Mr. Hastings had himself forgotten the character which he had given of Nundcomar; but he says that his colleagues were perfectly well acquainted with him, and knew that he was a wretch, the basest of mankind. But before I read to you the character which Mr. Hastings gave of him, when he recommended him to the Presidency, (to succeed Mahomed Reza Khan,) I am to let your Lordships understand fully the purpose for which Mr. Hastings gave it. Upon that occasion, all the Council, whom he stated to lie under suspicion of being bought by Mahomed Reza Khan, all those persons with one voice cried out against Nundcomar; and as Mr. Hastings was known to be of the faction the most opposite to Nundcomar, they charged him with direct inconsistency in raising Nundcomar to that exalted trust,—a charge which Mr. Hastings could not repel any other way than by defending Nundcomar. The weight of their objections chiefly lay to Nundcomar's political character; his moral character was not discussed in that proceeding. Mr. Hastings says,—

"The President does not take upon him to vindicate the moral character of Nundcomar; his sentiments of this man's former political conduct are not unknown to the Court of Directors, who, he is persuaded, will be more inclined to attribute his present countenance of him to motives of zeal and fidelity to the service, in repugnance perhaps to his own inclinations, than to any predilection in his favor. He is very well acquainted with most of the facts alluded to in the minute of the majority, having been a principal instrument in detecting them: nevertheless he thinks it but justice to make a distinction between the violation of a trust and an offence committed against our government by a man who owed it no allegiance, nor was indebted to it for protection, but, on the contrary, was the minister and actual servant of a master whose interest naturally suggested that kind of policy which sought, by foreign aids, and the diminution of the power of the Company, to raise his own consequence, and to reestablish his authority. He has never been charged with any instance of infidelity to the Nabob Mir Jaffier, the constant tenor of whose politics, from his first accession to the nizamut till his death, corresponded in all points so exactly with the artifices which were detected in his minister that they may be as fairly ascribed to the one as to the other: their immediate object was beyond question the aggrandizement of the former, though the latter had ultimately an equal interest in their success. The opinion which the Nabob himself entertained of the services and of the fidelity of Nundcomar evidently appeared in the distinguished marks which he continued to show him of his favor and confidence to the latest hour of his life.

"His conduct in the succeeding administration appears not only to have been dictated by the same principles, but, if we may be allowed to speak favorably of any measures which opposed the views of our own government and aimed at the support of an adverse interest, surely it was not only not culpable, but even praiseworthy. He endeavored, as appears by the abstracts before us, to give consequence to his master, and to pave the way to his independence, by obtaining a firman from the king for his appointment to the subahship; and he opposed the promotion of Mahomed Reza Khan, because he looked upon it as a supersession of the rights and authority of the Nabob. He is now an absolute dependant and subject of the Company, on whose favor he must rest all his hopes of future advancement."

The character here given of him is that of an excellent patriot, a character which all your Lordships, in the several situations which you enjoy or to which you may be called, will envy,—the character of a servant who stuck to his master against all foreign encroachments, who stuck to him to the last hour of his life, and had the dying testimony of his master to his services.

Could Sir John Clavering, could Colonel Monson, could Mr. Francis know that this man, of whom Mr. Hastings had given that exalted character upon the records of the Company, was the basest and vilest of mankind? No, they ought to have esteemed him the contrary: they knew him to be a man of rank, they knew him to be a man perhaps of the first capacity in the world, and they knew that Mr. Hastings had given this honorable testimony of him on the records of the Company but a very little time before; and there was no reason why they should think or know, as he expresses it, that he was the basest and vilest of mankind. From the account, therefore, of Mr. Hastings himself, he was a person competent to accuse, a witness fit to be heard; and that is all I contend for. Mr. Hastings would not hear him, he would not suffer the charge he had produced to be examined into.

It has been shown to your Lordships that Mr. Hastings employed Nundcomar to inquire into the conduct and to be the principal manager of a prosecution against Mahomed Reza Khan. Will you suffer this man to qualify and disqualify witnesses and prosecutors agreeably to the purposes which his own vengeance and corruption may dictate in one case, and which the defence of those corruptions may dictate in another? Was Nundcomar a person fit to be employed in the greatest and most sacred trusts in the country, and yet not fit to be a witness to the sums of money which he paid Mr. Hastings for those trusts? Was Nundcomar a fit witness to be employed and a fit person to be used in the prosecution of Mahomed Reza Khan, and yet not fit to be employed against Mr. Hastings, who himself had employed him in the very prosecution of Mahomed Reza Khan?

If Nundcomar was an enemy to Mr. Hastings, he was an enemy to Mahomed Reza Khan; and Mr. Hastings employed him, avowedly and professedly on the records of the Company, on account of the very qualification of that enmity. Was he a wretch, the basest of mankind, when opposed to Mr. Hastings? Was he not as much a wretch, and as much the basest of mankind, when Mr. Hastings employed him in the prosecution of the first magistrate and Mahometan of the first descent in Asia? Mr. Hastings shall not qualify and disqualify men at his pleasure; he must accept them such as they are; and it is a presumption of his guilt accompanying the charge, (which I never will separate from it,) that he would not suffer the man to be produced who made the accusation. And I therefore contend, that, as the accusation was so made, so witnessed, so detailed, so specific, so entered upon record, and so entered upon record in consequence of the inquiries ordered by the Company, his refusal and rejection of inquiry into it is a presumption of his guilt.

He is full of his idea of dignity. It is right for every man to preserve his dignity. There is a dignity of station, which a man has in trust to preserve; there is a dignity of personal character, which every man by being made man is bound to preserve. But you see Mr. Hastings's idea of dignity has no connection with integrity; it has no connection with honest fame; it has no connection with the reputation which he is bound to preserve. What, my Lords, did he owe nothing to the Company that had appointed him? Did he owe nothing to the legislature,—did he owe nothing to your Lordships, and to the House of Commons, who had appointed him? Did he owe nothing to himself? to the country that bore him? Did he owe nothing to the world, as to its opinion, to which every public man owes a reputation? What an example was here held out to the Company's servants!

Mr. Hastings says, "This may come into a court of justice; it will come into a court of justice: I reserve my defence on the occasion till it comes into a court of justice, and here I make no opposition to it." To this I answer, that the Company did not order him so to reserve himself, but ordered him to be an inquirer into those things. Is it a lesson to be taught to the inferior servants of the Company, that, provided they can escape out of a court of justice by the back-doors and sally-ports of the law, by artifice of pleading, by those strict and rigorous rules of evidence which have been established for the protection of innocence, but which by them might be turned to the protection and support of guilt, that such an escape is enough for them? that an Old Bailey acquittal is enough to establish a fitness for trust? and if a man shall go acquitted out of such a court, because the judges are bound to acquit him against the conviction of their own opinion, when every man in the market-place knows that he is guilty, that he is fit for a trust? Is it a lesson to be held out to the servants of the Company, that, upon the first inquiry which is made into corruption, and that in the highest trust, by the persons authorized to inquire into it, he uses all the powers of that trust to quash it,—vilifying his colleagues, vilifying his accuser, abusing everybody, but never denying the charge? His associates and colleagues, astonished at this conduct, so wholly unlike everything that had ever appeared of innocence, request him to consider a little better. They declare they are not his accusers; they tell him they are not his judges; that they, under the orders of the Company, are making an inquiry which he ought to make. He declares he will not make it. Being thus driven to the wall, he says, "Why do you not form yourselves into a committee? I won't suffer these proceedings to go on as long as I am present." Mr. Hastings plainly had in view, that, if the proceedings had been before a committee, there would have been a doubt of their authenticity, as not being before a regular board; and he contended that there could be no regular board without his own presence in it: a poor, miserable scheme for eluding this inquiry; partly by saying that it was carried on when he was not present, and partly by denying the authority of this board.

I will have nothing to do with the great question that arose upon the Governor-General's resolution to dissolve a board, whether the board have a right to sit afterwards; it is enough that Mr. Hastings would not suffer them, as a Council, to examine into what, as a Council, they were bound to examine into. He absolutely declared the Council dissolved, when they did not accept his committee, for which they had many good reasons, as I shall show in reply, if necessary, and which he could have no one good reason for proposing;—he then declares the Council dissolved. The Council, who did not think Mr. Hastings had a power to dissolve them while proceeding in the discharge of their duty, went on as a Council. They called in Nundcomar to support his charge: Mr. Hastings withdrew. Nundcomar was asked what he had to say further in support of his own evidence. Upon which he produces a letter from Munny Begum, the dancing-girl that I have spoken of, in which she gives him directions and instructions relative to his conduct in every part of those bribes; by which it appears that the corrupt agreement for her office was made with Mr. Hastings through Nundcomar, before he had quitted Calcutta. It points out the execution of it, and the manner in which every part of the sum was paid: one lac by herself in Calcutta; one lac, which she ordered Nundcomar to borrow, and which he did borrow; and a lac and a half which were given to him, Mr. Hastings, besides this purchase money, under color of an entertainment. This letter was produced, translated, examined, criticized, proved to be sealed with the seal of the Begum, acknowledged to have no marks but those of authenticity upon it, and as such was entered upon the Company's records, confirming and supporting the evidence of Nundcomar, part by part, and circumstance by circumstance. And I am to remark, that, since this document, so delivered in, has never been litigated or controverted in the truth of it, from that day to this, by Mr. Hastings, so, if there was no more testimony, here is enough, upon this business. Your Lordships will remark that this charge consisted of two parts: two lacs that were given explicitly for the corrupt purchase of the office; and one lac and a half given in reality for the same purpose, but under the color of what is called an entertainment.

