With the capture of Twet Nga Lu and the subjugation of the Red Karens all serious trouble in the Shan States west of Salween ended. Writing in July, 1890, the Superintendent of the Southern Shan States was able to say:—

"During the year under report, which extends from the beginning of June, 1889, the Shan States have been perfectly quiet. Nowhere have there been any revolts, nowhere any insubordination or sedition; hardly anywhere, except along the frontier with Burma, any dacoities or gang robberies." (Report on the Shan States for 1889-90 by Mr. (now Sir George) Scott.)

Pretenders had become convinced that they could not succeed against the chiefs who had been confirmed in possession by the Sovereign Power, and they settled down to make the best of things. The floating army of ruffians who had supplied the fighting material in past times had disappeared, and contrived to pick up a living in more peaceful ways.

"They make very good show-figures in a Sawbwa\'s processions, with their tattooing from ankle to throat and their chest and arms bossed all over with armlets and charms let in below the skin. They are also admirable letter-carriers to distant States. They know all roads, they are afraid of nobody, and they seem to be able to trudge from dawn to sunset for an indefinite number of days.... It is certain, however, that the States are infinitely quieter than they have been at any time since the death of King Mindon, and probably quieter than they have been at all." (Ibid.)

The year 1889 therefore offered a good opportunity for attending to Trans-Salween affairs.

[210]

Early in this year the question of the frontier line which was to limit our responsibilities eastward was anxiously considered. Some of the States west of the Salween which had already come under our protection held or claimed ground east of the river. There were others lying wholly east of the Salween which had been subject to the dominion of Burma although they had been loosely held. Of these the most important, Kengtung and Kang Hung, held, or claimed to hold, territory east of the Mekong.

It will be easily understood that the Government was not eager to lay hold of more territory than it was bound in honour to accept as the successor of the Burmese dynasty. We had already taken as much as we could administer or garrison with efficiency. Our authority was now definitely established up to the Salween. The country lying between that river and the Mekong was known to be mountainous, unhealthy, and unprofitable, destitute of roads, a succession of steep mountain ranges which made travelling most laborious. To maintain even a handful of troops in that region would be costly. Revenue, there would be none. It was asked where were our responsibilities to end? It was not easily answered. The problem had several sides—the military, the political, and the administrative. From the soldiers\' point of view the arguments in favour of making the Salween our eastern boundary had considerable force. The river gave a clear and definite frontier drawn from north to south. The advance of a possible enemy through the country between the Mekong and the Salween could not, from the nature of the ground, be made without much difficulty; whereas the defence would have, in the wide plateau with its rolling prairies on the west of the Salween, an admirable position, with easy communications open to the Irrawaddy Valley.

Looking at the matter, moreover, from a broader point of view, it was doubtful whether the British dominion in India was not outgrowing its strength. In 1886 the annexation of Upper Burma added, roughly, 120,000 square miles to the area for which the Government of India was responsible. Of this, roughly speaking, 20,000 square miles lay across the Salween. Before Upper Burma was added to the Empire it had been argued by a great military authority[211] that if we were seriously threatened by an enemy beyond the frontier of India, it would be necessary to recall the garrison of British Burma and to let that province go for the time. If there were any foundation for this opinion the difficulty in the event supposed would be very much increased by the addition of the new province. For no addition had been made to the army in India since the annexation. There were strong reasons, therefore, for not going a yard farther than was necessary. The advance beyond the Salween meant the inclusion of some 20,000 square miles of very difficult country and the possible neighbourhood of a troublesome power.

In support of the military arguments it was urged that the Salween was designed by nature for a boundary. It cut its way, in a line running almost due north and south, through steep mountains and rocks. It was not navigable in its upper reaches; the mouth and the navigable portion of the river were in our hands. But as a matter of fact, however adapted by its natural formation for such a purpose, the Salween has not been able to limit the spread of any race or power that has settled on its banks. On the north the Chinese hold both banks. The Shans have settled indiscriminately on either side. It proved no obstacle to the extension of the Burmese power to the eastward. In short, so far from having been "an uncompromising natural boundary," as it has been called, it has not been a boundary at all except for a short length of about sixty miles where it divides the Lower Burma Salween district from Siamese territory. Moreover, it is a timber-floating river. The teak cut on either bank must be rafted down to Moulmein; and hence disputes would be sure to arise. Rivers, as a rule, are held to be bad boundaries, and the Salween is no exception.

