CHAPTER 4

=The British Alliance, A.D. 1818.=—Jaipur was the last of the principalities of Rajputana to accept the protection tendered by the government of British India. To the latest moment, she delayed her sanction to a system which was to banish for ever the enemies of order. Our overtures and expostulations were rejected, until the predatory powers of India had been, one after another, laid prostrate at our feet. The Pindaris were annihilated; the Peshwa was exiled from Poona to the Ganges; the Bhonsla was humbled; Sindhia palsied by his fears; and Holkar, who had extensive lands assigned him, besides a regular tribute from Jaipur, had received a death-blow to his power in the field of Mahidpur.[9.4.1]

Procrastination is the favourite expedient of all Asiatics; and the Rajput, though a fatalist, often, by protracting the irresistible _honhar_ (destiny), works out his deliverance. Amir Khan, the lieutenant of Holkar, who held the lands and tribute of Jaipur in _jaedad_, or assignment for his troops, was the sole enemy of social order left to operate on the fears of Jaipur, and to urge her to take refuge in our alliance; and even he was upon the point of becoming one of the illustrious allies, who were to enjoy the “perpetual friendship” of Great Britain. The Khan was at that very moment [378] battering Madhorajpura, a town almost within the sound of cannon-shot of Jaipur, and we were compelled to make an indirect use of this incident to hasten the decision of the Kachhwaha prince. The motives of his backwardness will appear from the following details.

=Hesitation to accept the Treaty.=—Various considerations combined to check the ardour with which we naturally expected our offer of protection would be embraced. The Jaipur court retained a lively, but no grateful remembrance, of the solemn obligations we contracted with her in 1803, and the facility with which we extricated ourselves from them when expediency demanded, whilst we vainly attempted to throw the blame of violating the treaty upon our ally. To use the words of one who has been mixed up with all the political transactions of that eventful period, with reference to the letter delivered by the envoy at the Jaipur court from our viceroy in the East, notifying the dissolution of the alliance: “The justice of these grounds was warmly disputed by the court, which, under a lively sense of that imminent danger to which it had become exposed from this measure, almost forgot for a moment the temper and respect which it owed to the English nation.” But the native envoy from Jaipur, attending the camp of the gallant Lake, took a still higher tone, and with a manly indignation observed, that “this was the first time, since the English government was established in India, that it had been known to make its faith subservient to its convenience”: a reproach the more bitter and unpalatable from its truth.[9.4.2]

The enlarged and prophetic views of Marquess Wellesley, which suggested the policy of uniting all these regular governments in a league against the predatory powers, were counteracted by the timid, temporizing policy of Lord Cornwallis, who could discover nothing but weakness in this extension of our influence.[9.4.3] What misery would not these States have been spared, had those engagements, executed through the noble Lake (a name never mentioned in India, by European or native, without reverence), been maintained; for the fifteen years which intervened between the two periods produced more mischief to Rajwara than the preceding half century, and half a century more will not repair it!

A circumstance that tended to increase this distrust was our tearing Wazir Ali from his sanctuary at Jaipur, which has cast an indelible stain upon the Kachhwaha name.[9.4.4] We have elsewhere[9.4.5] explained the privileges of _saran_, or ‘sanctuary,’ which, when claimed by the unfortunate or criminal, is sacred in the eye of the Rajput [379]. This trust we forced the Jaipur State to violate, though she was then independent of us. It was no excuse for the act that the fugitive was a foul assassin: we had no right to demand his surrender.[9.4.6]

There were other objections to the proffered treaty of no small weight. The Jaipur court justly deemed one-fifth (eight lakhs) of the gross revenues of the crown, a high rate of insurance for protection; but when we further stipulated for a prospective increase[9.4.7] of nearly one-third of all surplus revenue beyond forty lakhs, they saw, instead of the generous Briton, a sordid trafficker of mercenary protection, whose rapacity transcended that of the Mahratta.

