UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES TRIAL OF WARREN HASTINGS, ESQ. COMPLETE FROM FEBRUARY 1788, TO JUNE ^^> WITH A PREFACE, CONTAINING THE HISTORY OF THE ORIGIN OF THE IMPEACHMENT, A LIST OF THE CHANGES l.N THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, PENDING THE TRIAL, AND THE DEBATE IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, ON THE MOTION OF THANKS TO THE MANAGERS. Journals of the House of Commons, 2&A February 1701-2. " Resolved, 11 That it is the undoubted Right of every Subjeft of England, under " any Accusation, either by Impeachment or otherwise, to be brought " to A speedy Trial, in order to be acquitted or'condetnned. 1 ' V O L. II. LONDON: PRINTED FOR J. OWEN, N l68, PICCADILLY. *794 '/73.3 ^ 333) EIGHTY-SECOND DAY, May 15. BEFORE the Court assembled, it was generally rumoured, that his Majesty's Ministers had re- ceived an account of the capture of Seringapatam, and the defeat of Tippoo. Amidst the joy and satisfaction which this intelligence gave, we be- lieve that every man beheld the scene now acting in Westminster Hall with regret where they saw the man to whom great Britain owes all that she possesses, and all that she hereafter looks forward to enjoy in Indostan, suffering ur.der a six years prosecution, 'which no common mortal could have endured the man who laid the foundation of those alliances, and procured those resources, which have enabled Lord Cornwallis to do all that he has done against the tyrant who has oppressed our countrymen in India. The eulogium which Mr. Pitt and Mr. Dundas has so often pronounced upon his exertions, when all Ir:dia and all Europe were combined against him, were generally ad- mitted to be well merited; and we beiieve there were few present in the Court who did not re- member an observation made some time ago, " That some of the gentlemen who conduct the present ( 331 } present prosecution, have never once been right, even by accident, in their assertions and opinions relative to India." Major Osborne was called, and continued nearly two hours under a cross-examination by Mr. Burke, the design and drift of which, to common capacities, was totally lost; since not one question appeared to be rcK vant to the business of Benares, or to an/ other point that can have a reference to Mr. Hastings : but this sort of examination was much more amusing to the auditors than reading documents. Major Osborne was extremely clear and col- lected, and closed his evidence by a reply to t\\o very important questions proposed to him by a noble Lord:- The first, Whether there ever appeared any thing in the conduct of Mr. Has- tings to Cheyt Sing that indicated malice towards the latter?" The answer, Certainly not." The next question was, Whether the conduct of Mr. Hastings indicated partiality towards him ?" The answer, CertainlyMr. Hastings was partial to Cheyt Sing, and it was his universal chai\.rk-r to all the natives, as was very well known to all who had been in India." Mr. Markham was then called, and his exami.. nation continued from three until five; during which time he went through a great variety of most interesting and important particulars, each dire&ly ( 335 ) direftly contracting some one of the positive assertions in the article. He spoke of the dis- obedience of Cheyt Sing; the bad police of his country ; the forbearance of Mr. Hastings, and ultimately of the desperate resistance made by his troops, regular forces not in rabble or populace, as stated in the article. At this point, the examination closed. EIGHTY-THIRD DAY, May 19. THE Court met about twenty minutes before two. The counsel of Mr. Hastings went through their examination of Mr. Markham. That gen- tleman delivered his- evidence with a perspicuity and candour which did equal credit to his jiead and heart. In speaking of Ally Ibrahim Cawn, (a man whom Mr. Burke had mentioned with every circumstance of opprobium, in some of his printed vspeeches, and as a man whose appoint- ment to the office of the chief magistrate of Be- nares had occasioned general disgust) Mr. Mark- ham said, perhaps he was as well calculated to fill that high office, as any chief justice in any coun- try : that his appointment had given universal satisfaction, and he believed that the police of no city upon earth was so well regulated as Be- nares, f 336 ) nares, from the time that officer was appointed, u: ' this day, for he still filled the office: That Mr. Hastings had abolished oppressive exaclions; and that his arrangements had tended to the en- couragement of pilgrims to resort to Benares, from all parts of ladostan; and to the general happiness of the people. There were very many other important points in his evidence, each tend- ing totally to cut up the article as presented by the House of Commons. He finished about half an hour past three, when, to the astonishment of all persons (Lords, Commons, Managers, and spedators) Mr. Burke got up, and said, he was not ready for the cross- examination; that he was himself exhausted; that he supposed the witness was fatigued too, and he wished the Lords to adjourn. There was instantly a cry of Go on Go onnot without some marks of surprize and indignation in the galleries. Mr. Burke hesitated, and then said, if the Lords /- sisted upon it, he would proceedand then he put a question to Mr. Markham. The Earl of Derby was sitting close to the Managers box, and went from thence to the table, and spoke to the Lord Chancellor, who desired Mr. Law to proceed, with written evidence, if he had any. Mr. Dallas said all was given in, except one paper.-Mr. Law stated the substance of that paper, ( 337 ) paper, and called Mr. Wright to substantiate it, who was not present. The Lord Chancellor then said, he did not see how the Court could proceed, with the civi- lity due to the Managers, if they were not ready. Mr. Burke made no reply, and a motion was made to adjourn. To this Mr. Burke submitted, and the business ended. EIGHTY-FOURTH DAY, May 22. INFINITE ingenuity bas been used by senators, lawyers, and even one General, to discover the improprieties of Mr. Hastings's conducl; but, it should be recollected, that in one month a very considerable province was in general rebellion, that Cheyt Sing's success was great and rapid at the onset of the rebellion, and that in the next month the province was restored to peace and tranquillity; that it has continued in that state ever since, with an increase of two hundred thou- sand pounds a year to the annual profit of the Company. The gentleman pitched upon to cross-examine Mr. Markham, was John Anstruther, Esquire ; z and ( 338) and here an additional proof is afforded us of the astonishing versatility of British politicians. This case of Benares promises to last almost the iife of man ; nearly ten years ago it was just as well known as it. is now. At that time the conduct of Air. Hastings, at Benares, was at- tacked by the Kings Ministers, and their friends in Leadenhall-street, and most powerfully, ably, and successfully defended by Mr. Anstruther; who displayed almost as much oriental learning in his. defence, as Mr. Pitt did a few years after in the House of Commons, but as the fashion of the world passeth away more in politics than in morals, Mr. Anstruther cannot allow Mr. Has- tings to hay- been right m any respeft at Be- nares; and accordingly he kept Mr. Markham at the bar, under a cross-examination of three hours and a half. Mr. Anstruther put a great variety of questions to Mr. Markham relative to the conversation which -parsed beiweeu Cheyt Sing and Mr. Has- tings, at oaxar. Mr. Markliam's answers were very I explicit; but at la^t he discovered that the Ma- jnager had taken his ideas of this conversation jfro.n a forged paper, which had been circu- lated m India some ten years ago, under the fdise name of Che> t Sings manifesto. Mr. Marly- ham treated thi, p^cr with much contempt, an(J positively ( 339 ) positively declared his own conviftion, that it was a forgery. Such we understand to be the opinion of every gentleman, in any degree con- versant in the affairs of India. Mr. Markham, however, gave it a death's blow. Soon after five, the Court broke up; and here we must lament the premature adjournment of the former day; for not one question put by Mr. Anstruther had a connection with the exa- mination of Mr. Markham in chief; consequently an hour and a half was aBually lest: for, why are twenty Managers appointed by Parliament, and those Managers allowed, -at a great expence, five counsel, and two solicitors? We suppose, that justice may not be delayed; yet the Court did adjourn on Wednesday last, because 'Mr. Burke said he was exhausted ; and to-day, not Mr. Burke, but Mr. Anstruther, was the cross-examiner. EIGHTY-FIFTH DAY, May 23. From the difficulty of making a House of Com- mons this day, the Court did not assemble until a quarter before two o'clock; and the whole day was consumed in the cross-examination of Mr. Markham. There is a sort of anecdote in the polite circles relative to this cross-examination, z 2 which ( 340 ) which may not be uninteresting to the renerality of our readers. In an earlier period of Mr. Burke's life, h6 was exceedingly intimate with the Archbishop of York, who, as we are told, is godfather to his son. When people in general were- shocked and dis- gusted at the premature adjournment of Wed- nesday last, it was said that Mr. Burke, in con- sideration of the footing on which he had been for many years with ti e Archbishop, did not chuse to cross-examine Mr. Markham ; and ac- cordingly, Mr. Anstruther undertook the office. We are inclined to believe that this was a con- temptible idle report, because those who saw Mr. Markham at the bar the first day, must have been convinced, that any species of cross-examination which either ingenuity or malevolence (if male- volence could have been presumed; had dictated, would in the end have tended to the honour, and not to the disgrace of that gentleman. Again we disbelieve this report, because though Mr. Burke did not examine Mr. Markham on this day, he was at the elbow of Mr. Anstruther, and was his adviser throughout the whole exami- nation. It happened this day Mr. Anstruther was en- gaged; the cross-examination for the first hour therefore fell upon Mr. Burke. We do not chuse to enter into particulars, but we appeal to the common ( 341 ) common sense of mankind, to determine, whether, in the two whole days consumed in the cross-exa- mination, any one point was made, which tended in the slightest degree to support the article as voted by the last House of Commons. On the contrary, every answer served still more strongly to shew the merit of I^r. Hastings, and to place the firmness and integrity of Mr. Markham in the strongest possible point of view. To detail the questions would be tedious and uninteresting: to detect the blunders of those who put the ques- tions, would be to expose the people of Great Britain, in whose names they were put. We wish here to speak of the impression made upon men of common understandings. The Ma- nagers and their counsel are all able men ; of course, they mean that this cross-examination should answer some great end ; -but we confess ourselves to be too stupid to discover it. The Court broke up at half past five, and we understand that Lord Rawdon complained of the mode in which Mr. Burke had addressed him, and declared his intention of desiring a confe- rence with the House of Commons, if such a circumstance should again occur. The Court adjourned. z 3 EIGHTY- ( 342 ) EIGHTY-SIXTH DAY, May 30, AT two o'clock, this day, the Commons wero enabled to form a House, by the assistance prin- cipally of gentlemen who had been pleased to attend, on the pressing and earnest solicitation of Mr. Hastings himself. We wish, once more, to call the fair and can- did attention of every Englishman to the circum- stances of this cause. In the first year, 1788, the Managers, twenty in number, attended in a body; a House was always formed by twelve o'clock, generally ear- lier, and the Court sat from that time until five, and sometimes later; it sat also thirty five days in that year. At present, in the year 1792, it is with the utmost difficulty a House can be made before two, and though we are now in the last day of May, the Court has only sat in this year sixteen days, but in fat not a third the number <5f hours that it sat in the first year. Two, three, or four dressed Managers are all that attend very few of the Commons-and of the Lords, originally one ( 343 ) bne hundred and eighty-six, there are n.ow not more than from thirty to forty. These circumstances are not detailed with a View of casting blame upon any of the parties^ because what is passed cannot be remedied, but it will not appear extraordinary, that Mr. Has- tings, subjecl to a trial of indefinite length, should take every possible means for bringing the trial - in this year to a close. Some officers have been detained in England to give evidence others are come up from distant parts of the kingdom and the universal voice of mankind deprecates this protracted cause, as the mo.st fatal stab that could be given to public justice and national honour. Mr. Hastings undoubtedly has nicjiy reasons for solid and heart-felt satisfaction under so long a trial. The King's Ministers, and Parliament, his pro- secutors, have adopted all his systems, and are now receiving the fruits of what the articles deem his crimes. The countries which he governed Continue to produce the same revenues. U pay the same obedience, and enjoy the same laws as "when he was in Bengal. Not a ship arrives from India without bringing some gentleman of character, who proclaims it aloud, that the natives in India, of all ranks, sects, and descriptions, unite in expressing their asto- nishment on hearing that Mr. Hastings is under a z 4 pro- ( 344 ) prosecution for desolating their country, for cruelty, injustice, and corruption. Our cnvn countrymen are equally astonished; and unversed in the mazes of British politics, cannot possibly conceive how those afts shall be highly merito- rious in Mr. Dundas, which are the subjects of censure in Mr. Hastings. Mr. Markham was again called to the bar, and his cross examination was compleatly fmi.shcd on this day, but attended with some peculiar circumstances. Before he replied to Mr. Burke's first question, he informed the Lords, that a few minutes before the Court assembled, he had received a letter from Mr. Burke, informing him that Mr. Mark- ham had written to his father, the Archbishop of York, above ten years before. It appeared, that in consequence of the very close intimacy and friendship which had subsisted between the Arch- bishop and Mr. Burke in former times, his Grace had, upon the receipt of this letter from his son, given it to Mr. Burke at Court in the year 1782, immediately after the receipt of it ; that Mr. Burke had 'kept it ever since that time, and returned it to Mr. Markam with a, polite note just before they went into Court yesterday. Mr. Markham, with the openness and sincerity which ever marks a man of real charaQer and honour, and has nothing to conceal, begged that 1 his (345) his letter to his father might be read. It was read, and in every point of any importance agreed exattly with the evidence that he had given, though it was singular enough that Mr. Burke had cross- examined him for two days, just as a man would have done who had studied the letter to the Ai ch- bishop, which letter Mr. Burke had never seen, as he assured the Court, from July, 1782, until he found it, in May, 1792, by accident. Mr. Markham went through a very long cross- examination, the longest, perhaps,' ever known or ( heard of; but each answer served to fix his for- mer testimony the more strongly, and to confirm every assertion made by Mr. Pitt, in his speech upon this article in the House of Commons. The close of his examination was singular and striking, and appeared to affetl the Court and the auditors, as much as it did Mr. Markham himself. He was asked if there was any part of Mr. Hastings's conduct to Cheyt Sing that ap- peared to him as resulting from vindictive, ma- licious, or interested motives ? He replied, that he had known Mr. Hastings for many years, most intimately, and was convinced, that in no part of his public conduct was he biassed by vindictive, malicious, or interested motives; that he was convinced he had ever made the public good, and the honour and advantage of his country, his first object; that of himself or his own own interest, he never bestowed a thought : and with a voice scarcely audible, (probably from the reflection that such a man should have been so treated by a combination of parties against him)* laying his hand upon his heart at the time, he added, " I am convinced, my Lords, he is the " most virtuous man of the age in which he " lives." After this evidence Mr. Burke, with evident marks in his countenance of a man who felt that Mr. Markham was believed by every gentleman present, proceeded to a few questions, none of them of any consequence, and then Mr. Mark- ham was dismissed having sustained his charac- ter as a gentleman, a man of honour, and infor- mation, through three long days of cross ques- tions, in which many points were enforced by Mr. Burke's cross-examination, which were not stated with such force in the examination in charge. The Court, at half past five, adjourned. EIGHTY* ( 347 5 EIGHTY-SEVENTH DAY, June 6. THE Court met this day at half-past one o'clock, having been detained some time in the expecta- tion that a few Managers might arrive. Mr. Burke was the only one present when the House was made ; and the particular and earnest appli- cation of Mr. Hastings to individual gentlemen, procured a House about one o'clock. Four gentlemen were examined, viz. Lieutenant Birrell, Colonel Blair, Charles Greene, Esq. and Lieutenant Wade. The evidence of these gen- tlemen was decisive as to several points of the utmost moment in the two important articles, Be- nares and the Begum. They all stated the delinquency of Cheyt Sing, his state of preparation, and his apparent determi- nation to assert his independence at the first fa- vourable moment. These gentlemen also spoke of the assistance afforded to Cheyt Sing, by the Begum, as a mat- ter of which no doubt was ever entertained in India; that they believed it then, and believed it now. Mr. ( 348 ) . Mr. Birrell and Mr. Wade spoke taken prisoners at Patiete, who declared they were sent from Fyzabad by the Begum. They also spoke of the universal estimation in which Mr. Hastings's character was held through- out India, by natives and Europeans, both before and since this prosecution commenced. In short, the pointed evidence of these gentlemen, the ge- neral voice of India, the improved and improving state of Bengal, as exemplified in Mr. Dundas's Budget, furnish such a mass of strong evidence on the side of Mr.. Hastings, that \\ith ail our re- spect for the last Parliament, we cannot but wondi r, how such a volume of unsupported criminatory al- legations should have appeared on their Journals. At half after five, Mr. Wade withdrew from the bar ; and just as the Court was about to rise, Mr. Hastings earnestly entreated their Lord- ships' attention for a few minutes ; and as the mat- ter he had to state, appeared to him to be ex- tremely important, he begged to address them from his notes; which the Lords readily agreed to, and then he spoke as follows : " I have, already, upon former occasions, ven- tured to state to your Lordships the hardships which I sustained by the unexampled length of this trial, even in the more early periods of it. I mean not now to repeat them; nor will it be necessary ( 349 ) necessary to sr-ew to your Lordships, how much they must b^ all aggravated by their subsequent extension. I merely allude to them for the pur- pose, and for that only, of bespeaking your par- don for the liberty I now take, in praying your Lordships to allow me as much time as you can afford during this session to hear the remainder of my defence. I should not so anxiously press this upon your Lordships, were I not assured that your Lordships have no longer any call for your attention to matters of greater importance, if any matter can exceed in its importance the course of a criminal trial protracted to such a length of years as mine has been. " For my defence on the article now in evi- dence before your Lordships, my counsel will desire only to call two more witnesses, selected from the survivors of a much larger number, whom we forbear to call, from a respecl to your Lordships time, and a consideration of the un- certainty of my life, or theirs, enduring to the end of a more complete refutation of the charge which the Commons have preferred against me. The examination, in chief of these witnesses (for I can- not limit the time of the cross-examination, or answer for that which may be' and in a very distinct and impressive manner he stated the military force of Cheyt Sing, far dif- ferent from what was necessary for him as a Zemindar. His state of preparation, the general opinion of his disaffe&ion, the operations of the war, and the restoration of general tranquillity. He spoke most pointedly and fully to the share the Begum had in the rebellion ; that independent of its being a faft, of which no officer in his camp ever entertained a doubt, he had himself con- versed with a wounded Nugeeb, whom he saw in the town of Pateita, after the storm of that place. That the man declared he was one of the corps entertained by the Begum that he had received two rupees in advance had arrived two days in Cheyt Sing's army and had received two wounds that the Colonel sent him to the hospital, where he was cured, and then discharged that he made no report of this to Mr. Hastings, because the facl was so universally talked of, and in his opinion so clear, as to render any communication totally un- necessary. In fad, that no person could doubt of the disaffeaion of the Begum That he had been a great number of years in Indiathat Mr. Hastings was beloved and revered by the people of India was better calculated to govern them A A 2 than than any man he knew, and the man of all others whom he would, wish to serve under. The Colonel underwent a very long, and a most tedious cross-examination by Mr. Burke, chiefly from letters and papers, both printed, which Mr. Burke had before him. Mr. Law once or twice interrupted Mr. Burke; but finding the interruption to lead only to speeches, he declared, that he would not ob- jea to any thing, of any kind, the Manager could say. The Chancellor's patience appeared at length to he exhausted, and he said the sort of line taken by Mr. Burke might prolong the trial to eternity. Earl Stanhope also objec\ed, and said, that such proceedings were insufferable. About five, Colonel Popham was released, and then Captain Symes was called. This gentleman is also an officer in his Majesty's service, and was Aid-de-Camp to General Musgrave during the present war. He was the officer mentioned by Mr. Hastings, who had gone to India since this trial began, and, after very ative service in India, was now returned, to mark to future ages the peculiar character of this impeachment. He stated, that he went through Cheyt Sing's country, the beginning of 1781, and was very ill treated, and insulted that the report of his disaffection was then general. That he was with the army at Cawnporc when Cheyt Sing rebelled that it was the universal report in the camp, that ( 357 ) that the Begum was disaffected, and had offered military aid to Cheyt Sing that nothing he had heard to the time of his leaving India last January tended to make him disbelieve the rjport ; but, on the contrary, much to fix it, as perfectly true. That he had heard the opening of this trial before he went last to India; that the trial was a subject of general notoriety, and that, so far from effect- ing a change of opinion as to Mr. Hastings, ad- dresses, as he heard in India, were sent from all ranks of people in his favour : that he believed there never had been a man in a high station so universally esteemed and beloved as Mr. Has- tings, and that the same opinions prevailed down to January 1792, when he left India. That he had conversed with several persons of the highest rank in that country, who all entertained the same opinions of him ; and that his prosecution in England had not in any degree lessened the attachment of the people of India. Mr. Burke did not chuse to ask Captain Symes one single question ; but said, with a pleasantry which was very ill received by. all who heard him that he left Mr. Hastings to enjoy the full ef- fect of the bounty of Providence, in having pre- served Captain Symes to give evidence in his favour. Some documents were then read the charge closed and Mr. Dallas gave notice, that he should sum up on the next sitting day. A A 3 EIGHTY- (358) EIGHTY-NINTH DAY, June ip. MR. DALLAS began his summary of the evidence, at half-past one this day. From a speech, which for clearness of arrangement, flu- ency and elegance of language, and soundness of argument throughout, has never been excelled ; it is difficult to seleft particular passages, without doing injustice to Mr. Dallas, by omitting others. The Benares cause being so very well known, Mr. Dallas passed slightly over all the immaterial allegations, proving, however, by a reference to evidence, that each was false, unfounded, and unsupported by any testimony of any kind. He was pointedly severe on the Managers, for their mode of drawing out and supporting their article ; pointing out a variety of evidence introduced by the counsel of Mr. Hastings, which must have been perused by the Managers' counsel, and which, upon every principle of honour and jus- ce, they ought not to have suppressed. He de- clined, he said, the task of following Mr. Burke through a long dissertation upon arbitrary power- but he laid it down as an incontrovertible fad, power, whether in the hands of one man, in a few, ( 359 ) a few, or in many persons, was still a trust, for the benefit of the governed ; and, if abused, the man or men who so abused it ought to be pu- nished. Upon this fair and manly ground, it wa$ his pride and his glory to say, he wished the cause of his client to stand, and he was sure of a decision in his favour. Had he employed the great and extraordinary powers vested in him for thirteen years by Great Britain, to promote the happiness of the people whom he governed, and for the honour and advantage of his native country ? Facls of the most public notoriety, and the ap- plauding voice of mankind, declared that he had done both. As to the particular charge before their Lordships, it must turn upon two points: the first, as to the right of the Company to make any demands upon Cheyt Sing beyond his an- nual rent; the second, whether Mr. Hastings, in making and enforcing the demands, was actuated by malice? He might, indeed, in one moment, make that sort of defence for his client, which he defied any power on earth to overturn. The demand was publicly made by Mr. Hastings and his counsel, transmitted by him- to the Directors in 1778, by the Directors to his Majesty's Mi- nisters ; and those Ministers and th Legislature, had in 1781, for a fourth time, re-appointed Mr. Castings Governor General of Bengal, and for A A 4 ten ten years. If a crime there was, all these parties, Direaors, Ministers, Parliament, and the people ?f Great Britain, in whose name -Mr. Hastings was at the bar, were accessaries to tie injustice, and had received all the advantages of it. He might well ask them, with what semblance of jus- tice they could come at the end of fifteen years, and call upon Mr. Hastings to answer for his condiia to Cheyt Sing? He would, however, scorn to have recourse to this mode of defence. The honour of Mr. Hastings, and the honour of Great Britain, required that he should meet the charge boldly and fully, and he would shew the world that it was hastily, inconsidc rately, and un- justly made, and had no foundation whatever to rest upon. Mr. Dallas, then, by a variety of evidence, proved, that Gheyt Sing was a subjca, and owed Company every duty due from a subjca to bis Sovereign. He proved from history, at dif- rent periods of the Mogul empire, that Zemin- dars mvariaWy afforded military assistance in war. He exposed, in very severe terms, the flimsr, nutilatcd,and garbled evidence given by the Ma- ^agers, in order to shew, that in ,775 Mr . H as- '"g engaged to make no demands of any kind upon Cheyt Sing, beyond his annual rent He wondered how a charge so grange could have *n made, and, looking round to the Managers, asked, asked, who could have drawn up such an article ? He proved, incontrovertibly, that every settle- ment made with Cheyt Sing, applied to his annual rent only, and that he was not released from any one of those duties due from subjecl to sove- reign; that he had taken an oath of fealty and allegiance on his investiture, and was proclaimed throughout the Zemindary of Benares, as the sub- je& of the Company. Having fixed the right incontrovertibly, and having exposed the unfairness of the article, in taking a partial expression of one of Mr. Has- tings's minutes, for the express purpose of fixing a sense upon it, totally different from the real meaning, had the sentence been taken together, he said, that, for the sake of argument, he would | make a concession, most wild and extravagant in : itself: he would suppose it had been proved, that Mr. Hastings had no right to demand military aid from Cheyt Sing, still the Managers would not advance one step, unless they could prove that malice, which they had so boldy charged. The state received and enjoyed the benefit of the annual subsidies, and had, in truth, given them their approbation, when the Legislature re- appointed Mr. Hastings, in 1781, to be Gover- nor General. It remained then to examine what ground there was for this extraordinary charge of malice. After (36*) After using all the industry in his power, he found its origin to be a solitary passage in Mr. Hastings's narrative, who mentions, that on Ge- neral Clavering's supposed accession to the Chair in Bengal, Cheyt Sing deputed a Vakeel to com- pliment him. This aft of the Rajah's excited such mortal and deadly hate in the mind of Mr. Hastings, that, from that moment, he determined to ruin the Rajah. Such is the idea, monstrous and incredible, undoubtedly, and supported by evidence well worthy such a charge. The event happened in June 1777. No trace of enmity is discovered, until the 9th of July 1778, more than a compleat year after the offence, and then, to be sure it breaks out in a very curious manner. It was in evidence before their Lordships, that his Majesty's Ambassador at the Court of f ranee (Lord Stormont) had in June 1777 transmitted to Mr. Hastings an account of a design formed by the French Ministry, to attack the British possessions in India. In July 1778, an account arrived in Bengal, that war was actually declared between France and England Every man knew that war with Spain must follow, and we had then been three years engaged in an unsuccessful war with America. What was Mr. Hastings to do in Bengal ? Could he expecl an union of two great powers in India, in his favour against France, with whom it was known they were then closely in aU liancc ? (363) liance ? Could he expect, that instead of receiving those returns of wealth from India, which were to uphold a sinking country, Great Britain would pour her treasures with a liberal hand into the lap of Bengal? Could he believe, that overmatched AS she was in Europe, in America, and in the West Indies, Great Britain could afford to send ten British regiments, and a fleet, to India? He cer- tainly could not ; he must depend upon his own resources ; he did depend upon them, and he suc- ceeded, against the most powerful combination ever formed for the overthrow of an empire. He entreated their Lordships to consider what Mr. Hastings did ; and whether the imagination .of man, or the malignity of man's nature, could have been supposed capable of so perverting his acts, until that perversion appeared in the name of the Commons of Great Britain. On the first news of the war, he proposed to increase the army the Council unanimously approved the measure; to capture all the French settlements in Bengal, and all their ships the Council agreed; to re- commend to Madras, instantly to commence the siege of Pondicherry the Council agreed ; to fit out a naval force, to reinforce Sir Edward Vernon, the British Commodore the Council agreed. Yet are these acts of the greatest public merit, involving in them very great personal responsi- bility, supposed all to be done with a view to Jiarrass, oppress, and finally, to ruin Cheyt Sing; because (3^4 ) because he was. on the same day, called upon to contribute his share to the additional cxpencc that these measures would bring upon .the public. Their Lordships would see, he said, that all these steps were taken upon an idea that Bengal might have been invaded, and with the public belief in all the Council, that France would make, in the course of the war, (as in fact she did) great efforts to recover her lost consequence in India. He then begged their Lordships to consider, how a charge so wild and strange was supported. The motion for calling upon Cheyt Sing is made, as all the others were, on the same day, by Mr. Hastings. Mr. Francis says he acquiesces, but thinks Cheyt Sing. should be told, that the demand will only be continued while the war lasts. Mr. Hastings jays, he means so; and adds, that as there seemed to be some difference of opinion, c* to the rigkt 9 -he \\ishes to leave the decision on that point to their superiors; stating his own opi- nion, which was, -that we were precluded by no engagements from calling on Cheyt Sing for ex- traordinary aic's on extraordinary emergencies. Mr. Dallas was as convincing as eloquent in this part of ti.is speech. He said.it was impossible that Mr. Hastings or Mr. Francis could have been actuated by malice in their condud to Cheyt Sing; but notwithstand- ing the Managers had attributed to Mr. Francis 1 . every (365 ) every virtue under Heaven, and had made him more an angel than a man, ( he must allow, that the charge of malice applied, with infinitely more force, to Mr. Francis than to Mr. Hastings. The latter makes a demand, and states, that he has a right to make it: the former, with doubts in his mind, as to the right, agrees with Mr. Hastings, without even expressing his doubts, for the information of his superiors ; but Mr. Hastings, to whom he had mentioned them in conversation, fairly brings the subjeft forward, and, as there was a doubt as to the right, leaves his superiors to decide. Is there any thing like malice in this proceeding ? or, if such a charge would apply at all, it must be to Mr. Francis, and not to Mr. Hastings. But, said Mr. Dallas, it applies to neither. In the same manly, intelligible, and common- sense style of argument, Mr. Dallas continued, having displayed a complete knowledge of his subject, and a perfect acquaintance with the laws and constitution of India. He often turned round to the Managers' box few were present. Mr. Burke, who went away at one tim'e, s >metimes coloured, and looked grave at other times ; he had that sort of smile upon his countenance which is not to be described, but which struck all who saw him. The lawyers of the people, Messrs. Douglas, Pigot, Burke, and Lawrence, (to whom we suppose Mr. Burke alluded, when he said Superjlua ( 366 } Super flua non noccnt") were also present* when Mr. Dallas so emphatically asked, who could have drawn up the article so incorrectly and unfairly. At a quarter past five, Mr. Dallas closed. NINETIETH DAY, June 11. THIS day the Court assembled at half-past one, and Mr. Dallas proceeded with the same fluency and clearnesss as before, to remark upon the charge and the evidence, from the point where he left off, down to Mr. Hastings's departure from Calcutta, in July 1781. The first striking passage was, where he came to answer that pa'rt of the charge which alledges that Mr. Hastings under pretence of a war, of which he had received no authentic intelligence, called upon Cheyt Sing for military aid, but really with a view to harrass, oppress, and, finally, to ruin him. He bestowed upon this charge the epi- thets futile, frivolous, and absurd. He stated in the clearest manner, the intelligence that Mr. Hastings had received from Lord Stormont, that war was likely soon to happen, and also of the measures France would pursue until it should break out. He paid Lord Stormont the highest compliments (367 ) compliments for his zeal in the service of his country, which induced him to communicate this important information to Mr. Hastings, though he had no authority from his own Court so to do. He next stated the communication from Mr. Bald- wyn at Cairo, that war had actually been declared between France and England, and he emphati- cally asked their Lordships, what would Mr. Has- tings have merited, had he paid no sort of atten- tion to this communication? Undoubtedly he would have merited the severest censures from his country ; and what was his return for a con- duft so much the reverse ? The Commons of Great Britain had brought him to their Lordships* bar, because, despising all personal consequences, he had afted upon the authority of Lord Stormont and Mr. Baldwyn, and had looked upon war to be actually declared, though .he had received no official advice of the faft. A charge like this, Mr. Dallas said, was unworthy the dignity, the justice, or the common-sense of a great nation, and would operate in all future times as a dread- ful lesson to Generals, Admirals, and Governors, who were entrusted by Great Britain with the care of her interests in the distant quarters of the globe. Having exposed the absurdity of the article in this view of it, he next took it up most ingeniously in another. Under the pretence of a war in Eu- rope, (368) rope, Mr. Hastings had not only made every de- fensive preparation in Bengal, of which the de- mand upon Cheyt Sing was a part, but he had also taken all the French settlements, and all the French ships i*h Bengal. Yet this at an aft against the law of nations was not charged at all ; but if there was any foundation for the article, all these measures he took merely to -furnish a ground for harrassing, oppressing, and finally, ruining Cheyt Sing. Mr. Dallas next proceeded to consider the va- rious circumstances that attended the several de- mands made upon Cheyt Sing for military aid. He went through the part which Mr. Francis had in each of these transactions He proved most clearly, that he was a party in every trans- action ; yet, strange to tell, he had heard a Ma- nager lament it as a great public misfortune, that Mr. Francis was not a Manager on this impeach- ment. Mr. Dallas pushed this argument to the conviction of every gentleman present. He went very fully into the distressed state of India at the commencement of the late war, and we believe he left no doubts in the breast of any one who heard him, of the sole objed Mr. Hastings had in view namely, the preservation of the British empire in India, against the most powerful com- bination ever formed against it. After (369) After having gone through all this part of his subject most completely and satisfactorily, he next came to consider the conduct of Cheyt Sing, in efusing to obey the orders of the government of Bengal. He exposed the falsehood of all his ex- cuses, and established the right of the Company to make the several demands, by the most convincing arguments. He proved, by the evidence, the ac- tual design formed by Cheyt Sing, to seize the first favourable opportunity to render himself in- dependent; and, at a quarter after four, being a good deal exhausted, he prayed leave to close for the day, saying, that he would conclude all he had to offer to their Lordships on the next meeting of the Court. The Lords adjourned accordingly. NINETY-FIRST DAY, June 12. MR. DALLAS began, by exposing in very strong and almost indignant language, the in- justice of making that a charge against Mr. Has- tings, of which the Court of Directors, the King's Ministers, and former Parliaments, had approved; but the charge having been made, he never would fly from it; and he proved, by reference to evi- dence, that every part of the charge was futile, ridiculous, and absurd. B s He 358039 ( 37 ) He next came to a subjeft, which he touched with an ability that must command universal approbation, while he preserved throughout the language of a gentleman, and the deference due to the person whom his Majesty has placed in the first situation in the country we mean the fun- damental difference between Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox, on the only points on which the merit or demerit of Mr. Hastings's conduct to Cheyt Sing must turn. He paid Mr. Fox the highest compliments; declared that he looked upon him as the ablest debater this country ever possessed ; and as a man, who scorning any appeal, but to the rea- son and good sense of his auditors, had fairly and openly put this charge upon its true ground. He had opened it in the last Parliament : he had held this plain and intelligible language, that Mr. Has- tings was under such engagements to Cheyt Sing ; that under no possible circumstances, could he demand more of him, than his annual rent ; con- pequently every extra demand was a crime ; and an intention to punish Cheyt Sing, for not imme, diately obeying these demands, was an aggrava- tion of that crime. AH Mr. Fox's eloquence, could not, as he him, *elf confessed to their Lordships (and that alone entitled Mr. Dallas, as "he said, to go into thil jubjea at all), induce another right honourable gentleman (described by Mr. Fox as^a person of (371 ) of the first abilities, and the first integrity) to concur with him. That gentleman (Mr. Pitt) had strenuously- contended, that Mr. Hastings had an undoubted right to demand extra aids from Cheyt Sing, in war that the Rajah was criminal in disobeying; that his disobedience merited punishment, but that Mr. Hastings had gone beyond the proper line, and therein the crime consisted. After stating the singular, unprecedented hardships of Mr. Hastings's case, he said it was impossible to prove that to be criminal, to which Mr. Pitt objected, namely, the intention to impose a fine. All this part Mr. Dallas argued most ably, and to the conviction of every man who heard him ; and concluded by observing, that whatever Mr. Pitt's opinion might be, the Commons of Great Britain had charged it as a crime, that Mr. Has- tings called upon Cheyt Sing to contribute to the expences of the war; and therefore, as was his duty, he had fully, and he hoped completely, refuted the charge. He next went into a clear detail of Mr. Mark- ham's evidence, which totally destroyed every allegation in the articles. Of Mr. Markham he spoke, as of a man whose character was far above his praise, who had stood a cross examination of four days from one of the most indefatigable examiners upon earth, and that every reply had B B 2 only (37" ) only served the more strongly to fix his former testimony. He then mentioned that singular circumstance of the letter found by Mr. Burke on a Sunday, after having been in his possession ten years, and sent to Mr. Mai kham, just as he was going into Westmin- ster Hall. He noticed the wonderful agreement be- tween all the material facts in that letter, and the evidence given by Mr. Markham ; though the one was written when the subjects were fresh in his memory, and the other given at the distance often years. It was an event most fortunate for the honour both of Mr. Markham and Mr. Has- tings. He particularly remarked upon an ex- pression in Mr. Burke's letter to Mr. Markham, that the facts he had stated, differed very little from those he had heard from other channels ; and after this confession, Mr. Dallas said, he was indeed astonished how the charge of malice could have been preferred against Mr. Hastings. After a most critical examination of Mr. Mark- ham's, Colonel Popham's, and Mr. Burrell's evi- dence, and applying each to the total destruaion of every allegation in the article, appealing as he did to the reason and common sense of the Court, and of all the auditors, Mr. Dallas came to his close, which contained some points that will be remembered as long as Great Britain is a , nation; for so long will the eighteenth century te ( 373 ) be celebrated for an impeachment, unexampled in the annals of the world. He observed, that those whom the Commons employed, had expressed no concern for the Bri- tish blood that was spilt at the massacre at Be- nares, nor for the general order issued by Cheyt Sing, to put all the Englishmen to death, as well as their dependants, wherever they could be found ; but that Cheyt Sing was the object of compassion and commisseration. Wishing, as he did, he said, to meet the Ma- nagers boldly and in front, he would admit, that there had been a consistency in their conduff, which he looked for in vain from other quarters. They had asserted, and they had attempted to prove that Mr. Hastings had no right whatever to demand any military aid from Cheyt Sing. The Managers afted for the Commons, and the Commons were the representatives of the people of Great Britain. Here then he would consider what that Bri- tish justice was, which an honourable Manager had so eloquently described. From British jus- tice it might be expected, that she would first relieve the oppressed^ and then proceed to punish the oppressor. Was this the case ? Was Cheyt Sing seated on the throne of his ancestors, as it was called by the Managers, or was he at this lime a wanderer upon the face of the earth ? B B 3 It (374) It was charged as a crime against Mr. Hastings strange, absurd, futile, and ridiculous indeed was the charge that after Cheyt Sings expulsion, he had raised the revenue of Benares from two hundred and thirty thousand pounds to four hun- dred thousand pounds a year. Could it be be- lieved possible, that a House of Commons, who had made such a charge, had for ten years con- curred in receiving that additional revenue for the public ? There was not a step he could stir, he said, without finding the subject involved in the grossest absurdity. In a most animated and captivating stile, he went through this line of argument, never de- parting from that respefl due from him to the House of Commons, but leaving an impression upon the minds of all who heard him, of the unexampled injustice and cruelty with which Mr. Hastings had been treated, that time cannot efface. He contrasted in a most happy stile the dif- ferent treatment that Cheyt Sing and Mr. Has- tings had experienced ; the former, who in cold blood had murdered our officers and soldiers; who had notoriously been guilty of every crime of which Mr. Hastings had charged him was an objet of pity to the Managers, who wept over his hard fate, but suffered him to wander over the ( 375 ) the face of the globe, and quietly accepted for the public the additional revenue arising from his expulsion : Mr. Hastings was brought to the bar of a Court of Justice, kept there for years, for having expelled Cheyt Sing. Having pushed this in a style of argument which could not be answered, he spoke more generally of the wildness and absurdity of the accusation against Mr. Hastings. If it could be supposed, he said, that the character of any man could be fixed, Mr. Hastings's was established when the Benares revolution happened. The Commons of Great Britain had imputed motives to him contrary to the universal tenor of his life. No man was better known