THE WORKS

OF

THE RIGHT HONOURABLE

EDMUND BURKE

IN TWELVE VOLUMES

VOLUME THE EIGHTH

[Illustration: Burke Coat of Arms. ]

LONDONJOHN C. NIMMO14, KING WILLIAM STREET, STRAND, W. C. MDCCCLXXXVII

CONTENTS OF VOL. VIII. 

NINTH REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. JUNE 25, 1783. 

 OBSERVATIONS ON THE STATE OF THE COMPANY'S AFFAIRS IN INDIA 3

 CONNECTION OF GREAT BRITAIN WITH INDIA 41

 EFFECT OF THE REVENUE INVESTMENT ON THE COMPANY 56

 INTERNAL TRADE OF BENGAL 75 SILK 83 RAW SILK 88 CLOTHS, OR PIECE-GOODS 99 OPIUM 116 SALT 142 SALTPETRE 170

 BRITISH GOVERNMENT IN INDIA 173

ELEVENTH REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. WITH EXTRACTS FROM THE APPENDIX. NOVEMBER 18, 1783 217

ARTICLES OF CHARGE OF HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS AGAINST WARREN HASTINGS, ESQUIRE, LATE GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF BENGAL: PRESENTED TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS IN APRIL AND MAY, 1786. --ARTICLES I. -VI. 

 I. ROHILLA WAR 307

 II. SHAH ALLUM 319

 III. BENARES

 PART I. RIGHTS AND TITLES OF THE RAJAH OF BENARES 327

 PART II. DESIGNS OF MR. HASTINGS TO RUIN THE RAJAH OF BENARES 339

 PART III. EXPULSION OF THE RAJAH OF BENARES 354

 PART IV. SECOND REVOLUTION IN BENARES 380

 PART V. THIRD REVOLUTION IN BENARES 386

 IV. PRINCESSES OF OUDE 397

 V. REVOLUTIONS IN FURRUCKABAD 467

 VI. DESTRUCTION OF THE RAJAH OF SAHLONE 484

NINTH REPORT

OF THE

SELECT COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

ON

THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 

June 25, 1783. 

NINTH REPORT

 From the SELECT COMMITTEE [of the House of Commons] appointed to take into consideration the state of the administration of justice in the provinces of Bengal, Bahar, and Orissa, and to report the same, as it shall appear to them, to the House, with their observations thereupon; and who were instructed to consider how the British possessions in the East Indies may be held and governed with the greatest security and advantage to this country, and by what means the happiness of the native inhabitants may be best promoted. 

I. --OBSERVATIONS ON THE STATE OF THE COMPANY'S AFFAIRS IN INDIA. 

In order to enable the House to adopt the most proper means forregulating the British government in India, and for promoting thehappiness of the natives who live under its authority or influence, yourCommittee hold it expedient to collect into distinct points of view thecircumstances by which that government appears to them to be mostessentially disordered, and to explain fully the principles of policyand the course of conduct by which the natives of all ranks and ordershave been reduced to their present state of depression and misery. 

Your Committee have endeavored to perform this task in plain and popularlanguage, knowing that nothing has alienated the House from inquiriesabsolutely necessary for the performance of one of the most essentialof all its duties so much as the technical language of the Company'srecords, as the Indian names of persons, of offices, of the tenure andqualities of estates, and of all the varied branches of their intricaterevenue. This language is, indeed, of necessary use in the executivedepartments of the Company's affairs; but it is not necessary toParliament. A language so foreign from all the ideas and habits of thefar greater part of the members of this House has a tendency to disgustthem with all sorts of inquiry concerning this subject. They arefatigued into such a despair of ever obtaining a competent knowledge ofthe transactions in India, that they are easily persuaded to remand themback to that obscurity, mystery, and intrigue out of which they havebeen forced upon public notice by the calamities arising from theirextreme mismanagement. This mismanagement has itself, as your Committeeconceive, in a great measure arisen from dark cabals, and secretsuggestions to persons in power, without a regular public inquiry intothe good or evil tendency of any measure, or into the merit or demeritof any person intrusted with the Company's concerns. 

[Sidenote: Present laws relating to the East India Company, and internaland external policy. ]

The plan adopted by your Committee is, first, to consider the lawregulating the East India Company, as it now stands, --and, secondly, toinquire into the circumstances of the two great links of connection bywhich the territorial possessions in India are united to this kingdom, namely, the Company's commerce, and the government exercised under thecharter and under acts of Parliament. The last [first] of these objects, the commerce, is taken in two points of view: the _external_, or thedirect trade between India and Europe, and the _internal_, that is tosay, the trade of Bengal, in all the articles of produce and manufacturewhich furnish the Company's investment. 

The government is considered by your Committee under the likedescriptions of internal and external. The internal regards thecommunication between the Court of Directors and their servants inIndia, the management of the revenue, the expenditure of public money, the civil administration, the administration of justice, and the stateof the army. The external regards, first, the conduct and maxims of theCompany's government with respect to the native princes and peopledependent on the British authority, --and, next, the proceedings withregard to those native powers which are wholly independent of theCompany. But your Committee's observations on the last division extendto those matters only which are not comprehended in the Report of theCommittee of Secrecy. Under these heads, your Committee refer to themost leading particulars of abuse which prevail in the administration ofIndia, --deviating only from this order where the abuses are of acomplicated nature, and where one cannot be well consideredindependently of several others. 

[Sidenote: Second attempt made by Parliament for a reformation. ]

Your Committee observe, that this is the second attempt made byParliament for the reformation of abuses in the Company's government. Itappears, therefore, to them a necessary preliminary to this secondundertaking, _to consider the causes which, in their opinion_, haveproduced the failure of the first, --that the defects of the originalplan may be supplied, its errors corrected, and such useful regulationsas were then adopted may be further explained, enlarged, and enforced. 

[Sidenote: Proceedings of session 1773. ]

The first design of this kind was formed in the session of the year1773. In that year, Parliament, taking up the consideration of theaffairs of India, through two of its committees collected a very greatbody of details concerning the interior economy of the Company'spossessions, and concerning many particulars of abuse which prevailed atthe time when those committees made their ample and instructive reports. But it does not appear that the body of regulations enacted in thatyear, that is, in the East India Act of the thirteenth of his Majesty'sreign, were altogether grounded on that information, but were adoptedrather on probable speculations and general ideas of good policy andgood government. New establishments, civil and judicial, were thereforeformed at a very great expense, and with much complexity ofconstitution. Checks and counter-checks of all kinds were contrived inthe execution, as well as in the formation of this system, in which allthe existing authorities of this kingdom had a share: for Parliamentappointed the members of the presiding part of the new establishment, the Crown appointed the judicial, and the Company preserved thenomination of the other officers. So that, if the act has not fullyanswered its purposes, the failure cannot be attributed to any want ofofficers of every description, or to the deficiency of any mode ofpatronage in their appointment. The cause must be sought elsewhere. 

[Sidenote: Powers and objects of act of 1773, and the effects thereof. ]

The act had in its view (independently of several detached regulations)five fundamental objects. 

1st. The reformation of the Court of Proprietors of the East IndiaCompany. 

2ndly. A new model of the Court of Directors, and an enforcement oftheir authority over the servants abroad. 

3rdly. The establishment of a court of justice capable of protecting thenatives from the oppressions of British subjects. 

4thly. The establishment of a general council, to be seated in Bengal, whose authority should, in many particulars, extend over all the Britishsettlements in India. 

5thly. To furnish the ministers of the crown with constant informationconcerning the whole of the Company's correspondence with India, inorder that they might be enabled to inspect the conduct of the Directorsand servants, and to watch over the execution of all parts of the act;that they might be furnished with matter to lay before Parliament fromtime to time, according as the state of things should render regulationor animadversion necessary. 

[Sidenote: Court of Proprietors. ]

[Sidenote: New qualification. ]

The first object of the policy of this act was to improve theconstitution of the Court of Proprietors. In this case, as in almost allthe rest, the remedy was not applied directly to the disease. Thecomplaint was, that factions in the Court of Proprietors had shown, inseveral instances, a disposition to support the servants of the Companyagainst the just coercion and legal prosecution of the Directors. Instead of applying a corrective to the distemper, a change was proposedin the constitution. By this reform, it was presumed that an interestwould arise in the General Court more independent in itself, and moreconnected with the commercial prosperity of the Company. Under the newconstitution, no proprietor, not possessed of a thousand pounds capitalstock, was permitted to vote in the General Court: before the act, fivehundred pounds was a sufficient qualification for one vote; and no valuegave more. But as the lower classes were disabled, the power wasincreased in the higher: proprietors of three thousand pounds wereallowed two votes; those of six thousand were entitled to three; tenthousand pounds was made the qualification for four. The votes were thusregulated in the scale and gradation of property. On this scale, and onsome provisions to prevent occasional qualifications and splitting ofvotes, the whole reformation rested. 

[Sidenote: The ballot. ]

[Sidenote: Indian interest. ]

Several essential points, however, seem to have been omitted ormisunderstood. No regulation was made to abolish the pernicious customof voting by _ballot_, by means of which acts of the highest concern tothe Company and to the state might be done by individuals with perfectimpunity; and even the body itself might be subjected to a forfeiture ofall its privileges for defaults of persons who, so far from being undercontrol, could not be so much as known in any mode of legal cognizance. Nothing was done or attempted to prevent the operation of the interestof delinquent servants of the Company in the General Court, by whichthey might even come to be their own judges, and, in effect, underanother description, to become the masters in that body which ought togovern them. Nor was anything provided to secure the independency of theproprietary body from the various exterior interests by which it mightbe disturbed, and diverted from the conservation of that pecuniaryconcern which the act laid down as the sole security for preventing acollusion between the General Court and the powerful delinquent servantsin India. The whole of the regulations concerning the Court ofProprietors relied upon two principles, which have often provedfallacious: namely, that small numbers were a security against factionand disorder; and that integrity of conduct would follow the greaterproperty. In no case could these principles be less depended upon thanin the affairs of the East India Company. However, by wholly cutting offthe lower, and adding to the power of the higher classes, it wassupposed that the higher would keep their money in that fund to makeprofit, --that the vote would be a secondary consideration, and no morethan a guard to the property, --and that therefore any abuse which tendedto depreciate the value of their stock would be warmly resented by suchproprietors. 

