An Answer to the -Anonymous Remarks on a Letter from ''arren (I Hastings, Esq. to the Court of Is Directors UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES A N ANSWER TO THE ANONYMOUS REMARKS OX A LETTER WARREN HASTINGS, ESQ, TO THE COURT OF DIRECTORS. LONDON: PRINTED FOR JOHN STOCKDALE, OPPOSITE BURLINGTON-HOUSE, PICCADILLY. M.DCC.LXXXVI. [ Price ONE SHILLING. ] A N ANSWER, &c A Letter dated fo long ago as 2ift February, 1784, ? JLJL from Mr. Haftings to the Court of Dire&ors, I now firft exhibited to the world in form of a pamphlet, _.; and made a vehicle for the introduction of illiberal re- Cj flections, and anonymous remarks, affords a ftrong pre- fumption of the laboratory where the pitiful compofition was fabricated. Internal evidence corroborates the fuf- picion. Much and accurate local knowledge joined with deliberate mifreprefentation, and unfupported aflertions I delivered with a farcaftic flippancy of ftyle, form a charac- ter fo legible, that it is impoflible to doubt the hand. The judicious choice of time for this publication throws ad- ditional light on the conjecture : for, even the temper of A 2 the .'554763 [ * J the Houfe of Commons may be affe&ed by a momentary delufion ; and the fophiftry of thefe Remarks may have Worked its intended operation before Mr. Haftings or his friends can have had leifure to refute it. The effect which this pamphlet may produce on the de- liberations of the Court of Directors, though the oftenfi- ble plea of the writer is certainly but a fecondary (if any) confederation. The Directors have long been in pofTeflion of the original letter Even the remarks are probably no novelty to them. The remarker will not be fufpecled of having been able to make fo long a facrifice of his vanity, although in favour of his malice, as to have hitherto fup- prefled the triumphant utterance of them from his own mouth whenever he could hope to lie undetected, or where he knew^jtfi lies would be applauded. He may quote Ho- race fui juris ; but the " nonum prematur in annum" is not compatible with the thoufandth part of his felf-conceit. The attention of the public has been fo long directed to the conduct of Mr. Haftings, that it is impoflible the great outlines of his character fhould be now mifunderftood. When, therefore, any picture is drawn, or any feature exhi- bited with refpeft to him, not conformable to thefe out- C 5 3 lines, men are no longer to be blinded by infidious co- louring, or mifled by unrefembling caricature. Sufpicions have been fo often fomented, and fo fully difpelled. Prejudices have been fo artfully raifed, and fo completely countera&ed, that of all the tales induftrioufly circulated to his difadvantage, not one has lived long e- nough to anfwer the purpofe of the inventor. Four lines quoted from the very letter in queftion, will abundantly fa- tisfy all the impartial and ctnutidpart of my readers on the prefent topic. It is Mr. Haftings that fpeaks and they are now in the habit of believing him." " Improvident, (fays he) for myfelf, zealous for the u honour of my country, and the credit and interefts of my " employers, I feldom permitted my profpects of futurity " to enter into the views of my private concerns." Is it extraordinary, that a man who has done fo much good, and refifted fo much evil, who has for twelve years fupported the powers of his government, and the very ex- iftence of the Britifh nation in India, againft all the ene- mies of his country, and the oppofition of almoft all his aflbciates, mould have had little time to think of his own concerns ? Is it wonderful that a man, who is confefledly improvident [ 6 ] improvident fhould not be rich ? The very articles charged in the account annexed to his letter are themfelves a full proof of the exiftence and extent of that improvidence. For above twelve years together he fuffers charges clear- ly of a public nature, to be carried to the account of his own private expence. He fuffers this, I fay, unconcerned^ when he might have feized athoufand opportunities of momentary influence in Council, during that period, to have pafled every item of them at the Board of Infpeclion^ which I de- fy the Remarker himfelf to aflert, not to have been compe- tent to the purpofe. The Examiner goes at large into the time and circum- ftances in which this letter was written. He feminizes each head of the account in all its points of view : he en- ters into the detail of Mr. Haftings's domeftic ceconomy in Bengal, with an intimacy not to be acquired at a diftance, and even defcends to the laborious minutenefs of verbal criticifm. It is to be wiflied, that in his own arrangements there was more perfpicuity, more connexion in his fen- tences, and more candour as well as more folidity in his obfervations. To remarks fo tautologous and fo