ars by reporting promises never to be fulfilled?" Thus
ended this interview.

The next day Sadik Allee had a dress of honour conferred upon him,
and an increase of one hundred rupees a-month made to his salary; and
Gholam Ruza, and his relative the fiddler, Anees-od Dowla, were
seated behind his Majesty in his carriage-and-four, and paraded
through the city, as in full possession of his favour. After the King
had alighted from the carriage at the palace, the coachman drove the
two singers to their apartments in the Mukbura, seated as before in
the khuwas, or hind seat. [On the 25th of May 1850, the King caused
the chief singer, Gholam Ruza, his father, Nathoo, his sister, and
her husband, Dummun Khan, Gholam Hyder Khan, Kotub Allee, his
brother, Sahib Allee, and the females of his family, in all fourteen
persons, to be seized and confined in prison. On the 2nd of June, all
but Gholam Ruza and Dummun Khan were transported across the Ganges
into British territory; and, on the 23rd of July, these two men were
transported in the same manner. The immediate cause of the King's
anger was the discovery that his divorced and banished wife,
Surafrazmahal, had actually come back, and remained concealed for
seven days and seven nights in the palace, in the apartments of the
chief singer, Gholam Ruza. They were all made to disgorge the
Company's notes and jewels found upon them, but the King visited
Gholam Ruza the day before his departure, and treated him with great
kindness, and seemed very sorry to part with him.]

On the 10th, I had written to Captain Bird to mention the distinction
which he appeared to have overlooked in his zeal to get the fiddlers
removed. The offence with which these persons stood charged in this
case was a personal affront to the King, or an affront to his
understanding, and not any interference with the administration of
the Government; and the first Assistant was requested by the Resident
to wait upon his Majesty, merely with a view to encourage him in his
laudable resolution to banish them, and to offer his aid in doing so
should his Majesty manifest any wish to have it; and not to demand
their punishment on the part of the British Government. In the one
case, if the King promised to punish the offenders and relented and
forgave them, we could only regret his weakness; but in the other, if
he promised to punish them and failed to do so, we should consider it
due to the character of our Government to in