Chapter IV: The Pirates (3)

In January, 1851, the Rajah, leaving Captain Brooke in charge, again left for England on account of the bad state of his health. He came home for rest and quiet, but this was denied him, and he had to sum up all his energies, and expend time and money to contend against the active and bitter hostility of his Radical opponents in England, who in spite of adverse majorities in the House of Commons and the opposition of some of the most prominent politicians in both Houses, continued their malignant persecution with great persistency both in and out of Parliament.

In 1853, the Aberdeen coalition Ministry came into power, which, like all coalitions, was feeble and lived by compromise. This Ministry agreed to give what Hume and his faction asked, and had thrice been refused by the House by large majorities,[178] a commission of enquiry into the conduct of the Rajah, before which he was to be called upon to defend himself against allegations scouted by the House, the incorrectness of which could be proved by the leading statesmen of the day, including such men as the Earl of Derby, Earl Grey, Viscount Palmerston, and Lord John Russell.[179] The Ministry most disingenuously kept their decision a secret from the Rajah until after he had left England, though not from Hume, who was able to send information to his coadjutors in Singapore that it was granted. They had got up an address to him, by the most unscrupulous devices, expressing disapproval of all that he had done, and urging that an enquiry might be instituted into the conduct of the Rajah by a Commission sent from England. This address was purported to have been signed by fifty-three merchants of Singapore. Afterwards, when the Commission sat in Singapore, only twenty-seven merchant firms were found to exist there, and of these twenty-two had signed an address of confidence in the Rajah. Some of those who had signed the address to Hume, and who put in an appearance before the Commission, exposed the way in which their signatures had been obtained by misrepresentations.

On April 30th, 1852, a great dinner was given to the Rajah at the London Tavern, to mark the sense entertained of the eminent services rendered by him in the interests of commerce and humanity, by his endeavours to put down the evils of piracy in the Eastern Archipelago, and by his labours to advance civilisation in that part of the world. The company, which numbered two hundred, included members of Parliament, Governors of the Bank of England, East India Company Directors, officers in the Army and Navy, and many others.

The Rajah delivered a speech, which, for truth and feeling, language
and action, will never be forgotten by those who had the privilege
of hearing him; ... and the feeling was current that should a crisis
ever arise in the fortunes of this country, he would be the man of
action, who ought forthwith to be called to the councils of the
nation.[180]

Only the opening passages of this speech can be given, made in response to the toast of his health:—

I will not pretend, gentlemen, to that species of pride which apes
humility. I will not say that I am wholly unworthy of your regard,
but I will tell you something of the position I hold in the East.
Your approval of my conduct is no light condemnation of the conduct
of those who have sought by every means, fair or unfair, to blast my
reputation, even at the risk of injuring their own; who under the
pretence of humanity have screened injustice, and on the plea of
enquiry, have been unscrupulous enough to charge murder. It is now
but a little more than five years since I was the idol of a spurious
popularity; it is more than three years that I have been the object,
but happily not the victim, of an unprecedented persecution, and it
will afford me no light satisfaction if this night a fair and
moderate estimate can be formed of my motives and conduct. Praise
and blame have been lavished upon me with no sparing hand. I have
been accused of every crime from murder to merchandise. I have been
held up as a prodigy of perfection, and I have been cast down as a
monster of iniquity. These, gentlemen, are the extremes which human
folly delights in; these are the distortions which the tribunes of
the people represent as Bible truths to the multitude, these the
delusions which a hackneyed politician uses lightly, to wound
feelings he has long outlived, and to cast a slur upon Her Majesty's
servants. The evil, I fear, is inevitable, but it is no less an
evil, that public morals, in such hands, should sink like water to
its lowest and dirtiest level.

In replying for the Bench, the Hon. Baron Alderson said:—

I am sorry to say that in one respect I differ from Sir James Brooke
and the Chairman, in that they expressed something of regret that
our distinguished guest had not the approbation of all mankind. I do
not think Sir James Brooke would deserve it if he had it; for I have
always observed—and I believe history will confirm me—that the
greatest benefactors of the human race have been the most abused in
their own time, and I therefore think Sir James Brooke ought to be
congratulated _because_ he is abused.