diffufe, it is impoflible to give a fimple and compact anfwer. When an article is confuted on the inftant of its appearance, it ftarts up again at a diftance, in another form j and, when I 7 ] one page of abufe is gone through, the next exhibits the fame abufe in a different drefs. His arguments ar.fi fo verfatile and unfubftantial that they elude the-gra% or vanifh from the touch of vigorous examination ; and the pitiful fhadow, of a jeft * muft occafionally fupply the place of fober reafoning. Let us follow the plan (if, in fo vague a performance, any plan can be difcerned or fufpected) of the Remarker. At leaft, let us firft confider (as he affects to do) the time and circumftances in which Mr. Haftings wrote his letter. " He knew (fays our Philippic page 12) that tt the power which had hitherto fupported him, had been u obliged to give away ; and that a fyftem from " which he had no protection to expect, was likely to prevail at home" Alluding to Mr. Fox's entrance into office. Will he then pretend to affert that either of the for- mer adminiftrations thofe of Rockingham and Shel- burne, were favourable to Mr Haftings ? In the firft, Mr. Fox himfelf bore a confiderable fway, and the grand accvfer^ ? Avocat meme du diable^ was faftened to the very ear of authority : Lord Shelburne's party, though lefs violent, was not more friendly. And if fear could make any impreffion on Mr. Hafting's mind, it cer- tainly was not a fear of the coalition adminiftration. But 44 private * See " moon/bine." page 24. [ 8 ] private letters mention, that when he fet out on his ** laft expedition to Lucknow, his fpirits were funk into " the loweft ftate of dejection." Be it fo, we grant the fact, and will confider whence it arifes. Let us now figure to ourfelves the Governor-General, juft departed from the Seat of Government on an affair of the firft political confequence, with a conftitution de- bilitated by long and laborious exertions under an inhof- pitable climate. He left the Prefidency with a fever hanging on him. In fome of the folitary hours of a tedious voyage againft the current of a mighty river He turns his thoughts for the firft time to a contemplation of his own private concerns. He had no reafon to hope that his return to Calcutta would be fpeedy, for the at- tainment of his object was neceflarily accompanied with delay: that he could not fear a fudden return may be fairly inferred from his having ventured to embark on fo delicate an expedition, burthened with fuch a weight of refponfibility. but he might perifh in the courfe of it : and every man who can eftimate the defpondency inevitably incident to all diforders of the bile, and who can feel the fad anxiety of having made no preparations for miti- gating to the furvivor the dreadful diflblution of the ten- dereft of all connexions, will be amply fatisfied as to the caufes of Mr. Haftings's uneafmefs. 4 Domeftic t 9 .1 Domeftic circumftances, in {horr> both authorize and account for his dejection of fpirits. But were public motives only to be allowed on this occafion, they maybe imagined both of number and weight fufficient to warrant any degree of diflatisfaction, without giving place among them to apprehenfion for the poflible manoeuvres of a " moon/bine " Miniftry.~ Grofs mifreprefentation at home, and rancorous oppofition abroad. Parliament and the Public equally hood-winked and deceived One administration after another bent to entangle, to perplex, and to miftake the affairs of India; or to turn the management of a mighty empire into a pitiful jobb the anarchy which the very expectation of Mr. . Fox's bill produced in Bengal ; the confufion and ruin which muft have enfued on its introduction thefe and a thoufand other political concerns, remote toto calo from all perfonal dread, might, allowably fill up the meafure of his defpondency. And, if the glory of having contributed to the fplendour of the Britilh name, by the eftablim- ment of its influence and the well-ordering of its govern- ments in India were ever dear to his ambition. well might he bleed for the threatened execution of meafures fo pernicious and fo deftructive to both. "If his prefent letter/* therefore, " when written, had very much the air of B "a windr " a winding up, not only of his Government, but of his life" it is not neceflarily indicative of " ajlcrte of mind *' enfeebled and perplexed by the confcioufnefs of guilt" It be- longs only to men of the Remarker's ftamp to connect the ideas of a loft dying fpetch and confejjion with the clofe of departing exiftence. Mf. Haftings's was the manly me- lancholy of a Patriot, perhaps in fome degree of a Hit/band, but certainly- not the cowardly timidity of a Culprit. " Carrying, therefore, this view of his fituation and tf reflections into the examination of his letter, we