HISTORY OF MAURITIUS. 
278 
Pondicherry had expressly engaged, by their letters, to execute the articles of the 
treaty, as they should be settled by M. de la Bourdonnais, whom they left the entire 
master to conduct the whole in the manner which he should judge most proper. It has 
also been observed that, in consequence of these engagements, M. de la Bourdonnais 
had framed the articles, and that he had sent a copy to the Council of Pondicherry, 
informing them at the same time, that if any alterations were made, he would not 
answer for their being accepted. But the gentlemen of Pondicherry forgot all their 
engagements, and returned the articles with alterations, which were not only inad¬ 
missible but impracticable. 
For example : by the fifth article, they made themselves masters of the time when 
they should evacuate the place, by stipulating, but without fixing the term, that it 
should not be evacuated till the captured property was settled: but as that period 
might be lengthened at their pleasure, one of the conditions, solemnly agreed to by 
M. de la Bourdonnais, that the evacuation should take place in January, would be 
violated. 
In this same article they inserted another condition, which was not less unjust: 
that the road of Madras should not be frequented by English vessels till after the 
evacuation. It was, in effect, to take from the English that freedom of commerce, 
which could alone put them in a condition to collect the funds necessary for the 
payment of the ransom. It was impossible for the English to accept of such a 
condition. 
The seventh article was not less ridiculous. They thereby declared that they 
would receive neither bills nor hostages, and that M. de la Bourdonnais should 
take charge of them on board his vessels. But this proposition was impracticable, 
because the hostages and the bills could not be delivered but at the moment of 
evacuation, when M. de la Bourdonnais would not be at Madras to arrange the 
final settlement of it. 
The eighth article, however, was that which gave the greatest offence. The 
Council determined to sign nothing with the English, and to enter into no engage¬ 
ment whatever, but with M. de la Bourdonnais. The latter saw through all the 
finesse of that business; as the rulers of Pondicherry had no other object than 
to delay the final settlement of the treaty till M. de la Bourdonnais should be 
obliged to quit Madras without signing it, and consequently leave the place to their 
discretion: but to render their projects abortive, M. de la Bourdonnais deter- 
