Article IV. (11) "In case any European Forces shall invade the territories of Persia, His Britannic Majesty will afford a force, or, in lieu of it, a subsidy. That in case the dominions of H. B. M. in India are attacked or invaded by the Affghans, or any other power, H. M. the King of Persia shall afford a force for the protection of the said dominions." (12.)

But, while the Government of India had, thus, secured the aid of Persia in case of the invasion of British India by the Affghans, or any other power, it was resolved to be doubly armed, on the present occasion, by having a treaty with the Affghans themselves. Accordingly, the mission of the Honorable Mr. M. Elphinstone was despatched to the Court of Cabool, which resulted in the following treaty. (13).

6. Article II. "If the French and Persians, in pursuance of their confederacy, should advance towards the king of Cabool's country in a hostile manner, the British state, endeavouring heartily to repel them, shall hold themselves liable to afford the expenses necessary for the above mentioned service, to the extent of their ability. While the confederacy between the French and Persians continues in force, these articles shall be in force, and be acted on by both parties."

So that, while the Government of India entered into a treaty with Persia to defend British India in case of its invasion by the Affghans, or any other power, it, at the same time, sent a mission to the King of the Affghans, and made

(11) Parliamentary papers.

(12) The definitive treaty, concluded at Tehran, by Messrs. Morrier and Ellis, on the 25th Nov. 1814, fixed the subsidy to Persia, if troops were not furnished, at 200,000 Tomauns (£400,000); but the late Abbas Merza, P. R. of Persia, in March, 1828, gave his bond cancelling the subsidy, provided £400,000 were given by the British Government to Persia, towards liquidating the indemnity due by Persia to Russia: this the king of Persia confirmed.

(13) On the 17th June, 1809, at Peshawer. By Article III. the king of Cabool, Shah Shoojah, was to receive no individual of the French nation into his territories. He was shortly after dethroned, which annulled the treaty.

a treaty with him to protect India from an invasion by the French and Persians! While the British Government merely engaged to defend Persia against European enemies, and Affghanistan only against one European power!

7. Had the British ministry secured the advantages to be expected to result from the commercial and political treaties with Persia, settled by Sir J. Malcolm in 1801, they might have prevented the King of Persia, in 1805, seeking the alliance of France. Our expedition to Egypt had been crowned with success, and there was no war in India. But when in 1809, we obtained the dismissal of General Gardanne's Embassy, and induced a Persian Ambassador's being sent to England, then, at all events, was the time to have secured such a political and military alliance with Persia, as to have prevented Russian influence succeeding that of France. It must have been foreseen that, if remote France could gain an ascendancy in Persia, the proximity of Russia rendered it probable that she would exert a more direct and permanent ascendancy in the councils of the Shah.

As observed by Sir J. McNeill, (14) "British replaced the French officers in the armies of the Shah, and taught them to combat, on several occasions with success, the battalions of the Czar." At this period too, France was amply engaged in Spain and Portugal.

8. In 1812, Russia was invaded by France. At this time though we were much engaged in the war in Spain and Portugal, still in India there was no war (15) to have prevented our embracing so favorable an opportunity to strengthen our relations in Persia, and prevent Russian influence in that country.

As the greatest commercial nation in the world, it was to have been expected that such permanent relations would have

(14) P. 60.

(15) In 1810, the expedition to the Mauritius had captured that island. In 1811, we became possessed of Java. British officers were sent to accompany divisions of the Russian troops, engaged against the French.

been established in Persia as should have secured to the British nation, a paramount commercial influence; and by such means, some recognised principle of permanent political advantage. (16) But the ministry of the day neglected British interests, and those of her ancient ally, and threw her on the mercy of Russia: this was not the Act of a Whig ministry.

In 1814, a treaty was concluded between Russia and Persia, by which the latter ceded to Russia, all her acquisitions South of the Caucasus, and engaged to maintain no navy on the Caspian; which now belongs to Russia: this we might have prevented. By the treaty of 1828 with Persia, Russia established the line of the river Arras (Araxes) as her frontier towards Persia. (17)

9. In 1833, several British officers were sent to Persia (18) to discipline the king's troops. Had Abbas Merza lived, British influence would have prevented the march of a Persian Army to Herat in 1837. The present king of Persia, Mahomed Shah, eldest son of Abbas Merza, having marched to Herat, the British officers in his service were not allowed to accompany the troops; and shortly after returned to Bengal.

