LORD DALHOUSIE AND THE ANNEXATION OF OUDE.
[TO THE EDITOR 'or THE " SPEOTATOR:] Sur,—In your review of Sir Toseph Paper's autobiography you repeat a statement which at one time was , current, but which I had believed to have been entirely disproved,—viz., that the Marquis of Dalhousie was "bent upon the annexation of Oude," and again, "The Governor-General decided. cm annexation." I was in Parliament at the time and took 8,1i interest in Indian affairs. Moreover, after I became Lord Dalhousie's son-in-law, he discussed the matter with me. He told me that he did not desire to annex Oude. Tha abomin- able state of its Government rendered some iorterferenee necessary; he pht before the Court of Director, three causes, one of which was annexation, but not that one which he recommended. But the home Government-decided in favournf it. He considered that immediate disarmament on the Punjab precedent became essential, and he raluctantlyconsented to postpone the 'Operation till after' tha hot weather, Cu account of the casualties which would be caused to the troops at that season. Before the cold weather came he had been obliged to leave India, a large force was sent to Persia, and Oude was not disarmed when the Mutiny broke out' in the following year. The armed forces of Oude made the suppression of the Mutinz inch more difficult. Ten more years must elapse . . 'before Lord Dalhousie's papers can be published, in accord- ance with his will." Those' whO knew and honoured. hini musi in the meantime not let pass assertions iminited to lifxi errors of policy--I am, Sir,- &C., •
Previous page