If the ill effects of every misdemeanor in the Company's servants wereto be _immediate_, and had a tendency to lower the value of the stock, something might justly be expected from the pecuniary security taken bythe act. But from the then state of things, it was more than probablethat proceedings ruinous to the permanent interest of the Company mightcommence in great lucrative advantages. Against this evil largepecuniary interests were rather the reverse of a remedy. Accordingly, the Company's servants have ever since covered over the worstoppressions of the people under their government, and the most cruel andwanton ravages of all the neighboring countries, by holding out, and fora time actually realizing, additions of revenue to the territorial fundsof the Company, and great quantities of valuable goods to theirinvestment. 

[Sidenote: Proprietors. ]

But this consideration of mere income, whatever weight it might have, could not be the first object of a proprietor, in a body socircumstanced. The East India Company is not, like the Bank of England, a mere moneyed society for the sole purpose of the preservation orimprovement of their capital; and therefore every attempt to regulate itupon the same principles must inevitably fail. When it is consideredthat a certain share in the stock gives a share in the government of sovast an empire, with such a boundless patronage, civil, military, marine, commercial, and financial, in every department of which suchfortunes have been made as could be made nowhere else, it is impossiblenot to perceive that capitals far superior to any qualificationsappointed to proprietors, or even to Directors, would readily be laidout for a participation in that power. The India proprietor, therefore, will always be, in the first instance, a politician; and the bolder hisenterprise, and the more corrupt his views, the less will be hisconsideration of the price to be paid for compassing them. The newregulations did not reduce the number so low as not to leave theassembly still liable to all the disorder which might be supposed toarise from multitude. But if the principle had been well established andwell executed, a much greater inconveniency grew out of the reform thanthat which had attended the old abuse: for if tumult and disorder belessened by reducing the number of proprietors, private cabal andintrigue are facilitated at least in an equal degree; and it is cabaland corruption, rather than disorder and confusion, that was most to bedreaded in transacting the affairs of India. Whilst the votes of thesmaller proprietors continued, a door was left open for the public senseto enter into that society: since that door has been closed, theproprietary has become, even more than formerly, an aggregate of privateinterests, which subsist at the expense of the collective body. At themoment of this revolution in the proprietary, as it might naturally beexpected, those who had either no very particular interest in their voteor but a petty object to pursue immediately disqualified; but those whowere deeply interested in the Company's patronage, those who wereconcerned in the supply of ships and of the other innumerable objectsrequired for their immense establishments, those who were engaged incontracts with the Treasury, Admiralty, and Ordnance, together with theclerks in public offices, found means of securing qualifications at theenlarged standard. All these composed a much greater proportion thanformerly they had done of the proprietary body. 

Against the great, predominant, radical corruption of the Court ofProprietors the raising the qualification proved no sort of remedy. Thereturn of the Company's servants into Europe poured in a constant supplyof proprietors, whose ability to purchase the highest qualifications forthemselves, their agents, and dependants could not be dubious. And thislatter description form a very considerable, and by far the most activeand efficient part of that body. To add to the votes, which is adding tothe power in proportion to the wealth, of men whose very offences weresupposed to consist in acts which lead to the acquisition of enormousriches, appears by no means a well-considered method of checkingrapacity and oppression. In proportion as these interests prevailed, themeans of cabal, of concealment, and of corrupt confederacy became farmore easy than before. Accordingly, there was no fault with respect tothe Company's government over its servants, charged or chargeable on theGeneral Court as it originally stood, of which since the reform it hasnot been notoriously guilty. It was not, therefore, a matter of surpriseto your Committee, that the General Court, so composed, has at lengthgrown to such a degree of contempt both of its duty and of the permanentinterest of the whole corporation as to put itself into open defiance ofthe salutary admonitions of this House, given for the purpose ofasserting and enforcing the legal authority of their own body over theirown servants. 

The failure in this part of the reform of 1773 is not stated by yourCommittee as recommending a return to the ancient constitution of theCompany, which was nearly as far as the new from containing anyprinciple tending to the prevention or remedy of abuses, --but to pointout the probable failure of any future regulations which do not applydirectly to the grievance, but which may be taken up as experiments toascertain theories of the operation of councils formed of greater orlesser numbers, or such as shall be composed of men of more or lessopulence, or of interests of newer or longer standing, or concerning thedistribution of power to various descriptions or professions of men, orof the election to office by one authority rather than another. 

[Sidenote: Court of Directors. ]

The second object of the act was the Court of Directors. Under thearrangement of the year 1773 that court appeared to have its authoritymuch strengthened. It was made less dependent than formerly upon itsconstituents, the proprietary. The duration of the Directors in officewas rendered more permanent, and the tenure itself diversified by avaried and intricate rotation. At the same time their authority was heldhigh over their servants of all descriptions; and the only ruleprescribed to the Council-General of Bengal, in the exercise of thelarge and ill-defined powers given to them, was that they were to yieldobedience to the orders of the Court of Directors. As to the Court ofDirectors itself, it was left with very little regulation. The custom ofballot, infinitely the most mischievous in a body possessed of all theordinary executive powers, was still left; and your Committee have foundthe ill effects of this practice in the course of their inquiries. Nothing was done to oblige the Directors to attend to the promotion oftheir servants according to their rank and merits. In judging of thosemerits nothing was done to bind them to any observation of what appearedon their records. Nothing was done to compel them to prosecution orcomplaint where delinquency became visible. The act, indeed, prescribedthat no servant of the Company abroad should be eligible into thedirection until two years after his return to England. But as thisregulation rather presumes than provides for an inquiry into theirconduct, a very ordinary neglect in the Court of Directors might easilydefeat it, and a short remission might in this particular operate as atotal indemnity. In fact, however, the servants have of late seldomattempted a seat in the direction, --an attempt which might possiblyrouse a dormant spirit of inquiry; but, satisfied with an interest inthe proprietary, they have, through that name, brought the directionvery much under their own control. 

As to the general authority of the Court of Directors, there is reasonto apprehend that on the whole it was somewhat degraded by the act whoseprofessed purpose was to exalt it, and that the only effect of theParliamentary sanction to their orders has been, that along with thoseorders the law of the land has been despised and trampled under foot. The Directors were not suffered either to nominate or to remove thosewhom they were empowered to instruct; from masters they were reduced tothe situation of complainants, --a situation the imbecility of which nolaws or regulations could wholly alter; and when the Directors wereafterwards restored in some degree to their ancient power, on theexpiration of the lease given to their principal servants, it becameimpossible for them to recover any degree of their ancient respect, evenif they had not in the mean time been so modelled as to be entirely freefrom all ambition of that sort. 

From that period the orders of the Court of Directors became to be sohabitually despised by their servants abroad, and at length to be solittle regarded even by themselves, that this contempt of orders formsalmost the whole subject-matter of the voluminous reports of two of yourcommittees. If any doubt, however, remains concerning the cause of thisfatal decline of the authority of the Court of Directors, no doubtwhatsoever can remain of the fact itself, nor of the total failure ofone of the great leading regulations of the act of 1773. 

[Sidenote: Supreme Court of Judicature. ]

The third object was a new judicial arrangement, the chief purpose ofwhich was to form a strong and solid security for the natives againstthe wrongs and oppressions of British subjects resident in Bengal. Anoperose and expensive establishment of a Supreme Court was made, andcharged upon the revenues of the country. The charter of justice was bythe act left to the crown, as well as the appointment of themagistrates. The defect in the institution seemed to be this, --that norule was laid down, either in the act or the charter, by which the courtwas to judge. No descriptions of offenders or species of delinquencywere properly ascertained, according to the nature of the place, or tothe prevalent mode of abuse. Provision was made for the administrationof justice in the remotest part of Hindostan as if it were a province inGreat Britain. Your Committee have long had the constitution and conductof this court before them, and they have not yet been able to discoververy few instances (not one that appears to them of leading importance)of relief given to the natives against the corruptions or oppressions ofBritish subjects in power, --though they do find one very strong andmarked instance of the judges having employed an unwarrantable extensionor application of the municipal law of England, to destroy a person ofthe highest rank among those natives whom they were sent to protect. Onecircumstance rendered the proceeding in this case fatal to all the goodpurposes for which the court had been established. The sufferer (theRajah Nundcomar) appears, at the very time of this extraordinaryprosecution, a discoverer of some particulars of illicit gain thencharged upon Mr. Hastings, the Governor-General. Although in ordinarycases, and in some lesser instances of grievance, it is very probablethat this court has done its duty, and has been, as every court must be, of some service, yet one example of this kind must do more towardsdeterring the natives from complaint, and consequently from the meansof redress, than many decisions favorable to them, in the ordinarycourse of proceeding, can do for their encouragement and relief. So faras your Committee has been able to discover, the court has beengenerally terrible to the natives, and has distracted the government ofthe Company without substantially reforming any one of its abuses. 