may " fairly account for many things," (and for every tbing\ " which he has left unexplained." On the 22d of May 1782 Mr Haftings had firft drawn up a ftatement of various fums of money, applied by his means to public ufes. In a fecond and explanatory letter of the 1 6th of December of the fame year, he writes " the " fources from which thefe reliefs to the public fervicfc " have come, would never have yielded them to the com- pany publicly." The Court of Directors, in a letter to Bengal, dated March 16, 1784, thus write, para. 47. " Although it K is not our intention to exprefs any doult of the integrity of " dur Governor-General, on the contrary, after having " received the prefents, we cannot avoid exprejjing ouf u approbation of his conduft^ in bringing them to the credit " of the Company ; yet, we muft confefs, the ftatement of u thofe tranfa&ions appears to us in many parts fo unin- ** telligible, that we feel ourfelves under the necefiiiy of " calling on the Governo-General for an expla- tl nation, &c." Mr. Mailings arrived in England in June 1785, and early in July he anfwers fully and fairly this interrogatory, (though not called upon publicly fo to do) by a letter to the Chairman, in which he meets the demand in every ftage, and replies to it : and ftill further refers him " for a more minute information, and for the means of making " any inveftigation which they (the,Dire&ors) may think * it proper to direct to Mr. Larkins, who was privy to <* every procefs of it y &c. &c." That is, he has at once put it out of his own power to glofs over or accommodate to any future emergency his account of prefents received, by giving up the perfon in pofleffion of the fums, dates, names, and every other document neceflary to elucidate the particulars of thefe tranfaaions. .2 ] Is this " an artifice to deceive the multitude ?" is this " an " indication of a mind enfeebled and perplexed by the confciouf- " nefi of guilt ? Bengal, though in the uninterrupted en- joyment of wealth, peace, and abundance during the whole period of "Mr. Haftings's Government, was at particular moments greatly in want of ready money for the inftant necefiities of aburthenfome war. Mr. Haftings, by his influence as Governor, by his character as a man, or by his connections in confequence of near 30 years refidence, was enabled from time to time to procure fome unexpect- ed afiiftance, fomc irregular act of benevolence, for the purpofe of a fudden emergency. " The exi- " gences of the Government (fays he) were at that " time my own, and every prefliire upon it refted with " its full weight upon my miijd. Wherever I could find " allowable means of relieving thofe wants, I eagerly feized << them." That is k through a fecret and unfufpected channel he derived thef unds for fitting out a military expedition, or anfwering a clamorous demand to which the public treafury was for the moment unequal : and now we are to be told u it refts with Mr. Haftings or hi 5 " friends to fhew what poflible motive, but a corrupt " one, could engage any native to give him money pri-. vately." From [ 13 1 From the motive which might weigh with a native in aflifting the ftate through the hands of its ruler, the Re- marker pafles to Mr. Haftings's motive in accepting it. " Receiving money again/} law, (fays he) is not an in. " different action in a Governor. If he had no wrong " motive, what motive had he ? and what was the view " or expectation of the perfon who gave it?" We will anfwer each of thefe points diftinctly. I. The Law, taken compendioufly, ftates, that all money received by a company's fervant is, bona fide, the pro- perty of the company and maybe fued for, &c. &c. Me. Haftings receives money, and makes over the money fo received to the company. Therefore the law is obferved. Therefore it is not againft Jaw. He acknowledges the amount, and gives up the nam of the perfon who kept his accounts Can this with juftice, with decency, with probability, be called "a confeffion which " fpecifies no particulars ?" Much lefs is there any room for the dirty infmuation (page 22) that " in a truft of the " loweft order, fuch a conduct would be deemed fufficient u evidence of fraud." II. If C H 3 II. " If Mr. Haftings had no wrong motive, what motive had. he?" A right one. The raljon d'ttat in a good fenfe, A principle ofpatriotifm. To relieve the exigencies of the ftate by every little aid which " be could thus Procure" from fources u whith would never have yielded them to the Company a publicly"' and why? becaufe there would have been a reafonable apprehenfion (as was really the cafe with Cheyt Sing) that a public contribution would have furnifhed a dangerous precedent to the Company for claiming a perpetual increafe of revenue. In a private aid this danger did not exift. III. What then