In England, especially, it is the case that the little men who bray their philanthropic sentiments on platforms are almost always found in opposition to and decrying those men who are doing mighty deeds for the advancement and happiness of mankind. There exists in narrow minds a mean pleasure in decrying those who tower above them intellectually and morally. They do not blow themselves up to equal the ox, but they spit their poison at him in hopes of bringing him down to their level. And the unfortunate result of the weakness of party government is that the party which is in power is always, or almost always, ready to throw over a great public servant to silence the yelping of the pack that snarl about his heels. It was so with Governor Eyre, it was so with Sir Bartle Frere, it was so with General Gordon, and it was so with Sir Bampfylde Fuller. "The time will come in our country when no gentleman will serve the public, and your blackguards and your imbeciles may have a monopoly of appointments," so in indignant sorrow wrote the Rajah. Though surprised and hurt at what had been said and done, he was not disturbed, and he treated his defamers with contempt and indifference, "conscious of right motives, and firm in right action."[181]

The Rajah left England in April, 1853. On his arrival in Sarawak he was attacked by small-pox. There was no doctor in Kuching at the time, but he was successfully nursed through his illness by his devoted officers, both English and native, amongst the latter being Sherip Matusain, who had lately been recalled from Sekrang in disgrace, and who now became one of his doctors. Prayers for his recovery were nightly offered in the mosque, and Malay houses. Offerings for his recovery were made in the shape of alms by the Indians; and votive oblations were made in their temples by the Chinese. The Rev. A. Horsburgh, who did so much to pull him through his illness, wrote:—

The joy in Sarawak when all danger was over was very great, for all
had been equally distressed, and many fervent prayers in church,
mosque, and temple, were offered for his recovery.

But we will here briefly interrupt the sequence of events to give in unbroken record the sequel that happily terminated the unprecedented persecutions which the Rajah was subjected to for over five years, for the miserable fiasco of the Commission, the direct result of these persecutions, left the Rajah's defamers powerless and humiliated, and the Government in a disgraceful dilemma.

The Commission sat in Singapore during the months of September and October, 1854. It consisted of two gentlemen, Mr. C. R. Prinsep, Advocate-General at Calcutta, already afflicted with the mental malady to which he soon after succumbed, and the Hon. Humphrey B. Devereaux, of the Bengal Civil Service. At the first and second meetings, of which due notice had been given, to the surprise of the Commissioners no one appeared to support the charges contained in the address to Mr. Hume, and subpœnas had to be served on several of the subscribers to that address. As a result, sixteen witnesses were produced in support of these charges, and not one of them deposed to any acts within his own knowledge which negatived the practice of piracy by the Saribas and Sekrangs; three deposed to specific piratical acts of those tribes; and one rather established than controverted their piratical character. On the other hand, twenty-four witnesses called by the Commissioners, with Mr. J. Bondriot,[182] late Resident of Sambas, Dutch Borneo (who volunteered his evidence) deposed expressly to acts of piracy on the part of these people. Traders and nakodas from Borneo, who were present in Singapore, were deterred from coming forward to give evidence by reports disseminated amongst them by the personal opponents of the Rajah that their attendance would lead to detention and inconvenience. The contention that the attacks of the Saribas and Sekrang Dayaks were merely acts of intertribal hostility was not upheld. The charge of wrongful and causeless attack and massacre wholly failed of proof, and was sufficiently negatived.[183] This was the judgment of Mr. Prinseps, and so far his brother Commissioner was with him, for, after dealing with their general character, Mr. Devereaux sums up by saying that the Saribas and Sekrang were piratical, and deserved the punishment they received, and that in conflicts with such men atrocities, in the ordinary sense of the term, are not easily committed.[184] These were the main points which mostly concerned the public, and upon which were based the grave accusations that it had been the pleasure of Mr. Hume and his adherents to formulate upon totally inadequate and most unreliable evidence. The other points brought by their instructions to the notice of the Commissioners were matters more between the Crown and the Rajah than of general interest to the public. Whether the position of Sir James Brooke as Rajah of Sarawak was compatible with his duties as British Consul General and Commissioner, and with his character as a British subject; was the Rajah engaged in trade? and whether the Rajah should be entrusted with a discretion to determine which tribes are piratical, and to call for the aid of her Majesty's Naval forces for the punishment of such tribes, were points upon which the Commissioners had to decide, and upon which they differed. They, however, agreed that the Rajah was not engaged in trade, and the other questions, except the involved one of the independence of Sarawak, had been solved by the Rajah's resignation of his appointments under the Crown, which was, however, only accepted late in 1855, long after he had in weariness of spirit ceased to exercise the functions of those offices.