This court, which in its constitution seems not to have had sufficientlyin view the necessities of the people for whose relief it was intended, and was, or thought itself, bound in some instances to too strict anadherence to the forms and rules of English practice, in others wasframed upon principles perhaps too remote from the constitution ofEnglish tribunals. By the usual course of English practice, the fargreater part of the redress to be obtained against oppressions of poweris by process in the nature of civil actions. In these a trial by juryis a necessary part, with regard to the finding the offence and to theassessment of the damages. Both these were in the charter of justiceleft entirely to the judges. It was presumed, and not wholly withoutreason, that the British subjects were liable to fall into factions andcombinations, in order to support themselves in the abuses of anauthority of which every man might in his turn become a sharer. And withregard to the natives, it was presumed (perhaps a little too hastily)that they were not capable of sharing in the functions of jurors. But itwas not foreseen that the judges were also liable to be engaged in thefactions of the settlement, --and if they should ever happen to be soengaged, that the native people were then without that remedy whichobviously lay in the chance that the court and jury, though both liableto bias, might not easily unite in the same identical act of injustice. Your Committee, on full inquiry, are of opinion _that the use of juriesis neither impracticable nor dangerous in Bengal_. 

Your Committee refer to their report made in the year 1781, for themanner in which this court, attempting to extend its jurisdiction, andfalling with extreme severity on the native magistrates, a violentcontest arose between the English judges and the English civilauthority. This authority, calling in the military arm, (by a mostdangerous example, ) overpowered, and for a while suspended, thefunctions of the court; but at length those functions, which weresuspended by the quarrel of the parties, were destroyed by theirreconciliation, and by the arrangements made in consequence of it. Bythese the court was virtually annihilated; or if substantially itexists, it is to be apprehended it exists only for purposes verydifferent from those of its institution. 

The fourth object of the act of 1773 was the Council-General. Thisinstitution was intended to produce uniformity, consistency, and theeffective coöperation of all the settlements in their common defence. Bythe ancient constitution of the Company's foreign settlements, they wereeach of them under the orders of a President or Chief, and a Council, more or fewer, according to the discretion of the Company. Among those, Parliament (probably on account of the largeness of the territorialacquisitions, rather than the conveniency of the situation) chose Bengalfor the residence of the controlling power, and, dissolving thePresidency, appointed a new establishment, upon a plan somewhat similarto that which had prevailed before; but the number was smaller. Thisestablishment was composed of a Governor-General and four Counsellors, all named in the act of Parliament. They were to hold their offices forfive years, after which term the patronage was to revert to the Court ofDirectors. In the mean time such vacancies as should happen were to befilled by that court, with the concurrence of the crown. The firstGovernor-General and one of the Counsellors had been old servants of theCompany; the others were new men. 

On this new arrangement the Courts of Proprietors and Directorsconsidered the details of commerce as not perfectly consistent with theenlarged sphere of duty and the reduced number of the Council. Therefore, to relieve them from this burden, they instituted a newoffice, called the Board of Trade, for the subordinate management oftheir commercial concerns, and appointed eleven of the senior servantsto fill the commission. 

[Sidenote: Object of powers to Governor-General and Council. ]

The powers given by the act to the new Governor-General and Council hadfor their direct object the kingdom of Bengal and its dependencies. Within that sphere (and it is not a small one) their authority extendedover all the Company's concerns of whatever description. In matters ofpeace and war it seems to have been meant that the other Presidenciesshould be subordinate to their board. But the law is loose anddefective, where it professes to restrain the subordinate Presidenciesfrom making war without the consent and approbation of the SupremeCouncil. They are left free to act without it _in cases of imminentnecessity_, or _where they shall have received special orders from theCompany_. The first exception leaves it open to the subordinate to judgeof the necessity of measures which, when taken, bind or involve thesuperior: the second refers a question of peace or war to twojurisdictions, which may give different judgments. In both instancescases in point have occurred. [1] With regard to their localadministration, their powers were exceedingly and dangerously loose andundetermined. Their powers were not given directly, but in words ofreference, in which neither the objects related to nor the mode of therelation were sufficiently expressed. Their legislative and executivecapacities were not so accurately drawn, and marked by such strong andpenal lines of distinction, as to keep these capacities separate. Wherelegislative and merely executive powers were lodged in the same hands, the legislative, which is the larger and the more ready for alloccasions, was constantly resorted to. The Governor-General and Council, therefore, immediately gave constructions to their ill-defined authoritywhich rendered it perfectly despotic, --constructions which if they wereallowed, no action of theirs ought to be regarded as criminal. 

Armed as they were with an authority in itself so ample, and by abuse socapable of an unlimited extent, very few, and these very insufficientcorrectives, were administered. Ample salaries were provided for them, which indeed removed the necessity, but by no means the inducements tocorruption and oppression. Nor was any barrier whatsoever opposed on thepart of the natives against their injustice, except the Supreme Courtof Judicature, which never could be capable of controlling a governmentwith such powers, without becoming such a government itself. 

There was, indeed, a prohibition against all concerns in trade to thewhole Council, and against all taking of presents by any in authority. Aright of prosecution in the King's Bench was also established; but itwas a right the exercise of which is difficult, and in many, and thosethe most weighty cases, impracticable. No considerable facilities weregiven to prosecution in Parliament; nothing was done to preventcomplaint from being far more dangerous to the sufferer than injusticeto the oppressor. No overt acts were fixed, upon which corruption shouldbe presumed in transactions of which secrecy and collusion formed thevery basis; no rules of evidence nor authentic mode of transmission weresettled in conformity to the unalterable circumstances of the countryand the people. 

[Sidenote: Removal of servants. ]

One provision, indeed, was made for restraining the servants, in itselfvery wise and substantial: a delinquent once dismissed, could not berestored, but by the votes of three fourths of the Directors and threefourths of the proprietors: this was well aimed. But no method wassettled for bringing delinquents to the question of removal: and if theyshould be brought to it, a door lay wide open for evasion of the law, and for a return into the service, in defiance of its plainintention, --that is, by resigning to avoid removal; by which measurethis provision of the act has proved as unoperative as all the rest. Bythis management a mere majority may bring in the greater delinquent, whilst the person removed for offences comparatively trivial may remainexcluded forever. 

[Sidenote: Council-General]

The new Council nominated in the act was composed of two totallydiscordant elements, which soon distinguished themselves into permanentparties. One of the principal instructions which the three members ofthe Council sent immediately from England, namely, General Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis, carried out with them was, to "_causethe strictest inquiry to be made into all oppressions and abuses_, "among which _the practice of receiving presents from the natives_, atthat time generally charged upon men in power, was principally aimed at. 

Presents to any considerable value were justly reputed by thelegislature, not as marks of attention and respect, but as bribes orextortions, for which either the beneficial and gratuitous duties ofgovernment were sold, or they were the price paid for acts ofpartiality, or, finally, they were sums of money extorted from thegivers by the terrors of power. Against the system of presents, therefore, the new commission was in general opinion particularlypointed. In the commencement of reformation, at a period when arapacious conquest had overpowered and succeeded to a corruptgovernment, an act of indemnity might have been thought advisable;perhaps a new account ought to have been opened; all retrospect ought tohave been forbidden, at least to certain periods. If this had not beenthought advisable, none in the higher departments of a suspected anddecried government ought to have been kept in their posts, until anexamination had rendered their proceedings clear, or until length oftime had obliterated, by an even course of irreproachable conduct, theerrors which so naturally grow out of a new power. But the policyadopted was different: it was to begin with _examples_. The cry againstthe abuses was strong and vehement throughout the whole nation, and thepractice of presents was represented to be as general as it wasmischievous. In such a case, indeed in any case, it seemed not to be ameasure the most provident, without a great deal of previous inquiry, toplace two persons, who from their situation must be the most exposed tosuch imputations, in the commission which was to inquire into their ownconduct, --much less to place one of them at the head of that commission, and with a casting vote in case of an equality. The persons who couldnot be liable to that charge were, indeed, three to two; but anyaccidental difference of opinion, the death of any one of them or hisoccasional absence or sickness, threw the whole power into the hands ofthe other two, who were Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell, one the President, and the other high in the Council of that establishment on which thereform was to operate. Thus those who were liable to process asdelinquents were in effect set over the reformers; and that did actuallyhappen which might be expected to happen from so preposterous anarrangement: a stop was soon put to all inquiries into the capitalabuses. 

Nor was the great political end proposed in the formation of asuperintending Council over all the Presidencies better answered thanthat of an inquiry into corruptions and abuses. The several Presidencieshave acted in a great degree upon their own separate authority; and aslittle of unity, concert, or regular system has appeared in theirconduct as was ever known before this institution. India is, indeed, sovast a country, and the settlements are so divided, that theirintercourse with each other is liable to as many delays and difficultiesas the intercourse between distant and separate states. But one evil maypossibly have arisen from an attempt to produce an union, which, thoughundoubtedly to be aimed at, is opposed in some degree by the unalterablenature of their situation, --that it has taught the servants rather tolook to a superior among themselves than to their common superiors. Thisevil, growing out of the abuse of the principle of subordination, canonly be corrected by a very strict enforcement of authority over thatpart of the chain of dependence which is next to the original power. 

[Sidenote: Powers given to the ministers of the crown. ]

That which your Committee considers as the fifth and last of the capitalobjects of the act, and as the binding regulation of the whole, is theintroduction (then for the first time) of the ministers of the crowninto the affairs of the Company. The state claiming a concern and shareof property in the Company's profits, the servants of the crown werepresumed the more likely to preserve with a scrupulous attention thesources of the great revenues which they were to administer, and for therise and fall of which they were to render an account. 

