Mr. E. Thornton, in his History of British India, intimates, that the Resident did not consider that it was possible to defend the city, but that Colonel Burn took a different and bolder view of the means of defence. A certain Lieut.-General, still living, was then a subaltern in the 14th Native Infantry, and present at the siege; from him, and others, we know that Sir David Ochterlony did plan the defence, and that Colonel Burn thanked him for his ability and advice. Mr. Thornton might have seen Lieut.-Colonel Ochterlony's report to General Lake, stating what he had done for the defence of the imperial city, as well as Colonel Burn's letter of thanks and report of the siege. It is singular, too, that Mr. Thornton was not aware that the _Resident_ was afterwards the celebrated Sir David Ochterlony, G.C.B., the pride of the Bengal army; distinguished no less for his gallantry, than for his political conduct; for he was, when he died, in August 1825, the Governor-General's Agent for the North-west Provinces, an office which has been changed into the designation of Lieut.-Governor of the North-western Provinces.[64] In 1806, Lieutenant-Colonel Ochterlony was removed from the post of Resident at Delhi to the command of the fortress of Allahabad, in consequence of an order from the Court of Directors, that no military officer should be the Resident at any Native Court. He was, however, granted the allowances of Adjutant-General of the army, as he had, by being Resident, lost his promotion to the head of that department. The Marquis Wellesley had appointed chiefly military men as Residents, which, in a country like India, seems to have been the best arrangement; for a divided authority in an unsettled country has generally proved injurious. I have thought it right to make the above digression, because Mr. Thornton's omission might lead some to suppose that Colonel Ochterlony had entertained erroneous military notions, and was deficient as a military man. The defence of Delhi depended on two circumstances; firstly, the walls of the city, and secondly, the prevention of an outbreak among the Mahomedan population; for, the people having been under British rule only one year, it was to be apprehended that the disaffected would rise and join Holcar. It was, therefore, Colonel Ochterlony's military skill, together with his knowledge of the native character, his temper, and cool judgment that saved the city of Delhi. FOOTNOTES: [Footnote 60: Ferishta, Rennel, Francklin, etc.] [Footnote 61: Son of the late Colonel Hercules Skinner of the Bengal Infantry. Colonel James Skinner, for many years commanded the 1st Local Horse, then called Skinner's Horse.] [Footnote 62: The East India Company allow him an annual pension of £120,000.] [Footnote 63: Thorn's History of the Maharatta War, p. 110.]