"Upon the question of the independence of Sarawak, Mr. Prinseps found the Rajah's position to be no other than that of a vassal of the Sultan, holding indeed by a tenure very bare, and easy to be thrown off altogether." Mr. Devereaux could give no definite opinion; but it was a question to be submitted only to the highest legal authorities, and the Rajah justly protested against the Commissioners dealing with it; and it is a question that has long since been settled.

One result of this senseless outcry in England against the Rajah was that no help was thenceforth accorded him by the fleet in the China and Straits waters. Were an insurrection to take place; were the Sekrangs and Saribas to send round the calling-out spear and muster their clans, not a marine, not a gun would have been afforded him by her Majesty's Government for his protection, and such was the case during the Chinese insurrection.

An evidence of the confidence felt after the quelling of the pirates was the increase in trade, the tonnage of merchant vessels in 1852 having risen to 25,000 tons, whereas in 1842 the whole trade was carried on by a few native prahus. Traders were secure along the coast, and, as was testified to before the Commission, the people of Sambas and Pontianak blessed the Rajah for the protection he had given them against the depredations of the piratical Dayaks; and those of Muka and Oya were thankful that he had settled near them—a little later they had more reason to be thankful, when he relieved them of their oppressive rulers. The Singapore _Free Press_ in February, 1850, said:—

A few, a very few years ago, no European merchant vessels ventured
on the north-west coast of Borneo; now they are numerous and safe.
Formerly shipwrecked crews were attacked, robbed, and enslaved; now
they are protected, fed, and forwarded to a place of safety. The
native trade now passes with careless indifference over the same
track between Marudu and Singapore where, but a little while ago, it
was liable to the peril of capture; the crews of hundreds of prahus
are no longer exposed to the loss of life and the loss of property.
The recent successful proceedings on the coast of Borneo have been
followed by the submission of the pirate hordes of Saribas and
Sekrang.

So late as June, 1877, when the Rajah had long been dead, Mr. Gladstone in addressing the House on the question of Turkey and Bulgarian atrocities, and probably as a comparison, said, "I cannot recollect a more shameful proceeding on the part of any country than the slaughter of the Dayaks by Her Majesty's forces and by Sir James Brooke."

Earl Grey and Admiral Farquhar published indignant replies. Mr. Bailie-Cochrane[185] took Mr. Gladstone to task in the House, whereupon the latter shuffled out of what he had said with less than his usual ingenuity, by saying that he never meant to blame the Rajah personally, but only the Government. The following is from Earl Grey's reply:—

The additional information respecting him which I have since gained
has only tended to confirm the impression I then received that his
character was a truly noble one, and I am sanguine enough to believe
that it would be regarded in the same light by yourself if you would
be induced to read the letters he addressed to his mother in the
early part of his career as Rajah of Sarawak. These, to my mind,
most beautiful letters are to be found in the very interesting life
of Sir James Brooke published some months ago by Miss Jacob. They
were written while the events they describe were going on, to a
mother whom he passionately loved, obviously without the remotest
idea that they would ever be published, and contain an account,
bearing the clearest impress of truth and sincerity of all that he
did, and of the feelings and motives by which he was guided. We find
in them a touching record of his pity for the oppressed Dayaks,[186]
of his righteous indignation against the oppressors, of his noble
self-devotion, and of his fixed determination to hazard, and if
necessary to sacrifice for their welfare, not only the whole of his
moderate fortune, but ease, health, and life itself, while he
steadily refused to listen to all attempts that were made to induce
him to use the position he had acquired for his own personal
advantage.

ATTACK ON S. USMAN'S STRONGHOLD.]

The Commission had done no serious harm with his own loyal people. They heard with bewilderment that the man on whom their prosperity, and indeed their security, depended, had been maligned in England, and was to be tried as a malefactor in Singapore, and their dread was lest he should be taken from their head, or should throw up his task in disgust, and the country be allowed to relapse into oppression and anarchy; for so surely as the Rajah left, would the pangirans return and resume their blood-sucking operations on one side, and on the other the pirates recover from their humiliation and recommence their depredations, and so they would perish between the upper and nether millstone.