Now in the course of these proceedings it was thought necessary that Mr. Hastings's banian, Cantoo Baboo, (a name your Lordships will be well acquainted with, and who was the minister in this and all the other transactions of Mr. Hastings,) should be called before the board to explain some circumstances in the proceedings. Mr. Hastings ordered his banian, a native, not to attend the sovereign board appointed by Parliament for the government of that country, and directed to inquire into transactions of this nature. He thus taught the natives not only to disobey the orders of the Court of Directors, enforced by an act of Parliament, but he taught his own servant to disobey, and ordered him not to appear before the board. Quarrels, duels, and other mischiefs arose. In short, Mr. Hastings raised every power of heaven and of hell upon this subject: but in vain: the inquiry went on.

Mr. Hastings does not meet Nundcomar: he was afraid of him. But he was not negligent of his own defence; for he flies to the Supreme Court of Justice. He there prosecuted an inquiry against Nundcomar for a conspiracy. Failing in that, he made other attempts, and disabled Nundcomar from appearing before the board by having him imprisoned, and thus utterly crippled that part of the prosecution against him. But as guilt is never able thoroughly to escape, it did so happen, that the Council, finding monstrous deficiencies in the Begum's affairs, finding the Nabob's allowance totally squandered, that the most sacred pensions were left unpaid, that nothing but disorder and confusion reigned in all his affairs, that the Nabob's education was neglected, that he could scarcely read or write, that there was scarcely any mark of a man left in him except those which Nature had at first imprinted,—I say, all these abuses being produced in a body before them, they thought it necessary to send up to inquire into them; and a considerable deficiency or embezzlement appearing in the Munny Begum's account of the young Nabob's stipend, she voluntarily declared, by a writing under her seal, that she had given 15,000l. to Mr. Hastings for an entertainment.

Mr. Hastings, finding that the charge must come fully against him, contrived a plan which your Lordships will see the effects of presently, and this was, to confound this lac and an half, or 15,000l., with the two lacs given directly and specifically as a bribe,—intending to avail himself of this finesse whenever any payment was to be proved of the two lacs, which he knew would be proved against him, and which he never did deny; and accordingly your Lordships will find some confusion in the proofs of the payment of those sums. The receipt of two lacs is proved by Nundcomar, proved with all the means of detection which I have stated; the receipt of the lac and a half is proved by Munny Begum's letter, the authenticity of which was established, and never denied by Mr. Hastings. In addition to these proofs, Rajah Gourdas, who had the management of the Nabob's treasury, verbally gave an account perfectly corresponding with that of Nundcomar and the Munny Begum's letter; and he afterwards gave in writing an attestation, which in every point agrees correctly with the others. So that there are three witnesses upon this business. And he shall not disqualify Rajah Gourdas, because, whatever character he thought fit to give Nundcomar, he has given the best of characters to Rajah Gourdas, who was employed by Mr. Hastings in occupations of trust, and therefore any objections to his competency cannot exist. Having got thus far, the only thing that remained was to examine the records of the public offices, and see whether any trace of these transactions was to be found there. These offices had been thrown into confusion in the manner you will hear; but, upon strict inquiry, there was a shomaster, or office paper, produced, from which it appears that the officer of the treasury, having brought to the Nabob an account of one lac and a half which he said had been given to Mr. Hastings, desired to know from him under what head of expense it should be entered, and that he, the Nabob, desired him to put it under the head of expenses for entertaining Mr. Hastings. If there had been a head of entertainment established as a regular affair, the officer would never have gone to the Nabob and asked under what name to enter it; but he found an irregular affair, and he did not know what head to put it under. And from the whole of the proceedings it appears that three lacs and a half were paid: two lac by way of bribe, one lac and a half under the color of an entertainment. Mr. Hastings endeavors to invalidate the first obliquely, not directly, for he never directly denied it; and he partly admits the second, in hopes that all the proof of payment of the first charge should be merged and confounded in the second. And therefore your Lordships will see from the beginning of that business till it came into the hands of Mr. Smith, his agent, then appearing in the name and character of agent and solicitor to the Company, that this was done to give some appearance and color to it by a false representation, as your Lordships will see, of every part of the transaction.

The proof, then, of the two lacs rests upon the evidence of Nundcomar, the letter of Munny Begum, and the evidence of Rajah Gourdas. The evidence of the lac and a half, by way of entertainment, was at first the same; and afterwards begins a series of proofs to which Mr. Hastings has himself helped us. For, in the first place, he produces this office paper in support of his attempt to establish the confusion between the payment of the two lacs and of the lac and a half. He did not himself deny that he received a lac and a half, because with respect to that lac and a half he had founded some principle of justification. Accordingly this office paper asserts and proves this lac and a half to have been given, in addition to the other proofs. Then Munny Begum herself is inquired of. There is a commission appointed to go up to her residence; and the fact is proved to the satisfaction of Mr. Goring, the commissioner. The Begum had put a paper of accounts, through her son, into his hands, which shall be given at your Lordships' bar, in which she expressly said that she gave Mr. Hastings a lac and a half for entertainment. But Mr. Hastings objects to Mr. Goring's evidence upon this occasion. He wanted to supersede Mr. Goring in the inquiry; and he accordingly appoints, with the consent of the Council, two creatures of his own to go and assist in that inquiry. The question which he directs these commissioners to put to Munny Begum is this:—"Was the sum of money charged by you to be given to Mr. Hastings given under an idea of entertainment customary, or upon what other ground, or for what other reason?" He also desires the following questions may be proposed to the Begum:—"Was any application made to you for the account which you have delivered of three lacs and a half of rupees said to have been paid to the Governor and Mr. Middleton? or did you deliver the account of your own free will, and unsolicited?" My Lords, you see that with regard to the whole three lacs and a half of rupees the Begum had given an account which tended to confirm the payment of them; but Mr. Hastings wanted to invalidate that account by supposing she gave it under restraint. The second question is,—"In what manner was the application made to you, and by whom?" But the principal question is this:—"On what account was the one lac and a half given to the Governor-General which you have laid to his account? Was it in consequence of any requisition from him, or of any previous agreement, or of any established usage?" When a man asks concerning a sum of money, charged to be given to him by another person, on what account it was given, he does indirectly admit that that money actually was paid, and wants to derive a justification from the mode of the payment of it; and accordingly that inference was drawn from the question so sent up, and it served as an instruction to Munny Begum; and her answer was, that it was given to him, as an ancient usage and custom, for an entertainment. So that the fact of the gift of the money is ascertained by the question put by Mr. Hastings to her, and her answer. And thus at last comes his accomplice in this business, and gives the fullest testimony to the lac and a half.

I must beg leave, before I go further, to state the circumstances of the several witnesses examined upon this business. They were of two kinds: voluntary witnesses, and accomplices forced by inquiry and examination to discover their own guilt. Of the first kind were Nundcomar and Rajah Gourdas: these were the only two that can be said to be voluntary in the business, and who gave their information without much fear, though the last unwillingly, and with a full sense of the danger of doing it. The other was the evidence of his accomplice, Munny Begum, wrung from her by the force of truth, in which she confessed that she gave the lac and a half, and justifies it upon the ground of its being a customary entertainment. Besides this, there is the evidence of Chittendur, who was one of Mr. Hastings's instruments, and one of the Begum's servants. He, being prepared to confound the two lacs with the one lac and a half, says, upon his examination, that a lac and a half was given; but upon examining into the particulars of it, he proves that the sum he gave was two lacs, and not a lac and a half: for he says that there was a dispute about the other half lac; Nundcomar demanded interest, which the Begum was unwilling to allow, and consequently that half lac remained unpaid. Now this half lac can be no part of the lac and a half, which is admitted on all hands, and proved by the whole body of concurrent testimony, to have been given to Mr. Hastings in one lumping sum. When Chittendur endeavors to confound it with the lac and a half, he clearly establishes the fact that it was a parcel of the two lacs, and thus bears evidence, in attempting to prevaricate in favor of Mr. Hastings, that one lac and a half was paid, which Mr. Hastings is willing to allow; but when he enters into the particulars of it, he proves by the subdivision of the payment, and by the non-payment of part of it, that it accords with the two lacs, and not with the lac and a half.

There are other circumstances in these accounts highly auxiliary to this evidence. The lac and a half was not only attested by Rajah Gourdas, by the Begum, by Chittendur, by the Begum again upon Mr. Hastings's own question, indirectly admitted by Mr. Hastings, proved by the orders for it to be written off to expense, (such a body of proof as perhaps never existed,) but there is one proof still remaining, namely, a paper, which was produced before the Committee, and which we shall produce to your Lordships. It is an authentic paper, delivered in favor of Mr. Hastings by Major Scott, who acted at that time as Mr. Hastings's agent, to a committee of the House of Commons, and authenticated to come from Munny Begum herself. All this body of evidence we mean to produce; and we shall prove, first, that he received the two lacs,—and, secondly, that he received one lac and a half under the name of entertainment. With regard to the lac and a half, Mr. Hastings is so far from controverting it, even indirectly, that he is obliged to establish it by testimonies produced by himself, in order to sink in that, if he can, the two lacs, which he thinks he is not able to justify, but which he fears will be proved against him. The lac and a half, I do believe, he will not be advised to contest; but whether he is or no, we shall load him with it, we shall prove it beyond all doubt. But there are other circumstances further auxiliary in this business, which, from the very attempts to conceal it, prove beyond doubt the fraudulent and wicked nature of the transaction. In the account given by the Begum, a lac, which is for Mr. Hastings's entertainment, is entered in a suspicious neighborhood; for there is there entered a lac of rupees paid for the subahdarry sunnuds to the Mogul through the Rajah Shitab Roy. Upon looking into the account, and comparing it with another paper produced, the first thing we find is, that this woman charges the sum paid to be a sum due; and then she charges this one lac to have been paid when the Mogul was in the hands of the Mahrattas, when all communication with him was stopped, and when Rajah Shitab Roy, who is supposed to have paid it, was under confinement in the hands of Mr. Hastings. Thus she endeavors to conceal the lac of rupees paid to Mr. Hastings.