was the motive of the donor? The generofity of a friend, the fubtlety of a courtier, the fervility of an Afiatic views of intereft hope of favour dread of neglect many or all of thefe combined (whether good or bad) might have had their weight. The queftion is not fo much what the donor might expect, as what did the Governor grant. Was Mr. Mailings a coUeftor^ that " a " Zemindar fhould give him one lack of rupees, to be " excufed two in his rent ?" The inftances of fuch prof- tituted and fraudulent patronage (if any exifted), muft have been fuflkiently confpicuous. What Zemindar's rent I -is J tent c^/ Mr. Haftings excufe or mitigate at pleafure ? - The "me'anejl" of his colleagues had in that refpect always an equal voice ; and, if He knows of any fuch inflance, why does he fhrink from its difcovery under the cowardly difguife of general in/inuation ? Sifting for private fcan- dal from the difappointed refentments and unfatisfied ext- f e<5tations of the tenants of Government, is an employment better fuite,d to form tempers and talents than a liberal en- quiry into the advantages or celebrity of a Mahommedan academy. That Mr. Haftings made fome ufe of his influence to procure money privately for the fervice of the ilate is allowed. That he facrificed the credit pf his ftation or the interests of his employers, or the integrity of his principles, in any of thefe inftances, is utterly de- nied and let the infmuator prove ; Probatiofequitur affirmailvwn. Of the money acknowledged by Mr. Haftings to hare pafied to the Company's account through his hands, 2 part is afterwards appropriated to the liquidation of Jvi? own demands upon them. The Remarker, by his,hints ? that the " claim might be fubje<5t to difficulties if really " left t that their fervant's boats have been " furnijhed with a " coft which would not be credited by thofe who have not feen. " thefubjefls of it" And what is this coft ? 59,165 rup. including above two years wages to numerous crews of boatmen. Let but the Proprietors turn back to the charges of f 30 ] of boats, even for General Smith's deputation to Luck- now, they will find them to have exceeded 3 lacks of rupees. tc The coft, therefore^ which would not be credited" means nothing more than that the Company have now, by Mr. Haftings's means, acquired an eftablifhment of boats more convenient and more elegant than he had ever feen before, at, comparatively, a hundredth part of the ufual expence A prodigious lofs, truly ! and incurred too from a man " in whofe integrity the legiflature have placed a diftin- u guifhed confidence, and who, {landing high himfelf, is M looked up to as an example," Boats are certainly " necefTary to enable the Governor to execute the duties of his fiction ;" and therefore Mr. Haftings charged them to the Compant. The amount, eftimated at two years only, is but 2,465 rupees a month and the Company, at the end of this period, are put into pofleffion of the beft boats ever conftru&ed in the country, and nearly as good as new. And yet Mr. Haftings has condefcended to apologize for having omitted to lay their charge before the Board, I am afhamed to have dwelt fb long upon fo clear a fubjea. [ 3i 3 We come now to Mr. Haftings's private fortune. In page 37, the Remarker exults in exhibiting an amount of very nearly 34,000 pounds fterling, arranged under five heads only, of little articles gleaned from Mr. Haftings's paft expences. In page 40, he allows Mr. Haftings's whole domeftic expences to have been but 8,000 rupees a month. What is eafier than to ftiew, that if thefe little articles of expence, gleaned out of paft accounts, amount (as by an average they are found to do) to about 2,335 rupees a month, it is impoflible that 8,000 rupees can be a fum large enough to entitle 2,335 rupees to the denomi- tion of little. If, therefore, Mr. Haftings had expended but 8,000 rupees a month, for the fupport of his family* 2,335 rupees would never have fuggefted to his mind the idea of little articles gleaned from paft expences. Mr. Haftings was not gaudy nor oftentatious But his eftablifh- ment was magnificent, and his houfehold extenfive. It has been computed, that, one day with another, half a maund, or near 40 Ik. of wax candles were confumed at his charge. This alone is an article of 1,200 rupees a month. ,,.. ,<-, ,". ; Mr. Haftings aflerts, that his fortune is JmaH.Thc Remarker only proves, that it might have been large. His manners were fimple, and his drcfs unaffected ; and there- therefore} by the Remarker's fyftem, he had no fire In hi? kitchen, and hardly a glafs of wine to give to his guefts. Does he not know, that Mr. Haftings expended, and ulti- mately loft great fums in building ? Were the coft and maintenance of all his horfes nothing ? Did he never lend money, which he could not