1920.] Dacca Diaries. 121 
the Nabob sending his Ameen!, Mamood Tuckey, to our house 
who acquainted us that the Nabob had impoured * him to seize 
our house, in order hereunto he clapt most of the Rt. Honble 
Compy’s concerns in one roome not sparing our apparell and 
opening all the rest had a whole view of what we had in the 
house when immediately he caused all ye roomes to be sealed 
and left us: about 10 of the clock at night returning againe he 
signified to us ’ twas the Nabob’s pleasure he should fetch away 
the broad cloth and silver and whatever was of value (and that 
in the morning the King’s officers* would come and take an 
account of the rest) which he accordingly did by oxen and 
dooleys, having taken away most part of ye broad cloth, the 
whole quantity of silver,* which were 7 ingotts, the plate 
> - > * and a great part of (?) men’s 
goods, which work he finished about 3 of the clock in ye 
morning 
A few days after the King’s officers came and took an 
account of what the Nabob had left which with particular 
men’s goods amounted to, according to estimation, neare 
Rs. 2000. They likewise seized all our papers notwithstand- 
ing our earnest request to them to remit them to us: Mahmooc 
Tuckey told us that our fleete at Chatgaam had discharged 
severall canon® but would not tell what mischief proceeded 
thereon, and that therefore the house and goods were ordered 
to be seized and that the Nabob intended to send us to Lal 
Baugh ® prison (ordering us our wearing apparell, kitchen uten- 
sills, palkees and rups 2007 for expenses) which in a few days 
after was accordingly performed, where we remained as in our 
ffactory untill the 11th of March when our troubles began to 
grow greater and greater upon us, for at the same time arrived 
Mr. Henry Hanley’ and Mr. James Ravenhill * with 14 persons 
salute rot yee pea a ck la gl er cae Eis oN em 
The Amin is mentioned along with the Kotwal in the first instal- 
ment of the diary. He may have been the Collector of Revenue. 
2 Em 
owered. 
Those under the Diwan, who were Oa teceeh of the Nawab. 
5 
Chittagong : { 
not assault the place is given under our hands in another paper. 
statement may have been false and made to justify their action or m 
probably such a rumour actually reached Dacca and the Nawab believed 
6 Lal Bagh was built in 1678 by Prince Mahd. Azam, but never 
i as intended for a Palace but never used as such. 
re] 
° 
oF 
3B 
ae 
< 
_ 
T-. 
i for Stanley. We find a Mr. Henry Stan- 
th when Heath arrived there and also at a 
ly not taken on board before Heath bom- 
barded Balasore. The mention of his name before Ravenhill’s tends to 
show that he was senior to Revenhill and strengthens the identification 
with Stanley. : 
9 He on a Company’s factor who accompanied Heath and Char- 