In order to make this transaction, which, though not in itself intricate, is in some degree made so by Mr. Hastings, clear to your Lordships, we pledge ourselves to give to your Lordships, what must be a great advantage to the culprit himself, a syllabus, the heads of all this charge, and of the proofs themselves, with their references, to show how far the proof goes to the two lacs, and then to the one lac and a half singly. This we shall put in writing, that you may not depend upon the fugitive memory of a thing not so well, perhaps, or powerfully expressed as it ought to be, and in order to give every advantage to the defendant, and to give every facility to your Lordships' judgment: and this will, I believe, be thought a clear and fair way of proceeding. Your Lordships will then judge whether Mr. Hastings's conduct at the time, his resisting an inquiry, preventing his servant appearing as an evidence, discountenancing and discouraging his colleagues, raising every obstruction to the prosecution, dissolving the Council, preventing evidence and destroying it as far as lay in his power by collateral means, be not also such presumptive proofs as give double force to all the positive proof we produce against him.

The lac and a half, I know, he means to support upon the custom of entertainment; and your Lordships will judge whether or not a man who was ordered and had covenanted never to take more than 400l. could take 16,000l. under color of an entertainment. That which he intends to produce as a justification we charge, and your Lordships and the world will think, to be the heaviest aggravation of his crime. And after explaining to your Lordships the circumstances under which this justification is made, and leaving a just impression of them upon your minds, I shall beg your Lordships' indulgence to finish this member of the business to-morrow.

It is stated and entered in the account, that an entertainment was provided for Mr. Hastings at the rate of 200l. a day. He stayed at Moorshedabad for near three months; and thus you see that visits from Mr. Hastings are pretty expensive things: it is at the rate of 73,000l. a year for his entertainment. We find that Mr. Middleton, an English gentleman who was with him, received likewise (whether under the same pretence I know not, and it does not signify) another sum equal to it; and if these two gentlemen had stayed in that country a year, their several allowances would have been 146,000l. out of the Nabob's allowance of 160,000l. a year: they would have eat up nearly the whole of it. And do you wonder, my Lords, that such guests and such hosts are difficult to be divided? Do you wonder that such visits, when so well paid for and well provided for, were naturally long? There is hardly a prince in Europe who would give to another prince of Europe from his royal hospitality what was given upon this occasion to Mr. Hastings.

Let us now see what was Mr. Hastings's business during this long protracted visit. First, he tells you that he came there to reduce all the state and dignity of the Nabob. He tells you that he felt no compunction in reducing that state; that the elephants, the menagerie, the stables, all went without mercy, and consequently all the persons concerned in them were dismissed also. When he came to the abolition of the pensions, he says,—"I proceeded with great pain, from the reflection that I was the instrument in depriving whole families, all at once, of their bread, and reducing them to a state of penury: convinced of the necessity of the measure, I endeavored to execute it with great impartiality." Here he states the work he was employed in, when he took this two hundred pounds a day for his own pay. "It was necessary to begin with reforming the useless servants of the court, and retrenching the idle parade of elephants, menageries, &c., which loaded the civil list. This cost little regret in performing; but the Resident, who took upon himself the chief share in this business, acknowledges that he suffered considerably in his feelings, when he came to touch on the pension list. Some hundreds of persons of the ancient nobility of the country, excluded, under our government, from almost all employments, civil or military, had, ever since the revolution, depended on the bounty of the Nabob; and near ten lacs were bestowed that way. It is not that the distribution was always made with judgment or impartial, and much room was left for a reform; but when the question was to cut off entirely the greatest part, it could not fail to be accompanied with circumstances of real distress. The Resident declares, that, even with some of the highest rank, he could not avoid discovering, under all the pride of Eastern manners, the manifest marks of penury and want. There was, however, no room left for hesitation: to confine the Nabob's expenses within the limited sum, it was necessary that pensions should be set aside."

Here, my Lords, is a man sent to execute one of the most dreadful offices that was ever executed by man,—to cut off, as he says himself, with a bleeding heart, the only remaining allowance made for hundreds of the decayed nobility and gentry of a great kingdom, driven by our government from the offices upon which they existed. In this moment of anxiety and affliction, when he says he felt pain and was cut to the heart to do it,—at this very moment, when he was turning over fourteen hundred of the ancient nobility and gentry of this country to downright want of bread,—just at that moment, while he was doing this act, and feeling this act in this manner, from the collected morsels forced from the mouths of that indigent and famished nobility he gorged his own ravenous maw with an allowance of two hundred pounds a day for his entertainment. As we see him in this business, this man is unlike any other: he is also never corrupt but he is cruel; he never dines without creating a famine; he does not take from the loose superfluity of standing greatness, but falls upon the indigent, the oppressed, and ruined; he takes to himself double what would maintain them. His is unlike the generous rapacity of the noble eagle, who preys upon a living, struggling, reluctant, equal victim; his is like that of the ravenous vulture, who falls upon the decayed, the sickly, the dying, and the dead, and only anticipates Nature in the destruction of its object. His cruelty is beyond his corruption: but there is something in his hypocrisy which is more terrible than his cruelty; for, at the very time when with double and unsparing hands he executes a proscription, and sweeps off the food of hundreds of the nobility and gentry of a great country, his eyes overflow with tears, and he turns the precious balm that bleeds from wounded humanity, and is its best medicine, into fatal, rancorous, mortal poison to the human race.

You have seen, that, when he takes two hundred pounds a day for his entertainment, he tells you that in this very act he is starving fourteen hundred of the ancient nobility and gentry. My Lords, you have the blood of nobles,—if not, you have the blood of men in your veins: you feel as nobles, you feel as men. What would you say to a cruel Mogul exactor, by whom after having been driven from your estates, driven from the noble offices, civil and military, which you hold, driven from your bishoprics, driven from your places at court, driven from your offices as judges, and, after having been reduced to a miserable flock of pensioners, your very pensions were at last wrested from your mouths, and who, though at the very time when those pensions were wrested from you he declares them to have been the only bread of a miserable decayed nobility, takes himself two hundred pounds a day for his entertainment, and continues it till it amounts to sixteen thousand pounds? I do think, that, of all the corruptions which he has not owned, but has not denied, or of those which he does in effect own, and of which he brings forward the evidence himself, the taking and claiming under color of an entertainment is ten times the most nefarious.

I shall this day only further trouble your Lordships to observe that he has never directly denied this transaction. I have tumbled over the records, I have looked at every part, to see whether he denies it. He did not deny it at the time, he did not deny it to the Court of Directors: on the contrary, he did in effect acknowledge it, when, without directly acknowledging it, he promised them a full and liberal explanation of the whole transaction. He never did give that explanation. Parliament took up the business; this matter was reported at the end of the Eleventh Report; but though the House of Commons had thus reported it, and made that public which before was upon the Company's records, he took no notice of it. Then another occasion arises: he comes before the House of Commons; he knows he is about to be prosecuted for those very corruptions; he well knows these charges exist against him; he makes his defence (if he will allow it to be his defence); but, though thus driven, he did not there deny it, because he knew, that, if he had denied it, it could be proved against him. I desire your Lordships will look at that paper which we have given in evidence, and see if you find a word of denial of it: there is much discourse, much folly, much insolence, but not one word of denial. Then, at last, it came before this tribunal against him. I desire to refer your Lordships to that part of his defence to the article in which this bribe is specifically charged: he does not deny it there; the only thing which looks like a denial is one sweeping clause inserted, (in order to put us upon the proof,) that all the charges are to be conceived as denied; but a specific denial to this specific charge in no stage of the business, from beginning to end, has he once made.

And therefore here I close that part of the charge which relates to the business of Nundcomar. Your Lordships will see such a body of presumptive proof and positive proof as never was given yet of any secret corrupt act of bribery; and there I leave it with your Lordships' justice. I beg pardon for having detained you so long; but your Lordships will be so good as to observe that no business ever was covered with more folds of iniquitous artifice than this which is now brought before you.



SPEECH

ON

THE SIXTH ARTICLE OF CHARGE.

SECOND DAY: SATURDAY, APRIL 25, 1789.

My Lords,—When I last had the honor of addressing your Lordships, I endeavored to state with as much perspicuity as the nature of an intricate affair would admit, and as largely as in so intricate an affair was consistent with the brevity which I endeavored to preserve, the proofs which had been adduced against Warren Hastings upon an inquiry instituted by an order of the Court of Directors into the corruption and peculation of persons in authority in India. My Lords, I have endeavored to show you by anterior presumptive proofs, drawn from the nature and circumstances of the acts themselves inferring guilt, that such actions and such conduct could be referable only to one cause, namely, corruption; I endeavored to show you afterwards, my Lords, what the specific nature and extent of the corruption was, as far as it could be fully proved; and lastly, the great satisfactory presumption which attended the inquiry with regard to Mr. Hastings,—namely, that, contrary to law, contrary to his duty, contrary to what is owed by innocence to itself, Mr. Hastings resisted that inquiry, and employed all the power of his office to prevent the exercise of it, either in himself or in others. These presumptions and these proofs will be brought before your Lordships, distinctly and in order, at the end of this opening.

