Captain Burnes and with Captain Wade. It is not in the scheme of these pages to comment on the merits of any of the prominent actors of that time, or to weigh one with another. Each, as far as possible, speaks in his own words. No two men differed more in their views of policy than Captain Wade and Captain Burnes. One was all for Sháh Shujá, the other for Dost Muhammad. Captain Wade, 'from the best sources of information open to him, believed that the Amír was by no means popular. The greater part of his troops were disaffected and insubordinate.' Captain Burnes, on the other hand, conceived that the Amír was 'a man of undoubted ability, who had at heart a high opinion of the British nation.' But however much they might disagree on the merits of Dost Muhammad, on one point they expressed themselves in identical language. If Sháh Shujá-ul-Mulk were sent back to Kábul with a mere personal guard of British troops he would be received with open arms. 'There is little doubt,' wrote Wade, quoting Masson, 'but that if (on the occasion of Sháh Shujá's last attempt on Kábul) a single British officer had accompanied him, not as an ally and coadjutor, but as a mere reporter of proceedings to his own Government, his simple appearance would have been sufficient to have procured the Sháh's re-establishment.' Masson was an Englishman who, for private reasons, had passed twelve years in Kábul, and was believed to be familiar with the temper of the people. In his view Captain Wade expressed entire con-
