In 1778 occurred Warren Hastings' trans-continental expedition from Bengal to the assistance of Bombay against the Marathas. In the course of that expedition Colonel Leslie seized Kalpi. Philip Francis who had been opposed to the expedition all along, never lost a chance of criticizing it adversely, and Hastings through it. On the 22nd June Colonel Lesl e sent to Calcutta some despatches from Bombay, urging him to hasten west. Incidentally, they mentioned the news just received, of General Burgoyne's surrender in the American War. Francis commented that in one breath they told one English army to proceed across one continent, and stated that another English army, which had attempted a passage across another continent, had been forced to capitulate. He pointed out that this was an evil omen, and pressed for the recall of the troops. He also quoted a private letter from Leslie's camp describing the privations that the troops had suffered, and stating that Crawford had died on the first march out of Kalpi, raving mad for want of a simple drink of water, and more than hinted that Leslie or Hastings had suppressed the news of his death. Hastings replied that the death had been unofficially reported in a letter received at the same time as a public despatch from Colonel Leslie, and in a moment of confusion he had supposed the death was mentioned in the despatch and so had not produced the letter. He then did so, giving an extract as follows "I have had the misfortune to lose Captain James Crawford, who commanded the 4th Battalion of Sepoys, by a most violent fever which carried him off in less than two hours." The letter was dated 5th June: and we find an official despatch dated 15th June, from Leslie from "Meergawa"—of course Margawan or Margayan. It seems therefore quite clear that the Captain James Crawford of this tomb must be the unfortunate officer whose death Leslie reported. But for this absurd attack of Francs on Hastings, the letter would never have emerged from the obscurity of Hasting's waste paper basket into the glare of the proceedings of the Secret Select Committee; and the tomb would have remained a puzzle. Parturient montes."
Nothing else is definitely known of James Crawford. He appears to be the officer mentioned by Dodwell and Mi;es, who became an ensign in 1764 (at the age of 15), a lieutenant in 1765, was dismissed the service on 16th February and restored on 7th July 1767; and then Dodwell and Miles know no more of his fate. We find a Lieutenant James Crawford giving evidence in the trial of Sir R. Fletcher for mutiny in 1766; if this is the same, it would explain the dismissal, whilst the subsequent restoration was more or less universal (even Sir R. Fletcher was reinstated). But it is not certain, for there are two James Crawfords mentioned about this time, and distinguished as senior and junior. It is pretty clear however that this was the James Crawford who was appointed to command the 1st Battalion of the 4th Sepoys in 1768, and gave his name to them—Crawford ki paltan; in which case he was the senior of the two.]
(References: Forrest 1772—1785; Cardew; Broome: D. and M.; Führer; communicated.)
