160 LA BOURDONNAIS AND DUPLELT. chap, that Madras shortly being in a position to demand a 1V ' ransom from Pondichery, could not have seemed, even 1746 to La Bourdonnais, a sound policy for France. But there is another light in which it is necessary to regard the transaction. Let us inquire whether, though it was not a sound policy for France, it did not seem a sound policy for the private interests of La Bourdonnais. And here we meet with some revelations which cannot fail to startle. We have seen in the course of the pre- ceding narrative, that during the six days, from the 21st to the 25th of September, a negotiation had been going on between La Bourdonnais and Governor Morse, as to the amount and the terms of the ransom. But besides the question of public ransom for Madras, there was the other, the perhaps equally weighty question, of private present to La Bourdonnais. That he did receive* a considerable present is undeniable, and, though such a transaction accorded with the customs of India in those early days, this acceptance of money must in almost every case, have considerably influenced the conduct of those who received it. With the knowledge of this fact before us, the refusal of La Bourdonnais to entertain the statesmanlike plans of Dupleix becomes at once intel ligible. Knowing, as we know now, that of the thre fc measures which he himself submitted to Dupleix, viz., the occupation of Madras by the French, its destruction, and its ransom — that of the ransom was the only one which would bring him in material advantage, all the mystery that enveloped his conduct disappears. He stands robbed of much of his glory— of that bright halo of pure disinterestedness with which historians have sought to encircle him — but he is at least an in- telligible being. We can watch his acts now, morally certain that we have our eyes on the secret spring by which all those acts were directed. But we would not be understood to assert that this was
- Vide, Appendix A.—" The private present to La Bourdonnais."