The Ministry made no attempt to remove the harmful impressions caused by the false step they had so weakly been induced to take; they but confirmed these by making no _amende_, and by withdrawing all support, and as the sequel will show, the Commission paved the way for the rebellion of the Chinese, and for the outbreak of disaffected Malays and other natives, aided and incited by intriguing Brunis, which were to follow, and which cost the lives of many Europeans, and great numbers of Chinese and natives, and nearly resulted in the extinction of the raj. With justice the Rajah wrote: "It is a sad thing to say, but true as sad, that England has been the worst opponent of the progress of Sarawak, and is now the worst enemy of her liberty."

-----

Footnote 108:

The Governor-General of Netherlands East Indies in a rescript, dated
January 23, 1846, acknowledged that the exertions during the past
twenty-five years effectually to suppress piracy on the coasts of
Borneo had not been successful for want of combination, and for having
been limited to the western coast.

Footnote 109:

_A Collection of Voyages_, 1729.

Footnote 110:

Sulu was the principal market for the disposal of captives and
plunder.

Footnote 111:

A son of Captain Francis Light, who founded Penang in 1786, was named
Lanoon, he having been born on the island at the time it was being
blockaded by Lanun pirates.

Footnote 112:

Dayak war-boats, some having as many as 75 to the crew.

Footnote 113:

_Expedition to Borneo of H.M.S. Dido_, 1847.

Footnote 114:

On behalf of the Sultan, Saribas and Sekrang being beyond Rajah
Brooke's jurisdiction.

Footnote 115:

Keppel, _op. cit._

Footnote 116:

These Sea-Dayaks, together with those of the Undup, also an affluent
of the Batang Lupar, subsequently became the mainstay of the
Government against the Saribas and Sekrangs.

Footnote 117:

_Life of Sir James Brooke_, p. 84.

Footnote 118:

Sir Edward's report upon Sarawak appears to have been favourable; he
pronounced the coal at Bruni, which he never examined, to be
unworkable, and the Sultan to be a savage.

Footnote 119:

Pronounced by the natives _Achi_.

Footnote 120:

More correctly Putusan, or Pemutus. We retain the old spelling.

Footnote 121:

These guns realised £900 at public auction in Singapore.

Footnote 122:

The Patinggi was always ready and ever to the fore where tough work
and hard knocks were going, and he was the guiding and leading spirit
in such expeditions as was this. "Three fingered Jack" the _Dido's_
crew had dubbed him, having that strong regard for him that brave men
bear towards another though his skin be of a different complexion—for
he had lost two fingers in a former encounter. The type has since
changed, and the courtly, intrepid, and determined fighting Malay
chief has gone—and he is missed. "I sigh for some of the old hands
that could not read or write, but _could_ work, and had more sound
wisdom in their little fingers than many popinjay gentlemen of the
present day carry in their heads," so wrote the present Rajah ten
years ago.

Footnote 123:

Mr. George Steward, formerly of the H.E.I.C.'s maritime service, had
been sent out by the Rajah's agent, Mr. Wise, on a trading venture. He
joined the expedition as a volunteer, and had concealed himself in
Patinggi Ali's boat, where he should not have been.

Footnote 124:

Keppel, _op. cit._ We have taken our account of the expedition up the
Batang Lupar mainly from Keppel's narrative, the only original history
of these operations hitherto published.

Footnote 125:

He was afterwards pardoned and permitted to reside at Sekrang town,
where he died.

Footnote 126:

Labuan, however, proved a failure as a trading centre, and in that
respect has taken a very secondary position to Kuching.

Footnote 127:

Journals, Keppel, _op. cit._

Footnote 128:

The pirates and their supporters, however, preyed upon Islams as well
as infidels, and religion was a dead letter to them in this respect.
Quite contrary to the tenets of their faith, true believers who were
captured were sold into slavery.

Footnote 129:

The son of Sherip Japar. S. Japar died the following year.

Footnote 130:

He was married to a niece of Datu Patinggi Gapur.

Footnote 131:

His son Haji Usup joined the Government service in 1862, and was
afterwards appointed Datu Bandar in the Rejang. He died April 1st,
1905, after having served the Government faithfully and with
distinction for over forty years. As a magistrate he bore a high
reputation.

Footnote 132:

The ring Bedrudin sent had been given him before he left Sarawak by
the Rajah, who told Bedrudin to send it to him when he had need of
him; it was seized by the Sultan before Japar escaped from Bruni.

Footnote 133:

He meant Bruni, which he had hoped to have restored to its former
state of prosperity.