Supposing the subsidy of 1814 to have been continued up to the year 1828, £5,600,000 were paid to Persia, and there have been several expensive Embassies; (19) so that eight or nine millions sterling have been paid to our ancient

(16) Our war with France, in Spain and Portugal was to support our commerce, and prevent the extension of Napoleon's " Continental System." Napier says (Hist. Peninsular War, Vol. 1, p. 3)

"He prohibited the reception of English wares in any part of the continent, and he exacted from allies and dependants the most rigid compliance with his orders; but this 'Continental System,' as it was called, became inoperative when French troops were not present to enforce his commands."

(17) The Persians to have no navy on the Caspian.

(18) Col. Pasmore, (the late,) Majors Todd and Laughton of the Bengal army. They sailed from Calcutta, in July, 1833.

(19) Sir H. Jones Brydges says, Sir J. Malcolm's two missions cost more than £262,000 alone!

ally, for which no adequate political advantage has been gained.

Sir J. McNeill states (20) that the British imports into Persia the last two years amounted to 1 millions, and the last year (1837) to nearly two millions. But it might be greater if we possessed more influence in that country. (21) 10. When Abbas Merza in 1828, cancelled the subsidy of 1814, with his father's consent, such a fact fully proved the hold which Russia had obtained on Persia, which a more liberal system might have averted. Persia had at one time consented to receive a French subsidiary force, and a British force would no doubt have been received, and at a time when the integrity of the Persian empire could have been assured. The years 1809 or 1812, would have been the best periods for such an arrangement, to have prevented the execution of the Russian and Persian treaty of 1814. But even in the year 1827, important service might have been afforded to Persia; and such a course would doubtless, have rendered our expedition into Affghanistan unnecessary.

11. The failure of the ministry of the above period to act with true policy towards Persia, and the advance of a large Persian army against Herat in 1837 (22) imposed on

(20) P. 119. He writes in 1838. The last two years must mean 1835 and 1836.

(21) We have not very recently learnt what the Committee of Commercial men in Great Britain, &c. have effected towards the extension of trade to the East, &c.

(22) Sir J. McNeill announced to Lord Palmerston that Mahomed Shah's army consisted of 45,000 men and 80 guns. There were besides one Russian Regt. and three European officers exclusive of those in the Russian corps, the staff of the Russian Envoy, and the Envoy himself was there aiding.

The Persian army drove in the garrison outposts at Herat on the 22nd Nov. 1837. There were two very large breaches, four smaller sized, and three difficult breaches; but they were not all practicable at once. On the 9th September, 1838, the siege was raised. The regular, or paid army of Herat was 8,000 men, but the whole city engaged in the defence. There were about 2,000 horse, and these were strong enough to prevent the Persians from foraging. All the guns (seven) were mounted on the walls.

the Government of India the necessity of sending the expedition into Affghanistan; since the fall of the above fortress, would have caused the whole of Affghanistan to become a Persian Province! Treaties had been tried since the year 1801, without success; because treaties, alone, were of no avail. I do not believe the expedition will cost above one-third of the money expended in Persian diplo

macy.

If then it were good and sound policy, to prevent the conquest of Affghanistan, by Persia, the next consideration was, whether it were better to restore Shah Shoojah who had been deposed for 30 years, and thus add to the measure an act of justice; or to make Dost Mahomed Khan, an usurper, the head of the Affghan nation?

I think the former measure was the most advisable and legitimate one; as there would be a sense of gratitude to the British Government for its past liberal asylum to a fallen monarch; (23) and kingly power was preferable to that of an usurper, whose rule was not by the choice of the people. To have made Dost Mahomed the head of the nation, and to have fully effected such a measure, we must have placed him in possession of Candahar, which would have involved a subsidiary force both at Candahar and Cabool, equal to the expense of the Shah's contingent; (24) together with European political officers at both cities; as is now the case. But we could not have placed the same confidence in Dost Mahomed; and it was of importance that the head of the nation should not be on unfriendly terms with Shah Kamran of Herat. (25)

(23) Who had received a pension from our Government for twenty-four years, as well as his brother Zeman Shah, a blind, and also a deposed monarch.

(24) 6,000 men. Though there are more than 60 British officers employed in the Shah's service, many must have been employed in the other case. With respect to the British Regts. now in the country, some must have been employed to have aided Dost Mahomed to establish his rule at Candahar, &c.

(25) Kamran had been accessary to the murder of Futeh Khan, (Vizier of his father, Mahmood Shah,) the brother of Dost Mahomed,