“That, with whomsoever the Vizier should make war, Fyzoola Khan should send two or three thousand men, according to his ability, to join the forces of the Vizier.

“And that, if the Vizier should march in person, Fyzoola Khan should himself accompany him with his troops.”

III.  That from the terms of the treaty above recited it doth plainly, positively, and indisputably appear that the Nabob Fyzoola Khan, in case of war, was not bound to furnish more than three thousand men under any construction, unless the Vizier should march in person.

IV.  That the Nabob Fyzoola Khan was not positively bound to furnish so many as three thousand men, but an indefinite number, not more than three and not less than two thousand; that of the precise number within such limitations the ability of Fyzoola Khan, and not the discretion of the Vizier, was to be the standard; and that such ability could only mean that which was equitably consistent not only with the external defence of his jaghire, but with the internal good management thereof, both as to its police and revenue.

V. That, even in case the Vizier should march in person, it might be reasonably doubted whether the personal service of the Nabob Fyzoola Khan “with his troops” must be understood to be with all his troops, or only with the number before stipulated, not more than three and not less than two thousand men; and that the latter is the interpretation finally adopted by Warren Hastings aforesaid, and the Council of Bengal, who, in a letter to the Court of Directors, dated April 5th, 1783, represent the clauses of the treaty relative to the stipulated aid as meaning simply that Fyzoola Khan “should send two or three thousand men to join the Vizier’s forces, or attend in person in case it should be requisite.”

VI.  That from the aforesaid terms of the treaty it doth not specifically appear of what the stipulated aid should consist, whether of horse or foot, or in what proportion of both; but that it is the recorded opinion, maturely formed by the said Hastings and his Council, in January, 1783, that even “a single horseman included in the aid which Fyzoola Khan might furnish would prove a literal compliance with the stipulation.”

VII.  That, in the event of any doubt fairly arising from the terms of the treaty, the Nabob Fyzoola Khan, in consideration of his hereditary right to the whole country, and the price by him actually paid for the said treaty, was in equity entitled to the most favorable construction.

VIII.  That, from the attestation of Colonel Champion aforesaid, the government of Calcutta acquired the same right to interpose with the Vizier for the protection of the Nabob Fyzoola Khan as they, the said government, had before claimed from a similar attestation of Sir Robert Barker to assist the Vizier in extirpating the whole nation of the said Fyzoola Khan,—­more especially as in the case of Sir Robert Barker it