The next point on which I thought it necessary to proceed was relative to the presumptions which his subsequent conduct gave with regard to his guilt: because, my Lords, his uniform tenor of conduct, such as must attend guilt, both in the act, at the time of the inquiry, and subsequent to it, will form such a body of satisfactory evidence as I believe the human mind is not made to resist.

My Lords, there is another reason why I choose to enter into the presumptions drawn from his conduct and the fact, taking his conduct in two parts, if it may be so expressed, omission and commission, in order that your Lordships should more fully enter into the consequences of this system of bribery. But before I say anything upon that, I wish your Lordships to be apprised, that the Commons, in bringing this bribe of three lac and a half before your Lordships, do not wish by any means to have it understood that this is the whole of the bribe that was received by Mr. Hastings in consequence of delivering up the whole management of the government of the country to that improper person whom he nominated for it. My Lords, from the proofs that will be adduced before you, there is great probability that he received very nearly a hundred thousand pounds; there is positive proof of his receiving fifty; and we have chosen only to charge him with that of which there is such an accumulated body of proof as to leave no doubt upon the minds of your Lordships. All this I say, because we are perfectly apprised of the sentiments of the public upon this point: when they hear of the enormity of Indian peculation, when they see the acts done, and compare them with the bribes received, the acts seem so enormous and the bribes comparatively so small, that they can hardly be got to attribute them to that motive. What I mean to state is this: that, from a collective view of the subject, your Lordships will be able to judge that enormous offences have been committed, and that the bribe which we have given in proof is a specimen of the nature and extent of those enormous bribes which extend to much greater sums than we are able to prove before you in the manner your Lordships would like and expect.

I have already remarked to your Lordships, that, after this charge was brought and recorded before the Council in spite of the resistance made by Mr. Hastings, in which he employed all the power and authority of his station, and the whole body of his partisans and associates in iniquity, dispersed through every part of these provinces,—after he had taken all these steps, finding himself pressed by the proof and pressed by the presumption of his resistance to the inquiry, he did think it necessary to make something like a defence. Accordingly he has made what he calls a justification, which did not consist in the denial of that fact, or any explanation of it. The mode he took for his defence was abuse of his colleagues, abuse of the witnesses, and of every person who in the execution of his duty was inquiring into the fact, and charging them with things which, if true, were by no means sufficient to support him, either in defending the acts themselves, or in the criminal means he used to prevent inquiry into them. His design was to mislead their minds, and to carry them from the accusation and the proof of it. With respect to the passion, violence, and intemperate heat with which he charged them, they were proceeding in an orderly, regular manner; and if on any occasion they seem to break out into warmth, it was in consequence of that resistance which he made to them, in what your Lordships, I believe, will agree with them in thinking was one of the most important parts of their functions. If they had been intemperate in their conduct, if they had been violent, passionate, prejudiced against him, it afforded him only a better means of making his defence; because, though in a rational and judicious mind the intemperate conduct of the accuser certainly proves nothing with regard to the truth or falsehood of his accusation, yet we do know that the minds of men are so constituted that an improper mode of conducting a right thing does form some degree of prejudice against it. Mr. Hastings, therefore, unable to defend himself upon principle, has resorted as much as he possibly could to prejudice. And at the same time that there is not one word of denial, or the least attempt at a refutation of the charge, he has loaded the records with all manner of minutes, proceedings, and letters relative to everything but the fact itself. The great aim of his policy, both then, before, and ever since, has been to divert the mind of the auditory, or the persons to whom he addressed himself, from the nature of his cause, to some collateral circumstance relative to it,—a policy to which he has always had recourse; but that trick, the last resource of despairing guilt, I trust will now completely fail him.

Mr. Hastings, however, began to be pretty sensible that this way of proceeding had a very unpromising and untoward look; for which reason he next declared that he reserved his defence for fear of a legal prosecution, and that some time or other he would give a large and liberal explanation to the Court of Directors, to whom he was answerable for his conduct, of his refusing to suffer the inquiry to proceed, of his omitting to give them satisfaction at the time, of his omitting to take any one natural step that an innocent man would have taken upon such an occasion. Under this promise he has remained from that time to the time you see him at your bar, and he has neither denied, exculpated, explained, or apologized for his conduct in any one single instance.

While he accuses the intemperance of his adversaries, he shows a degree of temperance in himself which always attends guilt in despair: for struggling guilt may be warm, but guilt that is desperate has nothing to do but to submit to the consequences of it, to bear the infamy annexed to its situation, and to try to find some consolation in the effects of guilt with regard to private fortune for the scandal it brings them into in public reputation. After the business had ended in India, the causes why he should have given the explanation grew stronger and stronger: for not only the charges exhibited against him were weighty, but the manner in which he was called upon to inquire into them was such as would undoubtedly tend to stir the mind of a man of character, to rouse him to some consideration of himself, and to a sense of the necessity of his defence. He was goaded to make this defence by the words I shall read to your Lordships from Sir John Clavering.

"In the late proceedings of the Revenue Board it will appear that there is no species of peculation from which the Honorable Governor-General has thought it reasonable to abstain." He further says, in answer to Mr. Hastings, "The malicious view with which this innuendo" (an innuendo of Mr. Hastings) "is thrown out is only worthy of a man who, having disgraced himself in the eyes of every man of honor both in Asia and in Europe, and having no imputation to lay to our charge, has dared to attempt in the dark what malice itself could not find grounds to aim at openly."

These are the charges which were made upon him,—not loosely, in the heat of conversation, but deliberately, in writing, entered upon record, and sent to his employers, the Court of Directors, those whom the law had set over him, and to whose judgment and opinion he was responsible. Do your Lordships believe that it was conscious innocence that made him endure such reproaches, so recorded, from his own colleague? Was it conscious innocence that made him abandon his defence, renounce his explanation, and bear all this calumny, (if it was calumny,) in such a manner, without making any one attempt to refute it? Your Lordships will see by this, and by other minutes with which the books are filled, that Mr. Hastings is charged quite to the brim with corruptions of all sorts, and covered with every mode of possible disgrace. For there is something so base and contemptible in the crimes of peculation and bribery, that, when they come to be urged home and strongly against a man, as here they are urged, nothing but a consciousness of guilt can possibly make a person so charged support himself under them. Mr. Hastings considered himself, as he has stated, to be under the necessity of bearing them. What is that necessity? Guilt. Could he say that Sir John Clavering (for I say nothing now of Colonel Monson and Mr. Francis, who were joined with him) was a man weak and contemptible? I believe there are those among your Lordships who remember that Sir John Clavering was known before he went abroad, and better known by his conduct after, to be a man of the most distinguished honor that ever served his Majesty; he served his Majesty in a military situation for many years, and afterwards in that high civil situation in India. It is known that through every step and gradation of a high military service, until he arrived at the highest of all, there never was the least blot upon him, or doubt or suspicion of his character; that his temper for the most part, and his manners, were fully answerable to his virtues, and a noble ornament to them; that he was one of the best natured, best bred men, as well as one of the highest principled men to be found in his Majesty's service; that he had passed the middle time of life, and come to an age which makes men wise in general; so that he could be warmed by nothing but that noble indignation at guilt which is the last thing that ever was or will be extinguished in a virtuous mind. He was a man whose voice was not to be despised; but if his character had been personally as contemptible as it was meritorious and honorable in every respect, yet his situation as a commissioner named by an act of Parliament for the express purpose of reforming India gave him a weight and consequence that could not suffer Mr. Hastings, without a general and strong presumption of his guilt, to acquiesce in such recorded minutes from him. But if he had been a weak, if he had been an intemperate man, (in reality he was as cool, steady, temperate, judicious a man as ever was born,) the Court of Directors, to whom Mr. Hastings was responsible by every tie and every principle, and was made responsible at last by a positive act of Parliament obliging him to yield obedience to their commands as the general rule of his duty,—the Court of Directors, I say, perfectly approved of every part of General Clavering's, Colonel Monson's, and Mr. Francis's conduct; they approved of this inquiry which Mr. Hastings rejected; and they have declared, "that the powers and instructions vested in and given to General Clavering and the other gentlemen were such as fully authorized them in every inquiry that seems to have been their object ... Europeans."[2]

Now after the supreme authority, to which they were to appeal in all their disputes, had passed this judgment upon this very inquiry, the matter no longer depended upon Mr. Hastings's opinion; nor could he be longer justified in attributing that to evil motives either of malice or passion in his colleagues. When the judges who were finally to determine who was malicious, who was passionate, who was or was not justified either in setting on foot the inquiry or resisting it, had passed that judgment, then Mr. Hastings was called upon by all the feelings of a man, and by his duty in Council, to give satisfaction to his masters, the Directors, who approved of the zeal and diligence shown in that very inquiry, the passion of which he only reprobated, and upon which he grounded his justification.