At first sight the strategical objections to crossing the Salween appeared to derive support from a consideration of the relations to foreign powers which might follow. It was not desired to take any step which might in the near future bring us into contact with France, and thus add a new factor to the frontier problems of our Indian Empire. The Government was even more anxious to avoid action which might give offence to Siam, or have the appearance of want[212] of consideration in our dealings with that somewhat unreasonable power.

Further examination, however, led to a doubt as to the soundness of these views. Supposing that the British Government, influenced by these motives, decided to decline responsibility for these Trans-Salween States, what would become of them? Even Kengtung, the most powerful, could not stand alone. China and Siam might be invited to absorb them, and thus a belt of territory might be placed between our boundary and that of French dominion in Tonquin China. But China, it was believed, had no wish to increase her responsibilities in these regions, where her authority was very weak. Siam might be willing enough, but her rule would be feeble and unstable, and not welcome to the Shans. Both countries on this frontier were more likely to lose than to gain. If, with the view of avoiding the inconveniences that might arise from becoming conterminous with a great Western Power in these distant countries, we should invite Siam or China, or both, to relieve us of the charge of the Trans-Salween country, what security was there that either of these powers would retain the territory given to them? We might be creating the very conditions we wished to avert. The result of a cautious policy of this kind might be to make our dominion conterminous with that of France, not on or beyond the Mekong but on the Salween itself—an intolerable position.

Looking at the matter from an administrative and local point of view, the Chief Commissioner was against stopping short of the frontier claimed by the King of Burma. It was argued that our new subjects, whether in Burma proper or in the Shan States, would not understand such a policy, and that it would have a bad effect on their feelings towards us. We might dignify it by the names of prudence and forbearance; they would ascribe it to fear and weakness. To them we should seem to have lifted a burden too heavy for our strength. We were afraid of going into places which the King had held and prepared for us.

This, however, might be disputed, or treated as a question of sentiment. But the practical objections were evident and insuperable.
The Easternmost Point of the British-Indian Empire.
Reach of the Mé Khong where our boundary marches with French Indo-China.

[213]

Looking to the character of the country lying between the Salween and the Mekong, it was certain to be the refuge of all the discontent and outlawry of Burma. Unless it was ruled by a Government not only loyal and friendly to us, but thoroughly strong and efficient, this region would become a base for the operations of every brigand leader like Twet Nga Lu, or pretender such as Saw Yan Naing, where they might muster their followers and hatch their plots to raid British territory when opportunity offered. To those responsible for the peace and order of Burma such a prospect was not pleasant.

These arguments prevailed, and it was decided to accept without flinching the full burden of responsibility which fell on us as standing in the King of Burma\'s place.

The States east of the Salween which were under the King of Burma came under two categories: those which were governed directly by their own chiefs or Sawbwas, and those which were subordinate parts of certain Cis-Salween States. Kang Hung and Kengtung came in the first class, and were the most important of the Burmese possessions east of the Salween. Their position may be roughly judged by the tribute paid to the King and the contingent they were bound to supply to the royal army. The tribute consisted of gold blossoms and cups, candles, bales of silk, ponies, and embroidered pillows; and it was due not only to the King and the heir-apparent, but to the members of the Hlutdaw, or Cabinet. Kang Hung sent tribute every third year, while Kengtung sent nearly thrice the value every year. The former State furnished a contingent of 2,500 men, half musketeers and half spearmen, and maintained seven posts on the southern frontier of from 60 to 100 men. The latter\'s contingent was of the same strength; but seven guards, with garrisons of from 50 to 200 men, had to be maintained by Kengtung on the southern frontier.

Kang Hung was the largest in area of the Trans-Salween States connected with Burma. The greater and the richer part lay to the east of the Mekong, and was overlapped on the north-east and east by Chinese territory. It was divided into twelve "panna," or townships, six of which lay on the east and six on the west of the river. The six panna on the east were more under the influence of China[214] than those on the west. Nevertheless, it is said that when Upper Burma was annexed there were no Chinese settlers in the eastern panna, and no interference of any kind by China with the administration of the country. Although in 1885 the King of Burma, in his secret treaty with the French, purported to cede Kang Hung to France, he had lost hold of Kang Hung altogether at that time, and he had no power then or previously to dispose of it without China\'s consent, although China did not meddle with the local Government.