than Mr. Hastings, and what had resulted from his prosecution ? His friends in England gathered round him, and all India rose up in his favour. Could this have happened, if there had been a shadow of truth in an assertion of one of the Managers, " that Ben- " gal felt relieved from a burthen under which she " had long groaned when he left India"? The as- sertion was wild and foolish. His cause, Mr. Dallas said, was the cause of truth and common sense. He chearfully submitted the honour of Mr. Hastings to their Lordships decision, and what was more, the honour and character of the British nation. * B 4 This This is indeed a very faint and imperfect ac- count of a few heads of Mr. Dallas's speech. We but echo the voice of the auditors, when we say, he far excelled Mr. Sheridan, and left Mr. Burke at a great distance behind him. This, however, may be owing in some degree to the subject, which gave him great advantages. He never stepped an inch beyond his evidence. He made no appeal but to the good sense of his audience, and in the sublimest part of the whole, when he exposed, in the most gentlemanly lan- guage, the mortal stab that British justice had received, by the mode in which this prosecution, was conducted, he said not one word which the House of Commons could controvert, or at which they could fairly take offence. The Court was unusually crouded, and there was that feeling on the whole, resulting from reason convinced not that burst of theatrical ap- plause which followed upon the close of Mr. Sheridan's speech, when men were pleased with splendid passages, which might have been applied with much more propriety to tales of chivalry in the middle ages, than to any one transaction in which Mr. Hastings bore a part. In one passage, Mr. Dallas was most eloquent, when he commented upon a private letter, written, by Mr. Hastings to Colonel Popham, recom- mending every kindness and attention to Cheyt Sing. ( 377 ) Sing. This he compared to the Manager's speeches, delivered in a full Court, carefully revised, in order to be transmitted to posterity, and drew the parallel between the ostentatious display of humanity in a parliamentary oration, and the silent exercise of that quality in Mr. Hastings. The Court adjourned until the second Tues- day in the next session of parliament. SIXTH (378) SIXTH YEAR, 1793. NINETY-SECOND DAY, February 25. THIS day the trial of Mr. Hastings was recom- menced, being the sixth year of the proceeding* in Westminster Hall, and the seventh of the im- peachment. Mr. Law opened the case, and complained in terms of great force and feeling, of the hard and unexampled sufferings of his client ; and he ex- pressed his hopes and his wishes, that this might be the last, as it was the first instance of the ex- tension of a criminal trial beyond the probable duration of the life of man. Mr. Law then proceeded to remark upon the several allegations in the article of the Princess of Oude; and with very great ability and apparent knowledge of his subject, refuted them as he went along, observing the instances in which the alle- gations were utterly unsupported by evidence of any kind, and justifying in other points what Mr. Hastings had done, and avowed. This (379 ) This cause is already so well known, that, in the present momentous and important situation of public affairs, a long detail is unnecessary. Mr. Law stated, what the whole world knows to be true, the critical and dangerous state of India in the last war; when it was actually pre- served by the adoption of those very measures for which Mr. Hastings has been so long im- peached. He justified him completely from the charges of cruelty or severity, and he stated va- rious instances of the Begum's disaffection. At five o'clock the Court adjourned. NINETY-THIRD DAY, February 18. THE Court on this day was fuller than on the preceding, though- few of the prosecutors appeared. Mr. Law proceeded in his opening of the defence on the Begum article ; and in very forcible lan- guage, and with his matter admirably arranged, went through the remainder of the article. He pointed out, that in almost every instance, the charges were refuted by the evidence called by the Managers themselves ; and in a most pointed manner, alluded to the unjustifiable means re- sorted to by the Managers in examining their wit- witnesses. Amidst an infinite variety* of matter, highly interesting. to Mr. Hastings to have ex- plained to the Court, which is to pronounce judg- ment upon him, he stated some that came home to the feelings and common-sense of every man in England. In the Benares article it had been stated by the House of Commons, that Mr. Hastings did certain acts under the pretence of a war. On so wild an allegation, Mr. Law commented \\ith great force: he asked, if that was a pretended -war, which all India knew to be true ? which this coun- try, to its cost, knew to be true; since she had expended above a hundred millions in it, and lost half her foreign dominions; in which, in India alone, she was successful under Mr. Hastings? In like manner he was accused, on this article, of taking from the Begum five hundred and fifty thousand pounds, in order to pay a pretended debt, due from the Vizier to the Company. Could such a charge be endured for a moment ? Was it a fretcndtd debt? Why then had not the House of Commons ordered it to be paid back again years and years ago ? But the fad was, that it was a real, a fair, and a just debt; acknowledged to be so by all parties, and paid as such. But it were an endlt-ss task, to enumerate all the absurd and contradictory accusations that had been preferred against Mr. Hastings. Some years ago, on a wry memorable occasion, it was admitted, ihat this *is a iair a fair debt ; but the recovery of it was stated to be impossible ; and a great leading chara&er (Mr. Fox) struck it out of the public accounts as des- perate. Hence the persecuted situation to which his client had so long been subjea. He had fal- sified every prediction of his enemies as to India. He had preserved it in war; he had lefc it in peace; he had improved its resources : he had proved, that those who pretended to some knowledge of that country, knew nothing about it. These were crimes not to be forgiven : he had fallen a vidim and a martyr to the zeal, ability, and success, with which he had served his country. Mr. Law then went rapidly through all that re- mained, and in a most admirable close, recapitu- lated the acknowledged services of Mr. Hastings; and added, that upon this, as on every other part of his case, he rested on the cool impartiality and Steady justice of his enlightened judges. The Court adjourned at four o'clock. MNETY- (382) NINETY-FOURTH DAY, February 19. THIS day was entirely spent in reading. The only remarkable circumstance was, that the name of Mr. Hastings seemed to operate as a charm in bringing about a temporary coalition between Mr. Burke and Mr. Sheridan the latter, though in a great-coat, and unpowdered, coming to the assist- ance of Mr. Burke, on a point of order and form, relative to evidence. This took up some time; and Mr. Burke had almost called his associate, " My Honourable Friend ; M but, correcting him- self, j,aid, " My Honourable Fellow Manager." The Court adjourned at five o'clock. NINETY-FIFTH DAY, February 26. THE Court met at half past one. Captain Cor- don was called by the Counsel of Mr. Hasting* immediately. In one hour, or less, the examina- tion was finished. Mr. Burke began his counter-process, and con- tinued it until near four, when Mr. Sheridan made hia (383) his appearance. The evidence was full, clear, and distinct, applying most exactly to every point; and if Captain Gordon had not been settled in the South of France when the charge passed the Commons, and of course incapable of giving his evidence, there is some reason to think, sixty thousand pounds might have been saved to the nation, and a trial of every man's patience for six years. About four o'clock, Mr. Burke said that he had finished with Captain Gordon for the present, but that he would call him again on the next d ly the Court met. Mr. Law instantly arose, and said he claimed as a right^ what the laws of his coun- try entitled him to expeft, that the Managers should Jinish their cross-examination, before they called another witness. Mr. Burke, Mr. Adam, and the Patriot Mr. Taylor, opposed this. Mr. I aw, confiding in the justice of his objcftion, and in the honour of the Court, persisted, but without fimhcr loss of time, by urging arguments in support of an inde- lible truth.. The Chancellor said, that if the counsel persisted, they had a right to do so; but that the Managers might consume the remain- ing time of the Court, by questions, aixl so have the privilege of pursuing their cross-examination on the next day. Upon (3*4) Upon this, Lord Stanhope arose, and expressed bis surprize at what had fallen from the learned Lord ; adding, that he could not susped the Ma- nagers to be capable of so scandalous a proceed- ing, as to ask frivolous questions for the sake of continuing an examination to the following day. Mr. Burke, misunderstanding what was said, accused Lord Stanhope of attacking the Commons^ by pronouncing their conduct to be scandalous. Lord Stanhope replied, by re-stating what he had said. Mr. Burke and Mr. Adam began to re-argue the point; but the Lords, with one voicc^ desired them to go on, which they did, and finished with Captain Gordon. Captain Williams was then called up j and, as his examination was likely to be long, the Court adjourned. NINETY-SIXTH DAY, February 27. CAPTAIN WILLIAMS, on the assembly of the Court, was called again to the bar, and the coun- sel were proceeding with all possible dispatch in c $ K in his examination; when first, Mr. Burke, and next, Mr. Sheridan, made observations as to the re -hearing of his evidence. They argued, and re- argued on the subject, until the Chancellor at last observed, that they had better permit the counsel to proceed. They took his Lordship's advice for a few minutes, and then again interrupted, and began an examination of their own. Some pro- gress was madej and Captain Williams gave clear and pointed answers to such questions as were put to him by the Counsel, the Managers, and the Lords. The substance of his evidence went to prove the hostile acts of the Begum. Mr* Sheridan, contrary to all former practice, broke in upon the examination in chief. Objections were made, and the day nealy spent, when Mr. Hastings, with marks of agitation, mixed with something of impatience, rose, and addressed the Court. He began by professing the sincerest re- spect for his judges, and he trusted to their sense of honour, and their love of justice, to excuse the irregularity he was about to commit. He, ob- served, that an intimation had been given to hiirij that this was the last day the Court were to meet prior to the circuits. If therefore, that intention, supposing their Lordships to have formed it, was to be changed, it must be by an application made before the rising of the Court. He called to their Lordships' recollection the unprecedented, c c dangerous) (386 ) dangerous, and alarming length of the trial; that lie was now in the sixth year of his appearance at their bar, and the eighth from the commencement of the process in the House of Commons; that no man's life could fairly be estimated to last so long, particularly a man at his age; that he had entertained a hope of its being the universal wish to bring the trial to a close in this session. By a close, he meant a conclusion of the process on both sides, and the judgment of the Court. To any other he never would consent, and therefore it was that he was anxious for a judgment, while he had a chance of living until it should take place. Mr. Hastings next mentioned the steps he had taken to get an attendance his petition to his Majesty; and he professed that he had hopes, from what was lately done in the House of Com- mons, which met the universal approbation of the country (alluding to Major Maitland's motion) : all these hopes were now vanished ; and he threw himself upon their Lordships, of whom he never had thought or spoken, but with the utmost re- sped and confidence. His present prayer, he said, was, that the House would sit day by day, in order to finish the present charge before the circuits. His reason was, that several gentlemen, for whom he had a very sin- cere respedand affcaion, had attended year after yea* (387 ) year in vain, but were now assembled in the ful- lest confidence, that their evidence would imme- diately be taken. Some came from very distant countries. One gentleman, Major Lumsdaine, from the North of Scotland ; another officer, Colonel Duff, who was waiting to do justice to his character, had attu- ally been in the Hall, the second year of the trial ; had returned to India; had served with very distinguished reputation in the war; came home a few months ago, on the restoration of peace, and was now ready to embark again. Could it be expected, that even private regard should induce this officer to neglect his publie duty ? Another gentleman, who had been waiting year after year, whose name had been meniioned yesterday, was Mr. John Pendred Scott; that gentleman pre- paring to come over from Ireland, to give his evidence, died about ten days ago.- With such examples before him, Mr. Hastings said, he- implored, he entreated their Lordships to afford , him at least an opportunity of closing his evi- j dence on this charge before the circuits, and to take such steps as should insure a compleat close and judgment in the course of this ses- sion. Mr. Hastings said much more. His speech was not preconcerted, but made with infinite force and effea. e c 2 Mr, Mr. Burke declared, that it was the Commons' wish to expedite the trial, as much as that of Mr. Hastings. Mr. Sheridan got up to speak, when the ad- journment was moved. NINETY-SEVENTH DAY, February 28. MR. BURKE having declared the earnest anxi- ety of the Commons to finish this trial, and also that they were always in their place, we wish with great deference and resped to notice these asser- tions. In the first place, the Managers have been so far from being in their places, few of them have assisted for the three last years, even to make a House, Major Maitland has publicly affirmed, that it was made last year, in the trial days, by the exertions of Mr. Hastings himself. A love of justice may induce the Managers to finish the trial ; but the personal inconvenience which they suffer, is of no moment; they may attend, or not, as they likeand though there was some demur, when only three thousand pounds were expended, sixty thousand pounds have since been paid with- out difficulty. As to the Counsel employed by the Managers, no gentlemen can be more at their ease. ( 389 ) case. Mr. Burke, Mr. Pigot, and Mr. Douglas, received one thousand and thirty guineas each, merely for attending in Westminster Hall, but without its breaking in upon any of their business. The Managers themselves being both pleaders and examiners of witnesses, nothing can be more com- fortable than the situation of all the parties em- ployed by the public. But far different is the case on the other side : Mr. Hastings appears in the humiliating situation of a defendant, with bended knee, as Major Maitland well' observed, year after year. His counsel, all men of eminence in their profession, must be most diligently and unceasingly employed in this cause, to the evident abandonment of much more business. The result is, that neither Mr. Hastings nor his counsel can have a wish but for. a speedy close ; while, on the other side, all parties are at their ease. This day was productive of extraordinary events. The Lords assembled at twelve; but there was no House of Commons. After some time the Ma- nagers attended, and then Captain Williams was called to the bar, and examined at great length, by Mr. Burke. The Lords retired at twenty minutes past two, to receive his Majesty. Lord Stanhope, as we understand, lamented that the present Chancellor did not follow the example of the last, in nmiself .putting the questions to the witness, as it would prevent such rubbish from appearing on their c c 3 Journals; Journals ; and he lamented, in very strong terms, 'fhc intolerable delay on the trial. At four o'clock, the Lords returned to the Hall, and the examination of Captain Williams continued till half-past five ; when Mr. Sheridan rose, and said he had a proposition to make tq the counsel, 'which, if assented to might shorten the proceedings. He observed, that however his public duty led him to support the charges against Mr. Hastings, yet he must freely confess, that that gentleman had the fullest right to com- plain, in the strong terms he had done, of the in- tolerable injury which he had sustained by the un- constitutional duration of the trial. Nor was this all ; the country, he was free to confess, would be Completely disgraced in the eyes of all Europe, and there never would be a future impeachment. Having put this very strongly, and apparently much to the surprize of Mr. Burke, he proceeded to his proposition, which was at once rejected by the Counsel, and tolerably strongly remarked upon by the Chancellor. When this conversa- tion ended, \t was near six o'clock, and the Court adjourned. - NINETY* 39 1 ) NINETY-EIGHTH DAY, March i. To understand the drift of the evidence given this day, and to elucidate the cross-examination, it will be necessary to state some circumstances that occurred in the last Parliament. Amidst a very large mass of matter, framed into articles by the late House, and abandoned by them, there was a charge, that Captain Williams, or some British officer, had caused Rajah Mustapha Cavrn to be put to death ; and the same charge calls this execution a cruel and atrocious murder. Cap- tain Williams petitioned the House, either to bring a direcl charge against him, or to give him some satisfaction for so foul an injury. By an appeal to the journals of the House, it will ap- pear, that this article was voted without the Members having had an opportunity of looking into it. Captain Williams could obtain no sort of satisfaction, and he represented the very pe- culiar hardship of his situation in a series of let- ters, addressed to Mr. Francis, who had taken an aftive part in this business. Here the matter rested, but Captain Williams had the pleasure .to hear his Majesty's Attorney General express c c 3 in ( 392 ) in the House his sincere concern, that he, as a Member, should appear to call that " a cruel and atrocious murder," of which he never had heard one word. To this business of Mustapha Cavvn, Mr. Burke examined Captain Williams, who shewed all the eagerness an innocent man could do, to wipe off the foul reproach which the last Parliament had cast uron him ; and it appeared by his evidence, that when he relieved Major Lumsdaine, early in 1781, in the command of Gorricpore, a man of the name of Mustapha Cawn, was delivered over to him a prisoner, and under sentence of death ; that he received a positive order from his commanding officer, Colonel Hannay, to carry this sentence into execution, which he did ; ancl he stated, that the man had for many years been a frce-booter and a rebel ; and that in the pe- rilous situation in which he was, he found it absolutely necessary to obey the orders which tic had received. The whole day was expended by Mr. Burke and Mr. Sheridan, in questions and cross-ques- tions upon this point, and relative to a letter which Captain Williams had found amongst some papers. In the midst of all this examination, it came out very clearly, that Captain Williams bad received information, which left him no rea- iQO to doubt of the intrigues of the Begum; and thai ( 393 ) that no man in India ever entertained a doubt upon the subject. At half past five, the Court adjourned. NINETY-NINTH DAY, March 2. THE business on this day commenced by the Lord Chancellor's stating, that the House, ob- serving the unfortunate delays which had oc- curred by the Managers interrupting the exami- nation of Mr. Hastings's witnesses, and by obser- vations, had determined, that in future, until the examination in chief was finished, the cross-exa- mination should not begin ; and that no remarks should be made, which were in their nature ob- servations on the effe6l of evidence. The same rule was to be observed by the defendant's counsel. Mr. Burke made a speech, in order to express his submission, and declared, that so extremely anxious were the Commons for a very speedy close to this unprecedented trial, that if the de- fendant's counsel wished it, and their Lordships chose so to determine, they we're ready to go on during the circuits. As soon as Mr. Burke sat down, Mr. Dallas called Lieutenant Shuldhanij who ; in reply to the several ( 394 ) several "questions put to him, said, that he had been ten years in India, and returned about two years; that at the time of Cheyt Sing's insur- reftion he was in Major Macpherson's regiment at Cawnpore ; that it was then currently reported, and universally believed, that the Begums were hostile to the British government, and had af- forded military aid to Chcyt Sing; that he had not then a shadow of doubt as to the truth of those reports, nor has he now ; that he remained in India nine years after the event, and he could safely swear that no one circumstance had come to his knowledge, which led him to doubt it, nor was it doubted by any one person of any descrip- tion in India with whom he had ever conversed, and he had conversed with great numbers of na- tives, as well as his brother officers, on the sub- ject. That if any one were asked to bring strift legal proof of the existence of a design some time ago, to overturn this happy constitution, he might not be able to do it, yet the fatl was of such no- toriety, that associations had been formed through- out the kingdom, to counteract the design. That the battalion to which he belonged marched from Lucknow to Fyzabad, and that the eunuchs Jewar and Bahar Allly Cawn, were under their charge ; that he had often seen and conversed with them ; that they were attended by a great number of their men servants, and sustained no hardships of any ( 395 ) kind, and complained of none ; that in order to induce them to pay the balance of the sum they had agreed to pay, they had been for a short time in irons ; that he was present when a smith was taking the irons from one of them, and that fhey were very little heavier than the gold or silver ornaments which the women of that coun- try wear round their ancles. He was cross- examined by Mr. Burke and Mr. Sheridan, and gave his answers in the clearest terms. Mr. She- ridan asked, why there should be a necessity for a smith to take off the irons, if they were so pxtremely slight? To which Mr. Shuldham neatly replied, that unless they had been rivetted, slight as they were, they would themselves have taken them off. Mr/ Sheridan asked if it was not known in India that Mr. Hastings had been many years impeached on this article ? Mr. Shuldham said, it certainly was universally known in India. This led Mr. Dallas to ask, if the circumstance of being impeached had hurt the character of Mr. Has- tings in India ? To this he replied, that when he spoke of Mr. Hastings, he spoke of a man with whom he was not personally acquainted; that he spoke from no sense of personal favours received, since none had been conferred; that he could say, with the utmost confidence, there jiever had been a man whose charader stood higher (396) higher than that of Mr. Hastings; that as Go- vernor there never was a man more able, nor, as a private charader, more amiable ; and that this was the general opinion of India, both amongst the natives and his own countrymen, and that it was not at all shaken by the impeachment. The next evidence called was Colonel Duff. This officer said he had been in India about thirty years; that he had returned to England since the commencement of this trial, stayed a short time, went back, commanded the artillery under Lord Cornwallis in the late war, and ar- rived again in England two months ago; that he was in India during the insurrection of Cluyt Sing; that the disaffection and hostility of the Begums was a facl at that time universally be- lieved; that he himself had then no doubt of it, nor has one circumstance that he has since heard led him to doubt it, nor does he believe any man in India ever did doubt it; that in the years 1781 and 1782, the Company's situation in India was most dangerous and alarming, much more so than at any other period before or since; that the troops were many months in arrears, and that the most strenuous exertions were necessary to preserve India to Great Britain. With respea to the bullock contraa, Colonel Duff deposed, that this was a service on which the success of every operation in War depended ; that ( 397 ) v that good bullocks never could be procured by an annual contract given to the lowest bidder; that under Mr. Crofte's contract, the bullocks were excellent, the regulations highly proper, and rigidly enforced; that six thousand seven hun- dred bullocks were' by no means too large a number; that so far from one driver being too much for every two bullocks, he thought there should be two to every three bullocks ; that with regard to Mr. Hastings, though he thought Mr. Hastings had in his public character done him no favour, but rather the contrary on one oc- casion yet that circumstance should not prevent him from doing justice. He had many years ago concurred with some hundreds of his brother officers in transmitting to Mr. Hastings the sense that the army entertained of his great merits and public services ; that he knew the opinion of India to.be very highly in favour of Mr. Has- tings, and that nothing which had happened during this trial had changed that opinion; but quite the reverse ; that no man stood higher in the general estimation, or had performed more important ser- vices; that the people of India, Europeans and natives, looked upon Mr. Hastings to be a very great and a very injured man ; and, added Colonel Duff, this is my opinion too. In the cross-examination Colonel Duff was very pointed. Mr. Sheridan asked him. to what mismanage- (398) mismanagement it was owing, that the army had been so much in arrears in 1781 and 1782 ? The Colonel replied, to no mismanagement at all, but owing to the very large suras sent by Mr. Has- tings to support the war in the Carnatic, and on the Malabar Coast. He was asked, when he heard of the disaffeaion of the Begums ? He said, as soon after the revolt of Cheyt Sing as the news could arriveand that he heard it repeatedly since, and had not a shadow of doubt in his mind on the subjca. In reply to Mr. Burkes questions, he said, that the bullock contracl met the warm ap- probation of Sir Eyre Coote, the commander in chief in India, and of General Stibbert, the pro* vincial commander in chief. Major Lumsdaine was next called, and gave the same pointed evidence as to the existence of the Begum's disaffeaion, which he said was a faa universally believed in India, and never doubted but in England. He said, that nothing could be so alarming as the state of the British empire in India at the close of 1781, and in the first months of 1782; that it was his firm opinion the existence of our Indian dominion depended at that time on the life of Mr. Hastings; that the army with which he was aaing was six and seven months in arrears; that he is confident the army must have been disbanded, without some assis- tance, in a very short time, their distresses were arrived ( 399 ) arrived at so great a height; and that the brigade under the command of Colonel Sir J. Gumming could not move for want of pay ; that in February 1782, they were relieved by the Vizier, having paid the Company a large sum of money, which, as he understood, was a part of his father's trea- sures, that he had taken from the Begum at Fyza- bad; that without such a seasonable supply, the most ruinous effeas would have followed; that he had served in India until the close of Mr. Hastings's administration; that no man ever stood higher in the opinion either of the natives or of his own countrymen, or was more esteemed ei- ther as a public or a private charader. He said Mustapha Cawn, the man whose death was termed by the late House a cruel and atrocious murder, was sent a prisoner to him in May 1780, by or- der of the Nabob, and under sentence of death; that he received very stria direaions for the guard of his person, and when he delivered over the command to Captain Williams in 1781, he reported Mustapha Cawn as a prisoner under sentence of death. The cross-examination by Mr. Burke lasted above two hours, on points, apparently at least, foreign from any charge against Mr. Hastings, and the Lords seeing no prosped of a close, Idjourned to the x 2th of April. HUNDREDTH (400 ) HUNDREDTH DAY, April 12. THE Court assembled, this. day, at one o'clock. The cross-examination of one gentleman, (Major Lumsdaine), \vas finished about half past two, Mr. Burke being the only Manager who asked a question ; and, to men of common conception, there was not one single point on the cross- examination which could, under any possible construction, apply to the case of Mr. Hastings. Mr. Wombwell was the other gentleman called. Mr. Dallas asked him a very few questions, and his answers confirmed the evidence of many other respectable witnesses, as to the universal belief that obtained in India, of the disaffection of the Begums, and also of the general respect and affetlion which all ranks of people felt for Mr. Hastings. Mr. Burke kept Mr. Wombwell two hours on a cross-examination as to salaries or pensions, that he had paid to English gentlemen in Oude, from the Nabob's treasury ; and though Mr. Wombwell twenty times told him, that all his accounts were public, and at the India House ^ that he never had paid one rupee privately ; that he h* knew nothing of any money having been pri- vately paid, either as a pension to a person in his own name, or for the use of that person, under some other 'name, yet question succeeded question* until the patience of every human being present appeared to be entirely exhausted ; and Mr. Wombwell himself, with some degree of impa- tience, said, he was ashamed to say he could not recollecl to whom he had paid money, but that he had paid none which was not regularly entered in the accounts at the India House, to which he again and again referred Mr. Burke. Many of the Lords shewed strong signs of im- patience, and the Archbishop of York declared, with a very strong and pointed emphasis, that the conduct of Mr. Burke was illiberal. To this re- mark no reply was made; and Mr. Wombweli being discharged, at half past five the Court ad- journed. 9 HUNDRE-D-AND-FIRST DAY, April 18. THE Court met at two, when Mr. Auriol was. called, and gave a very full and distinct evidence in favor of the general measures of Mr. Hastings's government. Mr. Plumer particularly tailed the D D attention C 42 ) attention of the "Lords to one purpose for which he had brought Mr. Auriol before them. Mr. Adam and Mr. Sheridan had adduced evidence to foew, that Mr. Hastings had dated a letter on the gth of November 1781, vhich contained the first information of the rebellion of the Begums ; no such letter appeared in the consultations until Ja- nuary 1782, consequently Mr. Hastings had put a false date, to that letter, and this was Mr. She- ridan's strongest argument to prove his guilt. Mr. Auriol swore, that the letter in question was received in due course; that Sir John Macpkerson took it from the Council table ; that he repeatedly applied to Sir John for it, in order to enter it upon the Records, and to fend it to England by the Swallow in December that Sir John in reply said, it was not necessary to send it by the Swallow, and in January a second copy came down with Mr. Hastings's narrative, fo that it became unnessary to get the original letter from Sir John Macpherson. This evidence effectually cleared Mr. Hasting* from the strongest imputation that had been thrown on his character during the trial. HUNDRED-AND-SECOND DAY, April 20. THE Court on this day completed all the evi- dence on the Begum charge. The day was spent in producing a great number of letters, extracts from many of which had been read by the Ma- nagers ( 403 ) uagers, and the remainder was now given, that the Lords might have the subje6l complete and ungarbled before them. Mr. Plumer very neatly opened the evidence he was offering, and observed upon the strange and unfounded assertion of the Managers, as it was entered on the minutes of evidence. He observed, that they had stated, that after the month of September, 1781, no state necessity existed in India Mr. Plumer said, he would produce evidence to prove, that for two years subsequent to this period, the distress was of the most serious nature; that Madras and Bombay,! receiving no pecuniary assistance from England, as they had done in the late war, depended en- '] tirely on Bengal, and owed their preservation solely to the exertions of Mr. Hastings. Mr. Plumer then produced authentic documents, which completely justified his assertions. He next of- fered to the Court a minute written by Sir John Shore, on Jaghire tenures. To this evidence, Mr. Burjce objected. Mr. Plumer replied, by saying, that in every point of view it was unobjectionable evidence, Sir John Shore being a man well versed in the laws and customs of India, and sele&ed by the King's Ministers and the Court of Directors to fill the high office of Governor General of Bengal. j> D 2 Mr. (404 ) Mr. Burke said, that the Commons had no- thing to do with Sir John Shore's appointment, but that the Managers knew that he was im- plicated in the crimes charged upon the prisoner at the bar, under whom he had for many y<. leaves it as a point to be settled between the Managers and the Counsel and Solicitors of Great Britain, on whom the infamy of such scandalous neglecl ought to rest. Six years, and sixty thousand pounds, wasted in the name of the public, upon points which common in- dustry would have prevented from having been agitated at all, fixes indelible disgrace somewhere; and Mr. Fox, who was present, appeared to feel for the situation he had been brought into. Such are the advantages of a public trial, that the in- Jamy, as Mr. Burke truly said, must rest some- where. The next point in Mr. Dallas's speech, was the discovery and detection of such a mass of misrepre- sentation and abandoned profligacy, as never yet occurred in a public proceeding. Here he could not be mistaken, for he read faithful extracts from Mr. Burke s speeches, and compared them with the evidence that Mr. Burke produced. From from the speech it appeared, that Mr. Burke Represented Mr. Hastings not only as the most corrupt, but as the most cruel and unprincipled of human beings. The date of all this corruption was supposed to be in the year 1772. As there was nothing like evidence to justify such wild ex- pressions, Mr. Dallas said, it would be right to Consider what Mr. Hastings had been up to that period. In the most chaste and modest language, he proceeded to state, that in 1749 Mr. Hastings Vent a writer to Bengal; that, after filling the highest situations there, that of Governor exceptcd) after having been concerned in all the Luportaiit events which happened between 1749 and 1765, he returned in that year to England; tnat in 1769, he was appointed second in Council at Madras, and was removed, and succeeded to the Govcrn- ment of Bengal in April 1772. That much cla- mour had been raised in England, on account of the fortunes acquired in Bengal, and the various changes that had taken [Jace between 1756 and 1765; that accounts had been published of the several sums gained by individuals in that period, but that amongst their names, that of Mr. Has- tings was not to be found. That this circumstance, and the highest opinion entertained of his abili- ties by Lord North, induced him to propose, in 1773s tliat Mr. Hastings should be appointed Go- E E 4 vernor ( 424 ) vernor General of Bengal for five years, by the Legislature of Great Britain. These circumstances, Mr. Dallas said, he did not mention as-a set-off against any proved f aft; but the Managers had proved no fatts; it was therefore fair to oppose to the monstrous absur- dities which they had ventured to utter, what was the established character of Mr. Hastings, up to 1772 ; and he would put it to any candid or ho*- nourable man to determine, whether, upon such flimsy reasonings as the Managers had offered, their Lordships would be induced to think, that} in one moment, Mr. Hastings should assume a cha- racter totally new ? for to such an absurd extent did the charge go. Mr. Dallas then proceeded to state the unex- ampled cruelty, the baseness, with which Mr. Hastings had been treated. He examined, and refuted, point by point, the allegations of the charge, as far as he went. He quoted several parts of Mr. Burke's speech, and sifted the evi- dence in support of it. He accused him of a most unwarrantable mis-statement of fads of taking the beginning and the close of the sentence of letters, with a view of totally perverting the sense of making assertions, that so far from hav- ing a shadow of foundation in fal, were contra- dicted by his own evidence; and, in short, of those acts which disgrace the Commons of Great Britain, (4*5) Britain, provided Mr. Dallas is well-founded) and he repeatedly pledged his charatter, well aware, as he said he was, of the sacredness of the pledgC| for the truth of all he had advanced. At five o'clock the Court adjourned* HUNDRED-AND-SEVENTH DAY, May 16, Ax two o'clock on this day the Court assem- bled, when Mr. Dallas proceeded in opening those articles whidh had employed the Managers two complete years. He apologized to the Lords for the time that he was taking up, but he entreated them to consider, that the part of the charge in which he was then proceeding, was a direft accu- sation of the receipt of a sum of money for an appointment to an office ; and though he had proved^ that this appointment was not only proper, but the best that could have been made, yet he was very ready to allow, that if Mr. Hastings had taken money for making it, the propriety of the appointment would in no degree lessen the corruptness of the a6l. He then stated the evi- dence as adduced by the Managers themselves, from which it clearly appeared, and was allowed by Colonel Monson, one of the Supreme Council epposed to Mr. Hastings, that it was an invariable custom (4*6) custom at the Courts of Eastern Princes, to allovf * specific sum in Heii of table expences. Such sum all the predecessors of Mr. Hastings had re- received while at Moorshedabad. Such sum the Nabob received when in Calcutta; and he af- firmed, that to call this receipt a corrupt receipt for an appointment to office, was wild and absurd in the highest degree, since the receipt had no sort of connection with Munny Begum's appoint- ment. After clearing this matter completely, he called the attention of the Lords most particularly to the period of time when the transaction happened, in order to shew the justice and gratitude of the latt House of Commons (which Mr. Burke had 50?;, Called a House elcfted by a corrupt Indian interest. ) The transaction happened in 1772, now twenty-one years ago. Since that period, Mr. Hastings had four several times been appointed Governor Go* neral of Bengal, by the Legislature of Great Bri- tain. It could not be said, that time had thrown any new light upon this subject, to authorize a departure from every principle of justice ; because the fact was, that every circumstance was as well known in 1775, as at this hour. Yet those who How supported this Impeachment, were then the friends of Mr. Hastings. Every effort was made by the Minister of that day 1775) to remove him from his otnce. That Minister, when the danger fretted. pressed, when Great Britain was sinking in Eu- rope, Africa, and America, had three several times, with the unanimous concurrence of the Legislature, re-appointed Mr. Hastings Governor General of Bengal, and Mr. Hastings had pre- served India to Great Britain. The credit of so preserving it was given to him by those who voted for his prosecution ; yet such -was the gratitude of the Commons of Great Britain, that sixteen years after this transaction of Munny Begum, and sub* sequent to four Parliamentary appointments, they had made it the subject of a criminal charge; and now, twenty-one years after it happened, was he, Mr. Dallas, defending Mr. Hastings from that accusation. Mr. Dallas said, that, after having completely refuted the charge, he could with propriety expose the baseness and ingratitude of it. He next ex- posed a great number of most wicked and auda- cious misrepresentations in the charge, and in the evidence j some not having, as he said, a shadow of foundation in truth ; some so marked, that Cha* rity itself could not impute them to hurry or mis* take, but evidently resulting from design. He pointed particularly at Mr. Burke here; and he read a quotation from his speech, in which Mr. Burke gave his character of Nundcomar. This Mr. Dallas finely commented upon, and, in return, described what really Nundcomar aw, so as to convey convey to every person, that he meant to describe another great man under his description of Nund- comar. Having effectually done away all the early part of the charge, he next came to consider those pre- sents, the receipt of which Mr. Hastings avowed, and for which there was no evidence of any kind* but the declaration of Mr. Hastings himself. He said, that if he could have the good fortune to convey to their Lordships that distinct idea which he had formed, he was sure that he should clear up every circumstance, and convince their Lord- ships, that when Mr. Hastings thought the British empire in India at stake, no thought for himself ever occurred to him. He then went completely through the present of Cheyt Sing, and made it clear, even from the Managers' evidence, that there was not a shadow of a ground to suppose^ that Mr. Hastings ever intended to appropriate that money to his own use, and he entered into a full discussion of the Aft of 1773, in order to prove, that the laws never meant to preclude the receipt of money for the public. After a number of very pertinent observations, the Court adjourned at a quarter after five o'clock. HUNDRED- 429 HUNDRED-AND-EIGHTH DAY, May 17. THE Court on this day assembled soon after two. o'clock. Mr. Dallas immediately proceeded in his summary, and desired their Lordships would have the goodness always to bear in mind, that upon this case of the avowed presents^ as the Managers termed them, there was no evidence of any kind except what Mr. Hastings had himself furnished ; and that no doubt did exist but that every rupee received by Mr. Hastings, as a pre- sent, was expended in the public service. Having already shewn, that the two lacks of rupees received from Cheyt Sing's Buxey were publicly applied, he would now take up the sums for which bonds had been granted to Mr. Has- tings in the years 1780 and 1781. He proved, most satisfactorily, from a reference to dates and circumstances, that Mr. Hastings never could iiave had the most distant idea of applying any part of this money to its own use. He next took up the present of one hundred thousand pounds sterling from the Nabob of Oude and his Ministers, and proved, that every rupee of this present also was applied to the public ( 430 ) public service, at a time when our very existence depended on the realization of every rupee that could be procured. After having very fully gone into this transac- tion, and effectually repelled the insinuation of the Managers, that Mr. Hastings had instructed Major Scott either to avow or conceal the re- ceipt of this present, as parties might be at the time, Mr. Dallas most eloquently stated the ser- vices performed by the appropriation of these several sums to the public. He then went into a full consideration of the letters of Mi*. Hastings and Mr. Larkins, and desired to put it seriously to the honour of every noble Lord present, whe- ther a man, who, from all the proceedings before them, never had a thought but for preserving the great and important empire committed to his charge, should have practised those mean and contemptible arts which he must have done, if any part of this accusation was founded in truth. At five, the Court adjourned. HUNDRED^ (430 KUNDREP~4ND-NINTH DAY, May 24, MR. DALLAS on this day closed his opening of the presents, and the revenue articles. If he astonished his auditors upon former occasions, he excited in their breasts on this day every sen- timent of admiration of his talents, and convic- tion of the justice of his cause. The remaining points, he said, were, a present received from Rajah Nobkessin, and applied to the payment of certain public expences incurred by Mr. Has- tings; and a present of one hundred thousand pounds offered by the Nabob of Oude, but not accepted. He stated, in the most clear manner, the circumstances of the first transaction, and proved, that the expences incurred and charged (o the Company were equally charged by Lord Cornwailis as they had been by the predecessors of Mr. Hastings. As to the next charge, he knew pot how to treat it seriously, because all the evi- dence adduced by the Managers proved the facts to be directly the reverse of those described in the charge. The only remaining article then was, the revenue-^a charge most important indeed, if (43*) if it were true in any of its parts, since it ac- cused Mr. Hastings of overturning all the esta- blishments of the country, of violating private property, and of oppressing and destroying the natives of Bengal. The Managers, however, had abandoned all the material parts of the article, and had confined themselves to three points : the sending Aumeens to the provinces, abolishing the Provincial Councils, and establishing a Com- mittee of Revenue in February 1781. A very few words, he trusted, would be suffi- cient to do away every evidence that had been offered on these points and as to the first, he had lo shew their Lordships, the most monstrous ab- surdity that ever disgraced a proceeding offered to a Court of Justice. The criminality in ap- pointing Aumeens, was stated in the charge to consist of the dangerous powers granted by their instructions, which gave them liberty to treat with oppression and cruelty every native who should presume to disobey their arbitrary orders. Yet, strange to tell, these instructions were not to be found in evidence, though they were the very ground of the charge ; after exposing, as it de- served, this scandalous negleft in those who have been so liberally paid by the public, Mr. Dallas said, that neither the instructions, which he would produce, nor any one document could in any, the slightest degree, justify the allegations in the charge. As ( 433 ) As to the abolition of th6 Provincial Councils, he proved that all men of all descriptions ap- proved the abolition, and the subsequent ap- pointment of the Committee of Revenue. He then took the same ground that Mr. Pitt had taken in the House of Commons, who voted against this monstrous charge in to the most monstrous, by Mr. Fox's account, of all the charges namely, that it was in the highest de- gree absurd to impute criminality to difference of opinion. After being most eloquent and con- vincing on this subject, he called the attention of the Court to the evidence of Mr. Anderson^ Sir John Shore, the public accounts, and the known state of Bengal; and he put it in so forcible a manner, that