IQ MEMOIR OF CAPTAIN LIGHT. 



The old controversy upon the point has long subsided. 

 As a matter of practical politics, the general " suzerainty " of 

 Siam is now, and since the Malay Restoration in 1842, ex- 

 pressly admitted; but that in 1786 it was admitted, or even 

 claimed, in any European sense of the word, ''suzerainty," 

 cannot be maintained. The view favouring Captain Light'S 

 direct negotiation with Kedah was supported by Mr. J. R. 

 Logan, and was held by those best-informed in Straits affairs 

 when the dispute arose. The opposite case, of which Colonel 

 Low, a Siamese scholar, made himself the chief exponent, is 

 best disposed of by quoting his own admissions in his paper 

 on the question in Vol. Ill of Logan's Journal: — 



P. 602. He admits that ''no coercion or intimidation was 

 "employed to obtain the cession of Penang in 1786." 



P. 601. That the Rajah protested his independence, and 

 was believed by the Government of India (after enquiries 

 protracted during 1778-86); while "Siam would readily have 

 consented'^ if consulted. 



P. 613. That there was an ^'ancient dependence, and a 

 rebellion against Siam in 1^20!^ which shews the unpractical 

 character of the claim, so many years after. 



Pp. 603-13. In fact the triennial "bunga mas" remains 

 the sole piece of evidence on which the whole figment has 

 been constructed. The value of this evidence can be gauged 

 by Colonel Low's own reference (p. 613) to "the rival nations 

 of Ava and Siam" both receiving this token (see also p. 610 

 where the Rajah of Kedah claimed our help against both 

 Burmese and Siamese). The bunga mas was no more than 

 a token of inferior pretensions, offered by a second-rate to 

 a first-rate Eastern Power, in the same way as it was formerly 

 offered by Siam to China. 



It is clear from many of these passages (pp. 600 to 609 

 and elsewhere) that Colonel Low imported into his chronicle 

 in Logan's Journal questions which sixty-five years before 

 had never been raised"^ at all, but which afterwards excited 



* In 1802 the Advocate-General at Calcutta advised on the question whether 

 the sovereignty of the Island had been ceded to Britain, and in the course of 

 his formal "Opinion" the very existence of the Siamese is ignored. 