If anything but conscious guilt could have possibly influenced him to such more than patience under this accusation, let us see what was his conduct when the scene was changed. General Clavering, fatigued and broken down by the miseries of his situation, soon afterwards lost a very able and affectionate colleague, Colonel Monson, (whom Mr. Hastings states to be one of the bitterest of his accusers,) a man one of the most loved and honored of his time, a person of your Lordships' noble blood, and a person who did honor to it, and if he had been of the family of a commoner, well deserved to be raised to your distinction. When that man died,—died of a broken heart, to say nothing else,—and General Clavering felt himself in a manner without help, except what he derived from the firmness, assiduity, and patience of Mr. Francis, sinking like himself under the exertion of his own virtues, he was resolved to resign his employment. The Court of Directors were so alarmed at this attempt of his to resign his employment, that they wrote thus: "When you conceived the design of quitting our service, we imagine you could not have heard of the resignation of Mr. Hastings ... your zeal and ability."[3]

My Lords, in this struggle, and before he could resign finally, another kind of resignation, the resignation of Nature, took place, and Sir John Clavering died. The character that was given Sir John Clavering at that time is a seal to the whole of his proceedings, and the use that I shall make of it your Lordships will see presently. "The abilities of General Clavering, the comprehensive knowledge he had attained of our affairs ... to the East India Company."[4]

And never had it a greater loss. There is the concluding funeral oration made by his masters, upon a strict, though by no means partial, view of his conduct. My Lords, here is the man who is the great accuser of Mr. Hastings, as he says. What is he? a slight man, a man of mean situation, a man of mean talents, a man of mean character? No: of the highest character. Was he a person whose conduct was disapproved by their common superiors? No: it was approved when living, and ratified when dead. This was the man, a man equal to him in every respect, upon the supposed evil motives of whom alone was founded the sole justification of Mr. Hastings.

But be it, then, that Sir John Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis were all of them the evil-minded persons that he describes them to be, and that from dislike to them, from a kind of manly resentment, if you please, against such persons, an hatred against malicious proceedings, and a defiance of them, he did not think proper, as he states, to make his defence during that period of time, and while oppressed by that combination,—yet, when he got rid of the two former persons, and when Mr. Francis was nothing, when the whole majority was in his hand, and he was in full power, there was a large, open, full field for inquiry; and he was bound to re-institute that inquiry, and to clear his character before his judges and before his masters. Mr. Hastings says, "No: they have threatened me with a prosecution, and I reserve myself for a court of justice."

Mr. Hastings has now at length taken a ground, as you will see from all his writings, which makes all explanation of his conduct in this business absolutely impossible. For, in the first place, he says, "As a prosecution is meditated against me, I will say nothing in explanation of my conduct, because I might disclose my defence, and by that means do myself a prejudice." On the other hand, when the prosecution is dropped, as we all know it was dropped in this case, then he has a direct contrary reason, but it serves him just as well: "Why, as no prosecution is intended, no defence need be made." So that, whether a prosecution is intended or a prosecution dropped, there is always cause why Mr. Hastings should not give the Court of Directors the least satisfaction concerning his conduct, notwithstanding, as we shall prove, he has reiteratedly promised, and promised it in the most ample and liberal manner. But let us see if there be any presumption in his favor to rebut the presumption which he knew was irresistible, and which, by making no defence for his conduct, and stopping the inquiry, must necessarily lie upon him. He reserves his defence, but he promises both defence and explanation.

Your Lordships will remark that there is nowhere a clear and positive denial of the fact. Promising a defence, I will admit, does not directly and ex vi termini suppose that a man may not deny the fact, because it is just compatible with the defence; but it does by no means exclude the admission of the fact, because the admission of the fact may be attended with a justification: but when a man says that he will explain his conduct with regard to a fact, then he admits that fact, because there can be no explanation of a fact which has no existence. Therefore Mr. Hastings admits the fact by promising an explanation, and he shows he has no explanation nor justification to give by never having given it. Goaded, provoked, and called upon for it, in the manner I have mentioned, he chooses to have a feast of disgrace, (if I may say so,) to have a riot of infamy, served up to him day by day for a course of years, in every species of reproach that could be given by his colleagues, and by the Court of Directors, "from whom," he says, "I received nothing but opprobrious and disgraceful epithets," and he says "that his predecessors possessed more of their confidence than he had." Yet for years he lay down in that sty of disgrace, fattening in it, feeding upon that offal of disgrace and excrement, upon everything that could be disgustful to the human mind, rather than deny the fact and put himself upon a civil justification. Infamy was never incurred for nothing. We know very well what was said formerly:—

"Populus me sibilat; at mihi plaudo Ipse domi, simul ac nummos contemplor in arca."

And never did a man submit to infamy for anything but its true reward, money. Money he received; the infamy he received along with it: he was glad to take his wife with all her goods; he took her with her full portion, with every species of infamy that belonged to her; and your Lordships cannot resist the opinion that he would not have suffered himself to be disgraced with the Court of Directors, disgraced with his colleagues, disgraced with the world, disgraced upon an eternal record, unless he was absolutely guilty of the fact that was charged upon him.

He frequently expresses that he reserves himself for a court of justice. Does he, my Lords? I am sorry that Mr. Hastings should show that he always mistakes his situation; he has totally mistaken it: he was a servant, bound to give a satisfactory account of his conduct to his masters, and, instead of that, he considers himself and the Court of Directors as litigant parties,—them as the accusers, and himself as the culprit. What would your Lordships, in private life, conceive of a steward who was accused of embezzling the rents, robbing and oppressing the tenants, and committing a thousand misdeeds in his stewardship, and who, upon your wishing to make inquiry into his conduct, and asking an explanation of it, should answer, "I will give no reply: you may intend to prosecute me and convict me as a cheat, and therefore I will not give you any satisfaction": what would you think of that steward? You could have no doubt that such a steward was a person not fit to be a steward, nor fit to live.

Mr. Hastings reserves himself for a court of justice: that single circumstance, my Lords, proves that he was guilty. It may appear very odd that his guilt should be inferred from his desire of trial in a court in which he could be acquitted or condemned. But I shall prove to you from that circumstance that Mr. Hastings, in desiring to be tried in a court of justice, convicts himself of presumptive guilt.

When Mr. Hastings went to Bengal in the year 1772, he had a direction exactly similar to this which he has resisted in his own case: it was to inquire into grievances and abuses. In consequence of this direction, he proposes a plan for the regulation of the Company's service, and one part of that plan was just what you would expect from him,—that is, the power of destroying every Company's servant without the least possibility of his being heard in his own defence or taking any one step to justify himself, and of dismissing him at his own discretion: and the reason he gives for it is this. "I shall forbear to comment upon the above propositions: if just and proper, their utility will be self-apparent. One clause only in the last article may require some explanation, namely, the power proposed for the Governor of recalling any person from his station without assigning a reason for it. In the charge of oppression," (now here you will find the reason why Mr. Hastings wishes to appeal to a court of justice, rather than to give satisfaction to his employers,) "though supported by the cries of the people and the most authentic representations, it is yet impossible in most cases to obtain legal proofs of it; and unless the discretionary power which I have recommended be somewhere lodged, the assurance of impunity from any formal inquiry will baffle every order of the board, as, on the other hand, the fear of the consequence will restrain every man within the bounds of his duty, if he knows himself liable to suffer by the effects of a single control." You see Mr. Hastings himself is of opinion that the cries of oppression, though extorted from a whole people by the iron hand of severity,—that these cries of a whole people, attended even with authentic documents sufficient to satisfy the mind of any man, may be totally insufficient to convict the oppressor in a court; and yet to that court, whose competence he denies, to that very court, he appeals, in that he puts his trust, and upon that ground he refuses to perform the just promise he had given of any explanation to those who had employed him.

Now I put this to your Lordships: if a man is of opinion that no public court can truly and properly bring him to any account for his conduct, that the forms observable in courts are totally adverse to it, that there is a general incompetency with regard to such a court, and yet shuns a tribunal capable and competent, and applies to that which he thinks is incapable and incompetent, does not that man plainly show that he has rejected what he thinks will prove his guilt, and that he has chosen what he thinks will be utterly insufficient to prove it? And if this be the case, as he asserts it to be, with an under servant, think what must be the case of the upper servant of all: for, if an inferior servant is not to be brought to justice, what must be the situation of a Governor-General? It is impossible not to see, that, as he had conceived that a court of justice had not sufficient means to bring his crimes to light and detection, nor sufficient to bring him to proper and adequate punishment, therefore he flew to a court of justice, not as a place to decide upon him, but as a sanctuary to secure his guilt. Most of your Lordships have travelled abroad, and have seen in the unreformed countries of Europe churches filled with persons who take sanctuary in them. You do not presume that a man is innocent because he is in a sanctuary: you know, that, so far from demonstrating his innocence, it demonstrates his guilt. And in this case, Mr. Hastings flies not to a court for trial, but as a sanctuary to secure him from it.

Let us just review the whole of his conduct; let us hear how Mr. Hastings has proceeded with regard to this whole affair. The court of justice dropped; the prosecution in Bengal ended. With Sir Elijah Impey as chief-justice, who, as your Lordships have seen, had a most close and honorable connection with the Governor-General, (all the circumstances of which I need not detail to you, as it must be fresh in your Lordships' memory,) he had not much to fear from the impartiality of the court. He might be sure the forms of law would not be strained to do him mischief; therefore there was no great terror in it. But whatever terror there might be in it was overblown, because his colleagues refused to carry him into it, and therefore that opportunity of defence is gone. In Europe he was afraid of making any defence, but the prosecution here was also soon over; and in the House of Commons he takes this ground of justification for not giving any explanation, that the Court of Directors had received perfect satisfaction of his innocence; and he named persons of great and eminent character in the profession, whose names certainly cannot be mentioned without highly imposing upon the prejudices and weighing down almost the reason of mankind. He quotes their opinions in his favor, and argues that the exculpation which they give, or are supposed to give him, should excuse him from any further explanation.