Mr. Burke and his coun- sel hung down their heads, apparently with shame and remorse. He read the allegations in the charge, one by one, as they were put to Sir John Shore, in the shape of questions. He read his answers, which proved that each allegation was false. He put it most forcibly to the Lords, to decide which they would believe the Managers, who had no local know- ledge, or Sir John Shore ? The Managers said, that Mr. Hastings had plundered, oppressed, and I destroyed the people of Bengal. Sir John Shore swore, that during the whole period of Mr. Hastings's administration, Bengal had improved in agriculture and population, and f F that (434) that the people were happier than under their native governments. But, said Mr. Dallas, I am aware of the answer that will be given, be- cause it has already been said your Lordships are not to believe Sir John Shore upon his oath, , because he is an accomplice in the crime* of Mr. Hastings. Strange inconsistency ! whimsical ca- price of fortune ! The accomplice of the crimes of Mr. Hastings, was called forth from his re- treatsolicited to accept of the highest office which this country could bestow Lord of a mighty empire, with millions of men submissive to his authority. But if he was the accomplice of Mr. Hastings's crimes, why does not Mr. Burke move to recal him? Why does he not impeach him ? Why does he stop here ? Society in pain and pleasure is grateful let the bar be taken down, and add to the list of delinquents the whole Court of Direaors, and his Majesty's Ministers, to whom the right honourable gentle- man had insinuated the impropriety of Sir John | Shore's appointment. If he were content merely to defend Mr. Has- tings from the charge, he should now close ; but he demanded much more. His client stood be- j fore their Lordships as the most injured man that any age or any nation had produced. His ser- j vices were great, important, and acknowledged, and (435 ) and the judgment of their Lordships would, he was confident, establish his fame to the latest posterity. Ask Sir John Shore what all India thought of him ? Sir John Shore had been asked, and answered the question fully. It was for the Managers only to run counter to evidence, and to the common sense of mankind, and their Lord- ships must believe them to be mistaken, to use no harsher phrase, or they must believe ever)' evi- dence perjured, and the whole -word to be misled. After a most eloquent close, Mr. Dallas sat down, and Mr. Hastings begged to detain their Lordships for a few minutes, and that he might not from hurry or confusion be mistaken in a point of great importance, he begged to read from a paper what he had to offer, which he did as follows : My Lords, " I venture to solicit the attention of your Lordships, to the situation in which this trial at present stands. " I hope, for your Lordships' indulgence, in requesting to be allowed such farther time, in the course of each day's sitting, as may enable me to bring the remainder of my defence, if no interruptions intervene, within the probable period of three days. F F a I hope, ( 436 ) " I hope, by the means of such indulgence, to conclude my evidence, on the article now under consideration, within the compass of one day. * 6 I am informed that the observations of m\ counsel upon it, will only occupy another day ; and the gentleman on my right hand (Mr. Law) is willing to wave any observations that the de- fence may be the sooner closed In that case, one day will be sufficient for this article. The abridged evidence with which I mean to trouble your Lordships, on the only remaining article, that of " Contracts," may be comprized within the space of one day more; I am willing to forego the benefit of a more detailed defence, in order to enable the Managers for the Commons full)- to conclude their reply within the course of the pre- sent session an expectation which, I trust I do not unreasonably entertain, in this advanced period of a trial that has been so many years depending. I am well aware of the disadvantages to which I subjeft my defence on this article, by leaving the evidence unstated and unapplied to make out its own efTed; and it is with reluaance that I deprive myself of the benefit of those ta- lents which have been so ably displayed on the former parts of my defence : for it is to those talents, aided by the zeal and cordial affeaion which have animated them to their best exertions, that I am now indebted for the hope and assu- rance (437 ) ranee I confidently entertain, that though / should. not live to receive the sanction of your Lordships acquittal, my name, at least, shall not descend blasted with infamy to posterity; but be recorded with those of the many other vidims of false opi- nion, some of higher worth, none of better in- tentions, who have done service to the states which employed them, and been requited with un- thankfulness and persecution. " My Lords, I consider the resolution which I have taken as a sacrifice, and I make it with the greater chearfulness, as it may, and must in some degree, prove no less an accommodation to your Lordships' time, than the means (if your Lord- ships shall so permit it) of obtaining my own deliverance from a state of suspence, which is become almost insupportable" Mr. Burke made some remarks on Mr. Has- tings's attack, as he called it, upon the Commons of Great Britain, and talked of the influence of his fortune and connections, apparently in a very confused stile but said Mr. Hastings must judge as to the wisdom of making his defence long or short. F F 3 HUNDRED- (438) HUNDRED-AND-TENTH DAY, May 25. THE Lords met this day before eleven o'clock, and sat until half past past five. The first part of the morning was taken up in reading a short variety of papers, stated by the counsel as necessary, to complete evidence which the managers had mutilated and garbled. Mr. Auriol was then called, and examined as to the oaths taken by Mr. Hastings, when he sue- ceeded to the government of Bengal in 1772. He said he was pretty certain, that he had seen Mr. Hastings's name subscribed to these oaths, in a book kept by himself as secretary, and left in his office to his successor just as he received it from his predecessor. As to (he restrictive oath proposed by Lord Clive in 1766, taken by himself, and by his sue, cessor, Mr. Verelst, in the Town-hall of Calcutta, \ before all the inhabitants, that was a totally dif- ferent oath, and had become obsolete before Mr, Auriol's arrival, and had not been taken by Mr. Carder the predecessor of Mr. Hastings. This w.as ctfso proved by Mr. Hudson, fully fixing upon ( 439 ) upon the Managers, or their counsel, the charges preferred against them by Mr. Dallas, of the most atrocious, and wicked deception. Mr. Burke cross-examined Mr. Auriol for nearly two hours complete, asking him an in- finite variety of questions, apparently of little consequence, but to which he received the clear- est answers. To one involved and complicated question, Mr. Auriol replied, by desiring it might be divided, and then he would answer it, which he did; upon which Mr. Burke made some re- fleaion, so very offensive, that the Archbishop of York started up with much feeling, and said it was impossible for him silently to listen to the illiberal condud of the Manager; that he ex- amined the witness as if he were examining, not a gentleman, but a pick-pocket ; that the illi- hrality and the inhumanity of the Managers in the course of this long trial, could not be ex- ceeded by Marat and Roberspierre, had the con- dud of the trial been committed to them. Mr. Burke seemed much confounded, but said, in reply, that he had not heard one -word of what had been spoken, and that he should atl as if he had not. He then pursued his examination; and, in the course of it, Lord Stanhope, Lord Moreton, and Lord Somers, expressed their be- lief that the trial never could come to a close, if a gentleman was to be examined so long upon the r F 4 rumour ( 440 ) rumour of rumours. Mr. Burke then began to ta)^ about the Begums, but was called to order ; and, about half past four, the counsel closed their evi- dence on the sixth, seventh, and fourteenth ar- ticles taking five days only, for what had occupied the Managers thirty-Jour on the prosecution. Mr. Plwmer then observed, that, agreeably to Mr. Hastings's engagement of yesterday, they should not sum up, nor expend any time in opening the only remaining charge, the contracts, but proceed dircftly to the evidence. The first was the opium contract ; and here he should sup, ply what, in candour and justice, the Managers ought not to have left deficient. He said, the evidence he should produce would prove : First, That until the government of Mr. Has- tings, opium was no branch of revenue to the Company, but a monopoly in the hands of indi* viduals. Second, That Mr. Hastings took it from those individuals, and made it a productive article of revenue for the Company. Third, That in 1775, it was put up to public contract, and the contract given to the lowest oi' fifteen bidders, that is, to the man who oli the best terms for the Company. Fourth, That in 1777 it was given to Mr. Mac r kenzie/or three years, on the same terms that the lowest bidder had it in 1775. Fifth, (441 ) Fifth, Which the Managers had tolaUy sunl, That in the year 1780 it was granted to Mr. Mackenzie for one year longer, by Mr. Francis, Mr, Wheeler, and Mr. Hastings the two first being a majority of the Board, This omission was the more unpardonable, because the jett of the charge against Mr. Hastings was his negleft of the Company's orders, who in December 1778 disapproved of the grant of the contract to Mr. Mackenzie in 1777, because it had not been ad- vertized.-^-Now, as this letter arrived in Bengal in 1779, and the contract was again given to Mr. Mackenzie in 1780, when the disapprobation was fresh in the recollection of Mr. Francis and Mr. Hastings, it was partial and unfair to sink thin transaction^ and to go on to the grant to Mr. Sullivan in 1781, who had it precisely on the same terms with Mr, Mackenzie. Sixth, He should give a minute of Mr. Francis, in which he said he thought, and he thought truly, that it would be bad policy to give the opium contract on too low terms to any contractor, for very valid reasons, and which undoubtedly in- duced the Board not to think this a contract, which every adventurer in India might specu- late upon. Seventh, He should examine a gentleman who had been one of the council at Patna, and accord- jngly Mr. Law was called to the bar, who said, that (442 } that from the time he came into the service in 1765, until 1773, opium was a monopoly for the advantage of the Company's servants at Patna; that they bought it at two hundred Sicca rupees a chest, and generally sold it from four hundred and fifty to five hundred rupees a chest; that Mr. Hastings took it from them and gave it to the Company. It appeared, that from 1775 to 1785, the con- tmft price was one hundred and ninety rupees a chest, for a large quantity as large as was in most years procured, and an advance of fifty rupees a chest upon all manufactured beyond that quan- tity. Mr. Plumer then gave in all his evidence to substantiate these fafts, which it did most com- pletely, and then the Court adjourned. Mr. Fox came into the Manager's box soon after the Archbishop of York had spoke, but did not stay long. Mr. Michael Angelo Taylor was the only Ma- nager who supported Mr. Burke, though he had \ declared, some time ago, that he would no more \ be seen in the box with him. The Lords seemed as if their patience was nearly exhausted, but we hope and trust, thai a very few days more, will end this tedious enquiry. Mr. Law in the course of the day gave in a very material and important piece of evidence. The ( 443 ) The Managers had in the year 1790, called Mr. Wright from the India House, to prove the. amount of Mr. Hastings's fortune by a statement of the remittances made in his name. These, in bills, and in diamonds turned out to be two hundred and thirty-eight thousand pounds, from which the in- ference drawn by the Managers was that that \vas his fortune. Mr. Law therefore called Mr. Woodman, who in conjunction with Mr. Francis Sykes, and a Mr. Waller, were his attornies in. England. Mr. Woodman swore, that above eighty thousand pounds of this money never came into their hands, but was indorsed over to other persons; that bills were drawn upon them for other sums, which they paid away ; and that the state of Mr, Hastings's fortune, from 1778 down to 1786, when it was finally delivered over to him, wa$ from seventy-three to sixty -five thousand pounds; the particulars being each year respectively stated; that he never knew, nor did he believe that Mr. Hastings ever employed any other persons in money transactions, nor did he believe, that he ever remitted money, except to the three gen- tlemen who had the management of his affairs. Mr. Burke did not chuse to put any question to Mr. Woodman. HUNDRED- ( 444 ) HVXDRLD-AND-ELEVENTHDAY, May 27, TH E Court met this day soon after eleven, when Mr. Pluiner proceeded to complete his evidence on the opium contract; and he proved the great addition to the public revenues, which resulted from Mr. Hastings's having made opium a branch of revenue for the Company, in 1773. He proved also, that the plan of sending opium to China \vas a very wise plan for the year it took place in ; but that in faft it was not the plan of Mr. Has- tings, but a scheme adopted by Mr. Wheeler, on the recommendation of a very ingenious and in- dustrious officer, Colonel Watson. He then proceeded to the bullock contract, a subjeft which had been much expatiated upon, by men grossly and foolishly ignorant ; and he proved the following fats by evidence. First, That so far from its being true, as the charge affirmed, that Mr. Hastings, in the year 17 79, abolished a contract, without any complaii t from the army of its inefficacy the truth was, th; t complaints of the. most serious nature had ba n transmitted from several corps of the army, to the Commander in Chief, and by him to Mr. Has- tings. Second, (445 ) Second, That no possible remedy, for so dange- rous an evil, could be applied, unless by giving a contracl on such terms as should insure a faith- ful discharge of so important a service. Third, That upon this principle. Sir Eyre Coote recommended in July 1779; anc ^ tne Board agreed to that contracl, which is the subje6t of the pre- sent charge. Fourth, That by the evidence of Colonel Duff, and by various authentic documents, it appeared, that the contracl; was not improvident, either as to terms or numbers. Fifth, That when it was converted into an agency, the same checks and regulations were kept up. Sixth, That the experience of the last -war fully evinced the necessity of attending most diligently to this, the most important branch of military ser* vice. The next contracl was that of Mr. Auriol, or, .more properly speaking, the agency for supplying the Carnatic with provisions, in the last general war. This agency Mr. Pitt most strenuously de- fended, giving the highest praise both to Mr. Has- tings and Mr. Auriol, for having saved a whole people from perishing by famine, and that too on the most economical plan ; but Mr. Burke beat Mr. Pitt in a division on this charge, in the House of Commons, that is dead and gone) and this day Mr. (446) Mr. Hastings answered to the charge, of having saved a nation, and he did it most completely through Mr. Dallas. So much time was expended in the examina- tion of Mr. Auriol, and in arguments, and in an adjournment to the Chamber of Parliament, that at six o'clock Mr. Dallas said they should take an hour and a half, or two hours more ; in conse- quence of which the Court adjourned. HUNDRED-AND-TWELFTH DAY, May 28. ON this day the case of Mr. Hastings was to- tally closed. The Lords met at half-past two, and, in a very short time, Mr. Dallas put in the whole of the evidence necessary to elucidate Mr. Bclli's agency : that agency which Mr. Pitt defended most strenuously in the House of Commons. After having finished, Mr. Law desired to introduce the several testimonials which had been sent from India in favour of Mr. Hastings, by the Marquis Cornwallis, as the best reply that could be given to that sort of general abuse which had been so plentifully heaped upon Mr. Hastings. To this Mr. Burke made some sort of objec- tion; but on Mr. Law reading to him a quotation from his own speech) in which he stood pledged, himself (447) himself to introduce this evidence, it passed, as also the addresses to Mr. Hastings, from the civil servants of the Company, and from the offi- cers of the army, and also the unanimous thanks of the Court of Dire6lors and Proprietors, ap- proved by Mr. Dundas, Mr. (now Lord) Grenville, Lord Walsingham, and Lord Mulgrave, the mem- bers of the Board of Controul, for his long, faith- ful, and able services, and with this mass of evidence to rebut the charge of having oppressed, ruined, and destroyed the natives of India, of having mate- rially ajfetted the interests of the Company, and dis- graced and degraded the British name and charac- ter, did the counsel of Mr. Hastings conclude. Mr. Hastings, when all the evidence was closed, addressed the Court to the following effect : MY LORDS, My evidence is now brought to its close. Sufficient has, I trust, been already done for every immediate purpose of necessary justifica- tion ; and it is not, my Lords, from any apprehen- sion which I entertain, lest any defects of this kind should exist, or from a vain opinion that they could be supplied by me, that I present myself once more to your Lordships' attention. No, my Lords, I leave the proof which I have offered to its just and effective operation, without any degree of doubtful anxiety for the issue. But, my Lords, I rise (418) I rise for a purpose, which no external testimony 1 tan adequately supply, to convey to your Lord- ships' minds a satisfaction which honourable minds may possibly expeft, and which the solemn asse- verations of a man, impressed With a due sense of the sacred obligations of religion and honour, can alone adequately convey. I know that the aftual motives of human con- duel: are often dark and mysterious, and sometimes inscrutable. As far as the subject is capable of further ascertainment, and the truth can be sealed by a still more solemn attestation, it is a duty \vhich innocence owes to itself to afford it. In the presence, therefore, of that Being from whom no secrets are hid, I do, upon a full review and scrutiny of my past life, unequivocally and conscientiously declare, that, in the administration of that trust of Government, which was during so many years confided to me, I did, in no in- stance, intentionally sacrifice the interest of my country to any private views of my own personal advantage; that, according to my best skill and judgment, I invariably promoted the essential in- terests of my employers, the happiness and pros- perity of the people committed to my charge, and the welfare and honour of my country, and at no time with more entire devotion of mind and pur- pose to these objeds, than, during that period, in which my accusers have endeavoured to represent me ( 449 ) jne as occupied and engrossed by the base pur- suit of -low, sordid, and interdicted emolument. It may be expected of me to say something in addition to what you have heard from Mr. Wood- man, respecting the actual state and extent of my fortune. He has proved the total amount of my remit- tances from India, during the period of my Go- vernment; and that the balance of my fortune, when last adjusted, shortly after my return to England in 1785, amounted to little more than ^ sixty-five thousand pounds. I protest, in the name of Almighty God, that I made no remittances to England during that pe- riod, which were not made to him, and my other attornies joined in trust with him; that I had no other persons in England or Europe, in trust of my pecuniary concerns ; and that his account of those remittances is accurately true, according to my best means of knowledge and belief upon the sub- ject; and that, including those remittances, I at no time possessed a fortune which exceeded, at its most extended amount, the sum of one hun- dred thousand pounds; and in this calculation I would be understood to comprehend every kind and description of property whatsoever. That, at the period of my return to England, my fortune did not exceed the balance already mentioned to hatve been then in the hands of my attornies, by c c more ( 450 } more than the sum oFtwenty-five thousand pounds ; amounting, on the largest calculation, to an aggre- gate sum of between eighty and ninety thousand pounds; and all the property which I possess stands pledged at the present moment For the dis- charge oF such debts as I have contracted since the commencement oF this long depending trial. These are the enormous Fruits oF thirteen years oF imputed rapacity and peculation, and oF up- wards oF thirty years oF aftive and important ser- vice!!! My Lords, I know not how I can more Fully and explicitly disavow every purpose oF appro- priating to my own benefit any oF the various sums received, and applied by me to the Compa- ny's service in moments oF extreme peril and exi- gency, than in the very terms in which I expres- sed such disavowal at your Lordships' bar, in the month oFJune 1791. I again repeat, that "I so- lemnly, and with a pure conscience, affirm, that I never did harbour such a thought For a single instant." IF, in addition to the prooF upon your Lord- ships* table, oF the justice and necessity oF the measures which are the subjects oF the two first ar- ticles oF the charge, it can be required oF me, by an aft oF solemn and sacred attestation on my part, to vouch the truth oF my defence in these particulars, and to vindicate my character From the the unfounded charge of malice alledged to have been entertained by me against the immediate ob- jefts of those measures, I once more call God to witness, that no motive of personal twnity-) no views of personal advantage to myself, or others, induced the adoption, on my part, of any of those measures, for which I am at this day criminally questioned; but that, in every instance, I acled under the immediate and urgent sense of public duty, in obedience to the irresistible demands of public safety, and to vindicate the just rights of the empire committed to my care against those who, in a moment of its greatest peril, were en- gaged in hostile confederacy to destroy it, I have no doubts, but that upon a fair review of all the existing circumstances, and the means of information then before me, no lavish or im- proper expenditure of public money will be found to have taken place in respecl to the contracts formed during my administration. For the prudence and success of the regulations adopted and pursued in respeci to the controul and management of the public revenue, I trust I may be allowed to appeal to the flourishing con- dition which the Company's provinces enjoyed during the period of my government, and which has been, from the continued operation of the same cause, in a course of progressive improve- ment to the present hour. G c 2 I know (45*) I know that your Lordships will, in your own en-, lightened and impartial wisdom, justly estimate the difficulties by which I was surrounded, during a long and arduous period of public service ; that you will allow for all the embarrassments arising from the long counteraction of my associates in the government; for errors resulting from the honest imperfection of my own judgment, from occasional deference to the counsels of others^ and from the varying sense of expediency which at different periods governed my own. Your Lordships well know, that the imperious exigencies of public affairs often present to the servants of the state no alternative but the painful choice of contending evils. The transcendent and peremptory daty of my situation, was to devise and to procure the neces- sary means of public safety. Feeling, as I dic|, the exigencies of the government as my own, and every pressure upon them resting with equal weight upon my mind; besieged, as at some times I was, by the hourly and clamorous impor- tunities of every department of the military ser- vice; goaded at others with the cries of our then famished settlements on the coast of Coromandel should I have deserved well, I do not say of my country, but of the common cause of suffering humanity, if I had punctiliously stood aloof from those means of supply, which gratitude or expecta- tion ( 453 ) lion enabled me to appropriate to the instant re- lief of such distresses ? The whole tenor-and conduft of my public life is now, my Lords, before you : it has undergone a scrutiny of such extent and severity, as can find no parallel in former times, and, I trust, will, in many of the peculiar circumstances which have characterized and distinguished this trial, leave no example to the future. My Lords, I have now performed the most so- lemn duty of my life, and with this I close my de- fence. I may now, I trust, assuredly consider my self as arrived at the threshold of my deliverance ; at that period, when no delay or procrastination can pre- vent thfr speedy and final termination of the pro- ceedings now depending before your Lordships. After such recent and acceptable proof on the part of your Lordships, of your earnest disposition to accelerate the conclusion of this trial, it would betray an unwarranted and unbecoming distrust of your justice, to offer any request to your Lord- ships on this subject, had I not other causes of apprehension. At this momentous and awful crisis, ignorant of what may be in the minds of others, I am compelled to obviate every possible, even though improbable, danger. In the short address which I made to your Lord- $hips on Friday last, I stated, that I should wave the (454 ) the observations of my counsel on the evidence of the article then before the Court, and both the opening and application of the evidence on the next; and that I made these sacrifices, well aware of their importance, for the express purpose of affording ample time to my prosecutors, during what remained of the probable term of this ses- sion, to make their reply. If the Managers for the Commons-had been equally desirous of accelerating the close of this trial, and I had a right to suppose that they were so, from their repeated declarations to that cffeft, what I had said might have been construed an otter of mutual accommodation; but, my Lords, it was received with resentment, and answered with re- proach, and worse insinuation. What other conclusion can I put upon this con- duel, but that which is conveyed to my ears from every quarter ; that they mean to endeavour to prevail on your Lordships to adjourn over this trial to its seventh year, that one more may be given them to prepare their replies. I do not know that this is their intention; but I may be allowed to suppose it; and though impressed with the firmest confidence of the just and favourable disposition of your Lordships, I cannot but dread the event of a question in which my rights may be at issue, with such opponents as the Managers of this pro- secution, speaking in the name of the House of Com- ( 455 ) Commons, and of all the Commons of Great Bri- tain. To meet such an attempt, if made, I humbly offer to your Lordships the "following arguments most anxiously recommending them to your con- sideration. In an address to a Court of British Peers, I cannot offend by pleading the rights which I pos- sess as a British subjearights, which are assured to me in common with all my fellow-subjects of this realm, by the pledges of ancient charters, and the sanaion of an oath, the most solemn that can be tendered, or taken by man. My Lords, I claim the performance of that sacred promise, in all its implied obligations, that justice be administered to me, and that it be administered now. In the long period of another year, I may be numbered with those of my Noble Judges whom I have, with sorrow, seen drop off year after year, and in aggravation of the loss which I have sus- tained by their deaths, I may thus lose the judg- ment of their survivors by my own. To the precepts and sanctions of the law, I join the rights which are derived from the practice of it. In the other courts of this kingdom their cri- minal process is limited in its duration, by express and positive regulations. On this High Co x urt, charged with other various H H and C 456 ) and important duties, the wisdom of our ancestors has imposed no restraint, but the rule of honour j and to that honour I make this, my last, appeal ; humbly praying, that if in the course of this hard, and long extended trial, I have conduced myself with the most patient and respe&ful submission, and borne all the aggravating circumstances of it with a tranquillity of mind, which nothing but a consciousness of integrity, and an equal re- liance on your ultimate justice could have sup- ported, I may obtain from your Lordships this only grace, that your Lordships will or- der the trial, now past its legal process, to con- tinue to its final conclusion during the present session. After Mr. Hastings had finished, both Mr. Fox and Mr. Burke remarked upon the very great freedom which he had taken with the Managers, and solemnly denied that they had the least wish for a further delay of this most enormously long trial ; and that no part of the delay could fairly be attributed to them. Mr. Fox felt the charge so strongly, that he said he should ap- peal to fads, to shew that the Managers were not to blame; so that we may hope that it will not be deemed libellous, if a friend to the freedom of the press should meet Mr. Fox openly and fairly on this ground. SEVENTH ( 457 ) SEVENTH YEAR, 1794. ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-FIRST DAY*, February 13. THE Court being assembled this day at half past twelve o'clock, Lord Kenyon sitting for the Lord Chancellor, as he was indisposed ; after the customary formalities, Mr. Law rose, and said, that in the hope of bringing this tedious trial to a close in the last year, Mr. Hastings had very much shortened his defence, but he had been disappointed, and that the trial had been adjourn- ed over to this year, even before the Managers had commenced their reply. Whatever reason he had had at the time to complain of the delay, it was in one respeft highly fortunate to him, as it had enabled him to have the benefit of the evi- dence of the noble Marquis, who was so lately returned from Bengal, after ating with so much tredit to himself, and so much advantage to the public in the situation which Mr. Hastings had so * We begin this year with the just day, because that day is marked on the tickets. The Court was appointed for some days, when it did net meet, or if it did meet, wheu no business was done. H H a long ( 458 ) so long held. But, as he understood his Lord- ship would not be able to attend in his place for some days, he now laid in his claim to examine him as soon as he had taken his seat in the House. Mr. Grey said, that without admitting what the learned counsel had contended for, a right in the defendant to examine the Marquis Cornwallis, he was very ready to declare that the Managers would give their assent to the examination of his Lordship, and they would go further, however favourable the noble Marquis's evidence might be, he could only speak to the general character which the defendant bore in India, and to the general success of his measures, but there was another gentleman, Mr. Larkins, who had for many years been confidentially employed by Mr. Hastings, and they had no objection to his being called also. Mr. Law rose again, and said that he disclaim- ed every idea of receiving as an indulgence the evidence of Lord Cornwallis, that the Managers not having commenced their reply, and it being known that Mr. Hastings closed his defence last year in the manner he had done, was with a hope of bringing in that year this intolerably tedious trial to a close, he claimed it as a right to examine the noble Marquis, whose testimony he conceived would ( 459 ) would be extremely importan ; but with his evi- dence Mr. Hastings would close his case. Mr. Grey declined opening the reply until Lord Cornwallis had been examined, and the Court adjourned to Wednesday the igth inftant, and afterwards to Tuesday the 25th. OtfE HUNDRED AND TWENTY- SECOND DAY, February 25. The Court met this day at half past one, when the Lord Chancellor informed the Managers that Mr. Hastings, owing to the continued indisposi- tion of the Marquis Cornwallis, had waved the privilege of calling his Lordship. The Managers would therefore proceed in their reply. Mr. Grey immediately rose, and said, that as they had already consented to the calling of Lord Cornwallis, so they were willing still to allow Mr. Hastings the benefit of that examination, if his Lordship should be well enough to be examined before the Managers had completed their reply. Mr. Grey said they had also offered another evidence, Mr. Larkins, whom Mr. Hastings'* counsel might call, if they pleased. That this H H 3 gentleman gentleman was in India during the whole of Mr Hastings's administration, whereas Lord Corn- wallis could only speak as to the general efikft of his measures, and his general character throughout the country. Mr. Law, in reply to Mr. Grey, said, that he disclaimed every idea of receiving from the Managers any indulgence as to the intended exa- mination of the Marquis Cornwallis. TIMI as soon as his client had heard of the arrival of ilat noble person in England, he had expressed aoi anxious wish to have the benefit of his evidence on many most essential and important points. That with the hope of obtaining it, their Lord- ships had made two adjournments of the Court a favor from their Lordships which Mr. Hastings would ever hold in grateful remembrance; but as, from the precarious state of Lord Cornwallis's health, it was uncertain at what period he would be enabled to attend in the Court, Mr. Hastings was reduced to the painful necessity of a protrac- tion to an eighth year of a trial which was now in its seventh year, or of giving up the advantage which he was confident he would receive from the testimony of the noble Marquis. In this situation, the anxiety of Mr. Hastings to bring this long depending trial to a close, and his con- fidence that he had already laid ample testimony before their Lordships, as to the important ad- vantage* ( 4 6i ) vantages derived by the public from his success- ful exertions in India, and his evidence on every material head of the accusation that had been preferred against him by a fortR^r House of Com- mons, had induced him now to declare that his evidence was closed : That he did so with pain, he confessed; but he did not do it while a hope remained that the state of Lord Cornwallis's health would allow him to appear at any definite period, so as to allow of time sufficient to close the trial in this year. Mr. Grey then proceeded to state that as Mr. Law did not mean to accept their offer of calling Mr. Larkins, the Managers would do it in the course of their evidence in the reply. He then read some documents, and proposed to call Mr. Francis. That gentleman accordingly entered the box, and Mr. Grey said, that as the council had affirmed that Mr. Francis had approved of the extra demand made upon Cheyt Sing, they would shew that in conversation at the Council he had mentioned his disapprobation of that measure. The question was, therefore, put to Mr. Francis whether any thing had passed in debate on the subject on the gth of July, 1778 and whether he had approved of that measure ? To this question Mr. Law pointedly objected, as leading in its consequences to another seven H B 4 years years trial. That if the Managers were compe- tent now to give evidence, which they might have given seven years ago, the life of man would not be of length cngaigh for the close of this trial. The law of evidence, he said, was so clear that no doubt could remain on the subject. Mr. Fox and Mr. Grey replied, and contended, that as the council had laid a stress on Mr. Fran- cis's consent to the demands that were made on Cheyt Sing, they had a right to shew the nature of the debate that took place when the demand was made. Mr. Fox said, he lamented as much any man could do the enormous length of this trial, but he affirmed that the fault lay neither with the House of Commons nor the Managers. To this speech, Mr. Plumer made a full and most able reply. He denied that, under any pos- sible circumstances, the Managers could be eiu titled to examine Mr. Francis. The evidence adduced was brought by the Managers themselves. Mr. Plumer went through the different years, and referred to the pages in the evidence ; by which it appeared, that when the war broke out Mr. Hastings proposed, on the gth of July, 1778, to call on Cheyt Sing to contribute his proportion to the expence of it. That Mr. Francis agreed, though he expressed some doubts as as to the right. That Mr. Hastings was convinced of his having the right, inherent in every state, to call upon the subjects in cases of emergency to contribute to the defence of the state: but that if the right was not clear the Company would determine it. That in the next year, 1779. Mr. Francis agreed to the demand without any reser- vation. That in the next year, 1780, he also agreed; that he further agreed, to demand the assistance of a corps of cavalry from Cheyt Sing, for the service of the war. That Cheyt Sing Jaaving demurred to the payment of the subsidy in 1780, Mr. Hastings proposed to fine him for his disobedience. To this Mr. Francis also agreed, though pro- fessing a hope that the threat would be sufficient. All these fatts, said Mr. Plumer, were given by the Managers themselves in evidence, and surely the counsel had a right to avail themselves of them in argument ; nor had they stopped there, they hoped they had stated what had a considerable effecl; on their Lordships and the public, and they saw where it pinched the Managers. Mr. Hast- ings was prosecuted for measures in which Mr. Francis had concurred, which neither the Direc- tors nor the King's Miniflers had disapproved, of which the public had received the benefit, and do still receive in the receipt of an additional reve- pue of two hundred thousand pounds a-ycar. On (464) On all these grounds, Mr. Plumer deniH that there was any thing like a reason to justify the demand of the Managers, and that if it were not resisted, the trial would be perpetual. Mr. Grey again expressed his anxious wish for a very early end to so tedious a tiial that the public expefted, and the Managers anxiously wished it. Some time was spent in framing the question, and just as it was about to be put Mr. Burke rose, though he said there was no necessity for him to rise, his respeftable fellow Manager having said all that was necessary, but as he had seen, by the arguments of this day, the use that had been made of the word acqui- escence, he rose to declare that he did not acqui- esce in any of the arguments used by Mr. Hastings's counsel, nor in any of the rules of law they had adduced: as to rules of law and evidence, he did not know what they meant : he and his friends had searched for them in vain ; that the character that properly belonged to a Member of the House of Commons was that of a plain, igno- rant layman; that it was true something had been written on the Law of Evidence, but very gene- ral, very abstract, and comprised in so small a compass, that a parrot that he had known might get them by rote in one half hour, and repeat them in five minutes. These rules, such as they were, might might serve for rules to the Courts below, but vere not to shackle the House of Commons, nor that High Court, who in their great national prosecutions claimed a right to obtain by whatever means they could acquire it, an entirety of their evidence. Unlearned laymen, as they were, they could produce, in support of their right to exa- mine Mr. Francis, precedents from trials by Im- peachment. Mr, Burke continued to speak for a consider- able time to the same effeft. After some further discussion, the Lords ad- journed, put the question to the Judges, and meet again on Thursday. The most remarkable circumstance of the day was, the declaration of Mr. Fox, that the delay which he allowed to be most grievous, was not the fault of the House of Commons, nor of the Managers. Of delay, no man accuses the present House of Commons but that the delay in this article was occasioned by the last House of Commons, is a faft that cannot admit of a doubt; because it is well known that to this hour no man knows wh it the opinion of the last House was upon this very article. Mr. Grey has invariably argued, that the crime of Mr. Hastings was in demanding a subsidy from Cheyt Sing, "which he had no right to f 466 ) to demand; and he deduces all the subsequent afts from this original crime. Here Mr. Grey speaks intelligibly at least Mr. Pitt has invari- ably affirmed that Mr. Hastings had a right to make that demand; that Cheyt Sing was criminal in resisting it; that he deserved punishment; but that Mr. Hastings's crime was in pro- posing to fine Cheyt Sing in the sum of fifty lacks of rupees, a fine beyond the offence. Now is there any one man in this kingdom who will agree with Mr. Fox, that it was not a fault in the last House of Commons, to send so material an article to the House of Lords without coming to a specific vote on the various allega- tions in it? The probability is, that if Mr. Pitt's avowed opinion had ever been put into the form of a question, he would have left the Managers in a minority, and then the Benares article could not have taken three days to try. The nation vould have saved the many thousand pounds that the prosecution of this article has cost them, and the trial might have been over long ago. The fads we state are of universal notoriety, and as often as they occur to honourable men, must strike them with astonishment. They were fully detailed by the counsel of Mr. Hastings, one of whom said, with great propriety, that if Mr. Hastings were guilty, the bar that inclosed him should should be taken down, and the space enlarged so as to take in the Court of Dire&ors, the Board of Controul, the King's Ministers, and Parlia- ment itself, \vhich had taken all that Mr. Hast- ings had acquired, and had loudly boasted of the value of the acquisition. Whatever delay may now be occasioned by settling the principle on which evidence can be produced in reply, we trust it will have the effe6t when the rule is estab- lished, of bringing to a very speedy close, a trial, the end of which all parties seem anxiously to look for. The Managers complain of the delay Mr. Hastings remonstrates and the Treasury, alarmed at the enormity of the demands made upon it for the expences of this trial, has lately sent the Solicitor's bills to two Masters in Chan- cery, and one of the Clerks of the House of Commons to be examined. We may venture to say that one hundred thousand pounds will not defray all the expence that the nation has been put to by the trial. Surely, then, it is time to bring it to a close, even if no consideration were due to a man who has received the thanks of his constituents, with the complete approbation of the King's Minifters, for his long, faithful, and im- portant services, and of whose merits there is hardly a dissenting opinion. ONE ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-THIRD DAY t February 27, The Court assembled this morning at half past one, when the Lord Chancellor informed the Managers that the question proposed to Mr. Francis could not be put. Upon this, Mn Burke immediately rose, and made a very long and vio- lent speech, in which he lamented that the Mana- ge*^ were ignorant of the principles on which so precipitate a determination was founded. That his respeft to the Court forbad him to think what he otherwise would, namely, that to allow them to put the firft question and to refuse the second, was a fraud and a cheat. That many calumnies had been spread abroad, accusing the Managers of being the cause of delay by their repeated at- tempts to introduce improper evidence, but that these and all other calumnies should be cleared up, and his character, and that of his fellow Managers should go down pure to posterity. After continuing for some time, he was called to order by the arl of Radnor, who begged the learned (469 ) learned Lord on the woolsack to stop so irregular a proceeding, and that the trial might be allowed to proceed. Mr. Burke replied, that any thing he could do with regularity he would not do irre- gularly, He then referred to the printed trials of the Earl of Stafford, in the reign of Charles the First of Lord Viscount Stafford, in the reign of Charles the Second and of the Earl of Maccles>- field, in the reign of George the First. He said, that in all these trials the Managers for the Com- mons contended that they had a right to ftrengthen their case in reply, by supplemental proof, and that, in faft, no rules by which inferior Courts were bound ever had, or ever ought to bind the Lords and Commons, and in a trial by impeach- ment the Court had no guide, but its own difcretion*. Mr. Burke then called Mr. Francis, and * It is to the honour of the Lords, that they reprobate by their practice, this dangerous do&rine. " To leave it in the breast of the Judge (says Mr. Fearne) to relax, or supersede general restrictions and rules, whenever he shall think particular cases not within the reason of them, may, perhaps, by some be thought a more im- portant absurdity, and a matter of greater mischief in its tendency and consequences, than that which is intended to be obviated by it j for this is in fact, making the discretion of the Judge, the only law in such cases an error, which our forefathers seem to have been illiberally studious to keep clear of For their creed seems to have been, what I have read, expressed in so much energy of terms, by a great Judge even of these times. The discretion of a Judge is the law f 470 ) and asked him whether it was in his power, at any time during his refidence at Bengal, to put an end to the demand of subsidy made upon Cheyt Sing during war? To this question Mr. Law objected, and with much feeling faid, he would not add ta a delay which was intolerable, by offerng a single argument, to shew that consistent wiih law and justice, no such question could be put in this stage of the trial. Mr. Fox, Mr. Burke, and Mr. Grey defended the propriety of this question, by repeating at very great length the arguments they had urged before, and Mr. Burke again affirming that no rules were to bind the House of Commons; but that under the title of supplemental proof, they had a right to ftrengthen their original case. He denied the soundness of the doclrine supported on the last day by the Counsel of Mr. Hastings, and added, that such a doftrine would be a complete cover *lut. Much more was urged, and Earl Stanhope twice attempted to shorten the discussion, though in vain. law of Tyrants 5 it is always unknown , it is d.fferent in different men } it is casual, and depends upon constitution, temper, and passion ; in the best, it is oftentimes caprice } in the worst, it is every vice, folly, and passion, to which human nature is liable." Vide Fcarne on Contingent Remainders, p. 4 t 8 and 429, 3 d edit, and Lord Camden's Argument in Doe v. Kerwy, Batter, c Gcorw III. 1675. * The ( 469 ) The Lord Chancellor applied to Mr. Law again, to know if he had any observations to make ? who answered, that he had none ; that this queftion came completely within the rules already laid down by their Lordships, and that this day, like the last, had been lifelessly wasted; that he owed too much to his client, and to their Lordships, to offer a single argument in reply to all that had been asserted. After this question was put, and when the Lords were about to adjourn to the Chamber of Parliament, Mr. Hastings rose, and said, he earnestly intreated their Lordships to address a few words to them ; that he had put his thoughts on paper just as he was coming down to-day, and had made a small addition, in consequence of what he had heard on this day. Leave being .very readily granted, Mr. Hastings addressed the Lords as follows: " In the Petition which a noble Lord (Lord Hawkefbury) had the goodness to present to your Lordships for me on Monday last, I informed your Lordships that I should forego the benefit -which I had hoped to derive from the testimony of Marquis Cornwallis, whose ill state of health might probably difable him from attending to deliver it, without the loss of so much time that might involve me in the peril of seeing my trial i i adjourned (47) adjourned over to another year; and I prayed your Lordships therefore to order that the trial should proceed, and with that degree of acceleration and dispatch which a due regard to the general rights of justice, and the sufferings of an indivi- dual, now in the seventh year of his trial, might induce your Lordships to adopt. " The immediate cause of my troubling your Lordships with that Address was a report convey- ed to me, that your Lordships had been pleased, in consideration of the noble Marquis's illness, to adjourn the trial, which stood ibr Monday last, to the following day, for the purpose of allowing me to make my option in the mean time, and to signify it to your Lordships, either that the pro- ceedings in the trial should be stopped until the noble Marquis's health should be sufficiently re- stored to enable him to attend in his place, or that it should proceed without it. " My Lords, if this information had been given to me on grounds of certain authority, J should not trouble your Lordships at this time, but rely with implicit confidence on such a pledge as it would be criminal to distrust; since it is impossi- ble to admit, for an instant, the suppsition that your Lordships would offer me an alternative which included so great a sacrifice, with- out (47* ) t>ut the most absolute determination to fulfil the condition of it. " But, my Lords, I neither know the terms on which that declaration of your Lordships was made, nor with certainty do I know that it was made at all; and when I see the time so very near in which it has been annually customary for your Lordships to adjourn the trial for many weeks, to allow for the absence of the Judges on their circuits, I cannot but feel the greatest alarm lest the same obstruction should be given to the trial even in this period of it, when the evidence on the part of the prosecution, and that of the defence, have been finally and declaredly closed, and almost a whole year elapsed, since the close of the latter. " My Lords, I beg leave to remind you of the great sacrifices which I have made to cut off all possible cause of delay ; that I put my defence on two charges almost wholly to issue on the evidence adduced by my prosecutors, and I gave up the pleadings of my able advocates on both. Thi* year, it is known to your Lordships with what earnestness and anxiety my Counsel solicited your Lordship's permission to call upon the House of Commons for his evidence, and that I have de- parted from the whole tenor of my conduci, by being myself the mover of delay to obtain it. Of 11* these ( 47* ) these delays, and these only, I am the cause, and I thank your Lordships for admitting them. My appeal to the noble Marquis was not made on slight grounds. When I first notified to him my intention of calling for his evidence, I had never had any communication with him respecting the subject. But I knew what was the truth, and I was confident he would declare it. I knew his heart and mind I knew myself, and I therefore knew with the most absolute certainty what his testimony would be. Yet I have made this great sacrifice added to the past And surely, my Lords, I am not un- reasonable in exacting this only requital, that my trial may suffer no further delay. ' I do therefore most earnestly supplicate your Lordships to grant me the indulgence of a con- tinuation of your proceedings in this Court, with- out any adjournment for the Circuits, or any other delays than such as the business of Parliament may render unavoidable, and that you will have the goodness to afford me such an assurance of it, as shall immediately quiet my mind from its present apprehensions. "My Lords, do not think this request presump- tous, nor that it proceeds from an impertinent curiosity. My (473 ) My Lords, it has more ufgent motives, and pardon me if I once more repeat, as my plea for making it, that I arm now in the seventh year of my prosecution in this Court, which has never before suffered any trial, even of the most cri- minal nature, except in the times of originating disorder and rebellion, to exceed the period of twenty-two days. That as I have been already subjected to a prosecution which has now endured six years, I may not (if I may trust to my under- standing of all that I have heard this day) be the continued subject of k, during six years more." As soon as Mr. Hastings sat down Mr. Burke rose, and said., that Mr. Hastings had merely repeated what he had said five years before; that the delay was not imputable to the Managers, but to the Counsel of Mr. Hastings, who had objected to evidence, and .that in this instance Mr. Hast- ings allowed himself to be the author of the delay. It was very true that the Prisoner had been six years before the Court, but he had no right to complain on that account had they not been em- ployed in considering his Crimes? Crimes that he had been committing for fourteen years ? Mr. Burke proceeded for some time longer in a similar strain, when Mr. Hastings rose, a,nd with a look in which indignation and contempt were strongly mixed, he said, " True, it is, my j i 3 Lords (474 ) Lords, as the Manager has said, thaj I did com, plain five years ago, when my trial was on the point of being adjourned, as it had then lasted longer than any other trial in this Court. I re- peated my complaint in every succeeding year, because every year was an aggravation of the hardship which I suffered. I complained of it, my Lords, as an abuse of justice, and I repeat, my Lords, that it was an abuse of justice, come from whom it may; but is it, my Lords, any ar- gument, that, because I have suffered a prosecu- tion of six years, I should endure it six years longer?" To this speech, Mr. Fox replied, that he most anxiously joined with Mr. Hastings, in entreat- ing the Lords to proceed with all possible expe- dition to the close of the trial. The Court adjourned, and meet again on Sa- turday. ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY- FOURTH DAY. March i. FOURTH DAY OF THIS YEAR. THE Court met this morning ten minutes be- fore two. The delay was occasioned, as we were informed. (475 ) informed, by the time taken up by the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, in deliver- ing the unanimous opinion of the Judges, on the last question referred to them, and by a most excellent and constitutional speech of the Lord Chancellor, who laid down with the utmost clear- ness and perspicuity the Law of Evidence, in reply, in criminal cases. His Lordship went at large into the several precedents quoted by Mr. 'Burke, and by reference to these cases, proved that they did not in any manner sustain the argu- ments offered by the manager. On the contrary, that in each instance the managers on those trials, had merely claimed what the Law allowed, aright to support their own witnesses, whose credibility had been impeached, and the right to reply to new matter offered by the several noble prisoners, whose cases were quoted. His Lordship con- cluded by moving, that the managers be inform- ed, that it was not competent to them to put the proposed question to Mr. Francis. On their Lordships assembling in Westminster Hall, the Chancellor declared this opinion. Mr. Burke said, that though the Commons submitted, they did not acquiesce in the determination of their Lordships. Mr. Grey seemed to be desirous of adhering very fairly to the rule laid down. He said, that 114 he he offered with some doubt a piece of evidence, which he thought material. The managers had, by mistake, given in a triplicate of a letter, in- stead of the original ; that to this triplicate the names of Mr. Hastings, Mr. Francis, and Mr. Wheeler were signed; that as the two latter formed a majority, the Counsel had argued that they had it in their power to revoke the demand of subsidy, had they thought it an improper one; but in truth and fal, the name of Mr. Barwell was signed to the original letter ; of course, if the fad were cleared up, the argument of the Counsel would fall to the ground. The Chancellor said, that this evidence was clearly inadmissible, and against the rules laid down by the Court; first, as tending to support their own evidence, and next, as it was not to rebut evidence, but argument. Mr. Law, how- ever, removed the difficulty, by saying he had not the least objection to the managers correcting their own mistake. This important point of evidence being settled, Mr. Grey said, that he would next propose to insert a Report of Mr. Duncan, the Resident at Benares, in 1788. The Counsel had cross-exa,. mined one of the manager's witnesses, who stated that the four hundred thousand pounds a-year, ike rent settled by Mr. Hastings, had been fully paid, I 477 ) paid, and that the country continued in a very flourishing state, well cultivated, and well peopled, during the whole of Mr. Hastings's administra- tion, and for two years after Mr. Markham had given similar evidence. The Counsel had also entered a Letter from Mr. Duncan, dated ia 1790, who stated that the country was then very flourishing, and paid the full rent which Mr. Hastings had settled. The managers, therefore, proposed to read another letter from Mr. Dun- can, dated in 1788, by which it would appear, that at that time parts of the country had fallen into decay, and were recovered by the exertions of Mr. Duncan. This evidence was admitted. and Mr. Burke chose to read detached extracts from it, with a view of shewing, that Mr. Duncan had been told, that certain parts of the Province of Benares had been badly cultivated since the expulsion of Cheyt Sing; and that above one lack of Rupees of additional Revenue had been imposed upon the Province by the present Rajah. To save time, Mr. Law was content that this report, which is of great length, should be en- tered as read; but to this, Mr. Burke objected, saying, that he wished to select certain passages, because if they were ^then read, their Lordships must hear them ; whereas if they were only entered on the minutes, they never might read them at 2 all. aH. A sentiment more extraordinary, undoubt- edly, than is to be found, even in all the works of Thomas Paine. Mr. Burke has been the pro- fessed champion of the Aristocracy of Great- Britain ; but in this single sentence he has said more to degrade it, in the opinion of the world, than any democratic writer could possibly do. We are confident, however, that every tittle of the evidence will be carefully read, and maturely weighed by every noble Lord, who commits his conscience and his honour to the issue, in this important cause. Mr. Grey next proposed to read a letter from Mr. Hastings to Lord Macartney, dated in July, 1781. It was not very easy to comprehend the drift of Mr. Grey in producing this evidence. He said that it was to shew that there were other modes by which the distresses of the Carnatic might be relieved in 1781, better than by extort- ing money from Cheyt Sing. Theextracl proved, that in the opinion of Mr. Hastings, the Madras Government had a6led wrong in not compelling the Rajah of Tangore to contribute largely to the support of the War in which the Sovereign State was engaged, and he advised Lord Macart- ney to furnish military stores and provisions, in future, to the utmost extent that the country could afford. Mr. Grey next wanted to prove, that ( 479 ) that the Directors disapproved this advice. The latter evidence was rejected. The last piece of evidence was so singular in its nature, and gave rise to so very animated a discussion, that we shall open it a little more at large than Mr. Grey did. The account of Cheyt Sing's expulsion arrived in England in the early days of the Rockingham administration. It is well known that that minis- try were anxious to seize any pretence to recal Mr. Hastings from Bengal a seleft committee, pf which Mr. Burke was the real leader, made a special report to the House of Commons on that revolution. Cheyt Sing was elevated to the rank of a Prince, and his expulsion was one of the grounds stated for the recal of Mr. Hastings in Parliament. Mr. Gregory and Sir Henry Flet- cher were at that time the Chairman and Deputy and were afterwards nominated Commissioners under Mr. Fox's India Bill. Though these con- sistent gentlemen had known that Mr. Hastings, for three successive years had ordered Cheyt Sing to contribute 50,0x30!. a-year to the support of the War, and had never once disapproved of the subsidy, yet when the Rockingham adminis- tration took up the matter in Parliament, they passed a variety of Resolutions, condemning the conduft of Mr. Hastings. These Resolutions were ( 480 ) were violently opposed by many of the Directors, and ultimately carried by very small majorities. The Resolutions arrived at Bengal in February 1783, and appeared to Mr. Hastings to be so dangerous in their tendency, that he wrote on the 23d of March 1783, a very strong, and possi- bly, in some points, an intemperate remonstrance from a public servant to his Masters. It may be said in excuse for Mr. Hastings, that he supposed, as any man would do who had then read the Resolutions, that it was intended to follow them by an order for restoring Cheyt Sing. This letter arrived in England in the month of September 1783, when Mr. Fox and Mr. Burke were in office with the Coalition Ministry. Sir Henry Fletcher, and the Deputy, ordered a gentleman in the India House to prepare obser- vations upon this letter, which being approved by a majority of the Court of Directors, were pub- lished for the use of the Proprietors, in order to justify the Court from the suppossed imputations thrown upon them by their servant Mr. Hastings. These Observations were published on the day. or near it, that Mr. Fox moved for leave to bring in his India Bill, and were highly extolled by Mr. Burke in the speech that he made in support of that Bill. Mr. Mr. Grey to the utter astonishment of every man who is at all conversant with the subject, offered these Observations as evidence on the following ground; He said, that when Mr. Hastings arrived in England, in 1785, the Direc- tors had returned him their thanks for his long, faithful, and able services. That these thanka were in evidence, and therefore the managers wished to enter the Observations, in order to prove, that however the Directors might generally approve the conduftof Mr. Hastings, they disap- proved of it in this instance. The Counsel declared that the evidence -was utterly inadmissible. They opposed the intro- duction of it, because it was a mere Party Pam- phlet, published for Party Principles, -when the great body of the Proprietors were aftive in sup- port of Mr. Hastings; and the gentleman who produced it, was afting in concert with those who wished to annihilate the East India Company. That it was neither more nor less than a defama- tory libel, for which those who published it might have been liable to prosecution. Mr. Burke took fire at this expression : talked wildly of prostituted Criminals, and prostituted audacity; with many other very intemperate ex- pressions, which excited a general murmur of disapprobation 1 in the Court. While ( 483 ) While Mr. Burke was yet on hU legs, The Marquis Townshend spoke to order, H< said, that such expressions were highly improper j and such language was not to be endured. It re- mained yet to be proved whether Mr. Hastings was a criminal or not; that to apply such an epithet to a gentleman under trial was contrary to the principle and the practice of the Law of Eng- land, which presumed every man to be innocent until he was legally pronounced to be guilty. Mr. Burke rose again, and said, that he did not know the noble Lord who had called him to order. He then persisted in affirming, that the managers had a right to enter the observations, as containing the sentiments of the Court of Directors. Mr. Hastings rose, and begged to inform their Lordships, that the observations which the mana- gers wished to introduce had never been tran- smitted to him; that they appeared to be writu-n not for the purpose of condemning him, but of justifying the Directors; that he could venture to assure their Lordships it was the first and only instance of an appeal made by the Directors to the public, relative to their conduct to one of their own servants. Such observations as these he was confident their Lordships would not admit in their minutes. He begged to remind their 3 Lordships, Lordships, that he had been thirteen years at the head of the Government of Bengal. In so long a period many of his acts had been disapproved, as undoubtedly they must be ; but no argument could fairly be urged against him, on account of these partial censures, since, on his return to England, when he conceived that he had entirely closed his public life, he had received the unani- mous thanks of the Court of Directors, which certainly obliterated all partial censures. Mr. Burke rose as soon as Mr. Hastings had concluded, and, in a speech replete with violence and invective, contended, that those observations were proper to be received, because they were an answer to a letter which the prisoner had dared to write to the Directors his masters, and to print and publish in Calcutta. Mr. Hastings, with spirit and dignity, instantly rose, and said, " My Lords, I affirm that the assertion which your Lordships have just heard from the manager is false I never did print or publish any letter in Calcutta that I wrote to the Court of Directors. I knew my duty better. This assertion is a libel; it is of a piece with every thing that I have heard uttered since the commencement of this trial, by that authorised, licensed (and after a long pause, he added, turn- ing (484) ing to Mr. Burke with infinite contempt in his countenance) y 1 " death, or the variable accidents of life, be taken fro.n him be- " fore the time of his defence. That his health, which a Jong ic- I " lidence in an ungenial climate had impaired, has been precluded I " from receiving the only remedy which a foreign air could afford " for its reftorution, and the only palliative which a ft.ite of cafe *' could afford it at home ; his fortune waited in the cxpenccs una- " voidably incident to fo heavy a profrcution, and his }- i Ton thnilt " out from its place in common focicty ; with other fuffcrings which, " though moft lenfibly felt by him, may not be fpecificd in an ad- " drefs to your Lordftups. " And your Petitioner beys leave humbly to obfcrve to your " Lordfliips, that although the profecution has yet been clofed upon " two articles only of his impeachment, twenty articles were pic- " ferred again ft him by the Honourable Houfe of Commons, that " thefe comprijed in effect all the material tranfaflions, civil f " political, military, revenue, and financial of a Government " / thirteen years ; that a confidtrable portion of his time was a *' period of great difficulty t danger and embarraJJ'ment, to ei'erv " dependent} ( 487 ) the Lords conceiving it to be absolutely impossi- ble to go on without the Judges, adjourned the Court to Monday, the yth of April. It " dependency of the Britijb Empire, and more particularly to the " extenfive territories which were under ibe aflual government " of your petitioner, or 'which depends upon his exertions for " fubfiftence and relief-, that your petitioner was therefore under " the neceffity, through his Counfel and Solicitors, of colkaing " and collating, from the voluminous records of the Eaft India Company, the whole biftory of his public life, in order to form " a complete defence to every allegation which the Honourable " Houfc of Commons has preferred againfthim ; for your Petitioner >< had no% when your Lordfhips were pleafed to grant him a copy " of the articles, neither has he now, any means of knowing " whether any, or what articles, if any, were meant to be aban- " doned by the Honourable Houfe of Commons. That it was not " poifible for your Petitioner to be prepared with the necelTary ma- " tej-ials for fuch a defence, without incurring a very heavy and f intolerable expence, the fums which have been actually paid, and for which your Petitioner Jlands indebted, amounting, ac-' " cording to the moft accurate eftiraate which he could procure from * the beft authority, to upwards of thirty thouj and pounds. That ** this is a fubjeft of great and fcrious alarm to your Pelitioner, * who, in the in.Icfiaite prcfpea before him, fees h'imfelf, in dan- " ger of wanting the means of defence, and even of fubfillence, mould his life, which is not yet probable, be continued to thfc '< dole of a trial, in which fo fmdll a progrefs has yet been made, unlcfs your Lordihips' wifdom mail enable you to afford /our ' Petitioner that relief which he humbiy iblicits, an 1 confidently " hopes to receive : that.your Petitioner, with ail fincerity of hem, < craves leave to aflureyour Lordfhips that he does not prefu.ue to " ftatehisfenfe of the hard/hips to which he has been, and is fub- jefted by the paft events of the trial, as matters of complaint, l< being fully perfuaded that they were unavoidably incident to the K K 2 < peculiar ( 488 ) It is with much pleasure fre hear Mr. Burke* pledge himself to examine fully into the charge of delay, \vhich Mr. Hastings so often makes, and makes with so much juftice : we trust that he will allow the discussion to be fully gone into. He will be pleased to recollect, that he arraigned Mr. Hastings in the name of all the people of Great Britain, as far back as the month of May, 1787. That, independent of four eminent Law- yers, Sir Gilbert Elliot, Mr. Anstruther, Mr. Adam, and Mr. Michael Angelo Taylor, he mov- ed for two Solicitors, and he employed originally fix Counsel, viz. Sir William Scott, Dr. Law- rence, Mr. Pigot, Mr. Mansfield, Mr. Douglas, and his own brother, Mr. Richard Burke. " peculiar nature of fuch a trial, and to the peculiar cbaracJer ar.d circumflancfs of the charge lubicb iuat the Jubjefl of it. That " he has ftated them with no other motive or view than to obtain " from your Lordfliips a deliverance from the dreadful chance of his " character being tranfmitted on the records of your Lordftiips high " and auguft Court, blafted ivitb unrefuted criminations, and an " acceleration of the time in which he may he enabled to make " his innocence, his integrity, and (may he be permitted in all hu- " mility to add) bit deferts apparent to. your Lordftiips. " Your Petitioner therefore mod humbly prays, that your " Lordfliips will be pleafcd to order that the trial may pro. " ceed, according to your Lordfhips order upon the laft ad- " journment, and that it may be continued to its clofe, (if " it be pofllble) without interruption. 3 J On the 22d of May 1782, Mr. Hastings sent 4 letter to the Diretlors, informing them that h, had received one hundred and ninety thousand pounds sterling, privately, which he had carried 10 the Compapy's account, *nd that he had received these sums at the time the Company very much Canted them, and that the whole had been applied to the public service. That if the Diredors wished for further infor- mation he was ready to answer upon honour or upon oath to any questions that should be put to him. The Diredors, in reply to this letter, d to know at what periods the several sums were re- ceived. This letter Mr. Hastings answered from Chel tenham, and said, that if they required further in formation, Mr. Larkins would give it to them - who, he believed, possessed the only copy of the paper he ever possessed. Mr. Hastings wrote to Mr. Lark.ns, who sent the account hon.c, which has occasioned so much enquiry. It appears upon the evidence,- that of this one hundred and ninety thousand pounds, one hun- dred and fif t y. five thousand is SQ emered thc Public Accounts at the time, as to leave it out of all doubt, that it was really and truly Public Money. But But as Bonds were taken in the name of Mr. Hastings, for 35,000!. in Nov. 1780, and in Jan. 1 781, and as those bonds were not indorsed until the 29th of May, 1782, the argument has been, that in that period Mr. Hastings meant to keep to himfelf that 35,000!. Mr. Hastings, from a most thorough conviction in his own mind, that Mr. Larkins knew the Bonds not to have been his property in 1781 ; and fur- ther being convinced that a declaration upon each Bond, declaring it not to be his property, was written in July 1781, desired Mr. Larkins to trans- mit the Bonds to the Company, in order, by their appearance, to verify his assertion. Mr. Larkins made a public application to Lord Cornwallis, desiring that these Bonds might be sent to the Company. He said, he made this ap- plication at the desire of Mr. Hastings, transmit- ted to him by Major Scott. The Bonds arrived, and, instead of bearing date in July 1781, the de- claration at the back of each is dated on the 2gth of May 1782. Here then, is the whole case, in which so much time has been spent. Mr. Has- tings eagerly furnished the evidence, to prove his own mistake, a strong proof, however, that he thought he was correct. The next point is the Paper transmitted to the Directors, at the express desire of Mr. Hastings, from an anxiety to give the fullest answers to the ques- ) questions put to him, as to the period when the several sums were received. This account was immediately sent by Mr. Lar- kins to the Directors ; it arrived in April 1787, and the following facts appear from it : i st. That two lacks of rupees were paid by Gunga Gavind Sing into the Treasury, from Di- nagopore ; and that a balance of one lack remain- ed in the hands of Gunga Gavind Sing. zd. That two lacks were received from Patna, and paid into the Treafury, as public money. 3rf. That one lack and a half was received from Nuddca, and paid into the Treasury. For the first and the last sums, bonds were ta- ken in the name of Mr. Hastings, whose private property they appeared to be, until he voluntarily declared that thefe bonds were not his property, and that he had no right nor title to them. If therefore the changes were to be rung upon this subjea for seven years longer, until One Hundred Thousand Pounds more are expended, we must still come back to the same point. That of the money received by Gunga Gavind Sing, he has not accounted for one lack ; and that Mr. Lar- kins does not recollca his being informed that the three bonds given to Mr. Mailings in 1781 were for money the property of the Company prior to the 22dMay 1782. These ( 5*3 ) These are the only two points that Mr. Lar- kins' evidence or his letter have a reference to at all, though he has been examined so many hours in two days. It is very material for those who feel an interest in this, as the most remarkable cause that ever was undertaken in a civilized country, to notice, that when the Counsel opposed the examination of Mr. Larkins, Mr. Burke boldly said, that if he were called, the Commons would prove by his teftimony a system of swindling, cheating, thieving, &c. Sec. Mr. Burke on this day changed his tone, and now merely professed to prove that Mr. Larkins was not privy to the receipt of thirty-five thousand pounds, out of one hundred and thirty thousand pounds, so easy as Mr. Hastings had supposed him to be acquainted with it. This point, and the information's to the jewels supposed to be given to Mr. Wheler, are the only two circumstances which this great examination has produced. To one of the questions put by Mr. Burke, Mr. Law objected in a very pointed manner, as being merely a repetition of what had been so often ask- ed before. Mr. Burke, in reply said, that the Counsel objected becaufe the answer would dam- nify their Client ; that they already had expe- rience enough on this trial, to know, that any at- tempt to controul the Managers, only tended to waste ( 5'4 ) waste time on Speeches; for that the Manager?, would have their way. Mr. Law,with great feeling, and with much con- tempt of the remark, said, that their Lordship* knew he had no motive whatever, but to endea- vour, by confining the Managers to some sort of rule, to bring this Trial to a closeMn this year. Mr. Hastings, when Mr. Law sat down, rose, and said, he wished to be heard for a few mo- ments To the question then put by the Mana- gers, or to any question of any kind that they might put in future, neither he nor his Counsel would object, provided their Lordships would sit, and close the Trial this year. Surely, as an Eng- lishman, and claiming the Rights of a British Sub- ject, this was not too much for him to a.sk. If their Lordships would only sit on this day and to- morrow, to finish this evidence ; and if they would afterwarcjs sit to finifh this Trial, now in the Seventh Year of it, in this Session, the Manager had his full permission to say what he pleased, and to ask what questions he pleased, no one would interrupt him. Mr. Hastings then, in a style of natural elo- quence which no studied speech could equal, said, as nearly as we can recolleft, as follows : "My Lords, I beg leave shortly to call to your recol- lection the sacrifices which I have made, merely to get ( 5'5 ) gt this eternal trial to an end. In the year 1791, now three years ago, I offered to wave my de- fence altogether, provided this Court would go to judgement on the case made by my Prosecutors. This was not agreed to. In the last year, 1793, the last Session, I gave up the advantage of the observations of my Counsel, in the evidence on one of the Articles, and waved both the opening and closing speeches of my Counsel on another Article, in order to leave time to the Managers to close their reply in the last session. Though three and twenty days were left to them for this pur- pose, they desired to postpone the reply to this session. Thus I lost the benefit of the observa- tions of my learned Friends, and was deprived ot" the purpose for which alone I gave them up. In this session, for the first time on this trial, I was the cause of delay. I wished to avail myself ot the advantage of Lord Cornwallis' testimony. His unexpccled illness occasioned two adjourn- ments of the Court; but when I found that it. would be uncertain at what period the Noble Mar - quis would be well enough to attend, I even waved the benefit of his testimony, that the trial might be accelerated. The desire of the Managers to intro- duce evidence which your Lordships would not admit, occasioned the adjournment for the Cir- cuits -, and in that period Lord Cornwallis re- covered. ( 5'6 ) covered. This was the only instance in which I delayed the Trial for a single moment. " The Managers then wished to call Mr. Lar- kins. My Counsel obje&ed, merely to avoid fur* thcr delay. To them I trusted the conduft of my cause I never instructed them to objeft to the calling of Mr. Larkins. They wished, as I do, that in some period of the life of man this cause should be brought to a close. Was it to be ex^. pefted, my Lords, after having made so many sa- crifices for the acceleration of this Trial, that I should consent to continue it to an indefinite pe- riod, to accommodate the Managers But when I heard him declare, that if Mr. Larkins was called, such a scene of fraud, deception, and iniquity would be discovered, that I should wish for moun- tains to cover me, (I think this was one of the strange expressions) I earnestly intreated my learn- ed Friend (Mr. Plumer) who sat next to me, to allow him at once to be called ; he thought the expressions of less consequence, and your Lord- ships determined that he could not be examined ; but my Counsel concurred with me in opinion, that the best way to counteract the insinuations of the Managers, was to consent to Mr. Larkins' appearance. He has now been two days before your Lordships, you have heard his testimony, and you see how much of the time has been wasted, by I By repealing the same questions to him so often over. I say, my Lords, that I will objed to no question that can be put, but surely I do not ask too much in return, when I request that you will suto-day and to-morrow, to close this examina- tion, so that a sufficient time may remain in this Session to bring this trial to a close that is all I am anxious about, and that secured neither I nor my Counsel will interrupt the Manager in any thing that he may say, however irregular it may be." This speech had a visible efFeSon all who heard it. Mr. Burke had begun a reply, but was desir- ed to proceed with his evidence, which he did, twice saying he had done, and twice rallying* again, but going back precisely to the questions that he had put on the last day the Court met. At length Mr. Burke said he had done, and then Mr. Dallas began his cross-examination ; the material answer to his question was, that every Rupee received hy Mr. Hastings had been ex- pended in the public service. All the Lords being gcftie, except five or six, the Marquis of Townshend Amoved to adjourn. The Court meets again on the 2 4 tb, the first day after the Easter adjournment, when, as we hear, the Lords determine to sit every da"y until this Trial i, closed. We think it extraordinary M M that, that, in a civilized country, a criminal Trial should have lasted seven years, at an expence to the na- tion of one hundred thousand pounds, and, to the individual, of a larger sum than ever was imposed upon any individual as a fine, except in the reign of Charles the Second. ONE HUNDRED AND TIVENTY-NINTH DAY. April 24. THE Court did not meet this day until the usual hour of two, when Mr. Dallas immediately proceeded in his cross-examination of Mr. Lark- ins, by which it appeared, that upon the bonds for three and a half lacks of rupees taken by Mr. Hastings in his own name, he never had received one rupee of interest. It further appeared, that though Mr. Larkins did not recolleQ being fully acquainted until the 22d of May, 1782, that these bonds were not the property of Mr. Hastings, but of the East-India Company, yet he thinks from circumstances, that he must have had some intimation upon the subject from Mr. Hastings, prior to that period, because the bonds were dated, two of them, ift and 2d of October, 1780, and the third on the 2$d of November 1780, of course one year's interest would become due upon them in (519) in Oaober and November 1781. As Mr. Has- tings was at that time up the country, and as Mr. Larkins had the charge of these bonds, he thought he could not have negleded to receive the interest upon them, unless he had received some directions on that head from Mr. Hastings. That no interest ever was received upon them, and that they never were entered upon the books of Mr. Hastings as his private property he was certain ; but he cannot swear positively to being fully acquainted with the transadion relative to these bonds prior to the 22d of May, 1782. In like manner the present received from Sadanund, the Buxey of Cheyt Sing, ftood upon the Company's books as the property of Mr. Hastings; but it was em- ployed in the public service, and Mr. Hastings lever made use of one rupee of it. That while these bonds, and this deposit, appeared apparently > belong to Mr.. Hastings, he was under the ne- cessity of borrowing money on his own private account from individuals, that necessity being created bv the readiness always shewn by Mr. Hastings assist those who wanted his assistance." that for the money so borrowed, he was obliged to pay an interest of 1O or 1 2 per cent, per annum, Which he would not have done had he conceived the three bonds in question, or the deposit, to be his own property. That Mr. Hastings was a man M M 2 known ( 5 20 ) known to be perfeaiy careless as to the ft ate of his own private fortune, and that it was with the greatest difficulty he (Mr. Larkins) could get Mr. Hastings to devote an hour to the consideration of the state of his private affairs, so very inatten- tive was he to every thing that concerned him- . self. Mr. Larkins said, that he believed he had the entire management of every thing that had a rela- tion to the private fortune of Mr. Hastings. That during the thirteen years in which Mr. Hast- ings was at the head of the government of India, he verily believed, that in no one instance, and he had full opportunities of making the observa- tion, had Mr. Hastings done any one aft, cither with an immediate or a remote view to his own personal advantage ; on the contrary, his known and fixed character was the very opposite to that which had been imputed to him, namely, of a man venal, corrupt, and oppressive, who, in all his atls, looked only to the accumulation of exorbi- tant wealth the allegation in the charge preferred by the late House of Commons. Mr. Dallas closed his examination, by asking Mr. Larkins, if he was the Accountant General at the time when Lord Cornwallis described him as a man, whose knowledge, abilities, and ac- knowledged integrity, entitled every thing that came (5" ) came from him to the fullest consideration ? apologizing for the mode in which he put the question. Mr. Larkins answered, that he was. He asked him one question more, which was, Whether he was obliged to Mr. Hastings for the honourable station which he had so long filled in the Com- pany's service ? He replied, that he was not ; that he entered into the Accountant's Office as the youngest assistant, that he rose regularly in the same office, till he came to be the head of it, in which he was confirmed by the Directors, and did not deem himself at all obligated to Mr. Hastings V for his situation. This examination was completely finished in half an hour, when Mr. Burke began a cross-examination, which lasted until twenty minutes after five, and Mr. Burke convincing every person who heard him, that there was one cause of the duration of this trial, which the Ma- nagers had omitted to mention in their report He began by asking Mr. Larkins whether he had communicated with the Counsel of Mr. Hastings ? To which he replied, that he had ; that he avowed himself to be the friend of Mr. Hastings ; but friend as he was to him, he was what he had de- " scribed himself to Mr. Burke to be, magis arnica -uentas t and therefore, without any consideration how it might affel Mr. Hastings, he was ready M M 3 tO to answer any question that could be put to him. This he had said to Mr. Burke, in the committee of managers, and this he now repeated. Mr. Burke then went through a very long examination, treading over and over again the same ground that he had gone through before, and drawing from Mr. Larkins. a more complete confirmation of his former testimony, namely, that he the wit- ness was convinced of the purity of Mr. Hastings's intentions, of his perfect indifference to every personal consideration, and of his invariable at- tention to the welfare of the East India Company. It appeared also on his re-examination, that the letter written by Mr. Larkins to the Company, on which so many comments were made, was not in consequence of any application from the Com- pany to him, but at the requisition of Mr. Hast- ings ; that he had every reason to believe the in- formation which he had given was full and com- plete, because the Company never had called upon him for an explanation on any one of thofe points which now were said to have been so imperfectly stated. Mr. Burke rang the changes again and again upon the subject; and in one of the replies pf Mr. Larkins, he observed ' that the witness must not attempt to give so impudent an answer. At last the Lords began to grow impatient ; and on Mr. BurHe asking the witness to speak from ( 5 2 3 ) from memory to the contents of written papers, Lord Hawke and Lord Stanhope, both remon- strated. At this time there were not above thir- teen Lords present in the Court. Mr. Burke took fire, and after many personal allusions to the learning of the Lords, which appeared igno- rance to ignorant men, he repeated the following lines : " Turpe est difficiles, habere nugas, " Et stultus labor est ineptiarum." which may be truly translated, " You bafe fel- lows treat trifles as of importance, and like fools, you boggle at mere nonsense." How the ad- mirers of Martial have translated this passage we do not know. Mr. Burke continued the examination for two hours and a half, each answer bringing the points more clearly forward in favour of Mr. Hastings, as to those particular traits in his character which those who know him have described as the dis- tinguifhing features in it. At last Mr. Burke touched again upon the balance of the lack of rupees, which was said to be left in the hands of Gunga Gavind Sing, and which he pretended to have given in jewels to Mr. Wheler. Mr. Burke asked Mr. Larkins if he had had any conversation on this subj eel with Mr. Hastings since his arrival M M 4 in (5*4 ) in England? He said he had, and since he had been examined by the Managers That when he mentioned the circumstances to Mr. Hastings, he told him that he had not the slightest recollection of it, and could not think it possible he should have said so ; but on Mr. Larkins telling him that the fact, though happening so many years ago, was so strongly imprinted in his memory that he should be ready to swear to it before the Lords, Mr. Hastings replied to him, " Then, Larkins, it must be so." At length, after repeating again and again the questions which he had asked on the examination in chief, and going through all the bonds and all the presents, and asking whether Mr. Hastings might not have received larger sums, of which Mr. Larkins knew nothing? to which the answer was, he did not know what he might have receiv- ed, but that he did not believe he had received any other sums and asking Mr. Larkins from whom Mr. Hastings had borrowed \aiious sums and whether he had repaid those sums ? To which the most satisfactory answers were given Mr. Burke said he had done, and Mr. Dallas saying he had no further questions to ask, Mr. Larkins withdrew, after undergoing an examination of two very long days, in which he acquitted him- self highly to his own honour, and to that of Mi . Hastings'^ ( 525 ) Hastings's chara&er, in the fullest and the most complete manner ; for it will be recollected, that at the time it v/as a matter of doubt, whether, ac- cording to the Law of the Land, Mr. Larkins could be called. Mr. Burke affirmed unequivo- cally, that if that witness were examined, he would expose such a system of thieving, cheating, swind- ling, and robbery, that Mr. Hastings would wish for mountains to cover him, and that if he (Mr. Hastings) had ever shewn compassion to man, woman, or infant, Mr. Burke would pity him for objecting to the examination of Mr. Larkins. What is the result? As far as the evidence of a man can go, whom we may describe as covered over with the eulogiums of General Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis, Mr. Hastings, Sir John Macpherson, the Marquis Cornwallis and the Court of Directors, that evidence is most decidedly in favour of Mr. Hastings. He de- scribes him as a man wholly regardless of his own interest, and whose mind was occupied by an at- tention to the interest of his constituents. We trust we may now conclude the evidence upon this long and most expensive cause, as closed. That the Nation will cease to be called upon for thousands after thousands, in support of a prosecution of which every man is heartily sick. PO we want to know the result of the measures of (5*6) of Mr. Hastings ? Look at the amount of the re- sources Three millions sterling a year when he came to the Government Five millions two hun- dred thoufand pounds when he left it Five milli- ons five hundred thoufand pounds now. Do we want to know the character of Mr. Haftings, and the refpeft in which his name is held in India? Look at the evidence of the Marquis Cornwallis, Col. Blair, Col. Duff, Col. Popham, and of every gentleman who was examined. Look at the tes- timonials transmitted by the natives of India the addresses of the inhabitants of Calcutta the Officers of the army, and the thanks of the Di- reclors and Proprietors approved by the King's Miniflers, for his long, faithful, and able fervices. If we are told in reply, that his fervices were ac- cidental, but that his objeft was as ftated by the last Houfe of Commons, to acquire exorbitant wealth. Let us ask which one fa6l through the whole trial supports fuch a charge, and whether the evidence of Mr. Larkins does not totally do it away? After going through fuch an ordeal, Mr. Hastings may reft in security, his character is be- yond the reach of fate, for the world will always remember that Mr. Hastings was not arraigned for petty crimes, but that he was charged with every atrocity that can disgrace and degrade human nature. (5*7 ) nature. In the end, we trust it will appear, that Magna est veritas, et prevalent, a quotation at least as apt as Mr. Burke's, from Martial. ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTIETH DAY. April 25. THE Court did not meet this day until twenty minutes after two, although the Lord Chancellor was down by half past one. It was hoped and expecled that the Managers would have proceeded to deliver in what remained of their written evi- dence, and to make their speeches in reply, that the public and the defendant might see an end to this protracled and everlasting Trial; but, to the astonishment of every one, Mr. Burke began by saying, that he was going to open a new head of evidence, in order to convici Mr. Hastings of fraud, robbery, swindling, cheating, and forgery : That it was the more necessary to do so, because Mr. Larkins had attempted to palliate these crimes, by stating that Mr. Hastings was negligent, in- attentive, and laboured under a total want of memory. Mr. Law endeavoured, but in vain, to confine Mn Burke within reasonable bounds, but finding that ( 5*8 ) that each interruption only led to further di<; ons, he suffered him to proceed as he pleased, and, in a speech of one hour and eight minute*, Mr. Burke went into the explanation of the most singular evidence that ever was offered to be pro- duced in a Court of Justice. It \\ill tend to clear this case to our readers, perhaps, if we state what the cause was originally, and compare it with the grounds now taken. When the nation, eight sessions ago, agreed with its representatives to impeach Mr. Hastings, it was upon the idea, that through his measures the welfare of the natives of India had been ma- terially affecled, the revenues of the East India Company greatly diminished, and the British cha- rafter disgraced and degraded in the opinion of the whole world. No such opinions being fashion- able at present, a new ground was taken, and it was said that if Mr. Larkins could but be ex- amined, Mr. Hastings would appear in his true colours, and so apparent would be his guilt, that he would wish for mountains to cover him. Mr. Larkins has been examined fully and completely, and he is now out of fashion with Mr. Burke. The hero of this day is Rajah Nobkissen, whom Mr. Burke described as a Jew, a Banyan, and an Usurer that they had to produce from a man of this description, an allegation against Mr. Hast- ings, (5*9) ings, which must be true, because Mr. Hastings had refused to answer it. Mr. Burke then went through the case as it appeared on his own evidence: that Mr. Hast- ings had borrowed three lacks of rupees from Nobkissen, which he had afterwards given to the Company, Nobkissen having desired Mr. Hastings to accept it ; that Nobkissen had since applied to have this money again, finding that Mr. Hastings had not taken it to himself, but given it to the Company ; and in the course of his speech, he pitied the unfortunate situation of this banyan and usurer so much, that all the suf- fering millions in India, were for the time for- gotten. Mr. Burke contended, that the bill filed in the name of Nobkissen on this subjecl ought to be received as evidence, in order to introduce the answer given by Mr. Hastings, which was, that as an impeachment upon this very subject was depending, he declined giving any answer at all to the bill filed against him. Mr. Burke argued that the declining to give an answer was a con- fession of guilt. Mr. Law very fully answered the argument of Mr. Burke. He said, that the Manager's argu- ments tended to make a trial perpetual; that there must be some period for closing proceedings, but that ( 530 ) that in no stage of the trial could the evidence now offered be admissible. Mr, Fox and Mr. Angelo Taylor contended for its admissibility, and were most fully and ably replied to by Mr. Law, Mr. Plumer and Mr. Dallas. The latter Gentleman said, broadly, that he believed Nobkissen was induced to enter his bill four years after the commencement of the Impeachment, by the efforts of those who were friendly to the Impeachment ; and he said that under no possible circumstance could the evidence be at mitted. Mr. Law and Mr. Plumer reprobated the pre- cedent of Lord Stafford's trial, that it happened almost at the commencement of a rebellion, when the Court and the Judges were panic struck, but that in better times no such doctrines as were fup- ported in 1642 would be admitted. Mr. Burke began his reply, by complaining of the length of the speeches of the Counsel, though their four speeches lasted one hour and seven minutes, and Mr. Burke spoke, in his first speech, one hour and eight minutes. He then proceeded, in the strongest language, and with the utmost vehemence of manner, to contend for the admissi- bility of the evidence that he had offered. He said that he was addressing a body of Nobles, and he hoped they would ad like Nobles, and not as thieves (531 ) thieves in a night cellar ; that he could not sus- pect them of so foul a thing as to rejeft the evi- dence that he offered ; that the Law of Parlia- ment was distincl from the Law of the Land ; that the Judges had no right to guide the Lords, and he trusted they would at all times follow the ex- ample of the Judges who were in office during' the Trial of Lord Strafford. He closed at six o'clock, and the Lords adjourned, when, as we are informed, it was instantly determined that the evidence offered by Mr. Burke was inad- missible. It is impossible to consider the singular pro- ceedings of this day without reflecting very seri- ously on the state of this Impeachment. Either Mr. Burke consults his Lawyers, or he does not. If he does, what is their advice worth ? They re- ceive an enormous sum from the public, and they are always in the wrong ; for we do not find that there is either debate, difference of opinion, or protest on any question of law which the Lords determine. If he does not consult them, why are they paid ? It is well known that Mr. Burke's brother lived very comfortably for six years on the proceeds arising from this Impeachment ; and the whole expence would pay and feed the Prussian Army for two months of the present campaign. Again Again it is to be considered, that Mr. Burke himself does not ad in this case as a mere indi- vidual. When he declared, in the last Parlia- ment, that Mr. Pitt and Mr. Dundas had, in one single instance, been guihy of an aft of greater iniquity and corruption than had been committed by Nero, in the most heroic times of Roman ini- quity ; he only exposed himself, unless he estab- lished the truth of his assertion by proof. When Mr. Burke shocked every Gentleman who was a Member of the last Parliament,, by the manner in which he spoke of his Majesty, at a time when every loyal subjea offered prayers to Heaven for his health, he spoke merely as an individual: but far different is the case at present. He is now the Representative of the Commons, who represent the People of Great Britain. He spends a hun- dred pounds of their money every day the Court meets. Every evidence that he offers, is the wit- ness of the People. Either he takes no advice, or he has very bad advice. Day after day, month after month, and year after year, the trial is dragged on yet the fafts on which the Impeach- ment was first grounded were true or they were false ; all the great points are passed by, and so little remains that we hope and trust the Lords willl take some steps to conclude a trial which, by its length, is become a grievance of a most alarming ( 533 ) alarming nature. Little disposed as we are to agree with Mr. Burke in general, we fully concur with him in opinion, that let this trial end when it will, or how it will, infamy must fall fome- where." ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY-FIRST DAY. May i. Lord Kenyon sat this day for the Chancellor, and the Court met before two o'clock, when his Lordship informed the Managers, that the evi- dence last offered was inadmissible. Mr. Burke, as usual, said the Commons submitted, though they did not acquiesce, and lamented the incon- veniences which the cause of the Commons sus- tained by the decision. Mr. Burke then said he had some important evidence to offer, which he was confident was open to no sort of objeaion, and it was neceflary 'for him shortly to open the nature of it. He said, that Mr. Hastings in his defence had stated that the various sums of money which the Com- mons had in faft charged him with receiving, were really taken by him, and applied to the public N N service (534) service in times of great difficulty and distress, and he had given in a very great variety of evi- dence to prove the distressed state of the Com- pany's affairs in the years 1779* 1780, 1781, 1782, and 1783. He had also given evidence to prove the great confederacy which was formed against the British Empire in India at those periods, and he loudly boasted of having preserved the British Empire entire in India, while her domini- ons were lost to her in America. Mr. Burke said, the Commons very readily admitted the dis- tresses of the Company to be as great as Mr. Has- tings stated them to be ; but it then became neces- sary, by way of rebutting the defence made by Mr. Hastings, to go into the origin, progress, and . termination of the Maratta War, in order to prove, that Mr. Hastings was the author of that war, which produced the confederacy against us, and excited France to use her utmost efforts for over- | turning the British Empire in India. He conten. ded, that as the defence of Mr. Hastings was new matter, the Commons had a right to rebut it by newmattpr; and in this view they offered it, not stating the Maratta War to be criminal, but that Mr. Hastings was the author of the fiistressei which were brought upon the Company by that war. He therefore proposed to begin with the proceedings of the Governor and Council of ' 3 Bombay ? ( 535 ) Bombay, in 1775, and so to go through the series of measures pursued relative to the Marattas until 1783, a body of documents that would fill at the least Seven Folio Volumes, and which could not be gone through in Seven Years. Mr. Fox sup- ported Mr. Burke, but very feebly. No other Manager spoke. Mr. Law, with great force, contended that in no possible shape could this evidence be pro- ducedThat there was no point which had been more disputed, than who was, or who was not the author of the Marattawar. It was plain that the late House of Commons did not believe Mr. Hastings to be the author of the war, because' Mr. Burke had originally presented a charge, ac- cusing Mr. Hastings as the author of it. That nothing was ever done upon that charge; Mr Hastings boldly denied it, but claimed all the' merit of reftoring peace to India. How was the fad as applied to the evidence ? The Managers had entered a letter from Mr. Hastings, in which he said that he left Calcutta in July 17 8i, im- pressed with a belief that strong measures were necessary to prevent the Company from sinking under the accumulated difficulties that surrounded them. The Managers had also entered a letter from Sir Eyre Coote, dated in September 1781, in order to prove that at that time no State ne- N w 2 cessity (536) cessity existed. To rebut this evidence, Mr. Law said the Counsel had given a variety of evi- dence to prove the actual state of distress at Madras, Bombay, and Bengal, in 1780, and the subsequent years and now the Managers meant to repel it, by going into the history of the rise, progress, and termination of the Maratta war, a proceeding which he was confident their Lordships would not entertain for a moment. Mr. Burke replied at very great length, and with very great violence, going over the same ground again, Mr. Law, in reply, said, it would be an in- suit to their Lordships, and treachery to Mr. Hastings, were he to waste a moment in further observations on what had been said by the Ma- nagers. Mr. Burke upon this grew exceedingly angry; and after much violent language, he said, that he rejoiced there were some persons amongst the audience of the day (the Turkish Ambassador and his suite were present) who did not understand English, as the chicane practised in this Court was of such a nature, that it would disgrace the pro- ceedings of a Turkish Divan or words very like it. Lord Kenyon and several other Lords called to Order, Mr- ( 537 ) Mr. Burke was visibly agitated* and qualified what he had said with an if. The Bishop of Rochester repeated the words as he understood them and that was, as a reflection upon the Court. The Short-hand Writer was referred to; but Mr. Burke said, that Mr. Gurney could not read his own Short-hand Notes. Lord Carnarvon got up and said, he did not conceive Mr. Burke mea'nt to refleft upon the Court ; and at last the Lords retired, to determine, whether it was competent to the Commons to go into the origin, progress, and termination of the Maratta war, in order to prove that Mr. Hastings was the author of that war, and could not there- fore plead the distresses and dangers of the Com- pany as an excuse for receiving money privately, and carrying it to the public service, such diffi- culties being occasioned by that war, of which they charged Mr. Hastings to be the Author. The Court adjourned. *!,<,'-<: . WE HUNDRED AND THIRTY-SECOND DAY. May 7. WE have endeavoured through the whole of long and tedious cause to present our readers N N 3 witfy (538) with a fair and impartial statement of the pro- ceedings of each day ; we shall preserve the same spirit of truth, giving the abstract of this day's events, which, blessed be God, is the last of the Trial, the speeches of the Managers exempted a circumstance so important, 'that we congratulate the Lords, the Commons, the Country, and Mr. Hastings, on its having taken place. Lord Kenyon (when the Court assembled on this day) informed the Managers, that the evi- dence they had offered could not be admitted. Our readers will recoiled that this evidence did, in faft, comprise the origin, progress, and termi- nation of the Maratta war, including in it a period of eight years, from 1775, to 1783, and filling at the least six folio volumes of printed evidence. Mr. Burke observed, that as the Court did not state the grounds on which they rejected the evi- dence, and as the Counsel had offered no argu- ment, except that the admission of it would occa- sion delay, the Commons were utterly at a loss to know why it was refused. Mr. Burke then said that this complaint of delay had been echoed from one end of the kingdom to the other ; that the Managers were libelled, and their motives misre- presented. He then asked what one reason under Heaven the Managers could have for wishing to protrad this Trial, in which they had now been engaged ( 539 ) engaged above eight years, -arid he himself an In- dian enquirer above fifteen years ; that those who were grown old, naturally wished for repose, and the young to enjoy the pleasures of youth. The prisoner was personally known to none of them, to him they Could have no enmity he interfered not in their polisical pursuits it was therefore impossible for any man^ with any degree of justice, to accuse them of delay. Here Mr. Hastings started up, and said he did dire&ly accuse the Manager of delay; that every word he was now uttering was irrelevant to the cause. He was pro- ceeding further, when Lord Kenyon desired Mr. Burke to proceed, and to go on with the evi- dence to which he supposed his remarks were pre- liminary. Mr. Burke then took a Newspaper from his pocket, and said, that the same complaints which Mr. Hastings made^ he had met with in a paper of this morning. After stating much more to the same purpose, Mr. Burke proceeded to read the paper, but was interrupted by Lord Kenyon, who said, the Court could not receive any complaint unless the Manager was prepared to support it by legal evidence. That it was not the duty of the Court to take notice of any matters which were not brought regularly before them. That he knew nothing of any Libels that had been pub- N N 4 lished, (540 ) lished, none of them having come under his in- spection. Mr. Burke again proceeded to state, in very strong terms, the unwarrantable liberties taken with the Managers and the Court in the reflecli- ons cast upon them. He was successively inter- rupted by Lord Caernarvon, Lord Thurlow, and Lord Somers, who entreated the Manager to pro- ceed with his evidence. Lord Thurlow said, that no complaint could be considered in the Court, unless from some cir- cumstances immediately occurring. That the Managers had it in their power to complain to the House of Commons, who might either pro- ceed themselves or by message to the Lords. Lord Somers expressed his hope that the time of the Court would no longer be consumed by matter foreign to the cause. That the Lords would take care of their own privileges. Mr. Burke then insisted that they were an in- tegral part of the Court, and he then read a long protest against the decisions of the Court, and denied that the Commons were to be looked upon as common prosecutors. The Lords declined to receive the protest. Mr. Burke strongly declared that the Commons were not the authors of the delay, and that it must test with the Court or Mr. Hastings. The The Earl of Coventry said, that as the Hon. Manager had taken infinite pains, and in a speech of considerable length, to prove that he neither \vished for nor was the cause of delay, he trusted he would immediately produce his evidence, in order to convince the Court still more of the jus- tice of his remarks. This debate was ended about a quarter after three, when Mr. Fox and Mr. Taylor proceeded to deliver the evidence in reply, in the charge of presents and contra&s. After Mr. Taylor had concluded his evidence in reply on the contract charge, it was supposed that the whole business was over, but Mr. Burke said he had a new head of evidence to go through; that Mr. Hastings had entered a variety of testi- monials from all ranks of people in India, ex- pressing their fullest approbation of his conduc\ and the sincerest affection for his person that these testimonials were transmitted by Lord Corn- wallis to the Company., and while the Commons of Great Britain were prosecuting Mr. Hastings in the name of the people of India, for practising every species of oppression upon them, that very people were telling the Commons that they were ignorant, uninformed, and deceived; he proposed, therefore, to enter Mr. Barlow's report of the Commerce of Benares, some letters from the Nabob (542 ) Nabob Vizier and his Ministers, and some peti- tions from the Raja of Dinagapore and his Coun- sel. To save time, the Counsel said they ad- mitted them all. The last documents not being ready, Lord Kenyon said, that the Court had no blame to lay upon the Managers, yet they did think their Agents very reprehensible for not having the evidence at hand ; and as it was understood all the evidence was to be closed on this day, the Court hoped there would be no longer delay, since it must be the wish of all parties to close this long depending Trial in this Session of Parliament. Mr. Burke, with infinite solemnity in his man- ner, said to their Lordships" As I have taken " the lead in this cause, it may be supposed that " I am better informed than my Fellow Mana- " gers, of the nature and tendency of the evi- ' dence which is offered that which I now mean to produce; and I call God to witness to the truth of what I assert, is of a nature so impor- " tant, that your Lordships cannot conscientiously go to judgement, unless it is before you ; it is indeed of more consequence than any evidence ' yet before you." At length the Books came, and Mr. Burke said, that one of the testimonials came from the Raja of Dinagapore, and his Mi- lusters. He, therefore, proposed to rebut it by giving ( 545 ) giving in the report of Mr. Paterson, on the cru- elties supposed to have been exercised on some inhabitants of Rungpore and Edracpore, in 0>e years 1781, and 1782. Mr. Law objeded to this evidence as utterly inadmissible. He reminded the Lords that this was a tale which he had pressed the Manager years ago to bring forward as a charge, in a shape in which it might be answered ; the Manager de- clined to do so ; and he trusted their Lordships would not admit four folio volumes on the Mi- nutes, to which the Defendant could not now reply. Mr. Burke disclaimed every idea of bringing the matter forward in this form, as a criminal charge against Mr. Hastings ; but the Raja of Dinagapore, and his Ministers, having stated the happiness every one enjoyed under the Adminiftration of Mr. Hastings, they meant to shew the miseries which the people sustained, and which induced Mr. Hastings himself to order an investigation of the conduct of Deby Sing, in the year 1782. Mr. Fox supported Mr. Burke. Lord Stanhope, Lord Walsingham, and Lord Kenyon spoke, and it being clearly the sense of the Court that the evidence was inadmissible, Mr. Burke at length gave it up. But as this story has been once more, and we believe now for the last time, alluded to, we owe it ( 544 ) it in justice to Mr. Hastings to call the attehtioft of our Readers to it. In 1788, in the third day of Mr. Burke's first Speech, he introduced this story, as applicable to the cause of Mr. Hastings. He detailed a variety of horrid cruelties, supposed to have been committed by, or by the orders of Deby Sing, and he said he would bring the charge home to Mr. Hastings. Lord Thurlow, who was then Lord Chancellor, said in the House of Lords, that the charges preferred by the Commons sunk to utter insignificance, when compared with this matter introduced by Mr. Burke in his opening speech, and that Mr. Burke would be a calumniator if he did not bring it forward in such a shape, as would enable Mr. Hastings to reply to it. In 1789, Mr. Hastings prayed the Commons to introduce this matter in the form of an Article, or to give him satisfaaion for the injury he sus- tained. The Commons did not comply with his re- quest. In 1790, the Managers offered tp introduce this report of Mr. Patterson, in order to shew what enormities might be committed without coming to the knowledge of an English Gentle- The Counsel rejeQed the evidence thus colla- terally introduced ; but said, that if preferred as a charge ( 545 ) charge they were ready and eager to refute it. The Lords voted, that it was inadmissible. In *79i, Mr. Hastings complained loudly of the injury he sustained by the introduction of sp atrocious a calumny, as this tale of Deby Sing was. He stated what was stri&ly true, that in no possible view could he be implicated in such charges as were proved against Deby Sing, since he had been most anxious to deleft them, and to punish the men if found guilty : that the cause did not come to a conclusion in his Government, but in the Administration of Lord CornwaUis, when it fully appeared, that the guilt of Deby Sing was trifling in a comparison with the magnitude of the accusation, and .that the most dreadful of these cruelties, which Mr. Burke detailed with so much effect in Westminster-Hall in 1788, never were committed at all. Mr. Burke had it in his power at any time, to lay before the Commons the grounds on which he imputed criminality to Mr. Hastings on this subject; but this he declined to do, and the whole tale has been buried in oblivion to this day, when Mr. Burke endeavoured to get it on the minutes of the trial ; not as a charge against Mr. Hastings not with the hope of obtaining re- dress for the people of India, but in order to prove that the testimonials transmitted by Lord CornwaUis from Dinagapore, in 1789, could not be ( 546 ) be true, because great enormities which Mr. Hastings was most anxious to deleft and to punish, were said to have been committed there in 1782. The evidence being rejected, and the Managers declaring that they had totally closed their evi- dence, Mr. Law concluded the day by the Fol- lowing energetic address to the Court : The evidence on the part of the prosecution being now fully closed, we might avail ourselves *' of your Lordships indulgence in this stage of the * proceedings, to observe at large upon the evi- n dence adduced in reply, during the course of ** the present Sessions of Parliament. But my Lords, * in pursuance of the same purpose which induced us in the last Sessions to forego a similar advan- ' tage, and to submit our evidence on one article of C charge, the Contracts, to your Lordships consi- deration, unaccompanied by any prefatory or concluding comments whatsover, and to leave * the evidence on another article, that of Presents, ** unenforced by such concluding observations, as " in other circumstances, we might have been dis- " posed to offer " In pursuance of that same purpose of accelera- * tion and dispatch, which dictated our conduct in the instance I have alluded to, and with a view to ** the nearer and mo re immediate termination of this "long (547 ) '< long depending trial, we again relinquish an ad- " vantage which can only be purchased at the in- tolerable price of further protm&ion and delay. " All the attempts made in the present Session, to *' support the case of the prosecution, have ended *' in producing an effect dire&ly contrary. We " confidently trust, that the strong and important " conclusions in favour of the defendant, which re- " suit from the invaluable oral testimony lately " given at your Lordships' Bar, cannot either have " escaped your Lordships' penetration, or fail to " have their due effe6l hereafter upon your Lord- " ships' judgement. *t After returning to your Lordships our humble " but grateful acknowledgements for the invariable " patience" and condescension with which our zea- " lous but imperfect endeavours to discharge our " bounden duty towards our client, have been at " all times honoured during the cour*e of so many <( years, it only remains for us, in the name and on " the behalf of Mr. Hastings to implore, that so " much of continued time may be yet allotted to " this trial in the course of the present Sessions, as " may be sufficient to bring it to an entire and ulti- c{ mate conclusion. To that moment Mr. Hastings " looks forward with impatient but fearless expec- " tation being as he is equally assured of his own 5* innocence, and your Lordships' justice." ONE (548 ) 0J\T HUNDRED AND THIRTY-THIRD DAY. May 8. Mr. Grey, on this day summed up, in part, the evidence in reply, on the Benares article. Before we go into the particulars of his speech, we fhall recall to our readers' attention the circumstances under which this most singular of all transactions came to be preferred as a high crime against Mr. Hastings. In 1786, Mr. Fox, who opened the charge in the House of Commons, argued, that Mr. Hast- ings had no right to demand military aid from Cheyt Sing, and that therefore all the a&s which followed, and were consequent of it, were cri- minal. That the objeft of Mr. Hastings was to ruin Cheyt Sing, and that he was aftuated against him by malice. In this opinion a large party fol- lowed Mr. Fox. Mr. Pitt argued that Mr. Hastings had a right to tax Cheyt Sing, and that as all the afts which followed were justified by that right, they were not criminal. That there was not a shadow of evidence on which Mr. Hastings could be charged with ( 549 ) with malice; but, said Mr. Pitt, Mr. Hastings was criminal in intending to commit an aft which he did not commit; that is, to impose a fine of forty or fifty lacks of rupees upon Cheyt Sing for his contumacy. In this opinion too, Mr. Pitt was followed by a large party. The resolution put to the vote was, that in the Benares Charge there was matter for crimination, and it was carried 119 against 79. But though Mr. Pitt and his friends, on the one side, and Mr. Fox and his supporters on the other, thought Mr. Hastings was criminal, they fundamentally disagreed as to the point of criminality. But seventy nine Members voted that there was no criminal matter in the charge. These, therefore, must have agreed with Mr. Pitt that Mr. Hastings had a right to tax Cheyt Sing, and with Mr. Fox, that it was not a crime in Mr. Hastings to intend to levy the fine, which, whether enormous or not, he did not levy. These seventy- nine Members formed a third party. Now let us see how the case would have stood had the opinion of the House been taken seriatim on each allegation. It cannot be known how many Members joined in opinion respectively with Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox; but as the number was 119, it will be fair oo to (550) to state them as equal that is, 60 on one side, and 60 on the other. We will suppose the question first to have been put by Mr. Fox, on the crimi. nality of demanding a war subsidy from Cheyt Sing. Mr. Pitt and his Partizans would have voted that it was not criminal but meritorious; and to their number 60, the number of the third party, which is 79, being added, would have made 139 against 60, for rejecting the -question. If after this, the question of the criminality of the intention of finding had been put by Mr. Pitt, this too would in like manner have been rejected by 139 against 60, and the charge thus wholly dismissed ; whereas, by blending two dif- ferent propositions in one question, the charge was carried by the union of two parties, enter- taining sentiments diametrically opposite in the same question. The charge so voted in 1786, and reduced to the form of an article in 1787, was supported by the Managers in 1788, answered in 1792, and now in this year 1794, and on this day Mr. Grey replied to the evidence of the Counsel. Mr. Grey took up a considerable time in reply- ing to a charge brought against the Managers, of wilfully garbling and misrepresenting fafts, both in the mode in which the article was drawn, and in the mode in which the Managers supported it. He ( 551 ) He said the charge was serious , heavy, and that it was a charge against the House of Commons, -whose Representatives they were. He then went through the different instances, with what success we do not presume to say, but a short relation of the main fact may help the public judgment. In January 1775, Sujah Dovvlah died. Mr. Hastings contended, that the Treaties subsisting between the States of Oude and Bengal did not Cease by the death of the Sovereign of Oude. The majority, Messrs. Clavering, Monson, and Francis, voted, That they did cease and that they had a right to conclude a new Treaty, exacling the best terms they could for the Company. Being but voted, Mr. Hastings made a new proposition, which was, that Cheyt Sing should be made a Sovereign, subject only to the payment of a cer- tain sum, half of which Bengal was to receive, and half the Sovereign of Oude. This proposi- tion was also negatived. Now, the charge brought against the Mana- gers is this that they applied the reasons offered by Mr. Hastings, to support a proposition that was negatived, to a proposition afterwards made, and which was accepted. The question is very simple : Upon what principle could the Managers feason in support of Rights, which Chcyt Sing really possessed ? Not surely from any arguments 002 urged ( 552 ) urged by Mr. Hastings to induce the majority t was the enormous amount of the intended fine. The complaint of Mr. Hastings is, and it js the first and great cause of the duration of the Trial that the sense of the late House never was taken on the separate allegations in the Article. Mr. Pitt also stated his clear opinion, that there vras no evidence to warrant the conclusion, tha t Mr. Hastings was actuated by malice, yet h? is charged, charged with doing all that he did from malicious motives. Take away the charge of malice, and allow the right to demand a subsidy what then becomes of Mr. Fox, and the Managers ? Mr. Grey at the close contended, that if the Lords adopted the opinion of the Managers, Mr. Hastings would merit a severe punishment. IF they adopted the opinion of Mr. Pitt, he would deserve some punishment, because, though no fine had in fa6i been imposed, it was clear Mr. Hastings intended to impose one. He ran cur- sorily over the remaining part of the observations of the Counsel, and made no remarks on Mr. Dallas's conclusion on the nature of British justice. The fact, however, is, that Cheyt Sing had been now expelled nearly thirteen years ; in that period, the Nation has received six millions sterling, every shilling of which is a robbery and plunder from Cheyt Sing, if he were unjustly expelled, and the nation has consented to receive from Benares, for twenty years to come, two hundred thousand pounds a year more than they have a right to re- ceive, provided his expulsion was unjust. Mr. Grey concluded his summary by taking a ground totally different from that on which the charge was originally entertained, Mr. Grey seem- ed to feel the weakness of his case. It was first brought (56* ) brought on and first argued in a manly way- Tnat Mr. Hastings had made dc.nands contr iry to treaty That his motive for making the demand was ma'ice, and his object to rain Cheyt Sin.;.- At the close, Mr. Grey allowed that Mr. Pitt jus- tified the right to make the demands, and scouted the charge of malice. But Mr. Grey contended, that if the Lords should concur with Mr. Pitt, still the proposed punishment exceeded the actual offence. Is there then an Englishman who will not lament, that at the close of the seventh year of a trial, it shou'd be a matter of doubt whether the Commons, who voted to impeach Mr. Hast- ings, diJ vote upon the narrow ground Mr. Pitt put the matter, or upon the broad ground on which the Managers originally put it. Such is the consequence of voting charges in a lump, and we trust it will operate as an example in all future impeachments. The ground of the Benares charge is malice, and the various demands made by Mr. Hastings on Cheyt Sing, were stated to be made with a view of harrassing, oppressing, and finally ruining him, in order to gratify the malice that Mr. Hast- ings had conceived. The proof of the malice Mr. Grey said, though not clear, was fairly to be inferred from the circumstance of Mr. Hastings having stated in his Narrative and Defence, that it it was highly indecent, and presumptuous in Cheyt Sing so far to interfere in the unfortunate political dispute of Bengal, as to send a Vakeel' to con- gratulate General Clavering on his supposed ac- cession to the Government of Bengal, at the time he attempted to seize it by violence. Mr. Pitt had treated such a proof with the utmost derision and contempt when it was offered to justify the charge in the House of Commons. Another proof that Mr. Hastings was actuated by malice was this : that no demands had been made on the Zemindars of Bengal. It has already been stated, in reply to this observation, that the lands of Bengal were let, either at their utmost value, or which is the same, at an amouut which was supposed to be the utmost the lands would yield. But the supposition, the most extraordinary in Mr. Grey's Speech was, that if Mr. Hastings should be convicted, one of the King's Ministers, on Mr. Hastings's principles, might propose to ease the burthens of the people, by imposing a large fine upon him. Let us bring this argument to the test of common sense : Suppose, as Mr. Grey did, that the Lords were to take up Mr. Pitt's idea, and to think that Mr. Hastings, by the Constitution of India, had a right to call upon Cheyt f 564 ) Cheyt Sing for extraordinary aids in time of ex- traordinary emergencies. Suppose them to rcjeft, as absurd and impossible, (as Mr. Pitt did), the charge of malice, which is, in faft, the foundation of the whole. Suppose them to think (as Mr. Pitt professed to do) that the conduft of Cheyt Sing was in the highest degree contumacious, and merited severe punishment, and suppose them to be of opinion, that the proposed fine of fifty lacks did exceed the aftual offence, then the ques- tion would be, whether upon the principles of Mr. Hastings, one of the King's Ministers could propose to relieve the public exigencies of this country, by imposing a large fine upon him. Mr. Hastings, in July 1781, was surrounded with difficulties ; he could not do as Mr. Pitt does . he could not borrow as many millions as he want- ed, and tax posterity with the interest of the debt. He had, in faft, borrowed as much money as he could get, before July 1781, and the Carnatic, and Bombay, looked to him for the pay and sub- sistence of their armies. Under such circumstances he intended to levy a fine of forty or fifty lacks of rupees, from a man who had been guilty of various als of contumacy and disobedience, and to employ that money in relief of the pressing exigencies of the state over which (565 ) \vhich Mr. Hastings presided. He believed, and he thought right, that this sum did not exceed a third of the money in Cheyt Sing's possession. In pursuance of his plan, Cheyt Sing was put . under an arrest. He was rescued, flew to arms, was victorious in the first instance, but in a month totally expelled from his Zemindary, carrying with him the principal part of his treasures. A new settlement was formed, by which the State gained an additional revenue of two hundred thousand pounds a year, which it has received from 1781, to this time, a period of nearly thirteen years. Were the King's Minister to take up Mr. Grey's idea, we know not how it could apply to the case before us ; Mr. Hastings intended merely to take four or five hundred thousand pounds from Cheyt Sing, a powerful and disaffecled subject, but to leave him the remainder of his wealth, and the \indisturbed possession of his Zemindary. His expulsion was the consequence of his resistance ; and the State acquired an addition of 200,000!. a year, which, with principal and interest, added to the money taken at Bidjygur, makes about six millions sterling. If it were an enormous oppres- sion to propose to take 4 or 500,000!. from Cheyt Sing, surely his expulsion is a greater act of vio- lence, and calls loudly for redress. p p Mark (566) Mark then what would be the consequence! The nation has spent One Hundred Thousand Pounds on this Trial : That money is lost and gone for ever. But even a part of it could not be recovered under the shape of a fine from Mr. Hastings, without the firmest conviction in the mind of every honest man, that Cheyt Sing ought instantly to be restored to Benares, and to receive from this country every rupee that has been unjustly taken from him. In this manner the Managers have invariably argued, and they have spoke the language of justice and common sense. The same Minister, therefore, who car- ries to the Exchequer the fine of Mr. Hastings, must drain the Exchequer of thirty-four milli- ons, seven hundred and ten thousand pounds ; for of that sum has Great Britain robbed India, through the agency of Mr. Hastings, provided there be truth in the language of the Gentlemen who have conducted the Impeachment. We think Mr. Grey argues fairly and seldom widely ; but we have stated this instance, in order to shew that the ablest men will sometimes push an argument too far, ON ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY-FIFTH DAY. May 15. Mr. Sheridan performed his . promise to the Lords, and finished what he had to offer in two hours and forty minutes. His speech was replete wit with and humour. The argumentative parts of his speech took up very little time, but he replied at considerable length to the animadver- sion of the Counsel of Mr. Hastings, on Mr. Sheridan's former speech. He justified himself from a very severe charge brought against him by Mr. Law, of having asked Mr. Middleton a ques- tion, and misleading him in his answer, by a paper that he put into his hand. He said it was the late Earl Camden who had asked the question which Mr. Law had supposed to come from the Ma- nager. He contended, that not one piece of evidence produced by the Managers had been disproved during the defence. He said, that much time had been taken by Counsel in their speeches, in order to prove points which he conceived of very p p 2 little (568) little importance to the cause. He ran very cur- sorily through the evidence, and said, though it was very true that the belief of the disaffection of the Begum obtained very generallry through- out India, it was rather a proof of the success of Mr. Hastings's scheme, than any thing else. That it was exceedingly improbable the Begum should be concerned in rebellion, and sai4 that the evidence of two Nujeebs being taken in arms at Pateeta, did not weigh in his mind. That in this stage of the business he should think all warm and intemperate expressions highly im- proper, and therefore should abstain from using them. In conclusion, Mr. Sheridan said, that the Counsel had endeavoured to deter their Lord- ships from finding a verdiQ against Mr. Hastings, by stating, that Six Hundred Thousand Pounds had been taken from him for the public service at a moment of great public exigency: that it had all been employed in the public service, antf that the Nation, knowing of the transaction a few months after it had taken place, had full oppor- tunity of redressing the wrong nearly twelve years ago. That it was impossible to vote that Mr. Hastings had afted wrong, unless they were pre- pared to do full and completejustice to those who bad been injured, Mr. (5*9) Mr. Sheridan said, he joined issue with the Counsel he fulty concurred with them : but such was his idea of the justice of their Lordships, that he was convinced they never would be de- terred from doing justice from a dread of the con- sequences CEconomical as the House of Com- mons was, he never could believe that they Would deny justice to the people of India, because jus- tice could not be done to them, without calling upon the people of England fora very heavy pay- ment. For his own part, convinced as he was, that on this article Mr. Hastings was guilty of having taken from the Begum a large sum of mo- ney for the public, on a charge of rebellion, which was ill-founded, he was ready to avow, that it would be impossible to declare Mr. Hastings guil- ty, without giving to the Begum compleat restitu- tion of all that had been taken from her, principal and interest. It was stated to amount to two millions sterling. The Counsel had assumed, that the Benares Charge also was totally disproved ; but they argued in the same manner, that if it were not disproved the Nation was bound to restore to Cheyt Sing, to call him from his present miserable situation, whether in a Maratta or a Mysore Camp, to pay back to him the Millions which had been brought into the Exchequer by his expulsion, and p p 3 to (57) to place him precisely in the state in which he stood when he was driven from Benares thirteen years ago. He would go further every person injured by the afcls of Mr. Hastings had a right to full retribution, or there was no justice in the pro- secution of the Commons ; but he hoped their Lordships would not be deterred from their duty by such considerations. The Commons were not prosecuting for personal purposes. No. It was to do justice to India; and to suppose that if it should appear the people of India were injured, this nation would merely stop at condemning the man who had injured them, while the nation re- ceived the advantages arising from his injustice, was a libel upon the country. Mr. Sheridan pur- sued this line of argument with infinite ability for some time, and concluded by thanking their Lord- ships for their indulgence, and by lamenting the length of this Trial, as a most heavy grievance, though he said he would not enter now into the cause of its protraction. ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY-SIXTH DAY. Mr " the originals at Calcutta. These being found, " proved that I had errod in my account of the * f transaction ; but it J^o demonstratively proved " that I had given that account, believing it to " be true, and presumptively, that my intention, ** and consequent instructions to Mr. Larkins " were, that the Bonds, in the event of my death, " should be cancelled by him." But the most material part, and which would afford a very strong presumption indeed a^.iiu.st Mr. Hastings, if the evidence were as Mr. Fox stated it, is now to be mentioned. After .stat- ing that the mistake as to the date of the Bonds was difcovered by Mr. Hastings himself, not by his Accufers, he faid, u My Lords, after this I should be almost * afraid to hazard a fupposition ; but as the Bonds " were left with Mr. Larkins, as my Attorney, 41 and as Mr. Larkins knew from the first that they (589) " they were not my property, I concluded, that " I told him, that in the event of my decease, he " was to deliver them to the Council, which I confounded with the Aft, of having endorsed " them." Mr. Fox affirms, that Mr. Larkins positively fwore, he did not know until the 22d of May, 1782, that the Bonds were not the Property of Mr. Hastings. If he did so swear, the inference would be fair, that between the receipt of Bonds in January 1781, and May 1782, it might be pre- sumed, that Mr. Hasting? intended to take this 40,000!. to himfelf, but still we shall be puzzled to know -why Mr. Hastings was fo anxious to have the Bonds produced. Mr. Fox dismisses all the conclusions and all the iup} ositons, and meets the facl fully. Mr. Hastings asserts most confidentl), that Mr. Lar- kins knew from the first, that the Bonds were not his property. The question then is, does Mr. Larkins, or does he not swear, in the manner that Mr. Fox stated him to swear ? We will endeavour to give his Evidenc most correEly. Mr. Larkins fwears that he does not recollect being told, until the 2d of May, 1782, that the fe Bonds \\ere not the property of Mr. Hastings; that he does not recolletl having been instructed by by Mr. Hastings in 1781, to deliver up those Bonds, in the event of his decease, to the Com- pany, that he hopes he is not expetltd to swear that he might not have forgotten it ; that he cer- tainly does not recollect it; that he certainly thinks it would have made an impression upon his memory : but he cannot undertake to sweai positively that Mr. Hastings did not give such an instruction, but if he did, he had forgotten it. Here is the substance of Mr. Larkins's evidence, which Mr. Fox stated fairly up to this point. It is not positive but Mr. Fox had a right to argue upon it as he did. But on the farther examination of Mr. Lar- kms, he swore, that those Bonds never made part of Mr. JJastings'i private Property, that they -were never entered on his books. That the money never made part of his private caJJi^ but was carried immediately into the Treasury. That no interest ever was received upon those Bonds ; and then to a farther question, Mr. Larkins answered, page 8760. " I do not recollect what instructions I had re- u ceived from Mr. Hastings, between the month ** of January, 1782, when they were first applied * for, and the 22d of May, 1782, when I be- w same completely acquainted with the transaction* Q. " Whether he gave you any explanation " upon ( 591 ) upon the fubjeft. Answer, I have already said, that I must have received some information from Mr. Hastings, which induced me to con- sider thefe Bonds, though apparently his pro- perty, not fo; otherwife, one year after their date, I should have applied to the Treasury for the annual interest which then became pay- " able upon them. I did not do so; but I " do know that Mr. Hastings ever told me be. fore the 22d of May 1782, anything that could have led me to suppose from whom that money was obtained!" This is a fair and complete abstraa of all the Evidence to this great and essential point. The interest due upon these Bonds in November 1781, was 3200!. Mr. Hastings was then at Benares, and Mr. Larkins had the Bonds at Calcutta. Is it, or is it not fair to believe, that the reafon which induced Mr. Larkins not to receive the interest was, Mr. Hastings having told him, that the Bonds were not hi? property. Every Gentleman will draw his own conclufionj but if it had been true, as Mr. Fox stated, that Mr! Larkins swore positively, that he had no commit nication prior to the 22 d of May, 1782, it would be clear that Mr. Hastings had asserted a false- hood; and it would be fair to prefume, he had forae nefarious purpofe to answer in having so done; ( 592 ) done ; as the Evidence really stands, is it not ra- ther more fair to conclude that Mr. Haftings re- membered rightly ? We repeat it, that Mr. Fox himself, very much to his honour, produced a piece of evidence which Mr. Hastings for many years had searched for in vain, and \vhich totally exculpated him from the first charge, that is, of having applied to his own use a sum of One Lack and a half of Rupees, in 1772, given as a bribe for an appointment to office ?->i j~.'