Independent of these state objections, there were abundance of private and individual motives arrayed in hostility to the British offer. For example: the ministers dreaded the surveillance of a resident agent, as obnoxious to their authority and influence; and the chieftains, whom rank and ancient usage kept at court as the counsellors of their prince, saw in prospect the surrender of crown-lands, which fraud, favour, or force had obtained for them. Such were the principal causes which impeded the alliance between Amber and the Government-general of British India; but it would have marred the uniformity of Lord Hastings’ plan to have left a gap in the general protective system by the omission of Jaipur. The events rapidly happening around them—the presence of Amir Khan—the expulsion of the orange flag of the Mahratta, and the substitution of the British banner on the battlements of Ajmer—at length produced a tardy and ungracious assent, and, on the 2nd of April 1818, a treaty of ten articles was concluded, which made the Kachhwaha princes the friends and tributaries in perpetuity of Great Britain.

=Disputed Succession.=—On the 21st of December of the same year, Jagat Singh died, and the choice of a successor speedily evinced to the ministers the impracticability of their exercising, as in days of yore, that “absolute power over their country and dependants,” guaranteed to them by the treaty.[9.4.8] Our office of arbitrating the differences between the Raja and [380] his vassals on the subject of the usurpations from the crown-lands, was easy, and left no unpleasant feeling; but when we intermeddled with the intrigues respecting the succession, our ignorance of established rights and usage rendered the interference offensive, and made the Jaipur chiefs repent the alliance which temporary policy had induced their prince to accept.

=Law of Succession in Rājputāna.=—It may be of use in future negotiations, to explain the usages which govern the different States of Rajputana in respect to succession. The law of primogeniture prevails in all Rajput sovereignties; the rare instances in which it has been set aside, are only exceptions to the rule. The inconclusive dicta of Manu, on this as on many other points, are never appealed to by the Rajputs of modern days.[9.4.9] Custom and precedent fix the right of succession, whether to the _gaddi_ of the State, or to a fief, in the eldest son, who is styled Rajkumar, Patkumar, or simply Kumarji, ‘the prince’; while his brothers have their proper names affixed, as Kumar Jawan Singh, ‘Prince Jawan.’ Seniority is, in fact, a distinction pervading all ranks of life, whether in royal families or those of chieftains; all have their Patkumar, and Patrani, or ‘head child,’ and ‘head queen.’ The privileges of the Patrani are very considerable. In minorities, she is the guardian, by custom as well as nature, of her child; and in Mewar (the oldest sovereignty in India), she is publicly enthroned with the Rana. Seniority in marriage bestows the title of Patrani, but as soon as an heir is given to the State, the queen-mother assumes this title, or that of Maji, simply ‘the mother.’[9.4.10] In the duties of guardian, she is assisted by the chiefs of certain families, who with certain officers of the household enjoy this as an established hereditary distinction.

On the demise of a prince without lawful issue of his body, or that of near kindred, brothers or cousins, there are certain families in every principality (_raj_) of Rajwara, in whom is vested the right of presumptive heirship to the _gaddi_. In order to restrict the circle of claimants, laws have been established in every State limiting this right to the issue of a certain family in each principality. Thus, in Mewar, the elder of the Ranawat clans, styled Babas, or ‘the infants,’ possesses the latent right of heir-presumptive. In Marwar, the independent house of Idar, of the family of Jodha; in Bundi, the house of Dagari,[9.4.11] in Kotah, the Apjis of Pulaitha[9.4.12]; in Bikaner, the family of [381] Mahajan[9.4.13]; and in Jaipur, the branch Rajawat (according to seniority) of the stock of Raja Man. Even in this stock there is a distinction between those prior, and those posterior, to Raja Madho Singh; the former are styled simply Rajawat, or occasionally conjoined, Mansinghgot; the other Madhani. The Rajawats constitute a numerous frerage, of which the Jhalai house takes the lead; and in which, provided there are no mental or physical disabilities, the right of furnishing heirs to the _gaddi_ of Jaipur is a long-established, incontrovertible, and inalienable privilege.

We have been thus minute, because, notwithstanding the expressed wish of the government not to prejudge the question, the first exercise of its authority as lord-paramount was to justify a proceeding by which these established usages were infringed, in spite of the eighth article of the treaty: “The Maharaja and his heirs and successors shall remain absolute rulers of their country and dependants according to long-established usage,” etc. “_C’est premier pas qui coute_”; and this first step, being a wrong one, has involved an interference never contemplated, and fully justifying that wariness on the part of Jaipur, which made her hesitate to link her destiny with ours.

