202 



JOURNAL, R.A.S. (OBYLON). [VOL. XXI. 



His Excellency, they declined to reply to the talpata, asserting 

 that they had received no authority from the Disava to do so. 



All this the Ambassador explained to the chiefs. He 

 begged, as instructed by His Excellency, for an inquiry into 

 the conduct of the Disava of Puttalam and of his Wanniyas ; 

 and that the same might be submitted to the gracious 

 consideration of His Majesty, so that he might pass his 

 censure on them for their wicked acts and warn them against 

 a repetition of the same in the future. 



They promissed to submit the matter as requested, and 

 added that possibly the evil behaviour of these men did lead to 

 the loss of a few arecanuts belonging to the Maha Gabadawa ;* 

 but that was of little concern, as a good deal more belonging 

 to the Maha Gabadawa and the inhabitants was likely to be 

 ruined by the closing of the ports. What was the reason for 

 their being so closed, contrary to all precedent ? It entailed 

 great loss on the Maha Wasala through the stoppage of 

 trade ; for. apart from the revenue which used to be received 

 from the harbours of Puttalam and Kottiarama, various 

 presents and rarities used to be brought to the Maha Wasala 

 through them, which were all now lost. What then was the 

 reason for this closure ? the Disava inquired two or three 

 times. He urged that it was the duty of the Company to 

 make good the loss thereby sustained. This question had 

 been repeatedly asked from the Ambassadors and from His 

 Excellency at Colombo, but up to date no decided reply had 

 been given. While the ports were open to trade no hostile or 

 injurious act had been committed by any one. His Majesty 

 was confident that the Company would do what was advan- 

 tageous to him and carry out his commands; and in His 

 Majesty's name the Disava requested the Ambassador on his 

 return to Colombo to submit the matter to His Excellency 

 without delay. 



This he undertook to do, but expressed his regret at his 

 inability to give a definite reply regarding the former custom 

 as regards the ports and the reason for their being closed, 

 as he was not well informed on the subject ; but they should 



* The question of these arecanuts was still unsettled in 1734, vide 

 Piclat's Memoir 'e, 43. 