The interference of government was introduced by this act in two ways:one by a control, in effect by a share, in the appointment to vacanciesin the Supreme Council. The act provided that his Majesty's approbationshould be had to the persons named to that duty. Partaking thus in thepatronage of the Company, administration was bound to an attention tothe characters and capacities of the persons employed in that hightrust. The other part of their interference was by way of inspection. Bythis right of inspection, everything in the Company's correspondencefrom India, which related to the civil or military affairs andgovernment of the Company, was directed by the act to be within fourteendays after the receipt laid before the Secretary of State, andeverything that related to the management of the revenues was to be laidbefore the Commissioners of the Treasury. In fact, both description ofthese papers have been generally communicated to that board. 

[Sidenote: Defects in the plan. ]

It appears to your Committee that there were great and material defectsin both parts of the plan. With regard to the approbation of personsnominated to the Supreme Council by the Court of Directors, nosufficient means were provided for carrying to his Majesty, along withthe nomination, the particulars in the conduct of those who had been inthe service before, which might render them proper objects ofapprobation or rejection. The India House possesses an office of recordcapable of furnishing, in almost all cases, materials for judging on thebehavior of the servants in their progress from the lowest to thehighest stations; and the whole discipline of the service, civil andmilitary, must depend upon an examination of these records inseparablyattending every application for an appointment to the highest stations. But in the present state of the nomination the ministers of the crownare not furnished with the proper means of exercising the power ofcontrol intended by the law, even if they were scrupulously attentive tothe use of it. There are modes of proceeding favorable to neglect. Others excite inquiry and stimulate to vigilance. 

[Sidenote: Proposition to remedy them. ]

Your Committee, therefore, are of opinion, that for the futureprevention of cabal, and of private and partial representation, whetherabove or below, that, whenever any person who has been in the serviceshall be recommended to the King's ministers to fill a vacancy in theCouncil-General, the Secretary of the Court of Directors shall beordered to make a strict search into the records of the Company, andshall annex to the recommendation the reasons of the Court of Directorsfor their choice, together with a faithful copy of whatever shall befound (if anything can be found) relative to his character andconduct, --as also an account of his standing in the Company's service, the time of his abode in India, the reasons for his return, and thestations, whether civil or military, in which he has been successivelyplaced. 

With this account ought to be transmitted the names of those who wereproposed as candidates for the same office, with the correspondentparticulars relative to their conduct and situation: for not only theseparate, but the comparative merit, probably would, and certainlyought, to have great influence in the approbation or rejection of theparty presented to the ministers of the crown. These papers should belaid before the Commissioners of the Treasury and one of the Secretariesof State, and entered in books to be kept in the Treasury and theSecretary's office. 

[Sidenote: Appointment of Counsellors, &c. ]

[Sidenote: Macpherson's appointment. ]

[Sidenote: Stables's. ]

These precautions, in case of the nomination of any who have served theCompany, appear to be necessary from the improper nomination andapprobation of Mr. John Macpherson, notwithstanding the objectionswhich stood against him on the Company's records. The choice of Mr. JohnStables, from an inferior military to the highest civil capacity, was byno means proper, nor an encouraging example to either service. Hisconduct, indeed, in the subaltern military situation, had received, andseems to have deserved, commendation; but no sufficient ground wasfurnished for confounding the lines and gradations of service. Thismeasure was, however, far less exceptionable than the former; because anirregular choice of a less competent person, and the preference given toproved delinquency in prejudice to uncensured service, are verydifferent things. But even this latter appointment would in alllikelihood have been avoided, if rules of promotion had beenestablished. If such rules were settled, candidates qualified fromability, knowledge, and service would not be discouraged by finding thateverything was open to every man, and that favor alone stood in theplace of civil or military experience. The elevation from the loweststations unfaithfully and negligently filled to the highest trusts, thetotal inattention to rank and seniority, and, much more, the combinationof this neglect of rank with a confusion (unaccompanied with strong andevident reasons) of the lines of service, cannot operate as usefulexamples on those who serve the public in India. These servants, beholding men who have been condemned for improper behavior to theCompany in inferior civil stations elevated above them, or (what is lessblamable, but still mischievous) persons without any distinguished civiltalents taken from the subordinate situations of another line to theirprejudice, will despair by any good behavior of ascending to thedignities of their own: they will be led to improve, to the utmostadvantage of their fortune, the lower stages of power, and will endeavorto make up in lucre what they can never hope to acquire in station. 

The temporary appointment by Parliament of the Supreme Council of Indiaarose from an opinion that the Company, at that time at least, was notin a condition or not disposed to a proper exercise of the privilegeswhich they held under their charter. It therefore behoved the Directorsto be particularly attentive to their choice of Counsellors, on theexpiration of the period during which their patronage had beensuspended. The duties of the Supreme Council had been reputed of soarduous a nature as to require even a legislative interposition. Theywere called upon, by all possible care and impartiality, to justifyParliament at least as fully in the restoration of their privileges asthe circumstances of the time had done in their suspension. 

But interests have lately prevailed in the Court of Directors, which, bythe violation of every rule, seemed to be resolved on the destruction ofthose privileges of which they were the natural guardians. Every newpower given has been made the source of a new abuse; and the acts ofParliament themselves, which provide but imperfectly for the preventionof the mischief, have, it is to be feared, made provisions (contrary, without doubt, to the intention of the legislature) which operateagainst the possibility of any cure in the ordinary course. 

In the original institution of the Supreme Council, reasons may haveexisted against rendering the tenure of the Counsellors in their officeprecarious. A plan of reform might have required the permanence of thepersons who were just appointed by Parliament to execute it. But the actof 1780 gave a duration coexistent with the statute itself to a Councilnot appointed by act of Parliament, nor chosen for any temporary orspecial purpose; by which means the servants in the highest situation, let their conduct be never so grossly criminal, cannot be removed, unless the Court of Directors and ministers of the crown can be found toconcur in the same opinion of it. The prevalence of the Indian factionsin the Court of Directors and Court of Proprietors, and sometimes in thestate itself, renders this agreement extremely difficult: if theprincipal members of the Direction should be in a conspiracy with anyprincipal servant under censure, it will be impracticable; because thefirst act must originate there. The reduced state of the authority ofthis kingdom in Bengal may be traced in a great measure to that verynatural source of independence. In many cases the instant removal of anoffender from his power of doing mischief is the only mode of preventingthe utter and perhaps irretrievable ruin of public affairs. In such acase the process ought to be simple, and the power absolute in one or ineither hand separately. By contriving the balance of interests formed inthe act, notorious offence, gross error, or palpable insufficiency havemany chances of retaining and abusing authority, whilst the variety ofrepresentations, hearings, and conferences, and possibly the merejealousy and competition between rival powers, may prevent any decision, and at length give time and means for settlements and compromises amongparties, made at the expense of justice and true policy. But this act of1780, not properly distinguishing judicial process from executivearrangements, requires in effect nearly the same degree of solemnity, delay, and detail for removing a political inconvenience which attends acriminal proceeding for the punishment of offences. It goes further, andgives the same tenure to all who shall succeed to vacancies which wasgiven to those whom the act found in office. 

[Sidenote: Provisional appointment for vacancies. ]

Another regulation was made in the act, which has a tendency to renderthe control of delinquency or the removal of incapacity in theCouncil-General extremely difficult, as well as to introduce many otherabuses into the original appointment of Counsellors. The inconveniencesof a vacancy in that important office, at a great distance from theauthority that is to fill it, were visible; but your Committee havedoubts whether they balance the mischief which may arise from the powergiven in this act, of a provisional appointment to vacancies, not on theevent, but on foresight. This mode of providing for the succession has atendency to promote cabal, and to prevent inquiry into thequalifications of the persons to be appointed. An attempt has beenactually made, in consequence of this power, in a very marked manner, toconfound the whole order and discipline of the Company's service. Meansare furnished thereby for perpetuating the powers of some given Court ofDirectors. They may forestall the patronage of their successors, on whomthey entail a line of Supreme Counsellors and Governors-General. And ifthe exercise of this power should happen in its outset to fall into badhands, the ordinary chances for mending an ill choice upon death orresignation are cut off. 

In these provisional arrangements it is to be considered that theappointment is not in consequence of any marked event which callsstrongly on the attention of the public, but is made at the discretionof those who lead in the Court of Directors, and may therefore bebrought forward at times the most favorable to the views of partialityand corruption. Candidates have not, therefore, the notice that may benecessary for their claims; and as the possession of the office to whichthe survivors are to succeed seems remote, all inquiry into thequalifications and character of those who are to fill it will naturallybe dull and languid. 

Your Committee are not also without a grounded apprehension of the illeffect on any existing Council-General of all strong marks of influenceand favor which appear in the subordinates of Bengal. This previousdesignation to a great and arduous trust, (the greatest that can bereposed in subjects, ) when made out of any regular course of succession, marks that degree of countenance and support at home which mayovershadow the existing government. That government may thereby bedisturbed by factions, and led to corrupt and dangerous compliances. Atbest, when these Counsellors elect are engaged in no fixed employment, and have no lawful intermediate emolument, the natural impatience fortheir situations may bring on a traffic for resignations between themand the persons in possession, very unfavorable to the interests of thepublic and to the duty of their situations. 

Since the act two persons have been nominated to the ministers of thecrown by the Court of Directors for this succession. Neither has yetbeen approved. But by the description of the persons a judgment may beformed of the principles on which this power is likely to be exercised. 

[Sidenote: Stuart and Sulivan's appointment to succeed to vacancies. ]

Your Committee find, that, in consequence of the above-mentioned act, the Honorable Charles Stuart and Mr. Sulivan were appointed to succeedto the first vacancies in the Supreme Council. Mr. Stuart's firstappointment in the Company's service was in the year 1761. He returnedto England in 1775, and was permitted to go back to India in 1780. InAugust, 1781, he was nominated by the Court of Directors (Mr. Sulivanand Sir William James were Chairman and Deputy-Chairman) to succeed tothe first vacancy in the Supreme Council, and on the 19th of Septemberfollowing his Majesty's approval of such nomination was requested. 