My Lords, I believe I need not say to great men of the profession, many of the first ornaments of which I see before me, that they are very little influenced in the seat of judgment by the opinions which they have given in the chamber, and they are perfectly in the right: because while in the chamber they hear but one part of the cause; it is generally brought before them in a very partial manner, and they have not the lights which they possess when they sit deliberately down upon the tribunal to examine into it; and for this reason they discharge their minds from every prejudice that may have arisen from a foregone partial opinion, and come uninfluenced by it as to a new cause. This, we know, is the glory of the great lawyers who have presided and do preside in the tribunals of this country; but we know, at the same time, that those opinions (which they in their own mind reject, unless supported afterwards by clear and authentic testimony) do weigh upon the rest of mankind at least: for it is impossible to separate the opinion of a great and learned man from some consideration of the person who has delivered that opinion.

Mr. Hastings, being conscious of this, and not fearing the tribunal abroad for the reason that I gave you, namely, his belief that it was not very adverse to him, and also knowing that the prosecution there was dropped, had but one thing left for his consideration, which was, how he should conflict with the tribunal at home: and as the prosecution must originate from the Court of Directors, and be authorized by some great law opinions, the great point with him was, some way or other, by his party, I will not say by what means or circumstances, but by some party means, to secure a strong interest in the executive part of the India House. My Lords, was that interest used properly and fairly? I will not say that friendship and partiality imply injustice; they certainly do not; but they do not imply justice. The Court of Directors took up this affair with great warmth; they committed it to their solicitor, and the solicitor would naturally (as most solicitors do) draw up a case a little favorably for the persons that employed him; and if there was any leaning, which upon my word I do not approve in the management of any cause whatever, yet, if there was a leaning, it must be a leaning for the client.

Now the counsel did not give a decided opinion against the prosecution, but upon the face of the case they expressed great doubts upon it; for, with such a strange, disorderly, imperfect, and confused case as was laid before them, they could not advise a prosecution; and in my opinion they went no further. And, indeed, upon that case that went before them, I, who am authorized by the Commons to prosecute, do admit that a great doubt might lie upon the most deciding mind, whether, under the circumstances there stated, a prosecution could be or ought to be pursued. I do not say which way my mind would have turned, upon that very imperfect state of the case; but I still allow so much to their very great ability, great minds, and sound judgment, that I am not sure, if it was res integra, I would not have rather hesitated myself (who am now here an accuser) what judgment to give.

It does happen that there are very singular circumstances in this business, to which your Lordships will advert; and you will consider what weight they ought to have upon your Lordships' minds. The person who is now the solicitor of the Company is a very respectable man in the profession,—Mr. Smith; he was at that time also the Company's solicitor, and he has since appeared in this cause as Mr. Hastings's solicitor. Now there is something particular in a man's being the solicitor to a party who was prosecuting another, and continuing afterwards in his office, and becoming the solicitor to the party prosecuted. It would be nearly as strange as if our solicitor were to be the solicitor of Mr. Hastings in this prosecution and trial before your Lordships. It is true, that we cannot make out, nor do we attempt to prove, that Mr. Smith was at that time actually Mr. Hastings's solicitor: all that we shall attempt to make out is, that the case he produced was just such a case as a solicitor anxious for the preservation of his client, and not anxious for the prosecution, would have made out.

My Lords, I have next to remark, that the opinion which the counsel gave in this case, namely, a very doubtful opinion, accompanied with strong censure of the manner in which the case was stated, was drawn from them by a case in which I charge that there were misrepresentation, suppression, and falsification.

Now, my Lords, in making this charge I am in a very awkward and unpleasant situation; but it is a situation in which, with all the disagreeable circumstances attending it, I must proceed. I am, in this business, obliged to name many men: I do not name them wantonly, but from the absolute necessity, as your Lordships will see, of the case. I do not mean to reflect upon this gentleman: I believe, at the time when he made this case, and especially the article which I state as a falsification, he must have trusted to some of the servants of the Company, who were but young in their service at that time. There was a very great error committed; but by whom, or how, your Lordships in the course of this inquiry will find. What I charge first is, that the case was improperly stated; secondly, that it was partially stated; and that afterwards a further report was made upon reference to the same officer in the committee. Now, my Lords, of the three charges which I have made, the two former, namely, the misrepresentation and suppression, were applicable to the case; but all the three, misrepresentation, suppression, and falsification, were applicable to the report.

This I say in vindication of the opinions given, and for the satisfaction of the public, who may be imposed upon by them. I wish the word to be understood. When I say imposed, I always mean by it the weight and authority carried: a meaning which this word, perhaps, has not got yet thoroughly in the English language; but in a neighboring language imposing means, that it weighs upon men's minds with a sovereign authority. To say that the opinions of learned men, though even thus obtained, may not have weight with this court, or with any court, is a kind of compliment I cannot pay to them at the expense of that common nature in which I and all human beings are involved.

He states in the case the covenants and the salary of Mr. Hastings, and his emoluments, very fairly. I do not object to any part of that. He then proceeds to state very partially the business upon which the Committee of Circuit went, and without opening whose conduct we cannot fully bring before you this charge of bribery. He then states, "that, an inquiry having been made by the present Supreme Council of Bengal respecting the conduct of the members of the last administration, several charges have been made, stating moneys very improperly received by Mr. Hastings during the time of the late administration: amongst these is one of his having received 150,000 rupees of Munny Begum, the guardian of the Nabob, who is an infant."

In this statement of the case everything is put out of its true place. Mr. Hastings was not charged with receiving a lac and a half of rupees from Munny Begum, the guardian of the Nabob,—for she was not then his guardian; but he was charged with receiving a lac and a half of rupees for removing the Nabob's own mother, who was his natural guardian, and substituting this step-mother, who was a prostitute, in her place; whereas here it supposes he found her a guardian, and that she had made him a present, which alters the whole nature of the case. The case, in the recital of the charge, sets out with what every one of your Lordships knows now not to be the truth of the fact, nor the thing that in itself implies the criminality: he ought to have stated that in the beginning of the business. The suppressions in the recital are amazing. He states an inquiry having been made by the Supreme Council of Bengal respecting the conduct of the members of the last administration. That inquiry was made in consequence of the charge, and not the charge brought forward, as they would have it believed, in consequence of the inquiry. There is no mention that that inquiry had been expressly ordered by the Court of Directors; but it is stated as though it was a voluntary inquiry. Now there is always something doubtful in voluntary inquiries with regard to the people concerned. He then supposes, upon this inquiry, that to be the charge which is not the charge at all. The crime, as I have stated, consisted of two distinct parts, but both inferring the same corruption: the first, two lac of rupees taken expressly for the nomination of this woman to this place; and the other, one lac and a half of rupees, in effect for the same purpose, but under the name and color of an entertainment. The drawer of the case, finding that in the one case, namely, the two lac of rupees, the evidence was more weak, but that no justification could be set up,—finding in the other, the lac and a half of rupees, the proof strong and not to be resisted, but that some justification was to be found for it, lays aside the charge of the two lac totally; and the evidence belonging to it, which was considered as rather weak, is applied to the other charge of a lac and a half, the proof of which upon its own evidence was irresistible.

My speech I hope your Lordships consider as only pointing out to your attention these particulars. Your Lordships will see it exemplified throughout the whole, that, when there is evidence (for some evidence is brought) that does belong to the lac and a half, it is entirely passed by, the most material circumstances are weakened, the whole strength and force of them taken away. Every one knows how true it is of evidence, juncta juvant: but here everything is broken and smashed to pieces, and nothing but disorder appears through the whole. For your Lordships will observe that the proof that belongs to one thing is put as belonging to another, and the proof of the other brought in a weak and imperfect manner in the rear of the first, and with every kind of observation to rebut and weaken it; and when this evidence is produced, which appears inapplicable almost in all the parts, in many doubtful, confused, and perplexed, and in some even contradictory, (which it will be when the evidence to one thing is brought to apply and bear upon another,) good hopes were entertained in consequence that that would happen which in part did happen, namely, that the counsel, distracted and confused, and finding no satisfaction in the case, could not advise a prosecution.

But what is still more material and weighty, many particulars are suppressed in this case, and still more in the report; and turning from the case to the proceedings of the persons who are supposed to have the management of the inquiry, they bring forward, as an appendix to this case, Mr. Hastings's own invectives and charge against these persons, at the very same time that they suppress and do not bring forward, either in the charge or upon the report, what the other party have said in their own justification. The consequence of this management was, that a body of evidence which would have made this case the clearest in the world, and which I hope we shall make to appear so to your Lordships, was rendered for the most part inapplicable, and the whole puzzled and confused: I say, for the most part, for some parts did apply, but miserably applied, to the case. From their own state of the case they would have it inferred that the fault was not in their way of representing it, but in the infirmity, confusion, and disorder of the proofs themselves; but this, I trust we shall satisfy you, is by no means the case. I rest, however, upon the proof of partiality in this business, of the imposition upon the counsel, whether designed or not, and of the bias given by adding an appendix with Mr. Hastings's own remarks upon the case, without giving the reasons of the other parties for their conduct. Now, if there was nothing else than the fallacious recital, and afterwards the suppression, I believe any rational and sober man would see perfect, good, and sufficient ground for laying aside any authority that can be derived from the opinions of persons, though of the first character (and I am sure no man living does more homage to their learning, impartiality, and understanding than I do): first, because the statement of the case has thrown the whole into confusion; and secondly, as to the matter added as an appendix, which gives the representation of the delinquent and omits the representation of his prosecutors, it is observed very properly and very wisely by one of the great men before whom this evidence was laid, that "the evidence, as it is here stated, is still more defective, if the appendix is adopted by the Directors and meant to make a part of the case; for that throws discredit upon all the information so collected." Certainly it does; for, if the delinquent party, who is to be prosecuted, be heard with his own representation of the case, and that of his prosecutors be suppressed, he is master both of the lawyers and of the mind of mankind.