. The whole argument on which Mr. Fox rests to criminate Mr. Hastings, is so unworthy of him, that he would not have used it we are sure, had he fairly considered the evidence. When Mr. Hast- ings declared, that Mr. Larkins was privy to every process of his money transactions, it was in July 1785, before he was impeached, and it is impos- sible for any man who reads the Letter to the Court of Dire8ors from whence this expression is taken, to apply the sense and meaning, which Mr. Fox applies to it, provided he first reads the Letter from the Directors, to which this is a reply. He is asked three questions by the Directors, and without book or account with him, he answers those three questions, and says, that if the Direc- tors wish for further information, or for the means of making any investigation, he refers them to Mr. ( 593 ) Mr. Larkins, who was privy to every process. What process is it he alludes to ? The process that had a reference to the questions put to him by the Directors. But as Mr. Fox in his hurry stated it, every Gentleman must have supposed, that this Letter was a defence of some accusation of the Commons, and not a reply to three specific ques- tions put to him by the Directors. What follows? Mr. Hastings says, perhaps, you will think what I now tell you, sufficient for any purpose you may have to answer ; if not apply to Mr. Larkins. The Directors were satisfied The Board of Controul was satisfied for they never inquired further about the matter. But Mr. Hastings was not satisfied. He had been asked at what period the several sums composing the 200,000!. was received? He answered, that he believed, .nearly at the time they were paid into the Treasury ; that he had no memorandum, but would write to Mr. Larkins, to send the ori- ginal memorandum if he had it, to the Directors. Mr. Hastings did so ; Mr. Larkins did send it, with a letter ; and this letter of Mr. Larkins, and this memorandum have been argued upon, as if they were presented by Mr. Hastings, as a complete answer to the charge preferred against him by the House of Commons. This is a fallacy. If there is any thing false in the letter, or in the account, Mr. ( 594 ) Mr. Fox has full right to say so, and to make the most of it ; but his candour, had he considered the subject, would have prevented him from stat- ing the letter, so as to impress his auditors with a belief, that it was a reply to a charge of the Home of Commons. Having thus cleared the ground, we come to consider what Mr. Hastings did say, when his conduft was viewed in a different light. The Directors and the King's Ministers in June 1785, returned him their thanks for his long, faithful, and able services. They did not accuse him of breaking the law, by accepting and paying into their Treasury 200,000!. On the contrary, they approved what he had done, and merely wanted to know why he took Bonds for some of the sums, and entered others as deposits why he concealed the receipt from his Counsel and theDi- reftors, and at what period the several sums were received. The answer was confined to the ques- tions asked. But the House of Commons charg- ed him with breaking the law, in accepting the presents at all ; and they charged him with re- ceiving them with a corrupt intention of applying them to his own use. Let any Gentleman read the answer of Mr. Hastings to these charges let him read Mr. Larkins's evidence, ajid then we (595 ) we affirm, that he will find no contradiction what- ever in the accounts. In the defence made by Mr. Hastings in the House of Commons, there is not one syllabic from which an inference can be drawn, that Mr. Hastings meant to impress the House with a belief that Mr. Larkins knew from whom any one of the sums was received, further than appears by the account sent home in May 1782. This is so material a part in the case, that if we repeat our arguments in some measure, the importance of the subjeft: will excuse us. In the defence made by Mr. Hastings in the House of Lords, there is not one single syllable from whence it can be inferred that Mr. Larkins knew either the persons from whom the several sums were taken, nor the periods at which they were taken, further than appears in the account of the 22d of May 1782. But in the defence before the Lords, there is this remarkable expression : " As the bonds were left with Mr. Larkins, as 4C my Attorney, and as Mr. Larkins from the first * knew that they were not my property, I con- " eluded that I told him in 1781, that in the event " of my decease he was to deliver them to the " Council, which I confounded with the a& of " having indorsed them." This , (596) This is the true and only point of the least con- sequence. Here is a positive assertion made by Mr. Hastings, that Mr. Larkins knew from the fir^t that the Bonds were not the property of Mr. Hastings; and Mr. Fox says, that Mr. Larkins positively swears to the contrary. If he really did so, then Mr. Fox would have a sound argu- ment. Mr Fox, we are confident, is incapable of making the a-s.Tiion he did, unless he thought it was true. It happens, however, that Mr. Lark- ins swears that he cannot, at the distance of twelve years, recolleft that Mr. Hastings told him the Bonds were not his property, or that he desired him to deliver them up on the event of his death. He thinks such a circumstance was not likely to escape him, but he also swears, that on these Bonds no interest ever was received, and that unless he had had some intimation from Mr. Hast- ings, which at this distance of time he cannot recollecl, he certainly should have received the interest on those Bonds, which he never did. One would conceive it impossible for any evi- dence short of positive recolledion to justify Mr. Hastings more fully. What motive can be assign- ed for Mr. Larkins's neglecting to receive the interest upon these Bonds, amounting in October and November 1781 to Thirty-two Th msanJ Rupees, Rupees, or 3000!. but the one Mr. Larkins assigns, that he must have had some communica- tion from Mr. Hastings, though he cannot recoi- led at this distance of time what it was ; where presumption is to determine guilt or innocence, the man who undertakes to state what an evidence has proved, should state it fairly and in toto ; and we are confident Mr. Fox would have done so, if it had occurred to him. He would not allow for a moment, a few years ago, that the 2000 Rupees a day received by Mr. Hastings in 1772, was other than a. bribe for an appointment to office. This year Mr. Fox very honourably produced evidence himself, which removed all doubts, by shewing, that all Governors, when at Moorshe- dabad, received the same allowance. In his first day's speech he brought a serious accusation against Mr. Dallas : That having mis- quoted the Clause of an Aft, the argument found ed upon it fell to the ground. On the second day he acknowledged that he, and not Mr. Dallas had misquoted the clause. The Lords, who have all the evidence before them, will naturally look to that, and to that alone. No remarks that do not apply to the whole evi dence can have weight with them ; but the Pub- lic who heard Mr. Fox's speech have a right to know, that, from haste, he did net state the whole R R of ( 010 ) I r. Lar kins' s evidence on this most imp. point. We have already proved that there is no evi- dence on this article, except the voluntary con- fession of Mr. Hastings himfelf We have al- ready shewn that a letter, written by Mr. Hast- ings in July 1785, to the Directors, was alluded to by Mr. Fox, as if it were an anfwcr to the charge of the Houfe of Commons, but that on this fallacy being detected, and when the letter is considered as it ought to be, with a reference to that letter, to which it is an anfwer, no contra- diction of any kind will appear in it; we shall therefore proceed with Mr. Fox's arguments. He observed, that it appeared by the Paper which Mr. Larkins tranfmitted to the Court of Directors, that upon the Cabooleats or engage- ments for money granted to Mr. Hastings, there was a balance of forty thoufand pounds due : That of this sum ten thousand was received, and has never been paid to the Company : That though the Paper states the remaining thirty to be in balance, it is even now a matter of doubt where it is, and that Mr. Haflings may have that money in his pocket at this moment, or Gunga Goviud Sing may have it, but that, in fad, Mr. Hastings has never given the Company any satisfaction on this point. Here ( 6n ) N Here again Mr. Hastings has very just ground to complain that Mr. Fox, professing a fair sum- mary of the evidence, has, in his hurry, most materially misrepresented it. This Paper has nothing to do with the charge of the House of Commons. The Directors desired to know from Mr. Hastings, in March 1784, at what periods the several fums which he had carried to their credit were received ? Mr. Hastings in answer, in July 1785, fays, he believes he can affirm with certainty that they were received near the time that they were paid into the Treasury, but if the Directors wish for further information, he re- fers them to Mr. Larkins, who was privy to every process of the transaction, and possessesas, he be lieves, the only memorandum that he, Mr. Hast- ings, ever kept of the transaction. He lays also, that this will be a channel for making any further investigation they please. The Directors and the Board of Controul enquire no further; but Mr. Hastings himself writes to Mr. Larkins, and de- sires him to send that memorandum to the Direc- tors. Mr. Larkins does so. Surely^ww the mo- ment the Directors possess the Paper, they are the persons to enquire. Mr. Hastings had as- sured them that he had paid into their Treasury all the money he received. If, from the informa- tion which that Paper afforded, it appeared either R R 2 tO ( 6*2 ) to the Directors, or to the Board of Controul, that there was a balance in Gunga Govind Sing's hands, or a ballance upon the Cabooleats uncol- lefled, they, and not Mr. Hastings, were the per- sons to order an enquiry in Bengal. Mr. Hast- ings fays, " I will afford you the means of mak- " ing any investigation apply to Mr. Larkins." ^The Directors made no investigation, and Mi. Hastings is now accused for a negleft, which, if it be one at all, must be accounted for by the Board of Controul. When we say accused, we do not mean that he is legally accused, for though the Commons were in possession of the Paper, by which it appeared tthat there was a balance of a Lack of Rupees in the hands of Gunga Govind Sing, and that Forty thousand Pounds were uncolletled, they have neither charged Mr. Hastings with cri- minality nor negleft, for not enforcing the pay- ment of thofe feveral balances ; and therefore every thing faid by Mr. Fox on these points, is foreign to the charge. Mr. Fox connected with the receipt of this money the character of Gunga Govind Sing, of whom he faid there was but one opinion, and that a very bad one. Here again Mr. Fox did not quote the evidence by any means cor- relly. The substance of all the evidence re- lative to Gunga Govind Sing is as follows Mr. Mr. Young fwore, that he bore a very bad character among the natives and Europeans. Mr. Peter Moore fwore, that he was a man of very bad character, and considered as a general oppressor of every native he had to deal with ; that by the Europeans he was detested, and by the natives he was dreaded. Mr. Harwood fwore, that he has heard Gunga Govind Sing was very arbitrary and oppressive in his public employment, and that that was his ge- neral character. Mr. Anderfon swore, that he did not recolleft any official complaints, nor indeed any complaints, against Gunga Govind Sing : that he did not think he had generally a bad chara&er; on the con- trary, he thought he generally had a good cha- racter, but at the fame time there might be per- sons found in Bengal who would give him a bad character ; there were perfons who had taken op- posite fides of a party, which will have an effect upon the minds of people, and persons who had suffered by his appointment, who were his com- petitors. Sir John Shore swore, that he did not believe Gunga Govind Sing was deficient either in skill or ability : That he was acquainted with him for a great number of years : That he knew no na- tive fit for the appointment he held : That he R R 3 certainly ( 614 ) certainly should not have selefted him by choice but cannot recolleft at present whether he could have pitched on any other perfon in preference : That he did not find Gunga Coving Sing so ac- tive and zealous as he wished him to be : That he believed any native in the situation in which Gun- ga Govind Sing was placed, would use his influ- ence for his own advantage, and he had no doubt Gunga Govind Sing did so: That when detached to Dacca and Bahar, Sir John, by his own choice, took with him, as his Executive Officer, the fon of Gunga Govind Sing. But the most fmgular circumftance attending this man, is contained in the evidence produced by Mr. Burke in reply, and it ought to operate most forcibly upon the mind of every candid man general abuse should go for nothing. Mr. Stables, after Mr. Haftings had quitted Bengal moved in council, " That Gunga Govind Sing, his son, and all his dependants, be removed from their offices" and he fays, " The cries and complaints of the natives in general, shew how unworthy he has been of his trust.'* Sir John Macpherson, the Governor General, opposes this motion, and fays, " Gunga Govind Sing is not himself desirous to be continued in office he fees that he has lost the confidence of a majority of Government, and he knows that he has ( 6i 5 ) has no 4ependance to place upon my fupport be- yond the moment that either past or present mis- conduct is proved against him. " I think there can be little fear, after the accusations that have already come forward againft him, but the natives will make com- plaints. The danger is on the other fide, and should make us cautious not to admit general charges without proof against him. The pre- cedent is a bad one in any country^ but espe- cially in Bengal. The outstanding balances, and their magnitude since the management of Gunga Govind Sing, would make a very heavy charge against him ; but on the other hand, if he can prove that a greater revenue has been realized from the provinces during his fervice as Dewan, than in any preceding period of the administra- tion of the revenue, he has a substantial claim to justice." The Directors were so struck with the injus- tice of the mode in which it was proposed to proceed against Gunga Govind Sing, that they wrote to Bengal in August, 1788, as follows^ after very fairly and fully stating the case. " Although we feel no predilection for Gunga Govind Sing, we muft fairly acknowledge that we do not think sufficient ground was laid to justify his removal from office." R R 4 " Another ( 616 ) Another ground for his removal was the expectation that complaints would come which were kept back by his continuance in office. In the early periods of our territorial possessions, when the whole Administration of the country, provincial and superior, was in the hands of one person, (Mahomed Reza Cawn) such an appre- hension might be allowed to prevail. But \ve think it would now greatly impeach both the vigour and justice of our Government in Bengal, to fuppose that any considerable atl of injustice could be committed by any individual whatso- ever, without the means of complaint and repara- tion being open to the aggrieved." Such is the opinion of the Directors and of the Board of Controul ; and against this, Gunga Go- vind Sing, described by Mr. Burke " as a man at the sound of whose name all India grew pale," nothing criminal has yet been proved, though he resigned his office in May 1787, and from that period has been a private inhabitant of Calcutta; and the only complaint preferred against him came to a solemn hearing in the Supreme Court of Ju- dicators, where Gunga Govind Sing was honour- ably cleared, and his accusers committed to prison, both for perjury and forgery. It will not be said, that the influence of Mr. Hastings protected him; for from the moment he left Bengal, the Su- preme (6i 7 ) preme Council were adverse to Gunga Govind Sing, and Lord Cornwallis will not be suspe&ed either of prote&ing, or of oppressing him. No Gentleman can believe from the evidence which have we given fairly on loth sides t that Gunga Govind Sing z'ssucha man as Mr. Fox describes him to be. We have already gone through the most ma- terial parts of this celebrated Speech. There were some points which we did not expeft from so fair a reasoner as Mr. Fox. He said, that Mr. Hastings having given the whole power of Bengal to Gunga Govind Sing in 1781, might have received many considerable sums, of which no- thing wasyet known. After a sevenyears Trial, and with incontrovertible evidence before the Court, that Bengal had been progressively improving in Agriculture, Population, and Commerce, during the Administration of Mr. Hastings ; after the opinion of India on the character and condu6l of Mr. Hastings was so well known, it was not to be expected, that so fair a man as Mr. Fox, would have wandered from what did appear in the evi- dence, into surmises, as to what Mr. Hastings might have done, which has not been discovered. Mr. Fox, in stating the several presents, did not endeavour to conned! with them any corrupt a6l done by Mr. Hastings in favour of those who gave ( 618 ) gave money ; nor was there any thing stated by way of aggravation, except in the case of the present received from the Nabob of Oude, amounting to 100,000!. which was accepted, Mr. Fox said, at a time when the Nabob was compel- led to rob his Mother. Here again Mr. Hastings has every reason to complain of the hard treat- ment he has met with; and we may a little admire the nature of British Justice. This present was,ftccepted in September 1781, and compleatly paid in February 1782. As fast as the money was received, Mr. Hastings ex- pended it in the public service, a great part being advanced to the army, in a period of the gr public distress. The propriety of this present, it remained with the Directors to determine. They might have taken it for the Company, or given it to Mr. Hastings, or have applied it in liquidation of the Nabob's debt; for after taking credit for these ten lacks of rupees, and after taking the fifty- five lacks from the Begum, there was still a considerable balance due from the Nabob to the Company. The Directors, with the approbation of the King's Ministers determined to keep these ten lacks to themselves in January 1783; and it is surely rather too much to hear Mr. Hastings ac- cused in May 1 794,of receiving these ten lacks, and to to hear it asserted to be an aggravation of the of- fence, that he had taken it from the Nabob about the time that a part of the Treasures of the Be- gum were seized, in order to discharge a part of the debt due from the Nabob to the East-India Company. This observation will indeed apply to every a& done by Mr. Hastings nothing that he did, if he aBed wrong, would have been a permanent evil. In twelve, or at the utmost, in eighteen months, any any one aB of his might have bean reversed, but all his a&s have been confirmed, and the advant- age accruing to the nation by confirming them all, is thirty-four millions seven hundred and ten thousand pounds, while Mr. Hastings has been seven years arraigned as a Culprit, for what he has done. After this, and after his having received the thanks of the King's Ministers, and the Di- reftors, for his long, faithful, and able services, we may surely say, that nothing in politics is certain. In the preceding remarks we have shewn, that of all the sums which Mr. Hastings admitted he had received, he is not accused of having ulti- mately applied one rupee to his own use. The accusation is, that for some time he in- tended to appropriate to his own use the one fifth part of the sums that he receivedWe have fairly stated (6 2 o) stated the evidence, and the World will draw it own conclusions. The present received from Nobkissen, resting upon Mr. Hastings'sdeclaration alone, and it being in proofjthat it was applied to the payment of cer- tain charges, which are admitted to have been incurred for public services, we shall proceed to remark on what Mr. Fox said relative to the Mahratia and to the money given by Mr. Hastings to purchase the neutrality, and the assist- ance also, of Moodajee Borsla, in the course of the last general war. Though it be clear that Mr. Hastings was not the author of the Mahratta War, we shall argue the point without consider- ing whether he was or was not the author of it, and we shall look to the actual situation in which the British Government stood in India at the commencement of the year 1781. Hyder Ally had totally defeated Colonel Baillie, and had compelled Sir Heclor Munro to retreat to Fort St. George. The Marattas in Guzzerat kept General Goddard at bay. .N.adajec Sindia was advancing from Malwa, and Moodajee Boosla had sent his son Chimnajee Boosla, at the head of thirty thousand horse, to invade Bengal in her richest quarter. The Nizam of the Decan, who had formed the confederacy against us, was threat- ening to take the field, and to attack the Nor- thern (621 ) them Circars. Nuzeph Cawn, who possessed the person of the Emperor, was hostile to us. A superior French fleet arrived upon the Coast in January 1781, and was expected to return with land forces, as soon as the season would admit. In this desperate state, though Mr. Hastings knew that Moodagee Boosla was unwillingly drawn into the confederacy against us, it surely became necessary to take some means to rid our western frontier of so powerful a body of men, as a thousand accidents might provoke hostilities. Nor was this all ; Colonel Pearse, who was going to reinforce Sir Eyre Coote with five regiments of Sepoys, could not march through Cuttack, while 30,000 Maratta horse remained there. Chimnajee Boosla, very frankly said that, drag- ged as his father was, against his will, into the confederacy, his army was reduced to such as state of distress, that it actually required assist- ance from Bengal, or it could not be kept in order. In Nov. 1780, Mr. Hastings privately sent Chimnajee three lacks of rupees, and in April he concluded a Treaty with him, 'by which he gave him thirteen, and lent him ten lacks more, which have never been repaid. In return for this sum of 260,000!. a free passage was secured for Col. Pearse's army through the Maratta Province of Cuttack ; ( 622 ) Cutfack ; two thousand Maratta horse were to join the Colonel ; he was to be well supplied with provisions, and the Maratta army of 30,006 horse vas to return to Berar. These conditions were most honourably performed, though the Ma- ratta horse came too late, and returned from Gaujam. The consequences of this arrangement were most beneficial From that moment one great Member of theConfederacy withdrew hin:sclf, and the other parts of the Confederacy distrusted each other. But before the confequcnces of this Treaty could be known, Mr. Dundas proposed a reso- lution, which the House voted, that Mr. Hast- ings had concluded a precarious Treaty, on most extravagant and dishonourable conditions, one party who made it having no authority so to do : But we believe Mr. Dundas very materially changed his opinion, when he knew that every good consequence which Mr. Hastings predicted, actually happened. No further effort was made against us by the Berar Mahrattas during the war; on the contrary, the most perfect amity subsisted between them and the English. A peace with Sindia followed in October 1781 ; a truce with all the Mahrattas in January 1782 ; and a general peace with them in May 1782 ; and we got ulti- mately out of the war in India, without the loss of ( 623 ) of an inch of territory; on the contrary, Lord Lansdowne was enabled to save a West India Island, by restoring to the French, the settlements we had taken from them in Bengal, and in the Carnatic. Mr. Dundas fairly confessed, in 1786, that the man who did not see in Mr. Hastings the features of a great Statesman, must be blinded by prejudice. Now let us see what Mr. Pitt and Mr. Dundas have done in a situation not very dissimilar from that of Mr. Hastings. It is of no consequence to shew, if it could be done, that the war might have been avoided, in which we are now engaged. The discussion of the question would be as useless now, as it was in 1781, to enquire whether the Direc- tors, the Government of Bombay, or Mr. Hast- ings, was the author of the Mahratta war. If Mr. Pitt brings us as honourably out of this, as Mr. Hastings brought us out of the Mahratta war, his important services, will be the more grate- fully acknowledged than those of Mr. Hastings have been. The facl is, that though Spain, Austria, Prussia, the Germanic Body, Great Britain, and Holland, are united against France, her numbers, and her situation, and the enthusiasm of the people have enabled those who direct her armies, to baffle all our efforts on the Continent. The (6*4) The King of Prussia, though the first to en- gage against France, professes his inability to con- tinue the war. This nation, which was the last engaged in the contest, consents to give him One Million Four Hundred Thousand Pounds, and uses her influence with Holland to give him Four Hundred Thousand Pounds more, for the service of a body of troops during the present campaign. The Treaty is warmly approved by the House of Commons. But tho' a confiderable sum has been sent in advance, the king of Prussia has totally ruined us in the Netherlands, by not complying with the terms of the treaty. We lament the situation in which this breach of Faith has placed Mr. Pitt ; but we do not blame him. The treaty by which Mr. Hastings gave 260,000!. to Moodagee Boosla, produced the most decisive and immediate good confequences, yet that treaty is branded on the Journals of Parliament, with the epithets " precarious," " unwarrantable," " ex- "jravagant,*' " impolitic," and " dishonourable." None of the reasoning now used in favour of Mr. Pitt, could be heard in defence of Mr. Hast- ings ; the House of Commons fees, and wisely sees, in the case of Mr. Pitt, the danger of en- couraging, abstract discussions at this perilous moment, and therefore every attempt to prove that ( 625 ) that the war might have been avoided is disco- vered. The calamity is at our door, and as Mr. Hastings well said, when Hyder had overrun the Carnatic, This is the season for aftion, not for ** debate :" But in the last general war, when the American contest armed the world against Great Britain; Gentlemen of the most opposite parties in Parliament, forgot their personal animosities, and though in daily habits of accusing each other as the authors of the calamities which England then sustained, joined most cordially in condemn- ing the measures of those in India, who were bravely struggling through every difficulty; and who, inftead of receiving from time to time, as Lord North did then^ and as Mr. Pitt does now> all the support that Parliament could give, had to contend with every fpecies of counteraction, which the folly, or the prejudice, or the ignorance, of persons who then guided the National Coun- cils, could throw in their way But though all men of enlightened minds, must now see the errors they then committed, one man, and but one man has the manliness to step forward and acknowledge his mistake. We mean Mr. Dun- das, who professing to think in 1782, that the removal of Mr. Hastings was a wise and neces- .sary measure, did in that year, move his recal in the House of Commons. But in 1784, he vo- s s luntarily f 626 ) luntarily stepped forth, and then expressed M the House his joy, that the proprietors of India Stock, had successfully opposed his motion, be- ing convinced that by continuing Mr. Hastings in India, they had performed a very eflential pub- lie fer/ice. As Mr. Fox slightly touched upon the Mar- ratta war and the Marratta Peace, we have of- fered the preceding remarks to our readers. We have been particular in our observations on Mr. Fox's Speech, because it applied to the great and important article on which the Impeach- ment now refts. It is indeed charged by the Commons, that the objeft of Mr. Hastings in all his afts, were " to * s acquire for himself, and his dependants, exor- " bitant wealth" He is charged therefore with giving 18,000!. a year to Sir Eyre Cootc a bullock contraft to Mr. Coftes an Opium contract to Mr. Sulivan one agency to Mr. Auriol a second to Mr. Belli and a third to Sir Charles Blunt These are all the accusations, though his prose- cutors had to review his dispofal of a great pa- tronage during a Government of thirteen years If for argument sake, it wre to be admitted, that the profits arising to the individuals on these con- tracts and agencies were as large as the managers state state them to be, the aggregate amount would be iflmg, when compared to the profit, on a single loan, in England, in the late war. Mr. Hastings was charged with taking very large bribes, betwen the years 1772 and 1774, and concealing the receipt of them and with re- ceiving large bribes, between the years 1780 and 1784; the receipt of which he discovered-His view in receiving these several sums was said to be, to acquire for himself exorbitant -wealth. The subjea, though apparently extenfive, does in fed he in a very narrow compass. All the charges in the first period, that is from irom 1772 to 1774, are unsupported by a tittle of evidence, except that which applies to the sum Two thousand Rupees a day, received by Mr. Hastings in the year 1772, wh en he was at Mor- shadabad, agreeably to the prance of his prede- cessors. Whether it was right in Lord Clive, in Mr. Verelst, and in Mr. Hastings, to receive that allowance for entertainment, is not the question- But it is clearly proved, that it was not that which Commons charged it to be - a bribe for the appointment of Muny Begum to a public office _ consequently the charge falls to the ground The presents received by Mr. Hastings be- twccn 1780 and 1784, are distinguished by Mr. Fox, under the name of the avowed presents " That is, presents of which there is not a tittle to of evidence as to the receipt of them, beyond the voluntary information given by Mr. Hastings himself. It was firft contended by Mr. Fox, to receive these presents subsequent to the aft of 1773, was a breach of the law. It was next contended that Mr. Hastings did for a time, intend to apply a part of these pre- sents to his own use These are the important questions to be considered. Mr. Fox said every thing that man could say upon both, and we admit, that his arguments would have the greatest weight, provided he had reasoned upon the evidence The faft is, that he only took a fart of the evidence, and omitted that part which placed the matter in a very opposite point of view. ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY-EIGHTH DAY. May 23. The Court met to-day at half past two, when Mr. Taylor replied on the Contracts . ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY-NINTH DAY May 27. Mr. Taylor concluded his summary of the con- tracts. ONE ( 629 ) i Mr. Burke's ist Day. ONE HUNDRED AND FORTIETH DAY, May 28. Of Mr. Burke's fpeech, on this day, it is ab folutely impossible to convey an adequate idea to thofe who did not hear it. Every term of abuse which the Englifh language affords, he applied to Mr. Hastings; but not one word had the least connection with the Evidence which has been in the trial. As we wish at all times to do jus- tice to Mr. Burke, we fhall transcribe two pas- sages from a speech printed by Mr. Burke him- felf in the year 1785, when Mr. Pitt and Mr. Dundas were as much the objects of his detesta- tion, as Mr. Hastings appears to be now; and we desire our readers to believe, that, if pos- sible, he abused Mr. Hastings this day in grosser language, than he then did His Majesty's present First Lord of the Treafury and Secretary of State. " Let no man hereafter talk of the decaying ' energies of nature, all the Als and Monu- " ments in the records of Peculation, the con- folidated corruption of ages, the patterns of w exemplary plunder in the heroic times of s s 3 Roman ( 630 ) " Roman iniquity, never equalled the gigantic " corruption of this single aft. " Your Ministers knew, when they signed the " Death Warrant of the Carnatic, that the Na- " bob would not only turn all the unfortunate " Farmers out of employment, but that he has " denounced his severest vengeance againft them " for acting under British authority. With a u knowledge of this disposition, a British Chan- " cellor of the Exchequer, (Mr. Pitt) and Trea- " surer of the Navy, (Mr. Dundas) incited by " no public advantage, impelled by no public " necessity, in a strain of the most wanton per- " fidy, which has ever stained the annals of man- " kind,- have delivered over to plunder, impri- " sonment, exile and death itfelf, according to " the Mercy of fuch execrable Tyrants as the " unhappy and deluded fouls, who, untaught by * uniform example, were ftill weak enough to " put their trust in English Faith." If the imagination of our readers can suppose it possible for abuse on an individual to be more virulent than that which we have quoted here, Mr. Burke on this day abused Mr. Hastings with more virulence than he abused Mr. Pitt on the 28th of February 1785. We think it necessary again to remark, that this abuse of Mr. Pitt, is taken taken from a speech published by Mr. Burke himself. Mr. Buric's *d Day. ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-FIFTH DAY, May 30. Mr. Burke began, on this day, by restating what he had faid yesterday, that Mr. Hastings, instead of appearing in a humble and decent manner, had dared to accufe the House of Com- mons of the bafest ingratitude, that he had given them Impeachment for Impeachment. After Mr. Burke had spent a considerable time in repeating what he had before said on this fub- jea, he went to the next head that he had dwelt upon on the laft day, and contended that Mr. Hastings was not founded in asserting that the Government of India was not arbitrary. It will be fufficient to fay, that Lord Corn- wallis, in one of the minutes alluded to by Mr. Burke, expressly fays, that every thing of Law, of Police, and of Regulation, tending k> me- liorate the condition of the people of Bengal, it owes to the British Government. Every s s 4 thing ( 63* ) thing depending, prior to the British Adminis- tration, on caprice, and the pleasure of the So- vereign, or the person to whom he delegated his power. In Lord Cornwallis's evidence there is the following question and answer. " Q. What is the general mode of proceeding " against refraftory Zemindars according to ihe Laws and Customs of Hindustan ?"' " A. It is difficult to defcribe the regular mode " of proceeding in a despotic Government, but tncy are frequently confined and dispossesed." This is the compleatest possible aiwwer to three fourths of Mr. Burkes fpeech. Mr. Burke also repeated what he had' before faid of the insolence of Mr. Haflings in acci^i > the House of Commons of the basest ii'gr,,titde He said he had impeached the Body who had im- peached him. That until this lime, every man who had been impeached by so great a liody as the Commons, feemed fensible of their misfor- tune; but different was the case with Mr. Has- tings. He boasted his merits, while he asserted his innocence. The facts alluded to are thefe, and the impartial part of mankind may think there is more of Truth than Infolence in what Mr. Has- tings said to the Lords in 1792. Mr. Hastings af- firmed to their Lordships, that the Commons had impeached him for afts which the King's Minis- ters ( $33 ) ters had fully approved. That while the Mana- gers were declaring in Westminfter-Hall, that Mr. Hastings had desolated the Provinces of Bengal, the India Minister was proclaiming to the House of Commons, that Bengal had been the best go- verned, and the most flourishing Country in In- dostan under the British Administration. That while the Managers were declaring, that the re- fources of the Company were diminished under the Administration of Mr. Hastings^ Mr. Dun- das was proving to the Houfe of Commons, by the evidence in figures, that under the adminis- tration of Mr. Hastings, they had increased two millions sterling a year; that is, that in 1772, when he came to the Government, they were three millions; and in 1785, when he left it, they were five millions sterling a year. After stating thefe fafts in the boldest but in the clearest language. Mr. Hastings adds, ad- dressing the Commons. " I gave you all, and you have rewarded me with confiscation, dis- grace, and a life of impeachment." If the above assertions were not striBly true, then indeed Mr. Hastings would be the most in- solent man alive. But the whole world knows, that each assertion is true, and until Mr. Burke spoke, \ve believe no man living thought of applying the word Insolence for Truth. Mr, Mr. Burke spoke from a quarter before Two till a quarter after Five, and went through a part of Benares, tho' he professed his intention to be, not to go into any of the articles which had been so fully detailed before. The greatest number of Lords present was Nineteen, they were reduced to Thirteen before Mr. Burke had finished. The audience was numerous, and of course the epi- thets used by Mr. Burke, which were of the coarsest kind, carried even beyond his former abuse of Mr. Pitt, would be circulated very ge- nerally. Mr. Burkes %d Day. ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-SECOND DAY. Junt 3. The court met at two o'clock to-day, and Mr. Burke proceeded to sum up the remainder of the Benares Charge. The account of it stands thus: It was opened by Mr. Fox and Mr. Grey in two days. It was closed by Mr. Anstruther in a speech ( 635 ) of one day. The evidence in reply was closed by Mr. Grey in a speech of two, and by Mr. Burke in a speech three days, fo that eight days have been employed by the Managers in Speeches on the Benares article, independent of what Mr. Burke said in his first opening fpeech : and after so much time, and after fo much money spent, the evidence proves, that when Cheyt Sing was ex- pelled in 1.781, Mr. Hastings raised the public revenue of Benares from 230,000!. to 400,000!. a year : that this increased revenue has been re- gularly paid from 1780 to 1793, and that there is no sort of doubt of this increafed revenue being regularly paid in future; that the country has flourished eminently fince the expulsion of Cheyt Sing; that Benares has considerably increased in building and in population fince the expulsion of Cheyt Sing ; that the Police, establifhed by Mr. Hastings, in Benares, has rendered that city the first in India. To this clear, decided, and undoubted evidence, Mr. Burke opposed a Let- ter, written by Mr. Hastings in 1784, in which he stated, that by the bad management, of the Aumil after a very heavy drought, the country had been greatly oppressed, and that in the line through which he marched, from Buxal to the extremity of the Benares Province, the natives had C 636 ) had dcsrted their villages, owing to the negleft of the Aumil. The next was a report from Mr. Duncan, in 1788, who fays, that fome Pergunnahs had fallen off since the expulsion of Chcyt Sing. Now Mr. Burke rejects all evidence from Gentlemen of all descriptions; rej efts the solemn assertions of the People themfelves; rejeBs the Public accounts; rejects all that his Friend Mr. Dundas has faid of the flourishing state of Ben- ares; a*nd insists upon it, that Mr. Hastings and Mr. Duncan have proved, that the Country is utterly ruined. And with this, at last, the Be- nares Caufe is ended, until the Lords shall de- cide, whether the six millions sterling, which this Nation has received from Benares shall be restored to Cheyt Sing. The fame mode of stating fafts which distin- guished Mr. Burke, when he told what passed in a large company, when the late Lord Dover was pre- sent, distinguished him in relating passages from the Letters of Mr. Duncan and Mr. Hastings. He read what the former Gentleman said of the state of some trifling Pergunnahs; and from that partial statement, he argued, that the whole Pro- vince of Benares was ruined inevitably; that Province from which the Company has received 400.000!. a year, from 1782 to this day. He He read parts, or rather he desired Mr. Wynd- ham, to read part of a letter from Mr. Hastings, in which he reprefented the confequences of an alarming drought, and the bad conduft of the Aumil when joined together for one year: but when Mr. Wyndham came to the following parts of the fame letter, Mr. Burke desired him to stop; we fhall therefore infert it in this place. I have the happiness to find all men satisfied and happy in the excellent administration of the " city of Benares, and have experienced what few men of the first station have known in the inter- courfe with the natives of India, if of any other 46 country, the voice of adulation, divested even in my own presence, from myself, in the eager- " nefs of bestowing a better merited praise upon " another. Such is the tribute which the wisdom and integrity of Ally Ibraham Caun have extort- ed from the hearts of thofe who have been " fubjeftion to his jurisdicV' At half past four, Mr. Burke complained that he was tired, and the Court adjourned, having sat only two hours and a half, though the Commons had fent a message that they were ready to pro- ceed day by day until the Trial was clofed ; but no Manager was ready to proceed to clofe this everlasting Caufe ; and yet the Managers formed a Com- ( 638 ) a Committee, instructed to inquire into tire caufes of the duration of the Trial. The court meets again on Thursday, when it is hoped, tho' hardly expeded, that Mr. Burke will clofe. Nothing new has been faid: from 1788 to 1794, the fame remarks have been repeated. Mr. Burkes 4/A Day. ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-THIRD DAY, Junt 5. The Court, on this day, betrayed strong symp- toms of being fatigued by the great length and fmall advance made by Mr. Burke in his closing Speech. The audience was thinned considerably, the Commons were few in number, no Managers, and only twelve Lords prefent. Mr. Wyndham afterwards arrived. Mr. Burke began at two, by restating, that Mr. Hastings, by expelling Cheyt Sing, and by his own subsequent regulations, had utterly ruined Benares. Injustice to the British nation, we wish to re- mark that from the letter, of which Mr. Burke read a part, and from the answer of Lord Corn- wallis, it is clear that the revenue of 400,000!. a year which Mr. Hastings had fixed as a proper sum sum for the British nation to receive, "was a sum which the Country could well pay, leaving the Rajah a sum amply sufficient for his dignity and expence. The country did pay this Revenue under Mr. Hastings, under Sir John Macpherson, and un- der Lord Cornwallis. It continues to pay it un- der Sir John Shore, yet with all this Evidence before him, with the Evidence of the public ac- counts; did Mr. Burke insult common sense on this day, by repeating again that Benares had been utterly ruined by Mr. Hastings. Mr. Burke then went into the complete history of Oude, though the whole has been abandoned by the Commons, and read extracts from Minutes, which do not apply in the least to any matter de- pending on this impeachment. Mr. Burke said he charged Mr. Hastings with treason and re- bellion, that is the Commons did so, for not lay- ing his Persian correspondence before the Coun- cil. From ten minutes past two, until the Court rose a quarter before five, not a fyllable faid by Mr. Burke, had the least reference to any matter in charge against Mr. Hastings. The whole Speech applied to those Articles, which the House of Commons have abandoned. By the last Houfe, they were voted without be- 1 ing ( 6 4 o ) ing read, and this Houfe precluded the Mana- gers from going into them at all. Consequent- ly, this was a day totally lost; and the Lords feemed to think so, for the number Twelve, which the court confided of, when it aflembled, was re- duced to Nine before Mr. Burke had done. When the Lords retired, a Petition was pre- fented from Mr. Hastings to the Lords, in which he reminded their Lordlhips, that when the Reply was postponed last year, it was stated that in fac\ it would be no loss of time, as the Court might sit day by day, so as to finish it and come to judge- ment early in this Sessions ; that except the short delay by the examination of Lord Cornwallis, the whole of this year had been taken up by the Ma- nagers in reply. That he could not help being alarmed at the advanced state of the Session, compared with the progress made by the Managers in the Reply ; and, therefore, he most earnestly intreated, that their Lordship swould take his unparallelled case into confideration ; and that they would be sui- tors to His Majesty not to prorogue this Sessions, until the Speech in reply was finished; and un- til nothing but the Judgement should remain. The Lords, after this Petition was read, determined to meet again on Saturday. As this was a day wholly lost, no man could form form an idea of the time Mr. Burke will take Ten guineas have been given to receive a guinea For every fpeaking day that Mr. Burke shall yet take; but it is very singular, that though the Commons sent a message to the Lords, that they Were ready to proceed day by day, Mr. Burke himself desires the Lords to indulge him with a day's recess. It was at his request that the Court did not meet last Saturday, and it was at his ear- nest desire that the Trial was put 'off from this day to Saturday. We trust, however, that the time will come, when every circumstance attend- ing this unparalleled Trial will be fully ex. plained. In such a season of calamity and danger, that r instead of evidence, epithets disgusting to all who hear them, should be fo lavishly bestowed upon |.a man who has done as much to serve his coun- l try, as any British subjed now living, is indeed |a very ferious evil. Nobody desires to stop Mr. Burke. If the Commons, in whose name he speaks, t think it right to keep all that Mr. Hastings pro- |cured for them, and to boast of the amount, .value, and importance of his acquisitions. I If the King's Ministers thinks it right to hold a language in the Houfe of Commons so totally different from what Mr. Burke holds in West- T T minster- ( 642 ) minster-Hall, still there can be no reason why some period should not be put to such contra- . diBions. Let us therefore hope, that his Ma- jesty will be addressed not to prorogue Parliament until Mr. Burke has done. The Lords who as- sembled to hear the opening Speech of Mr. Burke, to the number of one hundred and sixty-eight, are now reduced to ten. The Managers, Mr. Wyndham excepted, have deserted Mr. Hastings, and the whole world anxiously await the day of judgment. Mr. Buries $th Day. ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-FOURTH DAY, June 7. The Court met at two, twelve Lords present. Mr. Burke began by complaining in very strong terms, both of the Caurt and Mr. Hastings ; of the latter, for writing a most audacious Libel, un- der the name of a Petition ? and of the former, for having received it upon their Journals. What the House of Commons would do, in consequence of this insult, he could not tell, as he had not yet had an opportunity of consulting the House upon it ; he should therefore proceed as if no such Li- bel had been written. What ( 643 ) What Mr. Burke calls a Libel, is the Petition presented by Lord Hardwicke to the Lords, in which Mr. Hastings states truths that certainly do no credit to the Managers. The faft is, that in the last year the Lords wanted the Commons to begin and to finish their reply. Mr. Burke and the Managers persuaded the Commons to desire the Lords to put off the Trial to this year; and it was said in the Commons, that it would be no real loss of time, because the reply could not be finished in the last year, but by deferring it to this year, the House might meet day by day, and ac- tually conclude it very early in this Session. To this promise, and to the breach of it, Mr. Hastings did very strongly allude in his Petition to the Lords ; for it was impossible for him not to be apprehensive, that instead of pronouncing Judgement in this year, Mr. Burke's fpeech would not be finished, unless their Lordships interceed- ed with his Majesty, to keep Parliament sitting some time longer. It is equally certain, that the Commons did send a message to the Lords, that they were ready to proceed day by day. Mr. Burke applies continually to the Lords, and desires them not to sit two days together. Is it possible for Mr. Hastings not to feel? and has he not a right to complain ? Mr. Burke ^says, no other persen has ever dared to complain as Mr. T T a Hastings ( 644 ) Hastings has done. It may be so, but it is equally true, that no Englishman before this day, has been seven years on his trial, or impeached for the measures which he took to bring thirty-four mil- lions sterling into the Public Exchequer, and to add two millions sterling a year to the annual Re- venue of England. If the language of Mr. Hast- ings is bold, let it be considered, that his services and their importance are universally acknow- ledged. Mr. Burke then recapitulated the material points of his last day's speech', not one of which had the least reference to any one of the four articles, on which Mr. Burke himself admits the impeachment depends ; but as the result of all was said to be, that the dominions of the Nabob ofOude were ut- terly ruined by Mr. Hastings, we shall, as in the case of Benares, appeal to fa6ls, in order to prove that the ruin consists only in the imagination of Mr. Burke. In January 1775, Sujah Dowlah, Nabob of Oude, died, and was succeeded by his son, the present Nabob. It was determined by the Go- vernment of Bengal, in oppostion to the opinion of Mr. Hastings, that the Treaties subsisting be- tween Bengal and Oude expired with Sujah Dow- lah. They, therefore, compelled the Nabob either to give up all connections with Bengal, or to con- sent ( 645 ) sent to increase the Subsidy which he paid for a Brigade of British Troops, from 21, to 26,000!. a month ; and also, to cede for ever to the Com- pany, the Province of Benares. Mr. Burke defended this aft ; though Mr. Dun. das described it, as it certainly was, a most fla- grant breach of a Solemn Treaty . The Directors concurred in opinion with Mr. Hastings, that the Treaty with Sujah Dowlah did not expire at his death; but they were well pleased by the in- crease of the Subsidy, and the acquisition of Be- nares, both of which resulted from the intimate connection formed by Mr. Hastings with Sujah Dowlah, in the year 1773. At the latter end of the year 1775, such was the distress of the Nabob, and such the confusion in his country, owing to the Begum withholding his father's treasures, which left an army of one hun- dred thousand men many months in arrears, that the Nabob was persuaded by Mr. Bristow, to ap- ply for British officers to command his forces* The request was complied with, and a number of officers were sent to Oude upon emoluments and allowances, infinitely beyond any that were enjoyed by the Bengal army. Mr. Burke misre- presents this matter .so completely, that any per- son who heard him, must have supposed that Mr. Hastings formed this arrangement, whereas it was in T T 3 facl: ( 646 ) faft done by the majority, Messrs. Clavering, Mon- son, and Francis. Two of the officers first appointed were Major Webber, Aid-de-Camp to General Clavering, who was not in the Company's Service, and Major Mar- sack. It is no reflection upon Major Webber* who is a very worthy and honourable man, to say that he made a handsome fortune in the Nabob's service in four yers. It is well known that Ma- jor Marsack has purchased the fine Seat and Park of Lord Cadogan, at Cavcrfham. Many other officers appointed by General Clavering in 1775$ have returned with easy and independent fortunes. This Nabob had Aid-dc-Camps, Secretaries, Ad- jutant, and Quarter- Master-General, Pay-master, and Commissaries, with their Deputies. Mr. Bristow, who was the Chief, is supposed, upon good grounds, to possess the largest foi tune that ever was made in India. We do not men- tion this as invidious very far from it, but in order to shew that the system under which so many fortunes were made in Oude, was not form- ed by Mr. Hastings, as Mr. Burke so erroneously states, but by General Clavering, Colonel Mon- son, and Mr. Francis. The Nabob had no money, and was unable to- pay these new military and civil establifhments, or to discharge what was then owing to the Company. Company. He therefore assigned certain dis- trias to Mr. Bristow, who, in concert with the Minister, was in truth the Sovereign of Oude, a f a a stated by Captain Edwards, who swore that the Nabob was in a state of subordination to all the residents alike. In other words, and in ano- ther passage, he said, that the Nabob's Minister, who was under the influence of the resident, en- tirely governed the country. Such was the system established in 1775 by the majority, and this sys- tem continued under Mr. Bristow first, then under Mr. Middleton, or Mr. Purling, until September, 1781, when it was in fome degree altered. In 1784, Mr. Hastings made an arrangement with the Nabob, by which it was agreed that if, the Nabob discharged the debt then due to t Company ; and if in future he regularly paid the subsidy due for the British Troops, no resident should have the slightest interference in his do- minions, This arrangement, which Mr. Burke has quarrelled with, as he does with every thing, was very fully approved by the King's Ministers, and was ordered by them, to be invariably ad- hered to. It has been so, but still we exercise a superintending power in Oude, precisely similar to that which was exercised by Mr. Hastings. Lord Cornwallis, who, on all occasions speak! and aBs as a man of honour, was unwilling that T 4 648 his countrymen should undergo the scandal of be- ing the authors of disorders with which they had nothing to do, and wrote to the Direaors, That the Disorders in Oude are to be traced in the charaaer of the Prince," whom he describes as very extravagant, and utterly averse to business of any kind. His Lordfhip therefore proteBed the Minister, Hyder Big Khan, against the Na- bob, and as often as the Nabob seemed disinclined 3 aa agreeable to the wishes of the Minister, Lord Cornwallis has remonstrated, and the evil was redressed. When this Minister died in 1792, the Nabob waited to know the pleasure of Lord Cornwallis, before he appointed a successor. From 1773, when Mr. Hastings formed the first arrangement with SujahDowlah, to this time/ we have received above seventeen millions ster- ling from Oude. Oude has, in f a a, paid above one third of the annual expence of the Bengal army, independent of the large sums in bullion remitted to the Treasury, in Calcutta, which en. abled us to preserve India, in the last general war. We have proved, by a reference to f a a s , which > general notoriety, that the system which led our first interference in the internal Govern- 'ent of Oude, was not the system of Mr. Hast- mgs, but of General Clavering, Colonel Monson, and ( 649 ) and Mr. Francis. Justice to those Gentlemen induces us to declare, that no such mischievous confequences as Mr. Burke states, did result from that interference. The Military Farmers General, as Mr. Barke calls them, guarded the extreme Provinces of the Nabob's Dominions, countries which Mr. Bristow described, before these officers were appointed* as in such a state of anarchy and rebellion, that they could hardly be said to make part of the Nabob's dominions j under these Military Farmers General, the countries were much better governed than they had been before or since, and revenues were collected, and brought into the Treasury at Lucknow, from districts which before those Offi- cers were appointed, had paid nothing to the Nabob. That the assumption of the Government of Oude, by the British resident Mr. Bristow, in 1775, and the continuance of the same power uftder Mr. Middleton, was a serious evil, and that the employment of British officers to collect re- venues, was liable to every objection stated by Mr. Hastings, is most certain; but it was an evil, as it affected our own service, not as it injured the Nabob's subjects. Is there a man so weak, or foolish as to believe, that Oude is better governed now, than it was either by Mr. Bristow or Mr. Middle- ton? ton ? Certainly it is not ; but as the Nabob ha* discharged all his debts to the company, and as he now regularly pays the subsidy, we have no right, or pretence for interfering with him in his govern- ment, except by advice, which has been equiva- lent to command to this day. Even the removal of every species of inter- ference in the internal affairs of Oudc, was made criminal in Mr. Hastings, by one of those thirteen articles, which the Commons passed without read- ing, though the King's Ministers expressed their fullest approbation of the conduct of Mr. Hastings in forming that arrangement. We have gone through this subjeft. It is true that it has nothing to do with any matter in charge, but it will serve to shew with what ingenuity Mr. Burke can turn afts of merit into crimes. From this country of Oude, so compleatly and irretricveably ruined, this nation has received above 17 millions sterling since 1773. It is to receive in future years half a million sterling carfi year, and it is completely protected by the British forces from Foreign invasion. It is absurd, ridi- culous, contrary to fal, and to common sense, to state a country as ruined, which is enabled for twenty years together, to pay such sums to a Fo- reign State, merely for military assistance. ONE ( 6 5 i ) ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-FIFTH DAY, June 11. Mr. Burkes 6th Day. The Court this day assembled at two o'clock; twelve Lords being present, and Mr. Wyndham with Mr. Burke. The Manager recapitulated what he had said the last day, and then went into a very strong and pointed attack upon the testi- mony and conduft of Sir Elijah Impey, a Mem- ber of the House of Commons, and upon the several Gentlemen who had been employed in Oude. He went through the Begum charge in part, contended that it was impossible they should have been in rebellion in the year 1781, that the whole was a story invented by Mr. Hastings, as a plea for seizing her treafures ; and offered, as a proof of it, that the Directors had sent the most positive orders for instituting a particular enquiry into the truth of the accusation against the Be- gum, which orders the colleagues of Mr. Hastings would have carried into execution, had not they been over-ruled by Mr. Hastings. This subjeft occupied Mr. Burke for a consi- derable time ; and in the course of this fpeech, he applied so many coarse epithets to Mr. Hast- ings, that at length he started up, and declared, that that the Dire&ors had sept no orders for insti- tuting the inquiry mentioned by Mr. Burke; and that Human Nature must at lad be exhausted by hearing such gross falsehoods so often repeated. Mr. Burke appeared a little confounded, but recovering himself said, he hoped theCourt would not permit that wicked wretch that fcourge of India that criminal, to infult the House of Com- mons. After fome time Mr. Wyndham said, the best way would be, to read again the orders of the Directors, for the enquiry alluded to by Mr. Burke. As this is a matter of a most delicate nature, we shall merely state the Fafts, to which the orders of the Directors applied ; the orders themselves, the minutes that followed them, of which parts only were read by Mr. Wyndham, and leave the world to form their own conclu- sions. In July 1782, the Direftor* were informed that in confequence of the support given to Cheyt Sing, the Guarantee of the Company had been withdrawn from the Begum ; that Mr. Hastings had strenuously encouraged and supported the Na- bob in resuming the Jaghire, and in seizing the treasure of the Begum, they were informed that all the treasure taken, amounting to 500,000!. had been applied to the discharge of the debt due by the Nabob to the East-India Company. The Be- nares ( 653 ) Tiares narrative, and the affidavits, were sent home by the fame conveyance, and arrived in July 1782. The Directors answered these advices on the i4th of February 1783. The Managers gave the answer in evidence in 1788, and prefaced it with these words Then the Managers acquainted the House they would next proceed to shew that the Direftors did order an Enquiry to be made in India into the condua of the Begum, that all the world might know the real truth of the case; and that Mr. Hastings did stifle that Enquiry. The letter is then entered by the Managers in page " 920, and the answer in these words. If it should hereafter be found that the Begum did not take that hostile part against the Com- pany which has been represented, as well in the Governor General's Narrative as in the several documents therein referred to, and as it no where appears from the papers at present in our posses- sion, }hat they excited any commotion previous to the insurreaion of Cheyt Sing, but only arm, f ed themselves in consequence of that transaaion, and as it is probable that such a condua pro- 's ceeded entirely from motives of self-defence, un- der an apprehension that they themselves might likewise be laid under unwarrantable contribu- tions, we direa that you use your influence with the ( 654 ) u the Vizier that their Jaghires may be restored to " them." Here is the order ; and the point in dispute is, whether this be an order for enquiring into the truth of the Rebellion of the Begums, or whe- ther it be an order to use the influence of the Bengal Government to restore to her her Jag- hire ; as to the treasures, the Directors arc totally silent on that subjcft ; yet it is obvious, that if an enquiry was ordered, and if in the refult of that enquiry she should prove to have been falsely ac- cused, on what principle of justice, or common sense, could the Directors have patted over the Treafurcs. The Government consisted of Mr. Hastings, Mr. Wheeler, Mr. Stables, and Sir John Mac- pherson. After the Letter of the DireBors had been read, Mr. Wheeler stated his wish always to conform implicitly to the orders of the Directors ; that those then before them were entirely provi- sional ; that he was fully convinced, not only from the report of Mr. Hastings, but from the opinions of many individuals totally unconcerned on the subjea, that the Begums at Fyzabad did take a hostile part against the Company during the dis- turbances at Benares; but as the Diredors ap- peared to be of a different opinion, and conceived that there ought to be stronger proofs of the dc- fe&ion ( 6 55 ) fe&ion of the Begums than had been laid before them, he thought, that before they decided on these orders, the late and present Residents should collea all the information they could upon the subject. If there be sense or meaning in language, Mr. Wheeler said, before I consent to intercede with the Nabob, for the restoration of their Jaghires, I desire to know, what has been their past and present conduft. Mr. Hastings replies, that he thinks Mr. Wheeler has mistaken the intention of the Di- rectorsthat he sees nothing like an Order ex- pressed or implied, for such an enquiry as Mr. Wheeler proposes. Here the matter drops until the 22d of September, when a Minute from Mr. Staples is read, in which he says, that the Direc- tors feem not to be satisfied that the disaffection of the Begums is fufficiently proved, He therefore thinks, that the late and pre- sent Resident, should be called upon t o colleft what further information they can, and the Com- manding Officers who were at the time in the Vrzier's country. If there be any meaning in language, this mo- tion was not made in compliance with an Order, but because Mr. Stables conceived that the Di- retlors ( 656 } reftors seemed not to be satisfied with the infor- mation before them. Mr. Hastings appealed to the letter. He fays it does not order an enquiry, but adds, if evidence is to be collected, it should be collected from all persons capable of giving it, and not confined to official characters. To this Minute Mr. Staples makes no reply. Sir John Macpherfon, (whofe Minute Mr. Wyndham did not read, (though it follows in the next page,) says, " I have read the letter of the c Directors with attention. When it was first read in Council, I understood that the para- ** graphs about the Begums, as directing an in- K vestigation, Sec. " On a close attention to the words and spirit * of the different paragraphs upon the subject, I K do not think we are directed to commence any " new investigation of Evidence. Indeed I do * not see how any new investigation of Evidence " could be regularly undertaken, or what salu- < tary purpose it could answer. " There has been no appeal from the Begums * to this Government, and there certainly was " sufficient proof, at the time, that those who had the management of their concerns during the * troubles of Benares, were no friends, but real enemies to the cause of the English." Here Here is all the evidence to this point; Mr. Burke contends that an enquiry was ordered, that the colleagues of Mr. Hastings thought so, and that Mr. Hastings to screen himself refused it. If Mr. Burke had read all the evidence as it is on the Minutes, Mr. Hastings would have been un- pardonable in interrupting him. It would have been seen, had the whole been read, that neither Mr. Wheeler, nor Mr. Stables, proposed an en- quiry, because it was ordered, but because Mr. Stables thought the Directors seemed not to be satisfied, and because Mr. Wheeler would not ap- ply for the restoration of her Jaghire, until he knew her past and present disposition. Sir John Macpherson was clearly of opinion, that there was no order for an enquiry. Why did Mr. Wyndhamomit Sir John Macpherson's evidence? Why did the Managers, when they called Mr. Stables to this point in 1788, not call Sir John Macpherson, who was also in England? These are questions which may fairly be asked by those who wish really to know the truth. We do not mean to excuse Mr. Hastings, how- ever, on any ground but this. Mr. Burke set out, by saying, that he would read the evidence, to shew that Mr. Hastings had disobeyed the orders of the Directors. He gave the book to Mr. Wyndham ? U u who who read a garbled account, and Mr. Burke argu- ed, as if the whole had been read. ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-SIXTH DAY, June 12. Mr. Burkes ^h Day. This day produced nothing new From Mr. Burke, or worth recording. He desired Mr. Wyndham to read the account transmitted by Major Gilpm and Captain Jacques to the British Resident at Lucknow, of the distresses suffered by the Women of the Khord Mahl, or Concubines of Sujah Dow- lah, in 1782; but he totally omitted a reference to the evidence of those Gentlemen, by which it appears, that no British subjed, much less Mr. Hastings, who never heard of their distresses, could be accountable for them; that they had no sort of conneaion with the Begum, and that no mea- sures pursued against her, could in any respeft add to or diminish the distresses of these unhappy women, who had a very small allowance from the Nabob, and that small allowance was irregularly paid. By reading the description of these distresses, and and omitting the evidence of the cause of them, Mr. Burke made out a very piteous tale ; and with this, and other matters, which had no con- nection with Mr. Hastings, he continued until near six o'clock, when the Court adjourned, and meet again on Saturday, on which day Mr. Burke, it is said, is to make an end of his Speech. There were two very curious points in this day's Speech, on which we shall make a few observa- tions. The first was where Mr. Burke said, that this country had a particular interest in the good Go- vernment of India, since the Public were to re- ceive from the surplus revenues of India in future five hundred thousand pounds a year. How Mr. Burke could venture to allude to this law, is in- deed astonishing. t It passed in the last Session; and though Mr. Burke had solemnly pledged himself to oppose with his utmost force, every attempt to perpetuate the present oppressive and corrupt system by which India is governed : he actually absented himself as often as that Bill was under discussion in the House. It has passed, and it is grounded upon data, which are death's blows to the Impeachment; for it is assumed, that we have a right to all we possess in India; and it is assumed, that the revenues in fu- ture will be equal to what they now produce. If u u 2 Mr, (C6o ) Mr. Hastings has been justly impeached, heavy indeed are the demands which the Princes of India have upon England, for the public robberies of Mr. Hastings ; and very considerable must be the annual deductions from the future revenues of India. The second is a point, which tho' not immediately respecting Mr. Hastings, proves, that Mr. Burke has omitted no means to obtain information, and as he has procured none, it establishes most clearly the assertions of Colonel Duff, that India is unit- ed in his favotfr. Mr. Burke said, he had received a letter from Mr. Bristow, in which that Gentleman affirmed, that one of the Eunuchs of the Begum had suf- fered corporal punishment at "Lucknow. It is proved in evidence, that Mr. Hastings neither directly nor indirectly authorized such a punish- ment, nor was 'he ever acquainted with this cir- ciflhs'taric'e. The faft undoubtedly is, that if the teridih Resident had not interfered to prevent it, the Nabob would have put these Eunuchs to death ; Mr. Hastings knew nothing about them. The material question, and the only one in which lie is concerned is this ; " Was it right or wrong " in him to withdraw the Guarantee of the British " nation from the Begum, and to advise the Na- bob, to tak from her certain sums of money, for (66i ) " for the purpose of liquidating the Public Debt, " which he owed to the company ?" The supposed cruelties to the Eunuchs, the sup- posed distress of the concubines in the Khord Mahl, Mr. Hastings, connot be responsible for; Major Gilpin and Captain Jacques have fully proved, that he neither knew of the one or the other. But the curious point is this, that though Mr. Burke has let it out, that he has been carry- ing on a secret correspondence in Bengal, he has not been able to excite the Begum, or her Eunuchs, or any human being to complain of the tyranny, oppression, injustice, or cruelty of Mr. Hastings. ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-SEVENTH DAY, June 14. Mr. Burkes $th day. Mr. Burke on this day began by stating, that Mr. Hastings had despoiled the Nabob of Bengal 9 like an ancient knight, of all his armour his hel- met his haw beck and at last cut off his spurs that he afterwards restored him to all his privi- leges, for the purpose of again bringing into power u u 3 that ( 66. ) that infamous, corrupting, and corrupted prostitute, Munny Begum; that he made her Chief Justice, and the country was again given up to murderers and robbers -that he set up the country gentle- men to auction, and put his own domestics in pos- session of the . estates of the Nobles of the country. This part of Mr. lurkc's speech was uncon- nected with any matter in charge ; equally irregu- lar was it to state, that Mr. Hastings had been a bullock contra&or Mr. Burke then went very slightly through the contracts ; the abolition of the provincial Councils and Gunga Govind Sing, he then went back to Oude, and came back again to Bengal, to what he called the bribe of the entertainment that is, the sum of two thousand Rupees a day, paid to Mr. Hastings, while he was at Moorshedabad in 1772. Mr. Burke then said, that if the Lords would attend him one hour on Monday, he would finally close ; upon which the court adjourned. ONE ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-EIGHTH DAY, June 16. Mr. Burkes $th and last Days Speech. Mr. Burke began by an allusion to a speech of one of the council, whom he accused of taking im- proper liberties, and 'he then mentioned an epi- gram*, of which the same gentleman was the supposed author. As it is in proof, that the sum of 2000 Rupees a day received by Mr. Hastings in 1772, was for entertainment, agreeably to established cus- tom, and not a bribe, as charged by the late House for an appointment to office, Mr. Burke took up quite a new ground He affirmed that the covenants were made precisely to prevent this sort of abuse Here again Mr. Burke fails for both Lord Clive and Mr. Ve- relst subscribed the covenants, as well as Mr. Hastings; both those Governors took the two thousand Rupees a day for entertainment, with- out conceiving it to be, as it certainly was not, a breach of their covenants Mr. Burke then re- * Oft have I wondered that on Irish ground, No poisonous reptiles ever yet were found ; Reveal'd the secret stands of Nature's work, She sav'd her venom, to create a Burke. u u 4 turned ( 664 ) turned to Kobkessin's present, which he affirmed to be worse than any a6l of Verres, and applied the epithets, rogue, common cheat, swindler, to Mr. Hastings, for having taken that present for the Company. Mr. Burke then came to Lord Cornwallis's evi- dence, which he insisted proved Bengal to be ruined He then read the 39th seftion of the A& of the S^th of his present Majesty, to prove the oppres- sions of Mr. Hastings, The A61 of Parliament, he said, had declared the oppressions and the op- pressor, and addressing himself to the Lords, he said, You must repeal this A61 of Parliament, you must declare the Legislature a Liar, before you can acquit Warren Hastings. Mr. Burke then said, that Mr. Hastings had pleaded his merits, which was no answer to a cri- minal charge, but in faft, every aft which he stat- ed to be meritorious, had been condemned by a former Parliament, Mr. Dundas having moved forty-five resolutions, each of which condemned some aft done by Mr. Hastings. Every one of those, said Mr. Burke, not excepting one of them, were all censured by the House of Com- mons. Mr. Hastings admits this statement to be true, and told the House of Commens he did so, at the same time that he complained of the cruel injuries be ( 665 ) he suffered, by that body having censured and prosecuted him in one character, for ab which in another they had very fully approved, and of which they continued to enjoy all the benefit Mr. Burke next affirmed, that Mr. Hastings was the author of the Maratta war, and that he con- cluded it, by a dishonourable peace. At last Mr. Burke came to his close, which was the strongest mixture of the sublime and beauti- ful in language, but weak and silly in argument, that we ever remember to have heard He al- luded to the miserable state of France at the pre- sent moment to the murder of the best of Kings, and the most glorious of Queens, and to the destruction of the Parliament of Paris, a court almost as dignified as that which he was then ad- dressing, and uniformly pure in its legal decisions -to the destruction of all ranks and orders in society ; and after praying that heaven would avert from us the miseries that have desolated France, he said, that if it should be their Lordships lot to submit to the axe of the Guillotine, on any future and dreadful convulsion, their last hours would be more tranquil from a reflection, that in the great cause before them they had decided by the rules of equity and justice. With a peroration of which this is the substance, Mr. Burke con- eluded this long trial; and as he quitted Parliamer t in ( 666 ) in the course of the Session, we shall here give the deb-ue that took place on the motion of hanks to the managers, when it was brought for- ward by Mr. Pitt. HOUSE OF COMMONS, 28/A June. 1794. MR. PITT faid, he rose to make his promised Motion, for the Thanks of that House to the Managers for their condua in the Impeachment against Warren Hastings, Esq. When first he in- tended taking this step, he had considered it as a matter of course, to which he thought no possible objeaion could have been offered from any quar- ter of the House ; but when he had postponed his motion, upon intimation that it was intended to be opposed, he had set himself to consider what ob- jeaions could be made to such a measure gene- rally, or to this one in particular. The Impeach- ment itself had been voted, not only from a con- viaion that there was sufficient ground to put the party accused upon his trial, but as a terror to those those placed in a similar situation in the govern- ment of our distant provinces; nor wasihere any exercise of their power in which the House shewed themselves more majestic than in that pro- tection which they thus shewed themselves deter- mined to afford those parts of the British empire, which, by being thus far removed from their im- mediate inspection, might be supposed most liable to oppression and plunder. When he looked at the magnitude of the task which they had thus imposed upon their Managers, he could not avoid feeling every thing in their favour, and a business of such extent, and executed so ably, covered every error they might have lapsed into, if such could be really imputed to them, and that no ex- ception ought to be taken to it, unless a total fai- lure or miscarriage could be imputed to them. Where, he asked, could such a charge be stated ? Perhaps the length to which the trial had been protracted might be objected; this was a presump- tion naturally to be looked for, if we looked either at the nature of the transaction itself, the charges exhibited upon the occasion, or the evidence ne- cessarily produced in support of those charges. Was there any thing in all these which could be fairly imputed to their managers ? On the con- trary, it formed the peculiar privilege and advan- tage of trial by impeachment, over the ordinary proceedings f 668 ) proceedings in the courts of justice, that delin- quencies beyond their reach were to be brought, if deserving, to punishment without the interven- tion of those legal shackles which frequently arrest the avenging hand of the law in the ordinary forms. This, however, which, instead of an objection, was an argument in favour of impeachments generally, was unnecessary to be urged in the present in- ftance, if Gentlemen, instead of computing the years, took the trouble of analyzing the trial by the number of days, and the few hours occupied in each day, which it had taken up. The next point to be considered was, that of this time, whe- ther more or less, how much of it had been occu- pied by the managers, and how much by the de- fendant in the several replies, and ftill further, what additional delay given by the latter, by un- ceasing and unwearied objeBions taken on his part to almost every thing offered on the part of the prosecution. To prove this disposition to ob- jeBing to evidence, Gentlemen had but to look to the Report made by their Committee on the causes of delay, they would find it fully proved. It was in the next place to be recollecled, that their Managers had to discuss questions in the course of Mr. HastingVs Trial, which they could not tamely relinquish without abandoning the pri- vileges of the Commons, as contradistinguished from < 659 ) from the ordinary courts of law. Upon all these grounds he, and he trusted the House with him, would by no means be inclined to admit, either that there were any grounds for imputing any de- Jay whatever, or even if there were, that their Ma- nagers were to be censured for it. But these ob- jections, true or false, came in the present stage too late. If they were well founded, better they had been made in time, when the correction of them, as they arose, might have prevented two acts of injustice; rendering the Defendant an object; of persecution, and their Managers of delusion, in going on with measures in themselves wrong, but which the silence of that House seemed to sanction. Under all these circumstances, he could see no possible ground of objection to the present motion ; those who were of opinion from the be- ginning, that the prosecution was a just and ne- cessary one, mould not now object to its conclu- sion ; those who were originally of a contrary opinion, and adverse to the instituting any pro- ceedings whatever, he appealed to their candour, whether being in a minority throughout, they ought to expect the House to aft in the sequel, as they wished in vain to persuade them to act at the commencement; but rather allow the House to act: as was usual in similar cases. Did they wifh for the acquital of Mr, Hastings ? That was an event ( 670 ) event no longer in their hands, but rested in ano- ther place ; how then could that wish operate, either as a motive or reason for with-holding the usual thanks ? Any thing now done in the House of Commons could have no effeft upon the Lords Mr. Hastings must be acquitted or condemned upon legal evidence and legal evidence alone. It was not a question now, what the House would do if the Impeachment was now to be voted. The whole business was concluded as far as depended upon the House ; and not to thank the Managers, would be to depart from usual practice on similar occasions. It was certainly true, that such Gen- tlemen as had uniformly, throughout the course of the trial, shewn themselves adverse to the Mana- gers, could not add any thing to the eclat of the Managers, by joining in the vote of thanks : on the contrary, their dissent wo.uld prove it not a business of course, but rather of discrimination; still, however, he could not help expressing a wisli that on this, as on another occasion, hereafter to be submitted (the vote of thanks to Lord HoodJ, the vote of that house might be unanimous. He concluded with moving, " That the thanks of that House be given to the Managers appointed by them to conducl the prosecution against Warren- Hastings, Esq. for the faithful Management in the discharge of the important trust reposed in them." Mr. (6 7 ) Mr. DUNDAS seconded the motion. Mr. SUMNER said, he could not avoid ex- pressing his surprise, that a motion such as that he had just heard read, should be considered as a matter of course. He said, that he rose with considerable diffidence to oppose a motion which had been made by the Right Honourable Gentle, man, with whom it was generally his good fortune to agree. The Right Honourable Gentleman had supported the motion with all his talents and with all his influence, but he must add, he had not dis- played any degree of candour in the course of his speech, when he presupposed the objections which would be made from a certain description of Gentlemen in that House, one of whom he had infinite pride and pleasure in declaring him- self to be. Mr. Sumner said, he was happy to avow himself a very great admirer of Mr. Has- tings; that he looked up to him with every senti- ment of regard and affection ; but his objections to the present motion arose from circumstances utterly independent of Mr. Hastings. The Right Honourable Gentleman had said, that Mr. Has- tings could not in any shape be affe&ed now by any motion that could be made in this House ; that the decison was before a competent Court, which could only determine by evidence. Ad- mitting milling this to be the fact, as he did, still a vote of thanks was, in a certain degree, a vote of ap- probation of the Managers conduct. Surdy the period was too short for the Houfc to determine upon the conduct of their Managers. Seven years had the trial lasted, and it had been attended with circumstances new and extraordinary. It was true, that on former occasions thanks had bee voted, and as the Speaker had informed him from the chair, before tl>e judgement was pronounced, but certainly not until the verdift was known. In tl*s instance the thanks would be voted many months before the judgeinem, and though any thing that could be construed into an approba- tion of the Commons, would not affect the jutl Ce- ment, there was an indecency in the proceedings which led htm to oppose it in the -first instance by the previous question. Mr. Sumner said, that if the time were not im- proper, he certainly would not oppose a vote <>i thanks to the Managers, one cxcepted, who had faithfully discharged the trust imposed on them, by supporting the specific charges, voted by ihe last House of Commons. Mr. Sumner said t that he a-ctained the same opinion which he had so often profcased of the charges, which he thought to be ill founded ; but it was the duty of the .Managers to support them, and he never wtmld refuse be fo illiberal as to objeft to their receiving tl e thanks of that House at a proper time, provided they could be givn without their bestowing their thanks at the same time on the leading Manager, who, he contended, by his conduct, had dis- graced and degraded the House of Commons, and had dared, in their name, to vilify every Gentleman who had had the honour and good for- tune to serve his country in India; including in his abuse, all their connexions of every defcrip- tion, and applying the odious epithet gang to this body of men. The Speaker calling out order, Mr. Sumner said, that if he could find more mea- fured expressions to convey to the Houfe his fenfe of the misconduct of Mr. Burke, and of the dis- grace he had brought upon the House, he would use them ; but he would proceed to explain of what nature the Manager's conduft had been, in the hope that it would be as much reprobated by the House, as he knew it was ly all descriptions of persons out of doors. The fa&s that he ftiould de- tail, the Members in general were ignorant of, for very few indeed had attended; and of all Mem- bers of the Houfe, the Right Honourable Gen- tleman below him was the last man who was com- petent to decide on the conduft of the Managers, his various avocations making his absence from the trial an at of necessity. He had too high an opinion of the Minister to think it possible for x x him him to have made the motion before them, had he ever heard the leading Manager in Westminster Hall. Mr. Sumner said, in the light he viewed a vote of thanks, he cou'd not possibly assent to it. Did the House know that Mr. Burke had folemnly affirmed, that Captain Williams had murdered Raja Mustapha Cawn with his own hands ? He would ask, what authority had the House given to Mr. Burke to make such a charge ? Was it decent or honourable in the House to suffer such language to be uttered against any Gentleman, and yet deny to him the means of de- fending himself? All that man could do was done by Captain Williams to bring this outrage- ous calumny to a fair trial ; he petitioned the House upon it five years ago, the House would not bring a charge that he could reply to ; and is the Manager to receive thanks for daring to charge an English Gentleman with murder in a speech, and there to leave it? Is this British justice ! The last House voted twenty articles of im- peachment against Mr Hastings; three were gone through in the last Parliament Benares, the Be- $um, and the Presents. This House, by a formal vote, precluded the Managers from going into any other articles, except the Contrads; and the prosecution was finally closed in the first session of this Parliament. Does the House know, that in contempt and defiance of this resolution, the Ma- nager insisted on his riglu to go into the other articles, articles, and expressly told the Lords, that the Commons had not abandoned them, nor tvjr would abandon any one of them? Will the House thank the Manager for this contempt of their authority ? Does the House know, that the language used by the leading Manager to the Court was in the highest degree disgraceful ? That he had the presumption to tell the Court, whether with a view to intimidation, or fr6m -the wildness of the moment, that -the Commons had not only prosecuted, but they had found Mr. Hastings guilty when they impeached him ; that the Lords could not acquit him without proving the legislature altar? Is such language to be borne ? Is this Bri- tish justice? Will 'an English House of Com- mons approve of such sentiments ? Whit is a solemn trial by impeachment bat a mockery, a farce, if such language s not scouted by every man who hears it ? The leading Manager find ng ihe general sentiments of Gentlemen wh > have served in India to be strongly in favour of Mr. Hastings, and, in order to invalidate the testi- mony of the witnesses, has attempted t y b acken and to blast the character of eve.y Gentleman who has breathed the air of Asia. Was ihs uni'i- ersal abuse necessary in order to convict Mr. Hastings ? Is the character and fame of every man to be torn in pieces w ihout a h aring? Is his to be done by the authority of the House of x x 2 Com- I 676) Commons ? Arc they prepared to adopt at once the extravagant and indecorous substitution of the slang of Billingsgate for the strong energetic lan- guage of truth and justice? Will they confer on Mr. Hastings, by this vote, the minor titles of swindler, thief, rogue, sharper, cheat, or the more daring descriptions, tyrant, oppressor, and mur- derer ? " I charge him," said the Manager, " as *' a tyrant^ oppressor, and murderer in the largest M sense of the word." Does the House know, that though Mr. Burke was reprimanded for accusing Mr. Hastings of murder, he repeated the charge on the very next day, and again repeated it a few days ago, as he says himself, in the largest sense of the word ? Instead of thanks, does he not de- serve the resentment and the reprobation of the House? Has the House ever charged Mr. Has- tings with murder ? On the contrary, has it not reprimanded the Manager for using such foul lan- guage ? In his last and closing speech he has dared to say, that he charged Mr. Hastings with murder in the largest sense of the word, and this at a period when he could make no new charge of any kind without a positive disobedience of the orders of the House. Shall we return him thanks for abusing so grossly the confidence which the House reposed in him ? Did the House mean to impeach every man who had served his country in India when they put Mr. ( 677 ) Mr. Hastings on his trial ? The violence of due Manager had spared neither the dead nor the living. Hear, said Mr. Sumner, what he says in his closing speech : " This cruel tyrant, Hannay, a substitute for a " still more cruel and bloody tyrant. Warren " Hastings Hastings says to Hannay, you have " sucked blood enough for yourself, now suck M blood for your neighbours." Does this House authorize such language? Colonel Hannay is dead. No part of his con- .dul is implicated in the articles on which the cause rests. Speaking of another Gentleman, the Manager says, This Balfour, the writer of this extraordi- " nary letter, one of the military farmers general 46 employed under Hannay in desolating the coun- ** try." Is such language to be countenanced or endured? What is there in the charge that ap- plies in the smallest degree to Major Balfour ? Speaking of Major Osborne, the Manager said, u Major Osborne had been dismissed. A court- -martial removed him, justly or unjustly I care " not, from his situation. There he sits in that " box. Who sent him to Oude, to suck the blood the military had spared? What is there, said Mr. Sumner in the articles on which the Commons rest their case that applies xx 3 to to Major Osborne ? The House is degraded and disgraced by the misconducl of the Manager. M His supple, worn-down, beaten, cowed, and " I am afraid, bribed colleague, Mr. Wheler." Is this justifiable language to be applied to a man who is no more, when there is no evidence that can warrant such an insinuation? In any stage of the iria 1 , said Mr. Sumner, such language would be highly improper; but in the last stage of it, after evidence was closed on both sides, to make such remarks was in facl to betray the cause entrusted to him ; for he excited no sentiments but those of indignation and contempt, either in the Court or in the audience, by such general and illiberal abuse. In the same indecent terms that the Manager had mentioned every Gentleman almost who had given evidence on the trial, did he address the Court. Does the House know, that in offering a piece of evidence which the Court unanimously rejected, the Manager told them that he was ad dressing an assembly of nobles, that they would not do so foul a thing as uwrejcft the evidence he offered ; for if they did, they would aft like thieves in a night cellar ? Mr. Sumner said, he could continue to quote passages from the last speech of the Manager so very offensive to decency, so degrading to the character chara&er of the House of Commons, as would shock the ears of every Gentleman -who reflected, that as a Member he shared in the disgrace brought upon-' them all by the Manager; but he trusted he had laid sufficient grounds for the motion which he meant to conclude with, and would therefore move the previous question ? p3l"T3li '-. '-.' Mr WIGLEY said, r he rbse to second the mo- tion, and very fully concurred in all the observa- tions of his Honourable Friend. But there was another reason which also weighed most forcibly with him; the House was sensible of the clamour which had been raised out of doors, and justly raised on account of the unprecedented duration of this trial. The House felt it, and had ordered a Committee to report the causes of the duration of it. The House had good reasons, he pre- sumed 1 , though they did not occur to him, for ap- pointing the Managers to be members of that Committee. It struck him, that they were made judges m 1 their own cause, for the fault must be v;ith the -Managers, the Counsel of Mr. Hastings, or the Lords. In the close of that Report another was promised. Was it decent to thank the Mana- gers before any motion was even made upon tt first, or before the second Report, though pro mised so long ago, was delivered ? No precedent x x 4 of (68o) of former thanks applied in any degree to this case. The trial had lasted seven years, and would not be finally terminated until the next session. Let Gentlemen consider the nature of their Managers' conduct before they came forward with a vote of approbation. If the trial had been finished in the first year, the House would have been competent to form an opinion, but the Members had deserted the Hall, and even the Managers very few had lately attended. At all events, Mr. Wigley con- ceived the present to be a very improper time to vote thanks to the Managers. Mr. ROBINSON said, he had been present in Westminster Hall when the leading Manager had, in hii opinion, treated the Court with very great indecency. The security of the constitution de- pended upon each branch of the legislature being kept perfectly distinct, on its being treated with every degree of respe&. As the leading Manager had not afted towards the Court in a manner that became him to aft, he should certainly oppose his receiving the thanks of the House. Mr. WINDH AM said, that although at first in- tending not to speak, as being in some degree a party in the question, yet he felt himself relieved from this, by the distinction taken between Mr. Burke ( 68i ) Burke and the other Managers; although he was convinced there was not one of them but would be proud to be connected with him in the fame and honour of the transaction. Declaring him- self as competent to decide upon what had passed at the trial as any other person whatever, from his constant attendance, he affirmed, that in every in- stance quoted by the Member who opposed the motion, he had been completely mistaken; in many instances attributing to Mr. Burke words never uttered by him, and in others the expressions were so garbled as not to be understood. He, for one, had never conceived, that in speaking upon what the Managers looked upon as crimes of the deepest dye, they were to observe the courtly lan- guage of a drawing-room. Mr. FRANCIS said, that his intention in ad- dressing the House on the present occasion, was to give his testimony as a witness to certain points of fat. That having attended the trial with the greatest diligence, and more constantly, he be- lieved, than any other Member of the House, he was at least a competent witness upon every thing that passed, and that he did not mean to assume any other charaBer in this debate. That % without questioning the Honourable Gentleman's veracity, he did and must dispute the exa&ness of his recol- lection IcQion on many points; and that