Kengtung, which adjoins Kang Hung on the south, has had something of a history. About the middle of last century the Siamese invaded it. They were routed, and did not care to try a second venture. Later on it was the first State to revolt against Thebaw\'s exactions. The people, led by their chief, attacked the Burman Resident, and put him and his escort to the sword. The similar revolt at M?ngnai about the same time gave King Thebaw as much as he could do, and Kengtung was left alone. It has been related in Chapter XV how the Shan chieftains met at Kengtung and formed a Confederacy under the Limbin Prince. The chief of Kengtung had intrigued previously with the Myingun Prince with the object of inducing him to be their chief. As he was unable to come, the Limbin Prince was invited to lead. It was not the Burmese dynasty, but the person of King Thebaw they wished to be quit of.

When the Limbin Confederacy dissolved and M?ngnai and the leading Cis-Salween States came under the British flag, the Kengtung Sawbwa should have come with them. There were, however, influences which kept him aloof. The chief who had taken the lead against Thebaw had just died. His son, who was Sawbwa in 1888-9, was a mere boy, only thirteen years of age. The country between Kengtung and M?ngnai, through which he would have had to pass to meet Mr. Hildebrand, had been much disturbed and was unsafe. It was well known that his father had invited the Myingun Prince to head the revolt against Thebaw. As the party of resistance to British rule in Burma regarded the Myingun as their leader, it was possible that Kengtung might not be welcomed by the British authorities. These apprehensions, however, would have had little force had it not been for Saw Waing, the ex-Sawbwa of Lawksawk, who, with an[215] armed following, had taken refuge in Kengtung, and had obtained much influence over the young chief. If a representative from the Chief Commissioner could have gone immediately to Kengtung he would have submitted at once; for he had no chance of standing alone, and he knew it. But it took time to decide our policy, and determine the course to be followed regarding the easternmost dependencies of Burma. It was not wonderful that the boy-Sawbwa and his advisers should await events.

South of Kengtung, lying partly between it and the Mekong and partly across that river, was a small State called Chieng Kong. This State was believed at the time to be subordinate to Kengtung and to follow the fortunes of the larger State.

The small districts which were formerly governed directly by Burma had been annexed by Kengtung about the time of his revolt against the King. They were not of importance, except that one of them, Hsenyawt, contained the chief ferry over the Salween and included land on both banks of the river. The other, Hsenmawng, was a small circle entirely surrounded by Kengtung land. These two little tracts had in the King\'s time been administered by Burmese officials, probably in connection with the customs levied on the ferry traffic.

Kengtung had also appropriated the district of M?ngpu, which had belonged to the M?ngnai Sawbwa, and an adjoining tract known as M?nghsat, which M?ngnai also claimed. So far the questions concerned only the interests of our own feudatories.

Farther to the south, down the east bank of the Salween, lay four small States—M?ng Tang, M?ng Hang, M?ng Kyawt, and M?ng Hta. These four districts belonged to the Cis-Salween Sawbwa of M?ngpan. Owing to the action of the Siamese officials, who attempted to take possession of them, there was trouble in 1888, and the Superintendent had been sent across to arrange the disputed points with representatives of the Siamese authorities. The Siamese, however, did not choose to appear. They thought, it may be presumed, that having a bad case, or no case at all, they had a better chance of success by diplomatic action. On the spot, and with local evidence at hand to[216] rebut them, it would have been difficult to prove their assertions. Nothing could be done under the circumstances but to inquire and report the facts. This was done. The Government of India were satisfied that these divisions belonged to Burma, and were part of the territory of the M?ngpan Sawbwa. The Chief Commissioner was authorised to put M?ngpan in possession. Accordingly Mr. Scott visited the districts and formally installed the Sawbwa. He found that the residents were without exception M?ngpan Shans. There were no Lao inhabitants.

Until the dissolution of the Burmese authority in 1885, there had been no thought or talk of Siamese interference. At that time, seeing the chance of advancing their frontier to the Salween, an ambition they had doubtless cherished, the Chiengmai officials had ordered the headmen of these States to appear to swear fealty to Siam. They obeyed the order as the only means of escaping destruction. They returned gladly to their hereditary chieftain.

For five weeks after Mr. Scott\'s visit there was perfect quiet. How it came about that this settlement was again disturbed is not quite clear. The Siamese were bent on advancing their frontier to the Salween up to the southern boundary of Kengtung. Seeing that Mr. Scott had returned and had left no evidence of British authority in the shape of official or garrison, the former game was repeated. The headmen of the four States were again summoned "to drink the water of allegiance." Three of them obeyed. The fourth, M?ng Tang, sent a representative and wrote at the same time to the M?ngpan Sawbwa excusing his conduct on the ground of force majeure, and promising to return to his lawful lord when order was finally restored.