My Lords, I have here attempted to point out the extreme inconsistencies and defects of this proceeding; and I wish your Lordships to consider, with respect to these proceedings of the India House in their prosecutions, that it is in the power of some of their officers to make statements in the manner that I have described, then to obtain the names of great lawyers, and under their sanction to carry the accused through the world as acquitted.

These are the material circumstances which will be submitted to your Lordships' sober consideration in the course of this inquiry. I have now stated them on these two accounts: first, to rebut the reason which Mr. Hastings has assigned for not giving any satisfaction to the Court of Directors, namely, because they did not want it, having dropped a prosecution upon great authorities and opinions; and next, to show your Lordships how a business begun in bribery is to be supported only by fraud, deceit, and collusion, and how the receiving of bribes by a Governor-General of Bengal tends to taint the whole service from beginning to end, both at home and abroad.

But though upon the partial case that was presented to them these great lawyers did not advise a prosecution, and though even upon a full representation of a case a lawyer might think that a man ought not to be prosecuted, yet he may consider him to be the vilest man upon earth. We know men are acquitted in the great tribunals in which several Lords of this country have presided, and who perhaps ought not to have been brought there and prosecuted before them, and yet about whose delinquency there could be no doubt. But though we have here sufficient reason to justify the great lawyers whose names and authorities are produced, yet Mr. Hastings has extended that authority beyond the length of their opinions. For, being no longer under the terror of the law, which, he said, restrained him from making his defence, he was then bound to give that satisfaction to his masters and the world which every man in honor is bound to do, when a grave accusation is brought against him. But this business of the law I wish to sleep from this moment, till the time when it shall come before you; though I suspect, and have had reason (sitting in committees in the House of Commons) to believe, that there was in the India House a bond of iniquity, somewhere or other, which was able to impose in the first instance upon the solicitor, the guilt of which, being of another nature, I shall state hereafter, that your Lordships may be able to discover through whose means and whose fraud Mr. Hastings obtained these opinions.

If, however, all the great lawyers had been unanimous upon that occasion, still it would have been necessary for Mr. Hastings to say, "I cannot, according to my opinion, be brought to give an account in a court of justice, and I have got great lawyers to declare, that, upon the case laid before them, they cannot advise a prosecution; but now is the time for me to come forward, and, being no longer in fear that my defence may be turned against me, I will produce my defence for the satisfaction of my masters and the vindication of my own character." But besides this doubtful opinion (for I believe your Lordships will find it no better than a doubtful opinion) given by persons for whom I have the highest honor, and given with a strong censure upon the state of the case, there were also some great lawyers, men of great authority in the kingdom, who gave a full and decided opinion that a prosecution ought to be instituted against him; but the Court of Directors decided otherwise, they overruled those opinions, and acted upon the opinions in favor of Mr. Hastings. When, therefore, he knew that the great men in the law were divided upon the propriety of a prosecution, but that the Directors had decided in his favor, he was the more strongly bound to enter into a justification of his conduct.

But there was another great reason which should have induced him to do this. One great lawyer, known to many of your Lordships, Mr. Sayer, a very honest, intelligent man, who had long served the Company and well knew their affairs, had given an opinion concerning Mr. Hastings's conduct in stopping these prosecutions. There was an abstract question put to Mr. Sayer, and other great lawyers, separated from many of the circumstances of this business, concerning a point which incidentally arose; and this was, whether Mr. Hastings, as Governor-General, had a power so to dissolve the Council, that, if he declared it dissolved, they could not sit and do any legal and regular act. It was a great question with the lawyers at the time, and there was a difference of opinion on it. Mr. Sayer was one of those who were inclined to be of opinion that the Governor-General had a power of dissolving the Council, and that the Council could not legally sit after such dissolution. But what was his remark upon Mr. Hastings's conduct?—and you must suppose his remark of more weight, because, upon the abstract question, he had given his opinion in favor of Mr. Hastings's judgment. "The meeting of the Council depends on the pleasure of the Governor; and I think the duration of it must do so, too. But it was as great a crime to dissolve the Council upon base and sinister motives as it would be to assume the power of dissolving, if he had it not. I believe he is the first Governor that ever dissolved a Council inquiring into his behavior, when he was innocent. Before he could summon three Councils and dissolve them, he had time fully to consider what would be the result of such conduct, to convince everybody, beyond a doubt, of his conscious guilt."

Mr. Sayer, then, among other learned people, (and if he had not been the man that I have described, yet, from his intimate connection with the Company, his opinion must be supposed to have great weight,) having used expressions as strong as the persons who have ever criminated Mr. Hastings most for the worst of his crimes have ever used to qualify and describe them, and having ascribed his conduct to base and sinister motives, he was bound upon that occasion to justify that strong conduct, allowed to be legal, and charged at the same time to be violent. Mr. Hastings was obliged then to produce something in his justification. He never did. Therefore, for all the reasons assigned by himself, drawn from the circumstances of prosecution and non-prosecution, and from opinions of lawyers and colleagues, the Court of Directors at the same time censuring his conduct, and strongly applauding the conduct of those who were adverse to him, Mr. Hastings was, I say, from those accumulated circumstances, bound to get rid of the infamy of a conduct which could be attributed to nothing but base and sinister motives, and which could have no effect but to convince men of his consciousness that he was guilty. From all these circumstances I infer that no man could have endured this load of infamy, and to this time have given no explanation of his conduct, unless for the reason which this learned counsel gives, and which your Lordships and the world will give, namely, his conscious guilt.

After leaving upon your minds that presumption, not to operate without proof, but to operate along with the proof, (though, I take it, there are some presumptions that go the full length of proof,) I shall not press it to the length to which I think it would go, but use it only as auxiliary, assisting, and compurgatory of all the other evidences that go along with it.

There is another circumstance which must come before your Lordships in this business. If you find that Mr. Hastings has received the two lac of rupees, then you will find that he was guilty, without color or pretext of any kind whatever, of acting in violation of his covenant, of acting in violation of the laws, and all the rules of honor and conscience. If you find that he has taken the lac and a half, which he admits, but which he justifies under the pretence of an entertainment, I shall beg to say something to your Lordships concerning that justification.

The justification set up is, that he went up from Calcutta to Moorshedabad, and paid a visit of three months, and that there an allowance was made to him of two hundred pounds a day in lieu of an entertainment. Now, my Lords, I leave it to you to determine, if there was such a custom, whether or no his covenant justifies his conformity with it. I remember Lord Coke, talking of the Brehon law in Ireland, says it is no law, but a lewd custom. A governor is to conform himself to the laws of his own country, to the stipulations of those that employ him, and not to the lewd customs of any other country: those customs are more honored in the breach than in the observance. If Mr. Hastings was really feasted and entertained with the magnificence of the country, if there was an entertainment of dancing-girls brought out to amuse him in his leisure hours, if he was feasted with the hookah and every other luxury, there is something to be said for him, though I should not justify a Governor-General wasting his days in that manner. But in fact here was no entertainment that could amount to such a sum; and he has nowhere proved the existence of such a custom.

But if such a custom did exist, which I contend is more honored in the breach than in the observance, that custom is capable of being abused to the grossest extortion; and that it was so abused will strike your Lordships' minds in such a manner that I hardly need detail the circumstances of it. What! two hundred pounds to be given to a man for one day's entertainment? If there is an end of it there, it ruins nobody, and cannot be supposed, to a great degree, to corrupt anybody; but when that entertainment is renewed day after day for three months, it is no longer a compliment to the man, but a great pecuniary advantage, and, on the other hand, to the person giving it, a grievous, an intolerable burden. It then becomes a matter of the most serious and dreadful extortion, tending to hinder the people who give it not only from giving entertainment, but from having bread to eat themselves. Therefore, if any such entertainment was customary, the custom was perverted by the abuse of its being continued for three months together. It was longer than Ahasuerus's feast. There is a feast of reason and a flow of soul; but Mr. Hastings's feast was a feast of avarice and a flow of money. No wonder he was unwilling to rise from such a table: he continued to sit at that table for three months.

In his covenant he is forbidden expressly to take any allowance above 400l., and forbidden to take any allowance above 100l., without the knowledge, consent, and approbation of the Council to which he belongs. Now he takes 16,000l., not only without the consent of the Council, but without their knowledge,—without the knowledge of any other human being: it is kept hid in the darkest and most secret recesses of his own black agents and confidants, and those of Munny Begum. Why is it a secret? Hospitality, generosity, virtues of that kind, are full of display; there is an ostentation, a pomp, in them; they want to be shown to the world, not concealed. The concealment of acts of charity is what makes them acceptable in the eyes of Him with regard to whom there can be no concealment; but acts of corruption are kept secret, not to keep them secret from the eye of Him, whom the person that observes the secrecy does not fear, nor perhaps believe in, but to keep them secret from the eyes of mankind, whose opinions he does fear, in the immediate effect of them, and in their future consequences. Therefore he had but one reason to keep this so dark and profound a secret, till it was dragged into day in spite of him; he had no reason to keep it a secret, but his knowing it was a proceeding that could not bear the light. Charity is the only virtue that I ever heard of that derives from its retirement any part of its lustre; the others require to be spread abroad in the face of day. Such candles should not be hid under a bushel, and, like the illuminations which men light up when they mean to express great joy and great magnificence for a great event, their very splendor is a part of their excellence. We upon our feasts light up this whole capital city; we in our feasts invite all the world to partake them. Mr. Hastings feasts in the dark; Mr. Hastings feasts alone; Mr. Hastings feasts like a wild beast; he growls in the corner over the dying and the dead, like the tigers of that country, who drag their prey into the jungles. Nobody knows of it, till he is brought into judgment for the flock he has destroyed. His is the entertainment of Tantalus; it is an entertainment from which the sun hid his light.

