Tod was convinced that the miserable state of the country was chiefly due to the hesitation of the Indian Government in interfering for the re-establishment of order; and on this ground he does not hesitate to condemn the cautious policy of Lord Cornwallis during his second term of office as Governor-General. Few people at the present day would be disposed to defend the policy of non-intervention. “This policy has been condemned by historians and commentators, as well as by statesmen, soldiers, and diplomatists; by Mill and his editor, H. H. Wilson, and by Thornton; by Lord Lake and Sir John Malcolm. The mischief was done and the loss of influence was not regained for a decade. It was not till the conclusion of an expensive and protracted campaign, that the Indian Government was replaced in the position where it had been left by Wellesley. The blame for this weak and unfortunate policy must be divided between Cornwallis and Barlow, between the Court of Directors and the Board of Control.” But it was carried out in pursuance of orders from the Home Government. “The Court of Directors for some time past had been alarmed at Lord Wellesley’s vigorous foreign policy. Castlereagh at the Board of Control had taken fright, and even Pitt was carried away and committed himself to a hasty opinion that the Governor-General had acted imprudently and illegally.”[i.1] Tod tells us little of his relations with the Supreme Government during his four years’ service as Political Agent. He was notoriously a partisan of the Rājput princes, particularly those of Mewār and Mārwār; he is never tired of abusing the policy of the Emperor Aurangzeb, and, fortunately for the success of his work, Muhammadans form only a slight minority in the population of Rājputāna. This attitude naturally exposed him to criticism. Writing in 1824, Bishop Heber,[i.2] while he recognizes that he was held in affection and respect by “all the upper and middling classes of society,” goes on to say: “His misfortune was that, in consequence of his favouring the native princes so much, the Government of Calcutta were led to suspect him of corruption, and consequently to narrow his powers and associate other officers with him in his trust till he was disgusted and resigned his place. They are now, I believe, well satisfied that their suspicions were groundless. Captain Todd (_sic_) is strenuously vindicated from the charge by all the officers with whom I have conversed, and some of whom had abundant means of knowing what the natives themselves thought of him.” The Bishop’s widow, in a later issue of the _Diary_ of her husband, adds that "she is anxious to remove any unfavourable impressions which may exist on the subject by stating, that she has now the authority of a gentleman, who at the time was a member of the Supreme Council, to say, that no such imputation was ever fixed on Colonel Todd´s (_sic_) character."