صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

deputy of the first Bakhshi, were also surrounded. The disturbance was prolonged for a month; and as the house, known as Āgaf-ud. daulah's, in which Mir Jumlah resided, was close to the palace, he was forced in the end of Şafar to move to another house that he owned, called Fidāe Khān's, near Khārī Bāoli. At this house the whole of the Mughals congregated, their leaders being Sayyad Fathullah Khan, Khweshgi, and Bahādur Dil Khān. For many days, especially on the 1st Rabi' l. (23rd February, 1716), the uproar in the city was indes. cribable, the streets being filled with Mughal horsemen fully armed and clad in mail. As it was thought that this outbreak would be used as a pretext for an armed attack on his house, Qutb-ul-mulk fortified himself in his quarter of the city, and increased the number of his troops; while his son-in-law and nephew, Ghairat Khān, wbo had lately been appointed faujdār of Nārnol, returned to Diblī, to take part in his uncle's defence. The Emperor placed his personal guards, called the Haft Cauki, on permanent duty at the palace; and when Qutb-ul-mulk or Khān Daurān went to audience, they were accompanied by the whole of their troops. Mir Jumlah took fright at the aspect of affairs and sought refuge in Muhammad Amin Khan's house. At length it was decided that ten lakhs of rupees should be paid to the men, in order to get rid in this way of Mir Jumlah, with whom, owing to this conduct, Farrukhsiyar professed to be very angry.

All his titles were taken from him; and he was removed from the offices of Dāroghah of the Pages (Khawāş) and Dāroghah of the Post Office (Dāk), which were conferred on his deputies, Amin-ud-din Khān, Bahadur, and Mirza Khān. His government of 'Azimābād Patnah was transferred to Sarbuland Khān.3

On the 9th Rabi' I. 1128 H. (3rd March, 1716), Mir Jumlah moved to Nizâm-ul-mulk's house, and next day that noble conducted him as far as Narelah, and thence sent him on to Sihrind. At that place he delayed seven or eight months, putting up in the common roadside sarãe in the hope of exciting Farrukhsiyar's commiseration, but finally, by express order, he was forced to move on to Lāhor.

His titles were not

1 Apparently this Bitter Well (Khārī Booli ) lies behind and to the west of the Jāmi 'Masjid ; see map of Dihlī city in C. T. Metcalfe's " Two Narratives."

% This is Lāchin Beg, known as the tasmah-kash or "strap-twister" ( strangler).

8 Mirzā Muḥāmmad, 253, Khāfi Khān, II, 770, Siyar-ul-mutakharin, 29, Briggs, 129.

4 Narelah, Indian Atlas Sheet 49 N.E., 16 m. N. of Dihlī. Kāmwar Khān, 162, says Nizām-ul-mulk and Hāmid Khān only went as far as Mandavī-j-namak (the Salt Market). Farrukhsīyar ordered Shamsher Khān, Afghān, to conduct Mir Jumlah to Lāhor, Kāmwar Khān, entry of 7th Rabi' I., 1128 H.

restored until the 21st Jamādi, II, 1128 H., (11th June, 1716), on the intercession of Qutb-ul-mulk, who at the same time obtained for him a jāgir of three lakhs of rupees. The Mughals sought service where they could. Their principal officer, Babādur Dil Khān, was for a time with Qutb-ul-mulk, but not succeeding to his wishes, he transferred himself to Khān Daurān. In that service he stopped for a long time, without having any influence; he was then ordered to join Husain 'Ali Khan in the Dakhin.1

Section 23.-CONTINUATION OF THE Puors.

As soon as the disturbance raised by Mir Jumlah's return had been allayed, another hunting expedition was planned. At once the word passed from house to house and from tent to tent, that during

journey the arrest of Qutb-ul-mulk would be arranged. Farrukhsiyar moved to the Shālihmār garden at Agharābād? on the 6th Rabi' II, 1128 H. (29th March, 1716), and thence on the 10th, six kos further on, to Siūli. He returned to Agharābād on the 26th, and it was here that the fight took place on the 29th (21st April, 1716) between the retainers of Şamşām-ud-daulah and Muhammad Amin Khān, as already related. Farrukhsiyar returned to the palace on the 11th Jamadi II, (1st June, 1716). An urgent messenger had been sent on the 7th Rabi' II (20th March) to bring Rājah Jai Singh, Sawāe, from Mālwah, and on the 14th Jamādi II (4th June) the Rājah was reported to be at Sarãe Allah wirdi Khân; he was received in audience two days afterwards, Şamşām-ud-daulah conducting him from his camp near the 'Idgāh.8 Shortly afterwards Rāo Rājah Budh Singh, Hādah, of Būndi, arrived. He had been expelled by Mahārājah Bhim Singh, Hādah, of Kotah. Jai Singh introduced the fugitive to the Emperor and obtained for bim promises of succour. Every day Rājah Jai Singh seemed to rise in Farrukhsiyar's estimation. Finally, on the 9th Shawwāl (25th Sep.