Both the sixth and seventh articles contain the seeds of disunion, whenever it might suit the chicanery or bad faith of the protected, or the avarice of the protector. The former has already been called into operation, and the ‘absolute rulers’ of Jaipur have been compelled to unfold to the resident Agent the whole of their financial and territorial arrangements, to prove that the revenues did not exceed the sum of forty lakhs, as, of the sum in excess (besides the stipulated tributary fifth), our share was to be three-sixteenths.[9.4.14]

While, therefore, we deem ourselves justified in interfering in the two chief branches of government, the succession and finances, how is it possible to avoid being implicated in the acts of the government-functionaries, and involved in the party views and intrigues of a court, stigmatised even by the rest of Rajwara with the epithet of _jhutha darbar_, the ‘lying court’? While there is a resident Agent at Jaipur, whatever [382] his resolves, he will find it next to impossible to keep aloof from the vortex of intrigue. The purest intentions, the highest talents, will scarcely avail to counteract this systematic vice, and with one party at least, but eventually with all, the reputation of his government will be compromised.

This brings us back to the topic which suggested these remarks, the installation of a youth upon the _gaddi_ of Jaipur. We shall expose the operation of this transaction by a literal translation of an authentic document, every word of which was thoroughly substantiated. As it presents a curious picture of manners, and is valuable as a precedent, we shall give it entire in the Appendix, and shall here enter no further into details than is necessary to unravel the intrigue which violated the established laws of succession.

=The Installation of Mohan Singh.=—The youth, named Mohan Singh, who was installed on the _gaddi_ of Jaipur, on the morning succeeding Jagat Singh’s decease, was the son of Manohar Singh, the ex-Raja of Narwar, who was chased from his throne and country by Sindhia. We have stated that the Jaipur family sprung from that of Narwar eight centuries ago; but the parent State being left without direct lineage, they applied to Amber and adopted a son of Prithiraj I., from whom the boy now brought forward was fourteen generations in descent. This course of proceeding was in direct contravention of usage, which had fixed, as already stated, the heirs-presumptive, on failure of lineal issue to the _gaddi_ of Amber, in the descendants of Raja Man, and the branch Madhani, generally styled Rajawat, of whom the first claimant was the chief of Jhalai,[9.4.15] and supposing his incompetency, Kama, and a dozen other houses of the ‘infantas’ of Jaipur.

The causes of departure from the recognized rule, in this respect, were the following. At the death of Jagat Singh, the reins of power were, and had been for some time, in the hands of the chief eunuch of the _rawala_ (seraglio), whose name was Mohan Nazir,[9.4.16] a man of considerable vigour of understanding, and not without the reputation of good intention in his administration of affairs, although the system of chicanery and force,[9.4.17] by which he attempted to carry his object, savoured more of self-interest than of loyalty. The youth was but nine years of age; and a long minority, with the exclusive possession of power, suggests the true motives of the Nazir. His principal coadjutor, amongst the great vassals of the State, was Megh Singh of Diggi,[9.4.18] a chief who [383] had contrived by fraud and force to double his hereditary fief by usurpations from the crown-lands, to retain which he supported the views of the Nazir with all the influence of his clan (the Khangarot), the most powerful of the twelve great families of Amber.[9.4.19] The personal servants of the crown, such as the Purohits, Dhabhais (domestic chaplains and foster-brothers), and all the subordinate officers of the household, considered the Nazir’s cause as their own: a minority and his favour guaranteed their places, which might be risked by the election of a prince who could judge for himself, and had friends to provide for.

=Objections raised by the Government of India.=—A reference to the “Summary of Transactions” (in the Appendix) will show there was no previous consultation or concert amongst the military vassals, or the queens; on the contrary, acting entirely on his own responsibility, the Nazir, on the morning succeeding the death of his master, placed young Mohan in ‘the car of the sun,’ to lead the funeral procession, and light the pyre of his adopted sire. Scarcely were the ablutions and necessary purifications from this rite concluded, when he received the congratulations of all present as lord of the Kachhwahas, under the revived name of Man Singh the Second. The transactions which followed, as related in the diary, until the final _dénouement_, distinctly show, that having committed himself, the Nazir was anxious to obtain through the resident agents of the chieftains at court, their acquiescence in the measure under their signs-manual. It will be seen that the communications were received and replied to in that cautious, yet courteous manner, which pledged the writer to nothing, and gained him time for the formation of a deliberate opinion: the decision was thus suspended; all eyes were directed to the paramount power; and the Nazir, whose first desire was to propitiate this, entreated the British functionary at Delhi to send his confidential Munshi to Jaipur without delay. This agent reached Jaipur from Delhi six days after the death of Jagat. He was the bearer of instructions, “requiring a full account of the reasons for placing the son of the Narwar Raja on the masnad; of his family, lineage, right of succession, and by whose counsels the measure was adopted.” On the 11th of January this requisition was reiterated; and it was further asked, whether the measure had the assent of the queens and chiefs, and a declaration to this effect, under their signatures, was required to be forwarded. Nothing could be more explicit, or more judicious, than the tenor of these instructions [384].

