At the end of 1889 Burma was honoured by the visit of His Royal Highness Prince Albert Victor of Wales (the late Duke of Clarence), who spent some days in Rangoon and Mandalay. The Royal visit was highly appreciated by the Burmese, as well as by the European community, and was celebrated with much demonstration of genuine spontaneous loyalty. Chief of His Royal Highness’s staff was the late Sir Edward Bradford, whose high qualities it were superfluous to praise. CHAPTER XIII A VISIT TO THE SHAN STATES The Shan States occupy the whole of the eastern side of Upper Burma, and border on French Indo-China, China, and Siam. It is sometimes erroneously supposed that they are independent or semi-independent States, on the same footing as native States in India. From Theinni in the north to Mobye in the south, from the Myelat in the west to Kyaingtôn in the far east, these States were an integral part of the Burmese kingdom, over which the Burmese assertion of sovereignty was never abandoned or successfully resisted. Burmese Residents and garrisons were maintained. Though there were rebellions, revolts, and massacres, though in King Thebaw’s time the bonds of authority were loosened, independence was never established. Each State was administered by its own chief, Sawbwa, Myosa, or Ngwekunhmu, appointed or recognized by the Burmese Government, and very practically subject to the King and his Council. Consequently, when we succeeded to the sovereignty of Burma, the Shan States became as much an integral part of British India as any district of Upper Burma. To speak of the annexation of a Shan State is incorrect. Those States, such as Wuntho and Kale, which have ceased to be governed by their own chiefs, have been, not annexed, but taken under direct administration. The distinction between the Shan States and the rest of Burma is one not of political status, but of administrative method. The Legislative Councils of India and Burma make laws for the Shan States as for other parts of the Province. This power was exercised as long ago as 1886 in the first Statute relating to Upper Burma. The principle has been consistently maintained. The States which are really semi-independent, subject to suzerainty, are those of Karenni. The historical explanation is that before we took Upper Burma we strenuously maintained that Karenni was not part of the King’s dominions. When we succeeded to the King’s rights, we could not decently assert the contrary. But though there is a theoretical distinction, in practice Karenni is as much under control as the Shan States. [Illustration: PAGODA AT MONÈ.]