think us such fools as not to desire to have our estates and the earnings of our industry secure? We must always be exposed to the cupidity of a native sovereign; but we know that the British, either from a spirit of justice, or from policy, always leave individuals in the enjoyment of their property[1].'
In short, numerous causes contributed to form a sort of public opinion, as soon as the assured success of British arms gave it the power and the faculty to speak out without apprehension, and this opinion set in with increasing force against the leaders of the revolt. In this way the princes who survived destruction made efforts towards reform, and once they tried to introduce order; the benefits it afforded became apparent to their untutored minds, and a natural improvement in their affairs took place.
So strong were these influences, that they became immediately apparent even at the courts of Holkar and Sindhia, where, judging from what were the feelings there, we should least expect to find them operating. The treaty signed with Holkar at Mandesar, 6th January, 1818, has already been noticed. The prince, Málhár Ráo, was a minor, and through British influence Tántia Jogh was appointed minister, and was vested with the powers of regent. This arrangement, having been facilitated by the fact that the heads of this distracted state had been removed by internal feuds or by recent events, proved to be very satisfactory. Tántia Jogh was a man of
- ↑ Private Journal, i. 236.