[Sidenote: Mr. Stuart's situation at the time of his appointment. ]

In the nomination of Mr. Stuart, the consideration of rank in theservice was not neglected; but if the Court of Directors had thought fitto examine their records, they would have found matter at least stronglyurging them to a suspension of this appointment, until the chargesagainst Mr. Stuart should be fully cleared up. That matter remained (asit still remains) unexplained from the month of May, 1775, where, on theBengal Revenue Consultations of the 12th of that month, peculations to alarge amount are charged upon oath against Mr. Stuart under thefollowing title: "_The Particulars of the Money unjustly taken by Mr. Stuart, during the Time he was at Burdwan. _" The sum charged against himin this account is 2, 17, 684 Sicca rupees (that is, 25, 253_l. _ sterling);besides which there is another account with the following title: "_TheParticulars of the Money unjustly taken by Callypersaud Bose, Banian tothe Honorable Charles Stuart, Esquire, at Burdwan, and amounting toSicca Rupees 1, 01, 675_" (that is, 11, 785_l. _), --a large sum to bereceived by a person in that subordinate situation. 

The minuteness with which these accounts appear to have been kept, andthe precision with which the date of each particular, sometimes of verysmall sums, is stated, give them the appearance of authenticity, as faras it can be conveyed on the face or in the construction of suchaccounts, and, if they were forgeries, laid them open to an easydetection. But no detection is easy, when no inquiry is made. It appearsan offence of the highest order in the Directors concerned in thisbusiness, when, not satisfied with leaving such charges so longunexamined, they should venture to present to the king's servants theobject of them for the highest trust which they have to bestow. If Mr. Stuart was really guilty, the possession of this post must furnish himnot only with the means of renewing the former evil practices chargedupon him, and of executing them upon a still larger scale, but ofoppressing those unhappy persons who, under the supposed protection ofthe faith of the Company, had appeared to give evidence concerning hisformer misdemeanors. 

This attempt in the Directors was the more surprising, when it isconsidered that two committees of this House were at that very timesitting upon an inquiry that related directly to their conduct, and thatof their servants in India. 

[Sidenote: Mr. Sulivan's situation at the time of his appointment. ]

It was in the same spirit of defiance of Parliament, that at the sametime they nominated Mr. Sulivan, son to the then Chairman of the Courtof Directors, to the succession to the same high trust in India. Onthese appointments, your Committee thought it proper to make thoseinquiries which the Court of Directors thought proper to omit. Theyfirst conceived it fitting to inquire what rank Mr. Sulivan bore in theservice; and they thought it not unnecessary here to state thegradations in the service, according to the established usage of theCompany. 

The Company's civil servants generally go to India as _writers_, inwhich capacity they serve the Company _five years_. The next step, inpoint of rank, is to be a _factor_, and next to that a _juniormerchant_; in each of which capacities they serve the Company _threeyears_. They then rise to the rank of _senior merchant_, in whichsituation they remain till called by rotation to the _Board of Trade_. Until the passing of the Regulation Act, in 1773, seniority entitledthem to succeed to the _Council_, and finally gave them pretensions tothe _government of the Presidency_. 

The above gradation of the service, your Committee conceive, ought neverto be superseded by the Court of Directors, without evident reason, inpersons or circumstances, to justify the breach of an ancient order. Thenames, whether taken from civil or commercial gradation, are of nomoment. The order itself is wisely established, and tends to provide anatural guard against partiality, precipitancy, and corruption inpatronage. It affords means and opportunities for an examination intocharacter; and among the servants it secures a strong motive to preservea fair reputation. Your Committee find that no respect whatsoever waspaid to this gradation in the instance of Mr. Sulivan, nor is there anyreason assigned for departing from it. They do not find that Mr. Sulivanhad ever served the Company in any one of the above capacities, but was, in the year 1777, abruptly brought into the service, and sent to Madrasto succeed as Persian Translator and Secretary to the Council. 

Your Committee have found a letter from Mr. Sulivan to George Wombwelland William Devaynes, Esquires, Chairman and Deputy-Chairman of theCourt of Directors, stating that he trusted _his applications_ wouldhave a place in their deliberations when Madras affairs were taken up. Of what nature those applications were your Committee cannot discover, as no traces of them appear on the Company's records, --nor whether anyproofs of his ability, even as Persian Translator, which might entitlehim to a preference to the many servants in India whose study andopportunities afforded them the means of becoming perfect masters ofthat language. 

On the above letter your Committee find that the Committee ofCorrespondence proceeded; and on their recommendation the Court ofDirectors unanimously approved of Mr. Sulivan to be appointed to succeedto the posts of Secretary and Persian Translator. 

[Sidenote: Mr. Sulivan's succession of offices. ]

Conformably to the orders of the court, Mr. Sulivan succeeded to thoseposts; and the President and Council acquainted the Court of Directorsthat they had been obeyed. About five months after, it appears that Mr. Sulivan thought fit to resign the office of Persian Translator, to whichhe had been appointed by the Directors. In April, 1780, Mr. Sulivan iscommended for his _great diligence as Secretary_; in August followinghe obtains leave to accompany Mrs. Sulivan to Bengal, whence she is toproceed to Europe on account of her health; and he is charged with acommission from the President and Council of Fort St. George to obtainfor that settlement supplies of grain, troops, and money, from theGovernor-General and Council of Bengal. In October the Governor-Generalrequests permission of the Council there to employ Mr. Sulivan as his_Assistant_, for that he had experienced (between his arrival in Bengaland that time) the abilities of Mr. Sulivan, and made choice of him as_completely qualified for that trust_; also requests the board toappoint him Judge-Advocate-General, and likewise to apply to thePresidency of Madras for him to remain in Bengal without prejudice tohis rank on their establishment: which several requests the board atMadras readily complied with, notwithstanding their natural sensibilityto the loss of a Secretary of such ability and diligence as they haddescribed Mr. Sulivan to be. 

On the 5th of December following, the President and Council received aletter from Bengal, requesting that Mr. Sulivan might be allowed to keephis rank. This request brought on some discussion. A Mr. Freeman, itseems, who had acted under Mr. Sulivan as Sub-Secretary whilst hisprincipal obtained so much praise for his diligence, addressed the boardon the same day, and observed, "that, since Mr. Sulivan's arrival, _he_[Mr. Freeman] had, _without intermission_, done almost the _whole_ ofthe duty allotted to the post of Secretary, _which it was notorious Mr. Sulivan had paid but little attention to_; and neither his inclinationor duty led him to act any longer as Mr. Sulivan's deputy. "

Here your Committee cannot avoid remarking the direct contradictionwhich this address of Mr. Freeman's gives to the letter from thePresident and Council to the Court of Directors in April, 1780, whereinMr. Sulivan is praised for his "diligence and attention in his office ofSecretary. "

The President and Council do not show any displeasure at Mr. Freeman'srepresentation, (so contrary to their own, ) the truth of which they thustacitly admit, but agree to write to the Governor-General and Council, "that it could not be supposed that they could carry on the publicbusiness for any length of time without _the services of a Secretary_and Clerk of Appeals, two offices that required personal attendance, andwhich would be a general injury to the servants on their establishment, and in particular to the person who acted in those capacities, as theylearnt that Mr. Sulivan had been appointed Judge-Advocate-General inBengal, --and to request the Governor-General and Council to inform Mr. Sulivan of their sentiments, and to desire him to inform them whether hemeant to return to his station or to remain in Bengal. "

On the 5th December, as a mark of their approbation of Mr. Freeman, whohad so plainly contradicted their opinion of Mr. Sulivan, the Presidentand Council agree to appoint him to act as Secretary and Clerk ofAppeals, till Mr. Sulivan's answer should arrive, with the emoluments, and to confirm him therein, if Mr. Sulivan should remain in Bengal. 

On the 14th February, 1781, the President and Council received a letterfrom Bengal in reply, and stating their request that Mr. Sulivan mightreserve the right of returning to his original situation on the Madrasestablishment, if the Court of Directors should disapprove of his beingtransferred to Bengal. To this request the board at Madras declare theyhave no objection: and here the matter rests; the Court of Directors nothaving given any tokens of approbation or disapprobation of thetransaction. 

Such is the history of Mr. Sulivan's service from the time of hisappointment; such were the qualifications, and such the proofs ofassiduity and diligence given by him in holding so many incompatibleoffices, (as well as being engaged in other dealings, which will appearin their place, ) when, after three years' desultory residence in India, he was thought worthy to be nominated to the succession to the SupremeCouncil. No proof whatsoever of distinguished capacity in any linepreceded his original appointment to the service: so that the whole ofhis fitness for the Supreme Council rested upon his conduct andcharacter since his appointment as Persian Translator. 

Your Committee find that his Majesty has not yet given his approbationto the nomination, made by the Court of Directors on the 30th of August, 1781, of Messrs. Stuart and Sulivan to succeed to the Supreme Council onthe first vacancies, though the Court applied for the royal approbationso long ago as the 19th of September, 1781; and in these instances theking's ministers performed their duty, in withholding their countenancefrom a proceeding so exceptionable and of so dangerous an example. 

Your Committee, from a full view of the situation and duties of theCourt of Directors, are of opinion that effectual means ought to betaken for regulating that court in such a manner as to prevent eitherrivalship with or subserviency to their servants. It might, therefore, be proper for the House to consider whether it is fit that those whoare, or have been within some given time, Directors of the Company, should be capable of an appointment to any offices in India. Directorscan never properly govern those for whose employments they are or may bethemselves candidates; they can neither protect nor coerce them with dueimpartiality or due authority. 

