EARLY PART OP PRESENT CENTURY.
13
observes with regard to this report : — " This paper of Mr. Cruickshanks is of great importance, inasmuch as it evinces that cholera did exist to an extent not hitherto suspected to have occurred at so recent a date, and also that, even under these circumstances, no trace of it is foimd in the public records ; for, unless we had been guided by the "incidental remark of Dr. Duncan, made five years after the occurrence, and had most fortunately been able to refer to Dr. Cruickshanks, the medical returns of the corps never could have led to the knowledge of it. Hence, as already observed, though cholera very rarely appears in the sick returns of former times, it is by no means to be thence inferred that it did not then exist."*
We are, therefore, I think, justified in arriving at the conclusion that it was nothing new for cholera to spread over India in an epidemic form prior to 1817 and 1819. The nature of the disease was then for the first time fully recognised, and as the greater portion of the country had passed under our rule, British Officers were in a position to trace the progress of the disease over the length and breadth of th^ land.f
The Indian EjJidemic of 1817-21. North-iuesterly extension to Persia. — Early in March, 1817, a death from cholera occurred in Fort William, but, being an
- Scott's ' Report,' p. xi.
t Prior to 1760 the Company's territories in India were confined to an area containing some 15,000 square miles. In 1765 the ompany acquired command over Bengal, but not till 1775 over the Zamindai-i of Benares. From 1792 to 1799 the Nizam's ten-itory, the Carnatic, Goruckpore, and Bareilly came under their rule ; in 1801 Bundelkund ; in 1802 Kuttack and Balasore ; the Dooab, Delhi, and Ahmadnuggar in 1803; Gujrat in 1805; and Kumaon, Saugur, Hutah, and Darwar in 1817. During the following years Ajmere, the Southern Mahratta countay, and the districts on the Nerbudda were some among other states which fell under British rule.