But was it an entertainment upon a visit? Was Mr. Hastings upon a visit? No: he was executing a commission for the Company in a village in the neighborhood of Moorshedabad, and by no means upon a visit to the Nabob. On the contrary, he was upon something that might be more properly called a visitation. He came as a heavy calamity, like a famine or a pestilence on a country; he came there to do the severest act in the world,—as he himself expresses, to take the bread, literally the bread, from above a thousand of the nobles of the country, and to reduce them to a situation which no man can hear of without shuddering. When you consider, that, while he was thus entertained himself, he was famishing fourteen hundred of the nobility and gentry of the country, you will not conceive it to be any extenuation of his crimes, that he was there, not upon a visit, but upon a duty, the harshest that could be executed, both to the persons who executed and the people who suffered from it.

It is mentioned and supposed in the observations upon this case, though no circumstances relative to the persons or the nature of the visit are stated, that this expense was something which he might have charged to the Company and did not. It is first supposed by the learned counsel who made the observation, that it was a public, allowed, and acknowledged thing; then, that he had not charged the Company anything for it. I have looked into that business. In the first place, I see no such custom; and if there was such a custom, there was the most abusive misemployment of it. I find that in that year there was paid from the Company's cash account to the Governor's travelling charges (and he had no other journey at that end of the year) thirty thousand rupees, which is about 3,000l.; and when we consider that he was in the receipt of near 30,000l., besides the nuzzers, which amount to several thousand a year, and that he is allowed 3,000l. by the Company for his travelling expenses, is it right to charge upon the miserable people whom he was defrauding of their bread 16,000l. for his entertainment?

I find that there are also other great sums relative to the expenses of the Committee of Circuit, which he was upon. How much of them is applicable to him I know not. I say, that the allowance of three thousand pounds was noble and liberal; for it is not above a day or two's journey to Moorshedabad, and by his taking his road by Kishenagur he could not be longer. He had a salary to live upon, and he must live somewhere; and he was actually paid three thousand pounds for travelling charges for three months, which was at the rate of twelve thousand pounds a year: a large and abundant sum.

If you once admit that a man for an entertainment shall take sixteen thousand pounds, there never will be any bribe, any corruption, that may not be justified: the corrupt man has nothing to do but to make a visit, and then that very moment he may receive any sum under the name of this entertainment; that moment his covenants are annulled, his bonds and obligations destroyed, the act of Parliament repealed, and it is no longer bribery, it is no longer corruption, it is no longer peculation; it is nothing but thanks for obliging inquiries, and a compliment according to the mode of the country, by which he makes his fortune.

What hinders him from renewing that visit? If you support this distinction, you will teach the Governor-General, instead of attending his business at the capital, to make journeys through the country, putting every great man of that country under the most ruinous contributions; and as this custom is in no manner confined to the Governor-General, but extends, as it must upon that principle, to every servant of the Company in any station whatever, then, if each of them were to receive an entertainment, I will venture to say that the greatest ravage of an hostile army could not, indeed, destroy the country more entirely than the Company's servants by such visits.

Your Lordships will see that there are grounds for suspicion, not supported with the same evidence, but with evidence of great probability, that there was another entertainment given at the expense of another lac of rupees; and there is also great probability that Mr. Hastings received two lac of rupees, and Mr. Middleton another lac. The whole of the Nabob's revenues would have been exhausted by these two men, if they had stayed there a whole year: and they stayed three months. Nothing will be secured from the Company's servants, so long as they can find, under this name, or under pretence of any corrupt custom of the country, a vicious excuse for this corrupt practice. The excuse is worse than the thing itself. I leave it, then, with your judgment to decide whether you will or not, if this justification comes before you, establish a principle which would put all Bengal in a worse situation than an hostile army could do, and ruin all the Company's servants by sending them from their duty to go round robbing the whole country under the name of entertainments.

My Lords, I have now done with this first part,—namely, the presumption arising from his refusal to make any defence, on pretence that the charge brought against him might be referred to a court of justice, and from the non-performance of his promise to give satisfaction to his employers,—and when that pretence was removed, still refusing to give that satisfaction, though suffering as he did under a load of infamy and obloquy, and though urged to give it by persons of the greatest character. I have stated this to your Lordships as the strongest presumption of guilt, and that this presumption is strengthened by the very excuse which he fabricated for a part of his bribes, when he knew that the proof of them was irresistible, and that this excuse is a high aggravation of his guilt,—that this excuse is not supported by law, that it is not supported by reason, that it does not stand with his covenant, but carries with it a manifest proof of corruption, and that it cannot be justified by any principle, custom, or usage whatever. My Lords, I say I have done with the presumption arising from his conduct as it regarded the fact specifically charged against him, and with respect to the relation he stood in to the Court of Directors, and from the attempt he made to justify that conduct. I believe your Lordships will think both one and the other strong presumptions of his criminality, and of his knowledge that the act he was doing was criminal.

I have another fact to lay before your Lordships, which affords a further presumption of his guilt, and which will show the mischievous consequences of it; and I trust your Lordships will not blame me for going a little into it. Your Lordships know we charge that the appointment of such a woman as Munny Begum to the guardianship of the Nabob, to the superintendency of the civil justice of the country, and to the representation of the whole government, was made for no other purpose than that through this corrupt woman sixteen thousand pounds a year, the whole tattered remains of the Nabob's grandeur, might be a prey to Mr. Hastings: it could be for no other. Now your Lordships would imagine, that, after this, knowing he was already grievously suspected, he would have abstained from giving any further ground for suspicion by a repetition of the same acts through the same person; as no other reason could be furnished for such acts, done directly contrary to the order of his superiors, but that he was actuated by the influence of bribery. Your Lordships would imagine, that, when this Munny Begum was removed upon a charge of corruption, Mr. Hastings would have left her quiet in tranquil obscurity, and that he would no longer have attempted to elevate her into a situation which furnished against himself so much disgrace and obloquy to himself, and concerning which he stood charged with a direct and positive act of bribery. Your Lordships well know, that, upon the deposition of that great magistrate, Mahomed Reza Khan, this woman was appointed to supply his place. The Governor-General and Council (the majority of them being then Sir John Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis) had made a provisional arrangement for the time, until they should be authorized to fill up the place in a proper manner. Soon after, there came from Europe a letter expressing the satisfaction which the Court of Directors had received in the acquittal of Mahomed Reza Khan, expressing a regard for his character, an high opinion of his abilities, and a great disposition to make him some recompense for his extreme sufferings; and accordingly they ordered that he should be again employed. Having no exact ideas of the state of employments in that country, they made a mistake in the specific employment for which they named him; for, being a Mahometan, and the head of the Mahometans in that country, he was named to an office which must be held by a Gentoo. But the majority I have just named, who never endeavored by any base and delusive means to fly from their duty, or not to execute it at all, because they were desired to execute it in a way in which they could not execute it, followed the spirit of the order; and finding that Mahomed Reza Khan, before his imprisonment and trial, had been in possession of another employment, they followed the spirit of the instructions of the Directors and replaced him in that employment: by which means there was an end put to the government of Munny Begum, the country reverted to its natural state, and men of the first rank in the country were placed in the first situations in it. The seat of judicature was filled with wisdom, gravity, and learning, and Munny Begum sunk into that situation into which a woman who had been engaged in the practices that she had been engaged in naturally would sink at her time of life. Mr. Hastings resisted this appointment. He trifled with the Company's orders on account of the letter of them, and endeavored to disobey the spirit of them. However, the majority overbore him; they put Mahomed Reza Khan into his former situation; and as a proof and seal to the honor and virtue of their character, there was not a breath of suspicion that they had any corrupt motive for this conduct. They were odious to many of the India House here; they were odious to that corrupt influence which had begun and was going on to ruin India; but in the face of all this odium, they gave the appointment to Mahomed Reza Khan, because the act contained in itself its own justification. Mr. Hastings made a violent protest against it, and resisted it to the best of his power, always in favor of Munny Begum, as your Lordships will see. Mr. Hastings sent this protest to the Directors; but the Directors, as soon as the case came before them, acknowledged their error, and praised the majority of the Council, Sir John Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis, for the wise and honorable part they had taken upon the occasion, by obeying the spirit and not the letter,—commended the act they had done,—confirmed Mahomed Reza Khan in his place,—and to prevent that great man from being any longer the sport of fortune, any longer the play of avarice between corrupt governors and dancing-girls, they gave him the pledged faith of the Company that he should remain in that office as long as his conduct deserved their protection: it was a good and an honorable tenure. My Lords, soon afterwards there happened two lamentable deaths,—first of Colonel Monson, afterwards of General Clavering. Thus Mr. Hastings was set loose: there was an inspection and a watch upon his conduct, and no more. He was then just in the same situation in which he had stood in 1772. What does he do? Even just what he did in 1772. He deposes Mahomed Reza Khan, notwithstanding the Company's orders, notwithstanding their pledged faith; he turns him out, and makes a distribution of two lacs and a half of rupees, the salary of that great magistrate, in the manner I will now show your Lordships. He made an arrangement consisting of three main parts: the first was with regard to the women, the next with regard to the magistracy, the last with regard to the officers of state of the household.