mber, 1716), he was entrusted with the "crushing of Curāman, Jāt, under the circumstances and with the results already recorded.*

Again the Emperor quitted Dihli on the 24th Muharram 1129 H. (7th January, 1717), camping first at Masjid Mochiyah. On the 17th

1 Kāmwar Khān, 161, 165, Mirzā Muhammad, 253. Lāchin Beg (Babădur Dil Khān) turns up in the Dakhin in 1137 H. under Nizam-ul-mulk (battle with Mubā. riz Khăn ), see Khăfi Khăn, II, 954.

% 'Agharābād, a mile or two north of the city; Siūli; Sarãe Allahwirdi Khăn.

8 The Idgāh lies three-quarters of a mile west of the city wall; See plate 47 in Constable's "Hand Atlas," and plate 1 in Carr Stephen, “ Archæology of Dihli.”

4 Mīrzā Muhammad, 260, 275, 293, 302, Kāmwar Khān, 163, 165, Khafi Khan, II, 771, Ijād 43a.

He was

Şafar (30th January, 1717) he was at Narelah, and there ‘Ināyatullah Khān, Kashmiri, formerly Dīwān of the Khalisah, was received on his return from pilgrimage to Makkah, where he had gone early in the reign, on his own removal from office and the execution of his son, Sa'd. ullah Khān. Farrukhsiyar was now of opinion that it had been a mistake to remove all the old officials, and that they would have furnished a useful counterpoise to the overwhelming influence of the Sayyads. 'Ināyatullah Khān's return was, therefore, very welcome. received into favour, and the disparaging remarks, entered in the official history of the reign in regard to his son, were expunged by the Emperor's own hand. On the 27th Şafar (9th February, 1717) Farrukhsiyar was at Koedali, and from the 7th to the 13th Rabi' I, (18th to 23rd February) near Sonpat. He marched to Siūli on the 26th of that month (9th March, 1717), to Narelah on the 1st Rabi' II, back to Āgharābād on the 3rd, finally re-entering the palace on the 29th of that month (11th April). I'tigẫm Khăn, a protégé of Khăn Daurãn’s, had just resigned the office of Diwān, worn out with his struggles against undue influence. The next day 'Ināyatullah Khan was given the rank of 4,000, 3,000 horse, and appointed to be Diwān of the Khalisah and the Tan, also to be Governor of Kashmir, the latter appointment to be exercised by deputy*

'Ināyatullah Khān's appointment was displeasing to Qutb-ul-mulk, who recollected his harsh behaviour to Asad Khān in 'Alamgir's reign. Bat Ikhlās Khān, then on very intimate terms with the minister , intervened and effected a reconciliation. 'Ināyatullah Khan undertook to do nothing without the knowledge and consent of Qutb-ul-mulk, and to make no appointments independent of him. On the other hand, it was stipulated that Ratn Cand should not interfere with the work of the Khālişah Office; and as Qutb-ul-mulk was naturally indolent and fond of pleasure, being furthermore discouraged by the Emperor's conduct, four or five months would sometimes elapse before he attended at his public office to sign papers, business remaining meanwhile at a standstill. A promise was now made by him that he would come to the office in the palace once or twice a week. For a time the compact was observed, but events soon came to pass which put an end to the truce. 3

First of all, much to the disgust of Ratn Cand and the other Hindū officials, the jizyah, or poll-tax on non-Mahomedans, was

For 'Ināyatullah Khan, see Magāşir-ul-umarā, II, 828. 8 Khafi Khan, II, 773, Kammar Khăn, 171. 8 Khafi Khăn, II, 774.

reimposed. Next Inayātullah Khān endeavoured to reform the system of jāgirs, or assignments of land revenue in payment for service. The Hindās and eunuchs and Kashmiris, by fraud and force, had acquired rank beyond their deserts, and accumulated in their hands all the most profitable and easily managed jāgirs, reducing in a corresponding degree the chances of everybody else. Inayatullah Khān, after drawing up some comparative tables, meant to reduce or set aside these excessive grants. Ratn Cand and other officials were angry at these attempts to reduce their incomes, and on their persuasion Qutb-ul-mulk refused to ratify the scheme. After this time, the Hindūs put every obstacle in the Diwān's way, the agreement between him and the minister ceased to operate, and peace was maintained with difficulty.