If such rules as are stated by your Committee under this head wereobserved in the regular service at home and abroad, the necessity ofsuperseding the regular service by strangers would be more rare; andwhenever the servants were so superseded, those who put forward othercandidates would be obliged to produce a strong plea of merit andability, which, in the judgment of mankind, ought to overpowerpretensions so authentically established, and so rigorously guarded fromabuse. 

[Sidenote: Deficiency of powers to ministers of government. ]

The second object, in this part of the plan, of the act of 1773, namely, that of inspection by the ministers of the crown, appears not to havebeen provided for, so as to draw the timely and productive attention ofthe state on the grievances of the people of India, and on the abuses ofits government. By the Regulating Act, the ministers were enabled toinspect one part of the correspondence, that which was received inEngland, but not that which went outward. They might know something, butthat very imperfectly and unsystematically, of the state of affairs; butthey were neither authorized to advance nor to retard any measure takenby the Directors in consequence of that state: they were not providedeven with sufficient means of knowing what any of these measures were. And this imperfect information, together with the want of a direct callto any specific duty, might have, in some degree, occasioned thatremissness which rendered even the imperfect powers originally given bythe act of 1773 the less efficient. This defect was in a great measureremedied by a subsequent act; but that act was not passed until the year1780. 

[Sidenote: Disorders increased since 1773. ]

Your Committee find that during the whole period which elapsed from 1773to the commencement of 1782 disorders and abuses of every kindmultiplied. Wars contrary to policy and contrary to public faith werecarrying on in various parts of India. The allies, dependants, andsubjects of the Company were everywhere oppressed;[2] dissensions in theSupreme Council prevailed, and continued for the greater part of thattime; the contests between the civil and judicial powers threatened thatissue to which they came at last, an armed resistance to the authorityof the king's court of justice; the orders which by an act of Parliamentthe servants were bound to obey were avowedly and on principlecontemned; until at length the fatal effects of accumulated misdemeanorsabroad and neglects at home broke out in the alarming manner which yourCommittee have so fully reported to this House. [3]

[Sidenote: Proceedings in India not known to Parliament. ]

In all this time the true state of the several Presidencies, and thereal conduct of the British government towards the natives, was not atall known to Parliament: it seems to have been very imperfectly knowneven to ministers. Indeed, it required an unbroken attention, and muchcomparison of facts and reasonings, to form a true judgment on thatdifficult and complicated system of politics, revenue, and commerce, whilst affairs were only in their progress to that state which producedthe present inquiries. Therefore, whilst the causes of their ruin werein the height of their operation, both the Company and the natives wereunderstood by the public as in circumstances the most assured and mostflourishing; insomuch that, whenever the affairs of India were broughtbefore Parliament, as they were two or three times during that period, the only subject-matter of discussion anywise important was concerningthe sums which might be taken out of the Company's surplus profits forthe advantage of the state. Little was thought of but the disengagementof the Company from their debts in _England_, and to prevent theservants abroad from drawing upon them, so as that body might beenabled, without exciting clamors here, to afford the contribution thatwas demanded. All descriptions of persons, either here or in India, looking solely to appearances at home, the reputation of the Directorsdepended on the keeping the Company's sales in a situation to supportthe dividend, that of the ministers depended on the most lucrativebargains for the Exchequer, and that of the servants abroad on thelargest investments; until at length there is great reason to apprehend, that, unless some very substantial reform takes place in the managementof the Company's affairs, nothing will be left for investment, fordividend, or for bargain, and India, instead of a resource to thepublic, may itself come, in no great length of time, to be reckonedamongst the public burdens. 

[Sidenote: Inspection of ministers has failed in effect. ]

In this manner the inspection of the ministers of the crown, the greatcementing regulation of the whole act of 1773, has, along with all theothers, entirely failed in its effect. 

[Sidenote: Failure in the act. ]

Your Committee, in observing on the failure of this act, do not considerthe intrinsic defects or mistakes in the law itself as the sole cause ofits miscarriage. The general policy of the nation with regard to thisobject has been, they conceive, erroneous; and no remedy by laws, underthe prevalence of that policy, can be effectual. Before any remedial lawcan have its just operation, the affairs of India must be restored totheir natural order. The prosperity of the natives must be previouslysecured, before any profit from them whatsoever is attempted. For aslong as a system prevails which regards the transmission of great wealthto this country, either for the Company or the state, as its principalend, so long will it be impossible that those who are the instruments ofthat scheme should not be actuated by the same spirit for their ownprivate purposes. It will be worse: they will support the injuries doneto the natives for their selfish ends by new injuries done in favor ofthose before whom they are to account. It is not reasonably to beexpected that a public rapacious and improvident should be served by anyof its subordinates with disinterestedness or foresight. 

II. --CONNECTION OF GREAT BRITAIN WITH INDIA. 

In order to open more fully the tendency of the policy which hashitherto prevailed, and that the House may be enabled, in anyregulations which may be made, to follow the tracks of the abuse, andto apply an appropriated remedy to a particular distemper, yourCommittee think it expedient to consider in some detail the manner inwhich India is connected with this kingdom, --which is the second head oftheir plan. 

The two great links by which this connection is maintained are, first, the East India Company's commerce, and, next, the government set overthe natives by that company and by the crown. The first of theseprinciples of connection, namely, the East India Company's trade, is tobe first considered, not only as it operates by itself, but as having apowerful influence over the general policy and the particular measuresof the Company's government. Your Committee apprehend that the presentstate, nature, and tendency of this trade are not generally understood. 

[Sidenote: Trade to India formerly carried on chiefly in silver. ]

Until the acquisition of great territorial revenues by the East IndiaCompany, the trade with India was carried on upon the common principlesof commerce, --namely, by sending out such commodities as found a demandin the India market, and, where that demand was not adequate to thereciprocal call of the European market for Indian goods, by a largeannual exportation of treasure, chiefly in silver. In some years thatexport has been as high as six hundred and eighty thousand poundssterling. The other European companies trading to India traded thitheron the same footing. Their export of bullion was probably larger inproportion to the total of their commerce, as their commerce itself borea much larger proportion to the British than it does at this time or hasdone for many years past. But stating it to be equal to the British, the whole of the silver sent annually from Europe into Hindostan couldnot fall very short of twelve or thirteen hundred thousand pounds ayear. This influx of money, poured into India by an emulation of all thecommercial nations of Europe, encouraged industry and promotedcultivation in a high degree, notwithstanding the frequent wars withwhich that country was harassed, and the vices which existed in itsinternal government. On the other hand, the export of so much silver wassometimes a subject of grudging and uneasiness in Europe, and a commercecarried on through such a medium to many appeared in speculation ofdoubtful advantage. But the practical demands of commerce bore downthose speculative objections. The East India commodities were soessential for animating all other branches of trade, and for completingthe commercial circle, that all nations contended for it with thegreatest avidity. The English company flourished under this exportationfor a very long series of years. The nation was considerably benefitedboth in trade and in revenue; and the dividends of the proprietors wereoften high, and always sufficient to keep up the credit of the Company'sstock in heart and vigor. 

[Sidenote: How trade carried on since. ]

But at or very soon after the acquisition of the territorial revenues tothe English company, the period of which may be reckoned as completedabout the year 1765, a very great revolution took place in commerce aswell as in dominion; and it was a revolution which affected the trade ofHindostan with all other European nations, as well as with that in whosefavor and by whose power it was accomplished. From that time bullion wasno longer regularly exported by the English East India Company toBengal, or any part of Hindostan; and it was soon exported in muchsmaller quantities by any other nation. A new way of supplying themarket of Europe, by means of the British power and influence, wasinvented: a species of trade (if such it may be called) by which it isabsolutely impossible that India should not be radically andirretrievably ruined, although our possessions there were to be orderedand governed upon principles diametrically opposite to those which nowprevail in the system and practice of the British company'sadministration. 

[Sidenote: Investments. ]

A certain portion of the revenues of Bengal has been for many years setapart to be employed in the purchase of goods for exportation toEngland, and this is called the _Investment_. The greatness of thisinvestment has been the standard by which the merit of the Company'sprincipal servants has been too generally estimated; and this main causeof the impoverishment of India has been generally taken as a measure ofits wealth and prosperity. Numerous fleets of large ships, loaded withthe most valuable commodities of the East, annually arriving in England, in a constant and increasing succession, imposed upon the public eye, and naturally gave rise to an opinion of the happy condition and growingopulence of a country whose surplus productions occupied so vast a spacein the commercial world. This export from India seemed to imply also areciprocal supply, by which the trading capital employed in thoseproductions was continually strengthened and enlarged. But the paymentof a tribute, and not a beneficial commerce to that country, wore thisspecious and delusive appearance. 

[Sidenote: Increase of expenses. ]

The fame of a great territorial revenue, exaggerated, as is usual insuch cases, beyond even its value, and the abundant fortunes of theCompany's officers, military and civil, which flowed into Europe with afull tide, raised in the proprietors of East India stock a prematuredesire of partaking with their servants in the fruits of that splendidadventure. Government also thought they could not be too early in theirclaims for a share of what they considered themselves as entitled to inevery foreign acquisition made by the power of this kingdom, throughwhatever hands or by whatever means it was made. These two parties, after some struggle, came to an agreement to divide between them theprofits which their speculation proposed to realize in England from theterritorial revenue in Bengal. About two hundred thousand pounds wasadded to the annual dividends of the proprietors. Four hundred thousandwas given to the state, which, added to the old dividend, brought aconstant charge upon the mixed interest of Indian trade and revenue ofeight hundred thousand pounds a year. This was to be provided for at allevents. 

