “holy wars,” of “wars entered into for the advance­ment or security of Islâm,” and of “the extirpation of the enemies of the “faith.” This language is susceptible, no doubt, of being applied to other infidels besides the Nazarenes; but the time and occasion of its use, to say nothing of other circumstances, always sufficiently indicate who are actually intended. Thus, in the present case, the context so plainly points at the English, that we will venture to say, it would be difficult to find a candid and intelligent Mussulman, who would hesitate, for an instant, to declare his convic­tion, that they, and they alone, were alluded to in the passage in question. Indeed, it may be farther remarked, in confirmation of this opinion, that the “extirpation” of the Mahrattahs would never seem to have been an object in the contemplation of the Sultan; whose hatred to that nation was far less virulent than that which he bore to the English; nor was their power viewed by him with the same fear or jealousy. In his disputes with them, the acquisition of some fort or district, or the relinquishment of some pecuniary demand, was probably all that he at any time contended for.