Footnote 134:

Reports had been published that the Rajah was closely besieged in
Kuching by the Sultan's forces.

Footnote 135:

The foregoing details are mainly taken from Mundy's _Rajah Brooke's
Journals_. The captured cannon were sent to England. St. John says
some were melted up to construct cannon for the Crimea.—_Forests of
the Far East_ Brunis were famous brass-founders, and many of these
guns must have been very old.

Footnote 136:

_Private Letters of the Rajah._

Footnote 137:

His son, the Pangiran Muda, is still alive in Bruni.

Footnote 138:

The tribute was cancelled by the release of a debt due to the Rajah by
the Sultan, the interest upon which was equivalent to the yearly
tribute.

Footnote 139:

Though this deed bore the seal of Pangiran Abdul Mumin, he confirmed
it by another granted in 1853, after he had become Sultan. Only
copies, attested by H.M.'s Consul-General, exist now, the originals,
together with the two previous grants, having been burnt during the
Chinese rebellion of 1857.

Footnote 140:

Letter to the Earl of Clarendon, September 27, 1853.

Footnote 141:

Captain Mundy said truly of the Rajah that he was the _de facto_
sovereign of the whole coast of Borneo from point Api (he should have
said Cape Datu) to Marudu, 700 miles in extent.

Footnote 142:

The territory of Sarawak then extended to Cape Kedurong.

Footnote 143:

Mundy, _op. cit._

Footnote 144:

From _Blue Book_, March 2, 1854.

Footnote 145:

_Private Letters._

Footnote 146:

Letter from the Rajah to the Tuan Muda, 1864.

Footnote 147:

From Mundy, _op. cit._

Footnote 148:

Of these, three foundered from injuries received during the
engagement, so that few returned home to tell the tale. It took the
Balenini about fifteen years to forget the lesson.—_Sir James Brooke_,
St. John.

Footnote 149:

Mundy, _op. cit._

Footnote 150:

_Private Letters._

Footnote 151:

He joined the Rajah in March, 1843, having previously served in the
H.E.I. Co.'s Navy, and became Police Magistrate and Government
Secretary. In 1863 he was appointed Resident of Sarawak. He frequently
administered the Government during the absences of the late and the
present Rajah. He retired in 1873, and died in 1891.

Footnote 152:

The warrant of investiture was issued by her Majesty on May 22, 1848.

Footnote 153:

Amongst others who came out with the Rajah in the _Mæander_ were Mr.
Spenser St. John, afterwards Sir Spenser St. John, G.C.M.G., the
Rajah's Secretary; and Mr. Hugh Low, afterwards Sir Hugh Low,
G.C.M.G., Colonial Secretary at Labuan. Mr. St. John was
Consul-General at Bruni from 1853-1861; he left Borneo the latter year
upon promotion. Mr. Low had before spent some three years in Sarawak
botanising. He left Labuan in 1877, when he was appointed Resident of
Perak.

Footnote 154:

The eldest son of the Rev. Francis Charles Johnson, Vicar of White
Lackington, Somersetshire, by Emma, the Rajah's second sister.

Footnote 155:

Yellow ground, with black and red cross, as shown in illustration—the
arms of the Brookes. The Government flag is distinguished by a crown
in the centre; the Rajah's flag is a burgee, or swallow-tailed flag.

Footnote 156:

Keppel, _Voyage to the Indian Archipelago_.

Footnote 157:

_Private Letters._

Footnote 158:

Of his fifteen sons, Abangs Apong, Chek, Tek, and Bunsu all served the
Government afterwards; they were distinguished more for bravery than
for rectitude, but they were faithful and useful servants. Another son
was killed during the operations up the Saribas subsequent to the
action of Beting Maru. The Laksamana lived for years after these
events, and was about ninety when he died.

Footnote 159:

Keppel, _op. cit._

Footnote 160:

The plains on both banks of the river evidence a former cultivation on
an extensive scale.

Footnote 161:

St. John, _Life of Sir James Brooke_.

Footnote 162:

An army in Malay and Dayak.

Footnote 163:

Afterwards Admiral Sir Arthur Farquhar, K. C. B. He died in 1908, aged
ninety-three.

Footnote 164:

Anglice, King Lion.

Footnote 165:

Beting Maru is the name of a long sand-spit running into the sea
between the Kalaka and Saribas rivers off the Maru river.

