again on the serious illness of his successor in 1836[1]. The same anxiety is disclosed to secure a successor, by adoption or otherwise, for the other Hindu Sovereign State of Central India, Indor[2]. Even when no successor was declared or adopted by Holkar, the British authority deemed it politically expedient to at once provide for the devolution of the chiefship; providing, however, 'that the Maharaja who might be selected should be altogether without any pretensions to the Guddee but such as he should derive from being placed there by the British Government[3].' An equal solicitude in regard to secure a successor for a Muhammadan Sovereign State appears in the case of Bhopal, in 1820[4].
But while the policy of the Government of India was consistent in maintaining the succession, by whatever means, in the sovereign Native States, its practice in regard to the dependent Native States had been by no means uniform. As long as the influence of Lord Wellesley continued to be felt, the disposition was to maintain the succession even in the dependent Native States.
- ↑ Despatch, Political Department, Government of India, to Court of Directors, dated 25th July, 1836, pars. 171, 172.
- ↑ Despatch, from same to same, dated 22nd December, 1841, par. 94; also Despatch, dated 21st November, 1843, par. 2.
- ↑ Despatch from the Government of India to the Court of Directors, dated 23rd December, 1844, par. 10.
- ↑ Idem, dated 8th July, 1820, par. 12, and connected correspondence.