even the Ho' nourable Gentleman himself had not trusted en- tirely to his own memory, having been obliged to refresh it by recurring to a newspaper, to which Mr. Francis well knew that no confidence ought to be given. That he thought the Honourable Gentleman had greatly overstated, and given a very harsh and strained costru6tion, in every in- stance, to the language used in the pleadings by his Right Honourable Friend; but that, in some very material particulars, he took upon him to af- firm, that the Honourable Gentleman had been grossly mistaken or misinformed. For example, the expression of Spider of Hell was never ap- plied by his Right Honourable Friend to Mr. Hastings ; it was a quotation from a speech of Sir Edward Coke against Sir Walter Raleigh, and Mr. Burke, when he mentioned it, had spoken of it as a weak and foolish expression; that the words, a Judge of Hell, were nothing but a quotation from Virgil, Castigatyuc auditquc doios, subigitqucfatcri, which the Honourable Gentleman had thought fit to translate into very vulgar English, and then fixed his own English words upon Mr. Burke. There was another instance, more material than all all the rest, on which he could aver with positive certainty, and would be ready to do so, in a court of justice, if it ivere necessary, on which the Ho- nourable ^Gentleman was most competently mis- taken, namely, when he asserted that his Right Honourable Friend had' 'treated a vote of this House (in which some expression he had vised re- lative to Sir 1 Elijah Impey' had been 'disavowed and disapproved of) wfrrr levity 1 ' aVid 'distespea. This charge,- Mr. Francis affirmed,' was r riot true, and that there was not the smallest ground or pre- tence for it : that, on the contrary, when his Right Honourable Friend mentioned this vote in West- minster Hall, he did it in terms of the greatest de- ference and respect, and with a most singular choice and propriety of language; for the truth of which Mr. Francis appealed to Mr. Fox. Mr. Francis then observed, that Gentlemen who laid such mighty stress on casual expressions, or other little circumstances not essential to the con- duct of so heavy and so labourious a business as the Impeachment, fhould have been particularly cautious in stating the fa6ls with the utmost accu- racy; and finally, that even if it had been true, that any inconsiderate or even passionate expres- sion had escaped any of the Managers, which he was far from admitting, it would be no objeftion to the vote of thanks now proposed. That this vote (684 ) vote expressed nothing but to thank the Managers for their faithful management in their discharge of the trust reposed in them, and neither did nor could be supposed to bind the House to adopt every in- dividual word used by the Managers in their plead- ings ; and that therefore, unless it could be stated and proved, that their management had been unfaithful, which had not been attempted, nor even pretended, the House could not justly refuse their assent to the resolution as it stood proposed. Mr. FOX, contrary to his intention, found himself obliged to say a few words. He disclaimed all separation between the rest of the Managers, and the Right Honourable Member, so eminently qualified, not only by nature, but likewise by his particular study and attention to be, as he was termed, their leader in this business,and with whom it was their boast and glory to be identified. As to the imputation of using harsh terms, he did uot conceive, that the Managers were chosen for their capabilities in courtly phrases ; and as to persist- ing to think the fate of Nundcomar a murder, if there was any blame in it, it was his, for it was he and not Mr. Burke who had so expressed himself before the Lords, subsequent to the censure pas- sed upon Mr. Burke by the House, and he was yet to learn, how any vote of that, or any other House, House, however it might controul his words or a&ions, was to shackle his thoughts or opinions. Mr. LAW rose after Mr. Fox and said, that it was unnecessary for him to say much more than to confirm the statement of his two honourable friends, Mr. Surnner and Mr. Wigley, which he did most completely ; nor tfould he suppress his surprize and astonishment at the conduct of gentlemen of character, whose talents he revered, in attempting to excuse the leading Manager, by asserting, that in some instances, his expressions had been misre- presented. Mr. Law solemnly affirmed that they were not; that the English language did fot af- ford expressions more gross, violent, abusive, and indecent than those which the Manager had used. If any passage in his speech could be called sub - lime and beautiful, it was at best but sublime and beautiful nonsense ; at other times his expressions were so vulgar and illiberal, that the lowest black- guard in a bear garden, would have been ashamed to utter them. He was indeed surprised that a Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Fox) should conde- scend to mix his charader with that of the leading Manager. Mr. Law said, he had been a very con- stant attendant upon the trial, and he had often seen the Right Hon. Gentleman exert his great abilities in support of the cause assigned to him, and ( 686 ) and as often excited in order to correct the follies, and the intemperance of the leading Manager. Whatever his abilities might be, he was totally un- fit to conducl a public trial. His violence, his passion, and his obstinacy were unconquerable ; and as for his supposed information, he was really astonished that a man who had been twenty-two years employed in Indian inquiries should still be so very ignorant of India. His prejudices had totally warped his judgment. The feeling of the public, Mr. Law said, would not, and coulld not be changed by a vote of that House. Many thousand persons of both sexes had heard the closing speech of the Honourable Manager, which had lasted nine days. His expressions could not be mistaken; and he was confident, that if the minutes of the short-hand writers were called for, it would appear that the terms he used, instead of being less, were more illiberal, outrageous, and offensive than his honourable friends had repre- sented them to be. They were universally re- probated from the first characters amongst the nu- merous audience that heard them, down to the messengers, door-keepers, and guards. In that House, Mr. Law suid, Gentlemen would not speak out ; but he knew that they condemned the conduft of the leading Manager as much as he did ; but observed, that he was not to be controlled, and ( 687 ) and that opposition only made him the more vio- lent. Mr. Law said, the Manager had treated the Court as ill as he had done Mr. Hastings. To .the truth of the various quotations, one excepted, which was of an old date, he bore the fullest tes- timony. The expressions were used in this year, and all of them within a month. The context in no instance could take away from the grossness or illiberality of the expressions. It was dis- graceful to the House, and scandalous to the cause of justice, that the most atrocious libels fhould be uttered against Gentlemen whose condul was not in question, and who consequently could not defend themselves. Amongst the Gentlemen with whose characters the Manager had made free, there was a very old and intimate friend of his own, Major Osborne, a Gentleman of as fair and ho- nourable a character as any in England, and a man who knew how to defend himself. It was highly unjust in the House, and highly impolitic, to afford their sanction in the slightest degree to ,any of the abominable calumnies that were uttei> ed. It involved them in injustice, inconsistency, and absurdity. It degraded the national character most unjustly throughout Europe. Barrere in the National Convention had the other day detailed as a fact, an infamous falsehod, which party malice had invented many years ago ; be meant the ac- cusation, ( 688 ) accusation, that the English were the authors of the dreadful famine that raged so fatally in Bengal in the year 1770. At that time, Mr. Law said, he was in Bengal, and he affirmed most solemnly that every exertion was made by the British govern- ment to lessen the shocking miseries which the people sustained, not from any mismanagement of the government, which was then in the hands of Mahomed RezaCawn,but from a failure in the pe- riodical rains ; that every civil servant of the Com- pany, every British Officer at every military station, and every Englishman throughout Bengal, exerted himself to alleviate the distresses of the people. The most liberal subscriptions were entered into, and every personal exertion used, to procure grain \vherever it could be found ; yet some modern historians had represented the English as the cause of that famine, and as insensible of the miseries it brought upon the people. In the same style of misrepresentation did the leading Manager, in the first year of this trial, in- troduce a story which resounded through Europe, to the disgrace and scandal of this nation ; he meant the story of Deby Sing. Mr. Law said, that on its being told, he affirmed that it could not be true. He knew that cruelty was no part of an Englishman's character in any country, and as little so in India as any part of the world. This justice ( 68 9 ) justice he was sure the noble Marquis would do to his countrymen ; for he was too high and too honourable a character to conceal the truth, be- cause men of great consideration in this country had been misled. The noble Marquis had shewn himself to be superior to those follies and preju- dices which had distinguished so many persons in England. The leading Manager had implicated a very in- timate friend of his in the story of Deby Sing j he meant Sir John Shore, whom the Minister had se- le&ed to govern BengaL He had described that Gentleman as an accomplice in the crimes of Mr. Hastings, and had gone so far in folly as to re- monstrate to the Directors on their appointing him Governor General of Bengal. Mr. Law said, that when he heard the Manager tell this story with so much confidence in West- minster Hall, he was sure from his own knowledge of the country that the story could not be true ; but his regard for Sir John Shore, and his zeal for the honour of his country, induced him to sift the business to the bottom. He went most carefully and attentively through all those volumes which the Manager had in his possession also, and he boldly challenged the most inventive malice of the most malicious man that ever existed, to affix blame either upon Mr. Hastings or Sir John Y y Shore Shore for any concern they had in thai transac- tion. The fat was shortly this; a district was rented for two years to a man of the name of De- by Sing, and let out again by him to under-far- mers. This man had for years been employed in the revenue line, and was much esteemed both by Sir John Shore and Mr. Anderson. Tne first year the rents were regularly paid; in the second there were complaints of great severi- ties having been used in the collection of the reve- nue. The first and the only aft done by Mr. Hastings throughout the whole business, wa> to order Deby Sing to be removed, and that in so hasty a manner, as to expose himself to the charge of having acled with too much severity to him. A Gentleman was deputed to receive the com- plaints of the natives, Mr. Paterson, of whom the world has heard so much, and who was so little pleased with the extravagant encomiums of the leading Manager, that he has publicly disavowed him, and has publicly expressed concern that his reports should have been tortured into evidence against Mr. Hastings, who had no sort of concern in the business; but was most anxious to detccl the enormities of Deby Sing, and to punish him. Mr. Paterson transmitted to Calcutta all the complaints he had received, and amongst them were statements of cruelties practised upon cer- tain ( 691 ) tain of the natives, too shocking to be repeated. These complaints arrived when Mr. Hastings was absent, and the Board appointed a Committee of Company's servants (all senior to Mr. Paterson, and not junior, as the Manager stated) to sift this business to the bottom. The Commissioners were sworn, and the examinations were taken upon oath. Their commission did not terminate until long after Mr. Hastings was in England ; and the re- sult of the fullest examination -was, that the most dreadful of the cruelties charged never were com- mitted at all, and that for such severities as were ex- ercised, no possible blame could attach upon any English gentleman. Such, Mr. Law affirmed, was the true state of the case ; and it was a disgrace to the House of Commons that the leading Ma- nager should have travelled out of his indiclment, in order to utter his calumnies against Sir John Shore, and the public servants employed in the revenue line. Mr. Law lamented exceedingly that so superior a man as Mr. Fox, since he had accepted the of- fice of a Manager, had not condescended to exa- mine and to judge for himself before hespoke. Had he ever himself looked into the history of Deby Sing, he never could have justified for a moment (he conduft of the leading Manager. y a Nor Nor was this, said Mr. Law, the only instance in which the leading Manager had quitted the arti- cles entrusted to him, in order to indulge the ma- lignity of his own disposition. He had lately de- scribed Mr. Hastings as a man of a low, vulgar, and obscure origin, whose occupations had been base, mean and sordid. If it were of any conse- quence in this free country, and at this period, for a man to value himself upon the accidental cir- cumstance of family, Mr. Hastings might have as fair grounds to boast of his family as any Gentlc- maji in the House. Such topics arc ridiculous; but that from such a man as the Manager a word mould be uttered on the subjetl of low, mean, and obscure origin, was indeed most extra- ordinary, the Manager of all men living ought to have avoided such a topic. Mr. Hastings, the Manager said, had been a fraudulent bullock contractor in the year 1761. This is downright calumny. Where is the charge voted by the House, or where the evidence, that entitled him to make such an assertion? Indeed, said Mr. Law, the Manager, in his closing speech of nine days, wasted five of them upon points that had not the most distant relation to the cause entrusted to him by this House; and the more he consider- ed his conduft, the more he was convinced, that from 1788 to this day, he had systematically, for some ( 693 ) some purpose or other, delayed the close of the trial to as late a period as he possibly could, to the abuse of public jnstice, at a most enormous expence to the nation, and to the manifest inconvenience of all ranks of people. Every thing he had done was for the purpose of delay. The House col- le&ively had not attended, and therefore could not judge ; but such Gentlemen as had heard the Ma- nager examining witnesses, keeping some of them four days together, asking questions that had no relation to the points in issue, or putting the same questions over and over again, must be convinced that delay, and delay alone was his object. No \vords, Mr. Law said, could convey to Gentlemen who had not heard his closing speech an adequate idea of it it lasted nine days two were employed in going thro' the Benares, and two in going over the Begum article. A most indecent proceeding Mr. Law said, in his opinion, and a very poor compliment to the Managers, who had well and ably performed their duties; a proceeding that could have no other effecl than to weaken the force of their observations. Such was the uni- versal remark. Another day was wasted in part by remarks on the article,, which the Right Hon. Gentlemen (Mr. Fox) had enforced by every ar- gument that talents, eloquence, and ingenuity could bring forward, and which well merited the Y y 3 most (694 ) most serious attention of every man. Mr. Law said, though he differed in opinion with Mr. Fox, yet he must do him the justice to say, that all that man could do to support the cause, he had done. But here again the leading Manager must interfere; he must destroy as far as he could the effeft produced by Mr. Fox's speech: he went over the ground again, until listlcssncss, fatigue, and disgust were apparent in every countenance. The remaining four days were wasted by the Ma- nager upon points that had no sort of relation to the charge, improper at any time to have been agi- tated, but when dwelt upon in a speech in reply, which ought to be confined to remarks upon evi- dence before the Court, in the highest degree in- decent and irregular. Part of the time was wasted in reading papers that are not in evidence, and in blackening the characters of Gentlemen who can- not defend themselves. What, then, could the Manager mean, but to scatter his calumnies as wide as he could, and to continue the trial to the latest possible moment he could ? Mr. Law said, and it was well known, that he had no sort of con- nection with Mr. Hastings, and that he had in In- dia disapproved of some some of his political measures; beyond this he had never gone, as an Honourable Member (Mr. Francis) well knew. On political subjecU he had differed with Mr. Hastings, Hastings, but never upon any one of the four points on which this impeachment rests. On those points he never had but one opinion ; and he be- lieved the mind of every fair and impartial man in the kingdom was .made up as to Mr. Hastings. He was confident that Mr. Hastings in no one at of his public life,, had been warped by interested or malicious motives. One good effea this trial would have it would convince his countrymen how grossly they had |?een imposed upon, and they would be less liable to imposition in future. Mr. Law concluded by saying, that as he thought the conduQ of the leading Manager -throughout the trial, had entailed shame and disgrace upon the House of Commons, he should vote most heartily for the previous question. Mr. FOX, in explanation said, that what he had said on ttje topic alluded to, was the result of a full consideration of the subjea, and not from the hearsay of any person whatever; and what, were the same occasions to occur, he should not hesi- tate ta say again; but if it was from hearsay only that he had his information, he wondered how the Honourable Member came to know that circum- stance : but he could tell him the faB was quite the reverse. Y y 4 Mr- Mr. ANSTRUTHER supported the conduft of Mr. Burke, and said, that though the leading Manager originally had told the story of Dcby Sing, yet it was another Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Fox) and himself who proposed to give evi- dence upon it, thinking they might make Mr. Hastings responsible for the ats of Deby Sing. It was true the Court had unanimously rejected the evidence ; but he still retained his own opi- nion on that, and on other points of evidence which had been rejected. Mr. SUMNER spoke in explanation ; he wish- ed, if any one Gentleman doubted his veracity, to refer to the minutes of the short-hand writer, as the only criterion by which they could determine who was right in the statement of the language used by the Right Honourable Manager; and upon this point he declared himself willing to meet any of those Gentlemen who considered it in a different point of view from him. Mr. SHERIDAN supported the condud of Mr. Burke; he said, that if the question was merely whether the Managers merited the thanks of the House or not, that he should not vote on the occasion, but the motion for the previous question on the ground on which it was moved, i viz. viz. for the purpose of throwing a reflection on the conduft of one of the Committee, changed its nature entirely, and he therefore should feel it his duty to remain in the House with those who oppose it. The question was then put, when there ap- peared, For the previous question 21 Noes 55 Majority 34 The question of thanks was then put, when there appeared, Ayes 50 Noes 21 Majority 29 The usual motion, that the Speaker do give the thanks of the House to the Managers in their places, was then put and carried; and the SPEA- KER addressed the Managers in the following speech : Gentlemen, IT is my duty to communicate to you the thanks of this House, for the manner in which you have discharged a most arduous trust, on an occasion ( 698 ) Occasion highly interesting to the honour and jus-* lice of the nation. The subjeft, to which your attention has IHVM directed, was intricate and extensive beyond ex- ample : You have proved, that it was well suited to your industry and eloquence, the exertions of which have conferred honour, not on yourselves . only, but on this House, whose credit is intimately conncclcd with your own. A forcible admonition has been given on this occasion, to all persons in situations of high and important national trust, that they can neither be removed by distance, or shel- tered by power, from the vigilance and authority of this House, which is possessed of no privilege more important than that by which it is enabled to bring public delinquents to the bar of public jus- tice, and thus to preserve or rescue from disho- nour, the British name and character. But in addressing you on this occasion, and in considering the beneficial consequences to be cx- pecled from this proceeding, it is impossible not to advert to the increased security which the con- stitution has derived in the course of it, from the recognition and fall confirmation of the principle, that an impeachment is not discontinued by a dis- solution of Parliament; a principle essential to the privileges. of this House, and to the indepen- dent and effectual administration of public justice. Under Under these impressions, suggested by the na- ture and importance of your trust, and by the manner in which you have discharged it, I obey, with the utmost satisfaction, the commands of this House, by stating to you their resolution 44 That the Thanks of this House be given to 44 the Members, who were appointed the Mana- 44 gers of the Impeachment against Warren Has- 44 tings, Esq. for their faithful management in their 4i discharge of the trust reposed in them." Mr. PITT moved, that the Speaker do print his speech. Mr. BURKE said, that by the orders of the House, when the Thanks were given, he and his brother Managers were tongue-tyed, and had no means whereby to express their gratitude but by their submission to those orders. But he thought he should be wanting in gratitude if he did not, the moment the penalty of silence was removed, seize the first opportunity to express his own sa- tisfaajon, and that of his fellow Managers, on the occasion. They had laboured to discharge their duty, they had completed the task, and they were paid by the Thanks of that House, the first reward men could receive. Next to the Thanks he must notice the very dignified and elegant manner in which ( 700 ) which the Speaker had discharged that task, in which he consulted not only the grandeur and dignity of that House, but at, the same time po- liteness and attention to them. He then entered into a short defence of the ccfiiduft of the Im- peachment. He assured the House, that no aspe- rity of remark should provoke him to say a word, that prejudices arising from personal friendship, or from a sense of personal obligations, were too lau- dable for him to be discomposed at : he would only assure the House, that he had thrown no ge- neral reflections on the Company's servants, hav- ing merely repeated what Mr. Hastings himself had said of the troops serving in Oude ; and it would be found by referring to the iath and i3th articles, that the House had marked their opinion of the officers serving in Oude, in the very terms that he had used ; and as for the other expressions, they had been very much misrepre- sented. Mr. LAW, in reply to Mr. Burke, said, that he desired not to be included amongst those Gentle- men, if any such there were, which he did not be- lieve, who afted either from early prejudices, or from a sense of favours received ; he was as in- dependent of Mr. Hastings as of the two Right Honourable Gentlemen who were united in the present ( 7 01 ) present question; and he gave his vote from the firmest convi&ion that he was right, and that instead of thanks, the leading Manager merited the reprobation of every man who had the ho- nour of the House and of the country at heart : he was, indeed, sorry to see the Right Honoura- ble Gentleman ( Mr. Fox], whom he much re- spected, afting in the present instance under such a leader. He knew what the sense of the coun- try was, and no vote of that House, though sup- ported by all the influence both of the Minister and of the Opposition, could change the public mind, or convince the people of the propriety of the conduft of the leading Manager. With regard to his having misrepresented any one ex- pression used by the leading Manager in West- minster Hall, he was confident he had not, and that if the minutes of the short-hand writer were referred to, it would be found, that he had been infinitely more abusive and violent than he had been represented in the quotations that were made. Mr. Law repeated, that no con- tradiftion, let it come from what quarter it would, could have the slightest effea in this case ; it was impossible to mistate what so many thousands had heard, what so many thousands had reprobated, and which, as he said before, ex- cited no other sentiments than those of contempt and and indignation in the minds of the auditors, from persons of the highest rank down to the door- keepers, guards, and porters, attending in and about Westminster Hall, APPEXDIX. .3c. rro APPENDIX. IT may possibly be deemed more satisfa&ory to our Readers, if we cite at length the authorities for the several assertions made in the course of the debate. The vote alluded to by Mr. Sumner, which precluded the Managers from going into any fur- ther articles except contracts, passed the 4th of February, 1791, and is in the following words.: " That in consideration of the length of time " which has already elapsed since the carrying up " the impeachment now depending against Warren " Hastings,'Esq. it appears to this House to be pro~ " per, for the purpose of obtaining substantial * justice, with as little further delay as possible, to " proceed to no other parts of the said impeachment u than those on which the Managers have already " closed their emdence t excepting only such parts as " relate to contrails, pensions, and allowances" Upon ( 74 ) Upon this motion a division took place, Mr. Ryder proposing, that the prosecution should be instantly closed; the numbers were 161 to 79, so that it was carried to go on as far as the contracts, but no further. It is to be observed, that in obedience to the letter and the spirit of this vote, that the Mana- gers brought forward the article of contracts, and then entirely closed the prosecution in May 1791 ; that is, in four sitting days after this resolution of the House was voted. The impeachment then rested upon four articles The Benares, the Be- gum, the Presents, and the Contracts. The de- fence was confined to these four articles j and the evidence in reply^ was also confined to them ; the Lords rejecting every thing offered that was not striftly evidence in reply to these Jour articles. Mr. Fox, Mr. Grey,Mr. Sheridan, and Mr. Taylor, who summed up these four articles, confined themselves most correftly to the matter contained ineach ; but Mr. Burke contended, that the Commons had not abandoned one of the twenty articles ; and when stopped by the Court, retired to consult with Mr. Windham before he would give up the point. The proof that Mr. Burke attacked the charac- ters of the civil and military servants of the Com- pany collectively, will be found in the quotations that we shall give from his speeches in four several years. years. Mr. Burke denies this charge, and says, he merely repeated the refleaions that Mr. Has- tings had cast upon the Company's servants ; yet in various passages of his speech, he has accused Mr. Hastings of making common cause with them. In his last speech he accused Mr. Hastings of dis- obeying an order transmitted to him for enquiring into past abuses; commented on the excuse of- fered by Mr. Hastings, "which was, that any irre- gular ads committed were owing to a want of a system of law and policy, and did not originate in the habits of licentiousness in the Company's servants. Forgetting all that he had said, Mr. Burke seriously told the. House, that it was not he, but Mr. Hastings, who had calumniated the Company's servants. Mr. Burke added, that the House, in the i2th and i3th articles, had given their sentiments of the officers serving in Oude. It is not now of moment to state, though the faft is true, that the last House voted the i 2 th and 13th articles without reading one line of them; but had they been voted after the fullest enquiry, they were totally abandoned by a vote of this House-, the only step this House ever took being totally to abandon all that the last House had voted, four charges excepted; and into the truth or the false- hood of those four charges it never enquired. We do not say this with a view of diminishing the z 2 importance ( 76) importance which may be fairly due to those four charges; but as this House of Commons has, by an express law, appropriated to the public service^ the proceeds, to use a mercantile phrase, which arose from the afts that are charged to the criminal in those charges, it is fair to say, that they were not voted by this House of Commons, and that this House cannot believe them to be true. In the very sensible and energetic speech addres- sed by Mr. Speaker to the Managers, he truly says, that the House possesses no privilege more important than that by which it is enabled to bring public delinquents to the bar of public justice, and thus to preserve or rescue from dishonour the British name and characler. A noble sentiment, and most eloquently expressed. There never was an occasion on which the House of Commons acted so disinterestedly. In the original charge it was affirmed, that the various measures pursued by Mr. Hastings, by which thirty-four millions sterling were acquired for Great Britain, and an additional revenue of two millions sterling a year, were flagrant violations of public faith, or als of outrageous tyranny, plunder, and oppression. The charge is now curtailed, but in its present state is of great importance. Mr. Sheridan, speak- ing in the name and on the behalf of the Common^ said, that if Mr. Hastings were found guilty on the Benares ( 7=7 ) Benares, the Begum, and the Presents, ceconomi- cal as the House was, it would be impossible not to give the parties aggrieved full and complete, restitu- tion; that is, to take from the public six millions sterling, the principal and interest of the money taken from Cheyt Sing; two millions sterling, the principal and interest of the money taken from the Begum; and eight hundred thousand pounds, the principal and interest of the presents taken by Mr. Hastings, and paid into the public treasury : to this sum of eight millions eight- hundred thousand pounds, which must be paid in money, is to be added, a deduction of two hundred thousand pounds a year from the future revenue of Benares. By no other means can the British nation be rescued from dishonour, provided Mr. Hastings be guilty. No Gentleman, therefore, who considers the speech of the Speaker, or the speech of the Minister, which contained the same sentiment, can withhold his approbation, not unmixed -with wonder t at the very great disinterestedness expressed by both. Any other nation than Great Britain, when in- volved in an expensive and calamitous war, the fatal effe&s of which we daily experience, and af- ter having paid so largely for foreign aid, would be contented to enjoy the advantages that were pro- cured for them thirteen years ago without further investigation, until India called for redress. But z z 2 though ( 708 ) though the Minister of India has unequivocally declared, that an empire in the East has been well governed; though he presented, and the legisla- ture passed a bill, by which the public participate* to a great amount in the advantages obtained by Mr. Hastings; though from various accidents the Company \vcre unable to pay half a million in thit year to the public^ until the Legislature gave them leave to borrow the money ; such is the sacred re- gard which the Minister professes for the honour of the nation, thatybr seven years he had allowed that party which was once called the Opposition, to exert every talent they possess in order to prove, that without fixing everlasting disgrace on the British name and character, Mr. Dundas must not continue to impose upon the -world by boasting of the importance and value of our Indian terri- tories. Our opinion is, that the Managers have been completely mistaken ; an opinion we may be allowed to give, as we are not judges in the cause, and as all the evidence is closed; but if the Managers are right, the nation must pay to India eight millions eight hundred thousand pounds^ and we must take off two hundred thousand pounds a year from our India revenue in future, or the nation must undergo the double disgrace of having proved, that it has robbed and plundered to tn enormous amount, and of putting into its own i pocket ( 709 ) pocket all that was obtained by that robbery and plunder ' The following passages are sele&ed from Mr. Burke's speeches in the several years : MR. BURKE, IN 1788. " MY LORDS. ** The Gentlemen who have it in command to support the impeachment against Mr. Hastings, late Governor General of Bengal, have directed me to open a general view of the grounds upon which the Comjftons have proceeded in their charges against him : to open a general view of the extent, the magnitude, the nature, the tendency, and effcft of the crimes with which they have charged him. " What the greatest interests of the nation has be~ gun, its highest tribunal will accomplish. Justice will be done to India. " It is not solely, whether the prisoner at the bar be found innocent or guilty, but whether millions of mankind should be miserable or happy. " My Lords, It is not only the subjects of this great empire who are concerned, but the credit and honour of the British-nation will itself be decided by this decision. zz 3 "We " We know that as we are to be served by men, that the persons who serve us must be tried as men, and that there is a very large allowance indeed due to- human infirmity and human error. This we know, and have weighed before we came to your Lordships bar. But the crimes we charge are not the causes and ejfefts of common human frailty, such as we know and feel, and can allow for ; but they are crimes which have their rise in the wicked dis- positions of men they are crimes which have their rise in avarice, rapacity, pride, cruelty, ferocity, ma- lignity of temper, hauglitiness, insolence - f in short, every thing that manifests a heart blackened to the very blackest a heart dyed deep in blackness a heart gangreened to the very core. i " We have not chosen to bring before you a poor, trembling delinquent. We have brought before you the head, the chief \ a captain general of iniquity one in whom all the fraud, all the tyranny of India are embodied, disci- plined, and arrayed. " You have now a boundless objitl it is notfrom this county, or that parish, but whole climes, and differing nations. ' Knowing your Lordships to be possessed, along with all other judicial virtues, with that of patience, I hope, and trust, you will not grudge a few short hours to the explanation of that, vhich has has cost the Commons near fourteen years of assi- duous application that you will not refuse a few hours to what has cost the people of India upwards of thirty years of their innate -inveterate patience to tndure. " The first of his afts was the most bold and ex- traordinary that 1 believe entered into the head of any man, / will say, of any tyrant, which was no- thing less than a general exceptionless confiscation of the property of Bengal. He put it up to a pre- tended public, but in reality to a private and cor- rupt auction. " I shall say nothing either of the circumstan- ces of the purchase, or of the right of the people to their property, or to the nature and mode of deteaion, until that great question, the greatest of all which we shall bring, shall be brought before your Lordships, particularly as an article of charge. And here I come to the beginning of a great notorious system of government, which consists of many abuses, branched out into such a variety of ways, and has so much affefttd the kingdom, that I may venture to say, it will make one of the greatest and most weighty parts of the charges. " I charge him with having taken away the lands of orphans, with having alienated the fortunes of z z 4 ( 7*2 ) dows \vith having wasted the country and destroyed the inhabitants, after cruelly harassing and dis- tressing them. I charge him with having tortured their person^ and dishonoured their religion, thro his wicked agents, who were at the bottom and root of his villainy. " I charge him in the name of the Commons of England. *' Now, my Lords, what is it we want ? We want to have the cause of oppressed princes of undone women of the first rank, redressed of de- solated provinces and wasted kingdoms, redressed. Do you want a criminal, my Lords ? When was there so much iniquity charged against any one ? No, my Lords, you must not look to India to furnish one, for Mr. Hastings has not left in India substance enough to furnish such another de- linquent. ** I impeach Warren Hastings in the name of the people of India, whose laws, rights, and liberties he has subverted. I impeach him in ihc name of the people of India, whose country he has destroyed I impeach him in the name of hu man nature, which he has cruelly injured and op- pressed in both stxe?. MR, ( 713 ) ilfc. -BURKE IN 1789. Eminent for the pillage and destruction gf provinces. " Crimes of great enormity^ the ruin and expul- sion of illustrious families , the iota/ rum of villages, the total expulsion o/" the first houses in Asia. " A wan who, in his own person, has done more mischief than all those persons whose evil prac- tices had produced all those laws, those regulations, and even his own appointment. " A corrupt, shocking arrangement was made, and Bengal saw a dancing girl administer its laws. "He has murdered that man by the hands of Sir Elijah Impey. 11 He gorged his ravenousmtw with an allowance of 200!. a day. He is not satisfied without sucking the blood of 1400 nobles. He is never corrupt without he is cruel. He never dines without creat- ing a famine. He feeds on the indigent, the de- caying, and the ruined, and them he depresses to- gether; not like the generous eagle, whp preys on a living, reluctant, equal prey : No ; he is like the ravenous vulture, who feeds on the dead, and the enfeebled, who destroys and incapacitates nature in the destruction of its object, while devouring the carcases ( 7*4 ) carcases of the dead, and then prides himself in his ignominious security, and his cruelty is beyond his corruption ; at the same time, there is in his hy- pocrisy something more terrible than his cruelty, For at the same time that he exercises a proscrip- tion that sweeps off the bread of thousands of the nobility^ he turns the precious balm that flows from wounded humanity into deadly, rancorous? and mor- tal poison to the human race. " Mr. Hastings feasts in the dark alone; like a wild beast he groans in a corner over the dead and dying; and like the tyger of that country, he wishes to withdraw it to a cavern, to indulge with unobserved enjoyment in all the wanton caprices of his appetite. " He comes a heavy calamity to the nation, as we say a country is visited by famine and pes- tilence. " His crimes are so multiplied, that all the contrivances of ingenuity to cover them are abor- tive. " If the language had furnished me, under the impression of those feelings, a word sufficient to convey the complicated atrocity of that aft, as it stood in my mind, I should certainly not have used the word murder; but having no other, I was obliged to use that word. (7'5) MR. BURKE IN " One cannot conceive a crime that defames human nature, of which this man is not charged in the articles of impeachment that are given before your Lordships; and with respeftto the Commons of Great Britain, when human nature is stirred with rage against his crimes; when it is the sympa- thy which God has planted in us, and horror of those crimes, that has called the Commons to your Lordships' bar. When they hear of murders when they hear of women torn from their houses when they hear of the most cruel racks and tortures that can be inflitted, and all^this from the avarice of the man who is at your Lordships' bar. Every drop of blood that was spilt in conse- quence of his als, was murder. We charge him with robberies we charge him with tortures we charge h,im with cruelty. " The unfortunate people of England, for four- teen years have suffered these things. It is they that have had patience. " The Commons wish at this moment to close the charge, and to proceed no further in any of the articles now before you, than those on which they have already delivered their evidence. My Lords, the Commons rejoice at the approach of a day day, by them so long wished, a day which is to vin- dicate and give glory, or to obscure for ever, the justice of this kingdom. The Commons have ap- proached it with a manly confidence, but at the same time, with an anxious solicitude for the greatest stake any nation ever did, or ever could have, namely, whether its bighcsi bodies on judicial pro- ceedings; whether its hi -hest tribunals shall vin- dicate that justice, without which no government can stand ; whether they shall vindicate the dis- pensations of Providence, that has committed so great an empire in so distant a country to Great Britain; whether this country lias energy and abi- lity to proteft them ; whether we should retain a country so remote and distant, notwithstanding all the difficulties that nature has thrown in our way. My Lords, I venture to say, this day is a day most justly desired by the House of Commons. MR. $URKE IN 1794. " This swindling MAECENAS swindling of glory, and obtaining honour under false pre- tences a bad scribbler of absurd papers, who could never put two sentences of sense together. A frau- ( 77 ) " A fraudulent Bullock Contra&or his ex- amples are of persons who have become rebels to their sovereigns. " A traherous and rebellious assumption of the power which belongs only to the King, as Sove- reign, with both Houses of Parliament. " If you allow such do6lrines, your Lordships are as wild, savage, and unprincipled as the pri- soner who stands at your bar. " His supple, worn-down, beaten, cowed, and I am afraid, bribed colleague, Mr. Wheler. " Hear what Lord Coke says of a passage in Virgil Castigatque, auditque dolos, subcgitque fateri. " Such are the damned and damnable proceed- ings of a Judge in Hell, and such a judge was Warren Hastings. " We charge him as a tyrant, an oppressor, and murderer, in the largest sense of the word. " A man whose origin was low, obscure, and vulgar, and bred in vulgar and ignoble habits more proud than persons born under canopies of state, and swaddled in purple. 8S The indecency, the rancour, the pride, and the insolence of the Dows, the Hastings's, and their adherents. ( 7*8 ) You have seen the atrocious insolence, the tyrannical pride, with which he reproaches us. This cruel tyrant HANNAY, a substitute to a still more cruel and bloody tyrant, WARREN HAS- TINGSHASTINGS says to HANN ? AY, you have sucked blood enough for yourself, now suck blood for your neighbours. " Captain Williams murdered Rajah Mustapha Cawn with his own hand. ** No man is a tyrant, who is not, when he can be, a rebel. u God forbid that I should praise that Com- mittee in any respect I know it was a committee of robbers. " A species of account, which, in a night cellar amongst thieves, could hardly be attempted. " I wore a suit of fine cloaths as Jew bail they all will bum for your gang. * Here is a watch I wore it as long as I chose, and now I give it up to the gang. " As to house-rent for aid-de-camps, he may say, I have found lodgings in St. Giles'sybr some cf the gang. " A sink not only of filth and excrement to shock the natural senses, but of filth and excre- ment to shock the moral sense of every visitor. " Vindicating ( 719 ) ft Vindicating himself by the founding of a col- lege for thieves, pickpockets, felons, and house- breakers. " In the swindling account, swindle upon swin- dle and Mr. LARKING keeping the private as he kept the public account, has swindled a whole year in his account of this transaction. " A common-place dog-trot fraud, of the meanest of mankind. " You must repeal the Aft of Parliament, if you acquit Mr. HASTINGS you must pronounce the Legislature a liar. " Major Os BORNE had been dismissed. A court martial had removed him I care not whe- ther justly or unjustly; there he sits in that box. Who sent him to Oude to suck the blood the mi- litary had spared ? A wild beast when his belly is full may be pleased and lick your hand. You might have a serene day under such a beast, but can you under that man HASTINGS? " He is a captain general of iniquity thief tyrant robber cheat sharper swindler. We call him all these names, and are sorry that the English language does not afford terms adequate to the enormity of his offences. " Revenge is a sort of wild justice it is the test of heroic virtue we will continue to the end to ( 7 20 ) to persecute. I vow, that we bear immortal ha- tred against this scum, filth, and pollution of In- dian guilt; if the Commons do not, I take it all to myself. 41 Sir WALTER RALEIGH was called a spider of hell. This was foolish, indecent, in Lord COKE. Had he been a Manager on this trial, he would have been guilty of a negleft of duty, had he not called the prisoner a spider of hell. " I tremble for the event, because, if the pri- soner is innocent, the Commons are guilty. " Nothing but the malice of the House of Commons could have instigated them to institute this prosecution, if they had not been sure of his guilt Nothing but a great party formed by hi* wealth could support him. * We reduced this cause into a smaller compass, into four charges, because of the long protraction of it those we left being as bad as the rest. " What! compare this man, a bullock driver, with TAMER LAN E and those conquerors? When GOD punished PHARAOH and Egypt, he did not send armies, but lice and locusts, to lay the land waste. " This arbitrary creature ignorant stupid from a blind presumption, overturned the whole system, and ruined the trade of the country. By his ( 7" > his owrTconduft, he set all vigilance asleep : by his bullock contrails he corrupted his coadjutor. " When he comes before you, you find him possessed of no one quality fit for any busioess whatever. " Sometimes GOD has made wickedness mad. 46 I ask and scrutinize what was latent in a ty- ger's heart what was in a tyger's breast to do . and that he did. " He formed all these infernal plots in his mind, uncertain which he would execute. At the same time that he had the rapacity of a vulture, he had not the talons or the beak of a vul lure he lost his prey. FINIS. 10 rERSITY OF CALIFORNI THE UN1VF University of California W REGION) SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 405 Hllgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1388 Return this material to the library from which it was borrowed. I INON-RENEWA . i : )UE 2 WKS FROM DATE RE APR 2 991 ILL