It was not until some time afterwards that the Siamese made overt demonstrations by sending armed parties to the States, but the people were very much alarmed and ceased all communication with the west of the Salween. This reopening of the matter was not comprehended by the Shans, and it did not help to enhance our reputation in the Shan States.

South-west of these Trans-Salween possessions of M?ngpan, and separated from them by a Siamese district called Mueng Fai, lie two districts, Mehsakun and M?ngmau,[217] forming part of the territory of Mawkmai. The history of these tracts illustrates the fluid state in which the country on the borders of the Shan States and Siam was in 1887-9, and for some time previously. Perhaps neither Burma nor Siam had any established and acknowledged authority in these regions. In 1823 the chief of Mawkmai, Né Noi by name, who was distinguished by the appellation of the Kolan (nine fathom) Sawbwa, was cast into prison in the Burmese capital. He escaped, and returned to his country through Eastern Karenni, in much the same way as the Hsipaw Sawbwa at a later date. But he could not withstand the Burmese power; and crossing the Salween, with the aid of Shans from Mawkmai he "carved," to use the words of Mr. Scott\'s report, "the two States of Mehsakun and M?ngmau out of the jungle," and settled down there with his own people.

Here he lived for twenty years, until in 1873 he obtained a pardon and went back to Mawkmai, leaving a nephew to govern the Trans-Salween acquisitions. While he was at Mawkmai he was no peaceful neighbour, but made himself feared by the Karennis on his south border and by the Laos on the south and east. So far from being in any way subordinate to the Siamese officials at Chiengmai, he attacked the Siamese district of Mehawnghsawn and drove out the Shan, named Taiktaga San, who had been placed there by the Chiengmai authorities. He bestowed the district on his niece, by name Nang Mya. She was a lady with much force of character, who in England, in the reign of King George V. would have been a militant suffragette, and would have made short work of the ministry by marrying them all out of hand. Nang Mya, probably feeling the need of local knowledge and connections, dismissed her first husband, who bore the not very imposing name of Pu Chang Se, recalled her predecessor, Taiktaga San, from exile, and made him her consort. When the Kolan (nine fathom) Sawbwa returned across the Salween to Mawkmai, she and her new consort transferred their allegiance to the Siamese Governor at Chiengmai, without opposition on the part of the Mawkmai Sawbwa. Mehawnghsawn, it may be explained, is farther from Mawkmai than from Chiengmai, and the Salween flows between.

[218]

This transaction, however, did not affect the districts of Mehsakun and M?ngmau, which remained under Mawkmai territory without question until 1888.

When the Red Karen chief, after the old Kolan\'s death, attacked Mawkmai, Kun Noi, who was governing Mehsakun on his uncle\'s behalf, behaved disloyally to his cousin, the rightful heir to Kolan, and induced the Karenni to make him master of Mawkmai. How Kun Hmon was restored to his position in Mawkmai by a British force has been told above (Chapter XV, p. 184). He was unable, however, to regain the two Trans-Salween districts, and it was not convenient at the moment to send a party across to reinstate him. Kun Noi, having been ejected from Mawkmai by the British, turned his thoughts to Siam and opened communications with the Chiengmai authorities through his cousin, the lady Nang Mya, who governed at Mehawnghsawn, with the view of placing himself under their protection. This was the origin of the Siamese pretensions to the Trans-Salween districts of Mawkmai. They had no foundation in right. It had been for some time their ambition to advance their frontier to the Salween, but as long as Burma had a remnant of strength, they could not. They thought the time opportune when the Burmese power had gone and the British had not yet made good their hold. On the 6th of March, 1889, a band of men, some of whom were militia from Chiengmai, came and occupied Tahwepon, the chief ferry on the Salween in Mawkmai territory, and hoisted the elephant flag of Siam, claiming the whole of the borderland lying east of the river for the King of Siam.

The position of Eastern Karenni has been explained in the chapter concerning events in that country. The people are numerous and all Karen. In the thirty-eight villages in which they live there are neither Shans nor Laos. The territory had been for many years in the hands of the Karenni chief, and was colonized by his people, just as the two districts north of it had been colonized by Mawkmai. It formed the most profitable portion of the Karenni State, by reason of its extensive and valuable teak forests. The capital required to work the timber was found by British subjects from Moulmein, the Karennis furnishing the labour. The timber trade was completely stopped by the Siamese; the[219] elephants employed on it seized and carried off. The floating of the timber which had to be sent down to Moulmein by the Salween was prevented, and communication between the east and west banks prohibited by them. Such a state of affairs was most galling to the Karennis and injurious to the dignity and to the revenues of their chief.

