SIKHIM AND BHUTAN
communications with the Government at Lhasa and open a trade with Tibet.
Eden is so far right in saying that Bogle was charged with no political Mission to Bhutan inasmuch as the treaty of 1774 had already been concluded in the April of that year, and Bogle’s appointment letter is dated May 13, 1774, and in that letter no specific Mission to Bhutan is mentioned. Warren Hastings, in his letter to the Court of Directors, informs them that he is taking the opportunity of the Penchen Rimpochi’s letter to employ Bogle to visit the Lama and open intercourse between Tibet and Bengal, and does not mention Bhutan.
The letter of instructions to Bogle also refers entirely to the negotiations with Tibet, though some confusion arises from the employment by Warren Hastings in this letter of the word “Bhutan.” “Having appointed you my Deputy to the Penchen Rimpochi, the Sovereign of Bhutan,” is the opening sentence of the letter, but Warren Hastings has used the word “Bhutan” here and in other places where it is mentioned in the letter for “Bhot,” the native name of Tibet. This explanation of the use of the word “Bhutan” is to be found in Markham’s note, and the context of the letter shows that it is evidently the right one. But the subsequent correspondence between Warren Hastings and Bogle proves that the latter was certainly charged with a friendly message to the Deb Raja, and with the more important duty of opening up trade with that country, and, through it, with Tibet. The main object of his Mission was to open communications and trade with Tibet, but to attain this object he was to gain the Deb Raja’s consent to the passage of traders through Bhutanese territory.
Bogle was the bearer of presents to the Deb Raja, and spent some time at Tashi-cho-jong as the Deb Raja’s guest, and was hospitably and civilly treated.
There must also have been some later written instructions on this point, for in writing to Warren Hastings on
238