During this and the preceding reign, that of Jahāndār Shāh, the strict rules and regulations for business in all departments were much neglected. Most of the men who knew the old routine had disappeared by death or dismissal. The Wazir was not a trained administrator himself, and paid little or no attention to civil business; Ratn Cand had

been allowed to do almost what he liked. His views were narrow, and - he was chiefly governed by personal considerations. For several reigns the Emperors had devoted all their efforts to break down the custom of farming out the collection of the revenue. They had tried on all oc. casions to substitute direct management by paid servants of the State, bearing in mind the truth of the adage, amāni ābādānī, ijārah ujārā.”? As a result their treasury was full, their subjects contented, and their army well paid. These arrangements were now set aside, and the collections leased by Ratu Cand to the highest bidder.3 In

In consequence the revenue fell off, both of the State domains and of the assigned lands, and many jāgirdārs complained to the Emperor of the non-receipt of their allowances. During his term of office, Lutfullah Khān had only made tters worse by granting to mansabdārs holding the rank of from 50 to 1,000, a sum of fifty rupees a month, instead of their assignments on the revenue. This money, considering the high prices, did not

[ocr errors]

I See Note A at the end of this Section, on the Jizīyah tax, and Khāfī Khān, II, 775.

% Roebuck, No. 110, II, page 106, “ Direct management brings prosperity ; farming out, ruin."

8 We find unexpected confirmation of this accusation against Ratn Cand in Mr. E. Thurston's paper on the East India Company's coinage. Ratn Cand was the first to farm out the Benares mint, with the effect of causing the coinage to be reminted yearly, in order to increase the farmers' profits. [Journal As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXII., Part I. (1893), p. 55.]

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

suffice to meet their expenses, and, as we mast remember, it was no doubt very irregularly paid.

According to Yahya Khān, one of Farrukhsiyar's grievances against Abdullah Khan was, that whenever he appointed an 'āmil, he took from the appointee a writing in the nature of a contract or lease, and realized the money from the man's banker. This practice was held, rightly enough, to be destructive to the prosperity of the district to which the man was sent. The Emperor requested that it might be abandoned, and that in place of it, all appointments should be made amānī, that is, should involve complete accounting for gross receipts and expenses, and for the resulting balance. 'Abdullah Khān refused. He also offered a passive resistance to the re-imposition of the Jizyah, or poll tax.8

About this time a subordinate of the Khalişah office, a protégé of Ratn Cand, was called upon to file his accounts, and a large sum was brought out by the auditors as owing by him. 'Ināyatullah Khān imprisoned this defaulter and, in spite of repeated messages from Ratn Cand, refused to release him. One day, the man evaded his guards and took refuge in the house of Ratn Cand. With the Emperor's sanction, armed messengers were sent to bring the fugitive from his protector's house, but the Wazir's Dīwān refused to surrender him. Between the Emperor and the minister there was an angry interview, and the latter was ordered to dismiss Ratn Cand, but nothing came of it.

In pursuance of the plan to restore the older men to office, Sayyad Amir Khān, “Ulwi, who was then fort-commander at Agrah, was recalled to Court; he and his relations were presented on the 9th Rajab 1129 H. (18th June, 1717). Mirzā Muḥammad who, as a page, had served under this man in 'Alamgir's reign, was of opinion that his age (he being then seventy-four) and his failing memory, rendered him unfit for active employment. Şamşām-ud-daulah being of the same opinion, and seeing that the old man could never become a dangerous rival, pushed his claims, and as Qutb-ul-mulk was displeased with Amin-ud-din Khān, obtained for him that noble’s office of Dāroghah

[ocr errors]

1 Khishḥāl Cand, 399b.
% Khat-i-ant (?), this is some Hindi word, query read, a note of hand."
8 Yahya Khan, fol. 123 b.

4 The popular rumour was that Samsām-ud-daulah had fallen into disgrace, and would soon be supplanted in his office of Dāroghah of the Privy Audience Obamber by Sayyad Amir Khān.

5 Amin-ud-din Khān obtained re-employment two months afterwards (Mīrzā Muhammad, 331), and on the 29th Zul-Hijjah 1129H. (3rd December, 1718) he was made Buyutāt of the Rikāb (i.e., the Court) and of Dihlī,

J. I. 39

« السابقةمتابعة »