The replies of the Nazir and confidential Munshi were such, that on the 7th of February the receipt of letters of congratulation from the British Agent, accompanied by one from the supreme authority, was formally announced, which letters being read in full court, “the naubat (kettledrum) again sounded, and young Man Singh was conducted to the Partap Mahall, and seated on the masnad.” On this formal recognition by the British government, the agents of the chieftains at their sovereign’s court, in reply to the Nazir’s demand, “to know the opinions of the chiefs,” answered that “if he called them, they were ready to obey”; but at the same time they rested their adhesion on that of the chief queen, sister of the Raja of Jodhpur, who breathed nothing but open defiance of the Nazir and his junta. Early in March, public discontent became more manifest: and the Rajawat chief of Jhalai determined to appeal to arms in support of his rights as heir-presumptive, and was soon joined by the chiefs of Sarwar and Isarda,[9.4.20] junior but powerful branches of the same stock.

Another party seemed inclined, on this emergency, to revive the rights of that posthumous son of Prithi Singh, whom we have already described as living in exile at Gwalior, on the bounty of Sindhia; and nothing but the unfavourable report of his intellect and debased habits prevented the elder branch of the sons of Madho Singh recovering their lost honours.

While the paramount authority was thus deluded, and the chieftains were wavering amidst so many conflicting opinions, the queens continued resolute, and the Rajawats were arming—and the Nazir, in this dilemma, determined as a last resource, to make Raja Man of Jodhpur the umpire, hoping by this appeal to his vanity, to obtain his influence over his sister to an acquiescence in the irremediable step, which had been taken “in obedience (as he pretended) to the will of the deceased prince.” Raja Man’s reply is important: “That there could be no occasion for his or his sister’s signature to the required declaration on the right of succession to the masnad of Jaipur, which depended upon, and was vested in, the elders of the twelve tribes of Kachhwahas; that if they approved and signed the declaration, the queen his sister, and afterwards himself, would sign it, if requisite.”

The Nazir and his faction, though aided by the interposition of the Munshi, were now in despair, and in these desperate circumstances, he attempted to get up a marriage between the puppet he had enthroned and the granddaughter of the Rana of Mewar. It was well contrived, and not ill received by the Rana; but there was an influence at his court which at once extinguished the plot, though supported at [385] Delhi by the Rana’s most influential agent. It was proposed that, at the same time, the Rana should consummate his nuptials with the Jaipur Raja’s sister, the preliminaries of which had been settled a dozen years back. Money in abundance was offered, and the Rana’s passion for pageantry and profusion would have prevented any objection to his proceeding to the Jaipur capital. To receive the chief of the universal Hindu race with due honour, the whole nobility of Amber would have left their estates, which would have been construed into, and accepted as, a voluntary acquiescence in the rights of the Nazir’s choice, which the marriage would have completely cemented. Foiled in this promising design, the knot, which the precipitate and persevering conduct of the Nazir had rendered too indissoluble even for his skill to undo, was cut by the annunciation of the advanced pregnancy of the Bhattiani queen.

=Birth of a Posthumous Heir.=—This timely interposition of Mata Janami (the Juno Lucina of Rajwara) might well be regarded as miraculous; and though the sequel of this event was conducted with such publicity as almost to choke the voice of slander, it still found utterance.[9.4.21] It was deemed a sort of prodigy, that an event, which would have caused a jubilee throughout Dhundhar, should have been kept secret until three months after the Raja’s death.[9.4.22] The mysteries of the Rawalas of Rajput princes find their way to the public out of doors; and in Udaipur, more especially, are the common topics of conversation. The variety of character within its walls, the like variety of communicants without, the conflicting interests, the diversified objects of contention of these little worlds, render it utterly impossible that any secret can long be maintained, far less one of such magnitude as the pregnancy of the queen of a prince without issue. That this event should be revealed to the Nazir, the superintendent of the queen’s palace, with all the formality of a new discovery, _three months_ after Jagat Singh’s death, must excite surprise; since to have been the bearer of such joyful intelligence to his master, to whom he was much attached, must have riveted his influence [386].