Such was the condition of affairs in 1889, and it became necessary to take action to prevent further mischief. It was decided by the Government of India, in communication with the Foreign Office, to appoint a Commission to survey the frontier and settle disputed points with representatives of the Siamese. Accordingly, as soon as the season permitted, a Commission was formed under Mr. Ney Elias, C.I.E., as chief. The members of the Commission were Mr. W. J. Archer, Her Britannic Majesty\'s Vice-Consul at Chiengmai, Mr. J. G. (now Sir J. George) Scott, Major E. G. Barrow (now Sir Edmund Barrow), Captain F. J. Pink (now Colonel Francis J. Pink, C.B., C.M.G., D.S.O., Queen\'s Royal West Surrey Regiment). A survey party from the Government of India, under Captain H. M. Jackson, R.E., was attached to the Commission. Surgeon J. K. Close was appointed to the medical charge, with Dr. Darwin as his assistant. The escort, commanded by Major Clarke, O.L.I., was composed of two companies of the Oxford Light Infantry, two guns of a Mountain Battery, and a few rifles of the Shan (military police) Levy.

Early in December the Commission met at Fort Stedman, and marching down through Loikaw and Sawl?n, the Karenni capital, encamped near Ywathit, at the ferry on the Salween called Ta Sanglè. Here they had expected to meet the Commissioners who, it was understood, had been appointed by the Bangkok Government to represent it. No one appeared, however, with credentials from Siam. Whether this was a deliberate act of discourtesy, or only a failure caused by the general debility of the Siamese administration, may be questioned. Most probably it was an instance of the common policy of Orientals and others with a weak case, who prefer to plead before a distant and necessarily more ignorant tribunal, rather than to submit their statements and evidence to a well-informed officer on the spot. Perhaps, also, the advisers of the[220] Siamese Government avoided taking part in the inquiry in order that they might refuse to be bound by an unwelcome finding.

Under these circumstances, Mr. Elias was forced to proceed in the absence of the other side. The working season in these latitudes is short, and to have delayed action would have played the Siamese game and given them more time to harass the Karennis and appropriate their property. Although no final decision could be arrived at, the Commission could ascertain the facts, survey the country, and place the matter in a clear light before the Government of India. At least we should acquire an exact knowledge of the case, and be able to say what we were fighting about. The business, therefore, was allowed to proceed.

A standing camp was formed at Ta Sanglè, and three parties, led by Mr. Ney Elias, Mr. Archer, and Mr. J. G. Scott, respectively, started to examine and survey the Karenni country. Ten months had passed since the Siamese had appeared in these parts. The time occupied unavoidably in a triangular correspondence between the Chief Commissioner in Burma, the Government of India in Simla, and the Foreign Office at Whitehall, had not been altogether wasted by the Siamese, who had endeavoured to get the proverbial nine points of the law on their side. They had established a series of posts along the Salween, all of them stockaded and flying the white elephant flag of Siam. In each of these posts were fairly large garrisons of from fifty to one hundred men, some of them well armed Siamese troops, others Laos and Shans—men, these latter, from the west of the Salween, who had sought refuge in Siamese territory from the troublous times of the past years.

It was found that the frontier of Trans-Salween Karenni was clearly defined by a range running from north to south, from fifteen to five-and-twenty miles from the Salween. The inhabitants, almost all Karens, had built their villages on this frontier range. As they live by the rude method of cultivation known as Taungya, they frequently move from one site to another to get fresh ground. The forests are rich in teak, but the timber was worked not by the Karens, but by Shans, or by Burmese traders from Moulmein.[221] Everything went to show that the country had been settled and opened up by the Red Karens, and that the Siamese neither had nor pretended to have any rights over it until the time of our expedition against Sawlapaw. From inquiries made and from the number of their villages the Karen population was estimated at between three and four thousand. The Siamese had taken a very practical method of marking them for their own. All adult males without exception had been tattooed on the forearm with the emblem of an elephant, with a running number added below. At first it was thought that this might help us to compute the number of people in the country. But the tattooing had not been done systematically at the villages where the people lived, but at markets and ferries as they chanced to come from the villages around, to sell their produce or make purchases. Thus while one ............