By that vast demand on the territorial fund, the correctives andqualifications which might have been gradually applied to the abuses inIndian commerce and government were rendered extremely difficult. 

[Sidenote: Progress of investments. ]

The practice of an investment from the revenue began in the year 1766, before arrangements were made for securing and appropriating an assuredfund for that purpose in the treasury, and for diffusing it from thenceupon the manufactures of the country in a just proportion and in theproper season. There was, indeed, for a short time, a surplus of cash inthe treasury. It was in some shape to be sent home to its owners. Tosend it out in silver was subject to two manifest inconveniences. First, the country would be exhausted of its circulating medium. A scarcity ofcoin was already felt in Bengal. Cossim Ali Khân, (the Nabob whom theCompany's servants had lately set up, and newly expelled, ) during theshort period of his power, had exhausted the country by every mode ofextortion; in his flight he carried off an immense treasure, which hasbeen variously computed, but by none at less than three millionssterling. A country so exhausted of its coin, and harassed by threerevolutions rapidly succeeding each other, was rather an object thatstood in need of every kind of refreshment and recruit than one whichcould subsist under new evacuations. The next, and equally obviousinconvenience, was to the Company itself. To send silver into Europewould be to send it from the best to the worst market. When arrived, themost profitable use which could be made of it would be to send it backto Bengal for the purchase of Indian merchandise. It was necessary, therefore, to turn the Company's revenue into its commerce. The firstinvestment was about five hundred thousand pounds, and care was takenafterwards to enlarge it. In the years 1767 and 1768 it arose to sevenhundred thousand. 

[Sidenote: Consequences of them. ]

This new system of trade, carried on through the medium of power andpublic revenue, very soon produced its natural effects. The loudestcomplaints arose among the natives, and among all the foreigners whotraded to Bengal. It must unquestionably have thrown the wholemercantile system of the country into the greatest confusion. Withregard to the natives, no expedient was proposed for their relief. Thecase was serious with respect to European powers. The Presidency plainlyrepresented to the Directors, that some agreement should be made withforeign nations for providing their investment to a certain amount, orthat the deficiencies then subsisting must terminate in an open rupturewith France. The Directors, pressed by the large payments in England, were not free to abandon their system; and all possible means ofdiverting the manufactures into the Company's investment were stillanxiously sought and pursued, until the difficulties of the foreigncompanies were at length removed by the natural flow of the fortunes ofthe Company's servants into Europe, in the manner which will be statedhereafter. 

But, with all these endeavors of the Presidency, the investment sunk in1769, and they were even obliged to pay for a part of the goods toprivate merchants in the Company's bonds, bearing interest. It was plainthat this course of business could not hold. The manufacturers ofBengal, far from being generally in a condition to give credit, havealways required advances to be made to them; so have the merchants verygenerally, --at least, since the prevalence of the English power inIndia. It was necessary, therefore, and so the Presidency of Calcuttarepresented the matter, to provide beforehand a year's advance. Thisrequired great efforts; and they were made. Notwithstanding the faminein 1770, which wasted Bengal in a manner dreadful beyond all example, the investment, by a variety of successive expedients, many of them ofthe most dangerous nature and tendency, was forcibly kept up; and evenin that forced and unnatural state it gathered strength almost everyyear. The debts contracted in the infancy of the system were graduallyreduced, and the advances to contractors and manufacturers wereregularly made; so that the goods from Bengal, purchased from theterritorial revenues, from the sale of European goods, and from theproduce of the monopolies, for the four years which ended with 1780, when the investment from the surplus revenues finally closed, were neverless than a million sterling, and commonly nearer twelve hundredthousand pounds. This million is the lowest value of the goods sent toEurope for which no satisfaction is made. [4]

[Sidenote: Remittances from Bengal to China and the Presidencies. ]

About an hundred thousand pounds a year is also remitted from Bengal, onthe Company's account, to China; and the whole of the product of thatmoney flows into the direct trade from China to Europe. Besides this, Bengal sends a regular supply in time of peace to those Presidencieswhich are unequal to their own establishment. To Bombay the remittancein money, bills, or goods, for none of which there is a return, amountsto one hundred and sixty thousand pounds a year at a medium. 

[Sidenote: Exports from England to India. ]

The goods which are exported from Europe to India consist chiefly ofmilitary and naval stores, of clothing for troops, and of other objectsfor the consumption of the Europeans residing there; and, excepting somelead, copper utensils and sheet copper, woollen cloth, and othercommodities of little comparative value, no sort of merchandise is sentfrom England that is in demand for the wants or desires of the nativeinhabitants. 

[Sidenote: Bad effects of investment. ]

When an account is taken of the intercourse (for it is not commerce)which is carried on between Bengal and England, the pernicious effectsof the system of investment from revenue will appear in the strongestpoint of view. In that view, the whole exported produce of the country, so far as the Company is concerned, is not exchanged in the course ofbarter, but is taken away without any return or payment whatsoever. In acommercial light, therefore, England becomes annually bankrupt to Bengalto the amount nearly of its whole dealing; or rather, the country hassuffered what is tantamount to an annual plunder of its manufactures andits produce to the value of twelve hundred thousand pounds. 

[Sidenote: Foreign companies. ]

[Sidenote: Consequences of their trade. ]

In time of peace, three foreign companies appear at first sight to bringtheir contribution of trade to the supply of this continual drain. Theseare the companies of France, Holland, and Denmark. But when the objectis considered more nearly, instead of relief, these companies, who fromtheir want of authority in the country might seem to trade upon aprinciple merely commercial, will be found to add their full proportionto the calamity brought upon Bengal by the destructive system of theruling power; because the greater part of the capital of all thesecompanies, and perhaps the whole capital of some of them, is furnishedexactly as the British is, out of the revenues of the country. The civiland military servants of the English East India Company beingrestricted in drawing bills upon Europe, and none of them ever making orproposing an establishment in India, a very great part of theirfortunes, well or ill gotten, is in all probability thrown, as fast asrequired, into the cash of these companies. 

In all other countries, the revenue, following the natural course andorder of things, arises out of their commerce. Here, by a mischievousinversion of that order, the whole foreign maritime trade, whetherEnglish, French, Dutch, or Danish, arises from the revenues; and theseare carried out of the country without producing anything to compensateso heavy a loss. 

[Sidenote: Foreign companies' investments. ]

Your Committee have not been able to discover the entire value of theinvestment made by foreign companies. But, as the investment which theEnglish East India Company derived from its revenues, and even from itspublic credit, is for the year 1783 to be wholly stopped, it has beenproposed to private persons to make a subscription for an investment ontheir own account. This investment is to be equal to the sum of800, 000_l. _ Another loan has been also made for an investment on theCompany's account to China of 200, 000_l. _ This makes a million; andthere is no question that much more could be readily had for bills uponEurope. Now, as there is no doubt that the whole of the money remittedis the property of British subjects, (none else having any interest inremitting to Europe, ) it is not unfair to suppose that a very greatpart, if not the whole, of what may find its way into this new channelis not newly created, but only diverted from those channels in which itformerly ran, that is, the cash of the foreign trading companies. 

[Sidenote: Of the silver sent to China. ]

Besides the investment made in goods by foreign companies from the fundsof British subjects, these subjects have been for some time in thepractice of sending very great sums in gold and silver directly to Chinaon their own account. In a memorial presented to the Governor-Generaland Council, in March, 1782, it appears that the principal money lent byBritish subjects to one company of merchants in China then amounted toseven millions of dollars, about one million seven hundred thousandpounds sterling; and not the smallest particle of silver sent to Chinaever returns to India. It is not easy to determine in what proportionsthis enormous sum of money has been sent from Madras or from Bengal; butit equally exhausts a country belonging to this kingdom, whether itcomes from the one or from the other. 

[Sidenote: Revenue above the investment, how applied. ]

[Sidenote: Allowance to Nabob of Bengal. ]

[Sidenote: How reduced. ]

But that the greatness of all these drains, and their effects, may berendered more visible, your Committee have turned their consideration tothe employment of those parts of the Bengal revenue which are notemployed in the Company's own investments for China and for Europe. Whatis taken over and above the investment (when any investment can be made)from the gross revenue, either for the charge of collection or for civiland military establishments, is in time of peace two millions at theleast. From the portion of that sum which goes to the support of civilgovernment the natives are almost wholly excluded, as they are from theprincipal collections of revenue. With very few exceptions, they areonly employed as servants and agents to Europeans, or in the inferiordepartments of collection, when it is absolutely impossible to proceeda step without their assistance. For some time after the acquisition ofthe territorial revenue, the sum of 420, 000_l. _ a year was paid, according to the stipulation of a treaty, to the Nabob of Bengal, forthe support of his government. This sum, however inconsiderable, compared to the revenues of the province, yet, distributed through thevarious departments of civil administration, served in some degree topreserve the natives of the better sort, particularly those of theMahomedan profession, from being utterly ruined. The people of thatpersuasion, not being so generally engaged in trade, and not having ontheir conquest of Bengal divested the ancient Gentoo proprietors oftheir lands of inheritance, had for their chief, if not their solesupport, the share of a moderate conqueror in all offices, civil andmilitary. But your Committee find that this arrangement was of a shortduration. Without the least regard to the subsistence of this innocentpeople, or to the faith of the agreement on which they were broughtunder the British government, this sum was reduced by a new treaty to320, 000_l. _, and soon after, (upon a pretence of the present Nabob'sminority, and a temporary sequestration for the discharge of his debts, )to 160, 000_l. _: but when he arrived at his majority, and when the debtswere paid, (if ever they were paid, ) the sequestration still continued;and so far as the late advices may be understood, the allowance to theNabob appears still to stand at the reduced sum of 160, 000_l. _

[Sidenote: Native officers. ]

The other resource of the Mahomedans, and of the Gentoos of certain ofthe higher castes, was the army. In this army, nine tenths of whichconsists of natives, no native, of whatever description, holds any rankhigher than that of a _Subahdar Commandant_, that is, of an officerbelow the rank of an English subaltern, who is appointed to each companyof the native soldiery. 