reafonably expect to re- cover ? Or charitably give it away, without fo much as the form of an obligation for its return ? Was he exempt from lofTes, by remittances^ or on refpondentia, or in any or all the means, by which the Remarker would have exhorted him to augment his fortune at fimple of com- pound intereft ? Mr. Haftirtgs never thought of infmuat- ing that be. kept no accounts of his expenditure^ in the al of acknowledging that he has impfovidently diffipated, or Ipft his allowances j yet the Remarker would infer the con- trary. " it is true, fayS he, (page 42) that he talks of his " inaccuracy, and would willingly be thought a man care- ** leis about money matters : But we have evidence to the ** contrary before us. He has kept an exact account of the tl mimiteft articles of expence, and even of his charities." Is it incompatible with extravagance to keep accounts ? But becaufe Mr. Haftings has kept accounts, we have evi* dence (in the Remarker's language) that he has not been carelefs or inaccurate. Had he no accountant no clerk? Becaufe his money went too faft, was it therefor 2 difburfed [ 33 ] difburfed without a warrant ? Timon's profufion was un- limited, yet the faithful fteward had booked every item of his liberalities. " There is another way of eftimating his (Mr. Haft- " ings's) fortune," fays the Remarker, " that is, if he were " to be debited with the fums which he has been accufed and who now do r ftand forward with all the violence of inveterate enmity to accufe him : and if he had at- tempted to corrupt them, or any one of them, while their u trujl and Jlatlon gave them power to fupport him" they muft be the greateft knaves in the univerfe, if, after having contributed to impoverifti him by accepting his bribes, they now move heaven and earth to under- mine his honour and his life : or the greateft fools, if, after having nobly rejected his dirty offers, they do not now in the true fpirit of patriotifm difplay the iniquitous tranfaction to the world in all its foul detail of par- ticulars. P. S. A word or two of the falfe Englifli attributed to Mr. Haftings. The matter is indeed hardly worth no- tice ; for a man's ftyle may not be always equally pure : no imputation on the fanity of his intellects notwithftand ing. But it (hews the ingenuity of the Remarker in fcrupuloufly making the moft of all advantages. He has however 354763 r 38 ] however criticifed but three paflages ; and in two of them he is palpably wrong. They are " Interefted note" " Profpeds of futurity," And " difcharge viciffitudes." The firft of thefe is a blunder made by the Remarkcr himfelf, or his copyift ; for in the original Letter, and Sri the copy printed for the Houfe of Commons, the word is inter e/1 -note. Technically, for a note bearing intereft. The Remarker firft fabricates the blunder, and then dete&s it. " Profpefts of futurity" is right ; and the Remarker's ob- fervation (page 32) is falfe and abfurd. Mr. Haftings does not " call the latter part of his own life his Profpects " of Futurity." But fays that "his profpects of futu- " rity were unconnected with the view of his private " concerns." A fchool-boy would have been flogged for fo grofs a mifapplication. In the laft phrafe " difcharging , " the hard viciffitudes of his ftation" there is certainly an inconfiderable, but a very accountable deviation from propriety of fpeech. Read the fentence as it ftands in the Letter. Mr. Haftings had written " to difcharge the " laborious duties j" and then, in the hurry of writing, puts down the other member of his phrafe " hard vicif- " fitude* j" omitting^ and perhaps even thinking that he had [ 39 J had inferted the verb " meet" or whatever other word might have occurred in the moment of compofition. The fentence read with this infertion is perfectly pure " threatens me with a correfponding decay in whatever " powers of mind I once poflefled to difcharge the laborious ** duties and (meet) the bard vicljfitudts of my ftation." THE END. This Day is fullijbe^ Price is. OBSERVATIONS ON THE LAST DEBATE UPON T X E DEHLY NEGOTIATIONS, AND THE PROPOSED IMPEACHMENT O F MR. HASTINGS. Printed for JOHN STOCKDALE, oppofite Burlington-Houfe, Piccadilly. This Day is publi/hed, in Two Volumes Offavo, Price i os 6d in Boards, THE E A U TIE S OF THE BRITISH SENATE; Taken from the Debates of the Lords and Commons, from the Beginning of the Adminiftration of Sir ROBERT. WALPOLE, to the End of the Second Seflion of the Right Hon. WILLIAM PITT. To which is prefixed, The LIFE of SIR ROBERT WALPOLE, Printed for JOHN STOCKDALE, oppofite Burlington- Picaditty. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY Los Angeles This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. Form L9-32m-S,'58(5876s4)444 T,OS ANGELES DS K4 A2P2 1?3< v.l the Anonymous Rpm g T*T