At three o’clock on the 1st of April, a council of sixteen queens, the widows of the late prince, and the wives of all the great vassals of the State, “assembled to ascertain the fact of pregnancy,” whilst all the great barons awaited in the antechambers of the Zanana Deori the important response of this council of matrons. When it announced that the Bhattiani queen was pregnant beyond a doubt, they consulted until seven, when they sent in a written declaration, avowing their unanimous belief of the fact; and that “should a son be born, they would acknowledge him as their lord, and to none else pledge allegiance.” A transcript of this was given to the Nazir, who was recommended to forward an attested copy to the British Agent at Delhi. From these deliberations, from which there was no appeal, the Nazir was excluded by express desire of the Rathor queen. He made an ineffectual effort to obtain from the chiefs a declaration, that the adoption of the Narwar youth was in conformity to the desire of the deceased prince, their master; but this attempt to obtain indemnity for his illegal acts was defeated immediately on the ground of its untruth.[9.4.23]

By this lawful and energetic exertion of the powers directly vested in the queen-mother and the great council of the chiefs, the tongue of faction was rendered mute; but had it been otherwise, another queen was pronounced to be in the same joyful condition.[9.4.24] On the morning of the 25th of April, four months and four days after Jagat Singh’s death, a son was ushered into the world with the usual demonstrations of joy, and received as the Autocrat of the Kachhwahas; while the infant interloper was removed from the _gaddi_, and thrust back to his original obscurity. Thus terminated an affair which involved all Rajwara in discussion, and at one time threatened a very serious result. That it was disposed of in this manner was fortunate for all parties, and not least for the protecting power.

Having thus given a connected, though imperfect, sketch of the history of the Jaipur State, from its foundation to the present time, before proceeding with any account of its resources, or the details of its internal administration, we shall delineate the rise, progress, and existing condition of the Shaikhavati federation, which has risen out of, and almost to an equality with, the parent State [387].

Footnote 9.4.1:

[Mahīdpur, in the Indore State, 24 miles N. of Ujjain, when Sir John Malcolm defeated the Marāthas on December 21, 1817.]

Footnote 9.4.2:

_Vide_ Malcolm’s _Political History of India_, p. 434.

Footnote 9.4.3:

[The Author, an enthusiastic political officer, ignores the considerations based on the state of the finances of India and the danger of the political situation in Europe which suggested a cautious policy in India. See J. Mill, _Hist. of British India_, ed. 1817, iii. 702; Seton-Karr, _The Marquess Cornwallis_, 178 ff.; J. W. Kaye, _Life of Lord Metcalfe_, i. 326 ff. On the negotiations with Jaipur see Kaye, _op. cit._ i. 348 ff.]

Footnote 9.4.4:

[Wazīr Ali, the deposed Nawāb of Oudh, murdered Mr. Cherry, the British Resident at Benares, on January 14, 1799. He took refuge in Jaipur, and the Rāja, having made terms with the British, “treacherously delivered him up.” He was confined in Fort William, Calcutta, where he died in 1817 (J. Mill, _op. cit._ iii. 469 ff).]

Footnote 9.4.5:

Vol. II. p. 613.

Footnote 9.4.6:

A better commentary on the opinions held by the natives upon this subject could not be given than the speech of Holkar’s envoy to the agent of the Governor-General of India, then with Lord Lake: “Holcar’s vakeel demanded, with no slight degree of pertinacity, the cession of the Jeipoor and Boondi tributes; and one of them, speaking of the former, stated, that he no doubt would continue to enjoy the friendship of the English, as he had disgraced himself to please that nation, by giving up Vizier Alli (who had sought his protection) to their vengeance. The vakeel was severely rebuked by the agent (Colonel, now Sir John Malcolm) for this insolent reflection on the conduct of an ally of the British Government, who had delivered up a murderer whom it would have been infamy to shelter”; though the author of the _Political History of India_ might have added—but whom it was still greater infamy, according to their code, to surrender. See Malcolm’s _Political History of India_, p. 432.