Footnote 166:

This same Linggir in 1845 attempted to murder the Rajah and his
officers and other English guests whilst at dinner in the Rajah's
house at Kuching. He marched into the dining-room with eighty armed
men, pretending to pay a friendly visit. The Rajah and his guests
adopted the only policy open to them, and pretended as well to be
friendly, for they were completely at the mercy of the Dayaks. They
entertained their unwelcome guests with wine and cigars whilst waiting
for the Datus, to whom the Rajah had contrived covertly to send a
message. The Datu Temanggong arrived first with thirty men, and then
came the Datu Bandar with fifty men. The Datus wished to kill Linggir
for his intended treachery, the Rajah, however, spared him, perhaps
unwisely, but he had to slink away to his boat with a flea in his ear.
He had actually brought with him a basket to contain the Rajah's head.
He afterwards became a peaceable citizen, and very friendly to the
white men.

Footnote 167:

These unfortunate girls, and those taken at Matu, were barbarously
murdered by the pirates to prevent their being rescued.

Footnote 168:

Or better, Mashhor, an Arabic word meaning illustrious.

Footnote 169:

Mr. W. Brereton first came to Sarawak in the _Samarang_, as a
midshipman, in 1843. In 1848 he left the Navy and joined the Rajah. He
was first stationed at Labuan. He was only twenty years of age when
appointed to take charge of Sekrang.

Footnote 170:

The Sekrangs lost heavily at the battle of Beting Maru.

Footnote 171:

_Private Letters._

Footnote 172:

_Private Letters._

Footnote 173:

To show how these charges were supported by wilful and gross
exaggerations, that could only have been made for the express purpose
of deceiving the public, and which were as ridiculous as they were
mischievous, Hume stated that it was doubtful whether a portion of the
Royal Navy of China, which was reported to be off the coast at the
time for the purpose of making peace with these people (the Saribas
and Sekrangs), had not been destroyed by the expedition!

Footnote 174:

Keppel, _Voyage to the Indian Archipelago_.

Footnote 175:

The important fact that in all their marauding expeditions the Saribas
and Sekrang Dayaks were mixed up with the Malays of the Saribas and
Batang Lupar, who not only commanded and led them, but accompanied
them in large numbers seems to have been quite overlooked by both the
Rajah's accusers and his supporters. This in itself is a sufficient
indication of the piratical nature of these expeditions. The character
of these Malays as pirates was at least beyond question, and to assert
that they went with these poor "harmless and timid" Dayaks to assist
them in their intertribal feuds would be a very wide stretch of
imagination. We have shown that the force routed on Beting Maru was
led by Malays.

Footnote 176:

Married to a daughter of the Datu Patinggi Gapur. He was afterwards
selected by Sherip Masahor's party to murder the present Rajah, but
the task was not to his liking.

Footnote 177:

From _Life of Sir James Brooke_, St. John.

Footnote 178:

May 1850, 145 to 20; June 1850, 169 to 29; July 1851, 230 to 19.

Footnote 179:

The Rajah to Lord Clarendon, December 25, 1853.

Footnote 180:

John C. Templar, _Private Letters of the Rajah_, v. iii. p. 117.

Footnote 181:

_Private Letters._

Footnote 182:

The Dutch Resident of Western Borneo, not of Sambas only. He certified
that on one raid the Saribas and Sekrangs killed four hundred people
on the Dutch coast. Referred to by Earl in his _Eastern Seas_; he
relates that the Dayaks swept the whole coast from Sekrang to Sambas,
killing the entire population of Selakau. As far back as 1825, the
Resident of Sambas (Van Grave) and his secretary were killed on their
way to Pontianak in a small vessel. Keppel tells us the Saribas once
laid in wait for "the (Dutch) man-of-war schooner _Haai_, and in one
engagement killed thirty-seven of the Dutch, losing eighty of their
own force." Keppel's book, _A Voyage to the Eastern Archipelago in
1850_, contains an able refutation of the charges made by Hume and
Cobden.

Footnote 183:

The foregoing particulars are taken from Mr. Prinseps' report, dated
January 6, 1855.

Footnote 184:

From Mr. Devereaux's report.

Footnote 185:

Son of the late Admiral Sir Thomas Cochrane.

Footnote 186:

The Land-Dayaks.

THE TUAN MUDA'S FORT AT SEKRANG.]