complete form, beginning with Sir Charles Napier's original indiscretion down to his resignation, and the final verdict by the Duke of Wellington upon an officer whose noble qualities as a life-long comrade and thorough soldier the Great Duke highly valued, but whose follies of temper he deeply deplored[1]. I, as a civilian, confine myself to the Duke of Wellington's words.
'A close examination of the papers sent to me by Sir Charles Napier himself,' wrote the Duke of Wellington[2], 'with his report of the transaction, convinced me that there was no mutiny of the troops at Wazírábád, in December, 1849, or January, 1850. There were murmurings and complaints, but no mutiny. But it appears, according to Sir Charles Napier's statement, that there existed in the country a general mutiny, which pervaded the whole army of 40,000 men in the Punjab, in the month of January, 1850. Where is the report? where is the evidence of that mutiny, except in Sir Charles Napier's report sent to the Horse Guards, and in the 66th regiment, the corps at Govindgarh, which had been suppressed in a most signal manner without difficulty and without effort?
'It appears that the 66th regiment at Govindgarh, having mutinied, piled its arms in the fort under the orders of its officers, was marched out, disbanded, and