Footnote 9.4.7:

See Article 6 of the Treaty, Appendix, No. IV.

Footnote 9.4.8:

See Article 8 of the Treaty.

Footnote 9.4.9:

[_Laws_, ix. 105 ff. On the general question see Baden-Powell, _The Indian Village Community_, 305 f.]

Footnote 9.4.10:

In Mewar, simply Maji; at Jaipur, where they have long used the language and manners of Delhi, they affix the Persian word Sahibah, or ‘lady mother.’

Footnote 9.4.11:

[Dagāri or Dugāri, about 20 miles N. of Būndi city, with a picturesque palace (_Rājputāna Gazetteer_, 1879, i. 216.)]

Footnote 9.4.12:

[A short distance S. of Kotah city.]

Footnote 9.4.13:

[Mahājan, about 50 miles N.N.W. of Bikaner city.]

Footnote 9.4.14:

Mewar was subjected to the same premium on her reviving prosperity. The Author unsuccessfully endeavoured to have a limit fixed to the demand; but he has heard with joy that some important modifications have since been made in these tributary engagements both with Mewar and Amber: they cannot be made too light. Discontent in Rajputana will not be appeased by a few lakhs of extra expenditure. I gave my opinions fearlessly when I had everything at stake; I will not suppress them now, when I have nothing either to hope or to fear but for the perpetuity of the British power in these regions, and the revival of the happiness and independence of those who have sought our protection. He will prove the greatest enemy to his country, who, in ignorance of the true position of the Rajputs, may aim at further trenching upon their independence. Read the thirty years’ war between Aurangzeb and the Rathors! where is the dynasty of their tyrant? Look at the map: a desert at their back, the Aravalli in front; no enemies to harass or disturb them! How different would a Rajput foe prove from a contemptible Mahratta, or the mercenary array of traitorous Nawabs, whom we have always found easy conquests! Cherish the native army: conciliate the Rajputs; then, laugh at foes!

Footnote 9.4.15:

[Jhalai, about 42 miles S.S.W. of Jaipur city.]

Footnote 9.4.16:

_Nazir_ is the official name, a Muhammadan one, denoting his capacity, as emasculated guardian of the seraglio. Jaipur and Bundi are the only two of the Rajput principalities who, adopting the Muslim custom, have contaminated the palaces of their queens with the presence of these creatures.

Footnote 9.4.17:

See “Summary of Transactions,” Appendix, No. V. [The Author omitted to print this paper owing to its length.]

Footnote 9.4.18:

[Forty miles S.S.W. of Jaipur city.]

Footnote 9.4.19:

The Khangarot clan enumerates twenty-two fiefs, whose united rent-rolls amount to 402,806 rupees annually, and their united quotas for the service of the State, six hundred and forty-three horse. Megh Singh, by his turbulence and intelligence, though only the sixth or seventh in the scale of rank of this body, had taken the lead, and become the organ of his clan at court.

Footnote 9.4.20:

[Sarwar, 45 miles S. of Ajmer; Isarda, 60 miles S.S.W. of Jaipur city.]

Footnote 9.4.21:

The publicity, on this occasion, is precisely of the same character as marked the accouchement of the Duchess de Berri, who, it is said, not only had the usual witnesses to silence the voice of doubt, but absolutely insisted on the Maréchaux as well as the Maréchales of France being in the room at the moment of parturition.

Footnote 9.4.22:

Raja Jagat Singh died December 21, 1818, and the announcement of the Bhattiani being in “the eighth month of her pregnancy,” was on March 24, 1819.

Footnote 9.4.23:

Deeming a record of these transactions useful, not only as descriptive of manners, but as a precedent, inasmuch as they show the powers and position of the different authorities composing a Rajput State in cases of succession, I have inserted it in the Appendix. [As before stated, the Author omitted this paper.]

Footnote 9.4.24:

No notice, that I am aware of, was ever taken of this second annunciation. [The posthumous son of Jagat Singh, Jai Singh III., who succeeded, lived till 1835, during which period the State was a scene of misgovernment and corruption. He was succeeded by Mahārāja Rām Singh (A.D. 1835-80). His adopted son, Kāim Singh, succeeded under the title of Sawāi Mādho Singh II., and has administered the State with conspicuous ability.]

SHAIKHĀWAT FEDERATION