Forjett’s services at the time of the Mutiny were separately acknowledged. From the public he received various addresses and a purse of £3,850, subscribed by both English and Indian residents. The Government, whose eulogy of his action has already been quoted, granted him an extra pension and also bestowed a commission in the Army upon his son, F. H. Forjett, who was in command of one of the native regiments in Bombay at the time of the great Hindu-Muhammadan riots of 1893.[84] Yet Forjett is said to have regarded himself as slighted by Government in not having received from them any decoration.[85] It certainly seems curious that so admirable a public servant should not have been rewarded with a Knighthood or admitted to one of the Orders of Chivalry. But in Forjett’s day the Government bestowed decorations very sparingly, and it may have been thought that this faithful servant of the vanished East India Company was sufficiently recompensed by the grant of a commission to his son and by permission to accept the handsome pecuniary rewards offered to him by a grateful urban population. After his retirement, Forjett purchased a property near Hughenden, which he called “Cowasjee Jehangir Hall” after the well-known Parsi philanthropist, who gave so largely to educational and charitable institutions in Western India.[86] In 1877 he published _Our Real Danger in India_, in which he sought to explain the lesson of his own experience during the Mutiny and gave an account of the events of that period in Bombay. He died in London on January 27th 1890, but at what age is unknown, as the date of his birth has never been satisfactorily determined. He can hardly have been less than thirty-five years of age when he was appointed Superintendent of the Bombay Police in 1855, and was possibly older. Sir Lees Knowles of Westwood, Pendlebury, met him in 1886, and describes him at that date as “a man of middle height, with a very pale olive complexion, and highly nervous: he could not without shaking raise a glass of water to his lips.”[87] Forjett’s pension was paid in rupees, and after the more or less permanent decline in the exchange-value of the rupee, he requested the British Government on more than one occasion to permit him to draw his pension in sterling, but failed to obtain sanction to his request.