Page:John Russell Colvin.djvu/144

136 a history of the Afghán war. It is a narrative only of the events and discussions which preceded it. One incident, however, calls for remark before quitting the troubled scene of the Afghán imbroglio, because the Private Secretary's good faith might possibly seem to have been impugned in connexion with it. In the end of 1840 the anxieties felt by the Ministry had been echoed to Calcutta by the Board of Control. Sir John Hobhouse sent a despatch to Lord Auckland, urging him either to withdraw from Kábul, or to strengthen his force there. For reasons which do not concern this narrative, Lord Auckland contested this counsel. It had by that time become clear to most men that the central figure in the tripartite treaty had completely failed in his share of it. Sháh Shujá was a broken reed. He had no influence in Kábul. On that vital point, all on whose information Lord Auckland most relied, Burnes, Wade, Masson, Lord, had, without exception, misled him. Dost Muhammad, on the other hand, had given himself up voluntarily to the British Envoy, and was in honourable captivity in British India. The Mahárájá Ranjít Singh, his implacable enemy, was dead. In these later days the question cannot but arise, whether terms might not have been made, in 1841, with Dost Muhammad. Would it not have been possible to recall Sháh Shujá to honourable asylum at Ludhiána? Would Dost Muhammad, in his fallen fortunes, have made in 1841, as in 1838, a sine quâ non of Pesháwar? Of his influence in Kábul there was now ample proof.