Page:History of the French in India.djvu/468

442 GODEHEU AND DE LEYRIT. CHA?, any new grants of territory during the truce. The tenth, for the principle of uti possidetis till the treaty should 1754. be confirmed from Europe ; and the eleventh, for some future plan of indemnification for the expenses of the war. When we commented on the conditions of peace, which the agents of Dupleix submitted to the Confer- ence of Sadras in the autumn of the previous year, we noticed that the French proposals were remarkable more for their omissions than for what they contained. The same observation is applicable, in one particular point, to the treaty of which we have here given an outline. No mention is made of Muhammad Ali ; not a single reference to the office of Nawwab of the Karnatik. It was not, however, the less clear from this omission, that the English had gained, in this particular, all for which they had been contending. The clause which forbade either nation to accept office or government from the native authorities was an unmistakable renunciation on the part of Godeheu of all the dignities and govern- ments which the Subadar had conferred upon his pre- decessor. The French competitor for the office of Nawwab having thus resigned his claims, on whom but on the rival competitor, Muhammad Ali, would the vacated government devolve ? For five years had the French and English battled for this single point ; to maintain the French view, Dupleix had risked and lost his semi-regal seat in the Council of Pondichery, he had refused substantial offers of territory which did not include this concession. His successor tamely re- nounced it, without, however, obtaining those substantial advantages which alone could make it palatable. But the third and fourth clauses, and especially the fourth, contained concessions not only damaging to French interests but disgraceful to French honour. The third, under the pretext of giving to each nation equal possessions on the Koromandel coast, kept indeed