its outward beginnings was rehearsed in the same place, but though the awful tragedy of the Great Mutiny was to follow, the immediate outbreak was suppressed without bloodshed. Those who blame the rigour shown in 1824 may, perhaps, ask themselves whether lenity might not have been misconstrued. No one felt more keenly than the Governor-General the pain of the spectacle. He cannot reasonably be held responsible for the absence of tact and conciliation in the early stage of the discontent, and nothing cheered and pleased him more than the proof he was hereafter to receive of the return of a better feeling among the soldiers. The affair left an ineffaceable impression on the sensitive spirit of Lady Amherst. We can imagine, then, her delight as she writes thus:
'Soon after the unfortunate mutiny here, the 39th Native Infantry and the 60th Native Infantry volunteered services to go anywhere that Government ordered them. Colonels Andrews and Lines explained minutely the sort of service they would he sent upon and the duties they would have to fulfil. . . . They were told that their colours should be planted at a distance and that those who persevered in their first intentions were to range themselves around them, but should any on reflection after hearing these further particulars alter their minds, they were at liberty to remain where they were. To the unspeakable satisfaction of their commanders every one to a man ran and ranged themselves around their colours.'
In a later entry Lady Amherst notes a minute of the Council in Calcutta especially addressed to the