[Sidenote: All lucrative employments in the hands of the English. ]

Your Committee here would be understood to state the ordinaryestablishment: for the war may have made some alteration. All thehonorable, all the lucrative situations of the army, all the suppliesand contracts of whatever species that belong to it, are solely in thehands of the English; so that whatever is beyond the mere subsistence ofa common soldier and some officers of a lower rank, together with theimmediate expenses of the English officers at their table, is sooner orlater, in one shape or another, sent out of the country. 

Such was the state of Bengal even in time of profound peace, and beforethe whole weight of the public charge fell upon that unhappy country forthe support of other parts of India, which have been desolated in such amanner as to contribute little or nothing to their own protection. 

[Sidenote: Former state of trade. ]

Your Committee have given this short comparative account of the effectsof the maritime traffic of Bengal, when in its natural state, and as ithas stood since the prevalence of the system of an investment from therevenues. But before the formation of that system Bengal did by no meansdepend for its resources on its maritime commerce. The inland trade, from whence it derived a very great supply of silver and gold and manykinds of merchantable goods, was very considerable. The higher provincesof the Mogul Empire were then populous and opulent, and intercourse toan immense amount was carried on between them and Bengal. A great tradealso passed through these provinces from all the countries on thefrontier of Persia, and the frontier provinces of Tartary, as well asfrom Surat and Baroach on the western side of India. These parts openedto Bengal a communication with the Persian Gulf and with the Red Sea, and through them with the whole Turkish and the maritime parts of thePersian Empire, besides the commercial intercourse which it maintainedwith those and many other countries through its own seaports. 

[Sidenote: And the trade to Turkey. ]

During that period the remittances to the Mogul's treasury from Bengalwere never very large, at least for any considerable time, nor veryregularly sent; and the impositions of the state were soon repaid withinterest through the medium of a lucrative commerce. But the disordersof Persia, since the death of Kouli Khân, have wholly destroyed thetrade of that country; and the trade to Turkey, by Jidda and Bussorah, which was the greatest and perhaps best branch of the Indian trade, isvery much diminished. The fall of the throne of the Mogul emperors hasdrawn with it that of the great marts of Agra and Delhi. The utmostconfusion of the northwestern provinces followed this revolution, whichwas not absolutely complete until it received the last hand from GreatBritain. Still greater calamities have fallen upon the fine provinces ofRohilcund and Oude, and on the countries of Corah and Allahabad. By theoperations of the British arms and influence, they are in many placesturned to mere deserts, or so reduced and decayed as to afford very fewmaterials or means of commerce. 

[Sidenote: State of trade in the Carnatic. ]

Such is the actual condition of the trade of Bengal since theestablishment of the British power there. The commerce of the Carnatic, as far as the inquiries of your Committee have extended, did not appearwith a better aspect, even before the invasion of Hyder Ali Khân, andthe consequent desolation, which for many years to come must exclude itfrom any considerable part of the trading system. 

It appears, on the examination of an intelligent person concerned intrade, and who resided at Madras for several years, that on his arrivalthere, which was in the year 1767, that city was in a flourishingcondition, and one of the first marts in India; but when he left it, in1779, there was little or no trade remaining, and but one ship belongingto the whole place. The evidence of this gentleman purports, that at hisfirst acquaintance with the Carnatic it was a well-cultivated andpopulous country, and as such consumed many articles of merchandise;that at his departure he left it much circumscribed in trade, greatly inthe decline as to population and culture, and with a correspondent decayof the territorial revenue. 

Your Committee find that there has also been from Madras an investmenton the Company's account, taking one year with another, very nearly onthe same principles and with the same effects as that from Bengal; andthey think it is highly probable, that, besides the large sums remitteddirectly from Madras to China, there has likewise been a great deal on aprivate account, for that and other countries, invested in the cash offoreign European powers trading on the coast of Coromandel. But yourCommittee have not extended their inquiries relative to the commerce ofthe countries dependent on Madras so far as they have done with regardto Bengal. They have reason to apprehend that the condition is ratherworse; but if the House requires a more minute examination of thisimportant subject, your Committee is willing to enter into it withoutdelay. 

III. --EFFECT OF THE REVENUE INVESTMENT ON THE COMPANY. 

Hitherto your Committee has considered this system of revenueinvestment, substituted in the place of a commercial link between Indiaand Europe, so far as it affects India only: they are now to consider itas it affects the Company. So long as that corporation continued toreceive a vast quantity of merchantable goods without any disbursementfor the purchase, so long it possessed wherewithal to continue adividend to pay debts, and to contribute to the state. But it must havebeen always evident to considerate persons, that this vast extraction ofwealth from a country lessening in its resources in proportion to theincrease of its burdens was not calculated for a very long duration. Fora while the Company's servants kept up this investment, not by improvingcommerce, manufacture, or agriculture, but by forcibly raising theland-rents, on the principles and in the manner hereafter to bedescribed. When these extortions disappointed or threatened todisappoint expectation, in order to purvey for the avarice which ragedin England, they sought for expedients in breaches of all the agreementsby which they were bound by any payment to the country powers, and inexciting disturbances among all the neighboring princes. Stimulatingtheir ambition, and fomenting their mutual animosities, they sold tothem reciprocally their common servitude and ruin. 

The Governor-General, Mr. Hastings, and the Council, tell the Directors, "that the supply for the investment has arisen from _casual_ and_extraordinary_ resources, which they could not expect _always_ tocommand. " In an earlier minute he expresses himself still moredistinctly: he says, "If the internal resources of a state fail it, orare not equal to its _occasional_ wants, whence can it obtain immediaterelief but from _external_ means?" Indeed, the investment has not beenfor any long time the natural product of the revenue of Bengal. When, bythe vast charge and by the ill return of an evil political and militarytraffic, and by a prodigal increase of establishments, and a profuseconduct in distributing agencies and contracts, they found themselvesunder difficulties, instead of being cured of their immoral andimpolitic delusion, they plunged deeper into it, and were drawn fromexpedient to expedient for the supply of the investment into thatendless chain of wars which this House by its resolutions has so justlycondemned. At home these measures were sometimes countenanced, sometimeswinked at, sometimes censured, but always with an acceptance of whateverprofit they afforded. 

At length, the funds for the investment and for these wars togethercould no longer be supplied. In the year 1778 the provision for theinvestment from the revenues and from the monopolies stood very high. Itwas estimated at a million four hundred thousand pounds; and of this itappears that a great deal was realized. But this was the high flood-tideof the investment; for in that year they announce its probable decline, and that such extensive supplies could not be continued. The advances tothe Board of Trade became less punctual, and many disputes arose aboutthe time of making them. However, knowing that all their credit at homedepended on the investment, or upon an opinion of its magnitude, whilstthey repeat their warning of a probable deficiency, and that their"finances bore an unfavorable aspect, " in the year 1779 they rate theirinvestment still higher. But their payments becoming less and lessregular, and the war carrying away all the supplies, at length Mr. Hastings, in December, 1780, denounced sentence of approachingdissolution to this system, and tells the Directors that "he bore toohigh a respect for their characters to treat them with the management ofa preparatory and gradual introduction to an unpleasing report: that itis the _only substantial_ information he shall have to convey in thatletter. " In confidence, therefore, of their fortitude, he tells themwithout ceremony, "that there will be a necessity of making a largereduction, or possibly a _total suspension_, of their investment;--thatthey had already been reduced to borrow near 700, 000_l. _ This resource, "says he, "cannot last; it must cease at a certain period, and thatperhaps not far _distant_. "

He was not mistaken in his prognostic. Loans now becoming the regularresource for retrieving the investment, whose ruin was inevitable, theCouncil enable the Board of Trade, in April, 1781, to grant certificatesfor government bonds at eight per cent interest for about 650, 000_l. _The investment was fixed at 900, 000_l. _

But now another alarming system appeared. These new bonds overloadedthe market. Those which had been formerly issued were at a discount; theBoard of Trade was obliged to advance, therefore, a fourth more thanusual to the contractors. This seemed to satisfy that description ofdealers. But as those who bought on agency were limited to no terms ofmutual advantage, and the bonds on the new issue falling from three toeight, nine, and ten per cent discount, the agents were unable tofurnish at the usual prices. Accordingly a discount was settled on suchterms as could be made: the lowest discount, and that at two placesonly, was at four per cent; which, with the interest on the bonds, made(besides the earlier advance) at the least twelve per cent additionalcharge upon all goods. It was evident, that, as the investment, insteadof being supported by the revenues, was sunk by the fall of theircredit, so the net revenues were diminished by the daily accumulation ofan interest accruing on account of the investment. What was done toalleviate one complaint thus aggravating the other, and at lengthproving pernicious to both, this trade on bonds likewise came to itsperiod. 

Your Committee has reason to think that the bonds have since that timesunk to a discount much greater even than what is now stated. The Boardof Trade justly denominates their resource for that year "the sinkingcredit of a paper currency, laboring, from the uncommon scarcity ofspecie, under disadvantages scarcely surmountable. " From this they valuethemselves "on having effected an _ostensible_ provision, at least forthat investment. " For 1783 nothing appears even ostensible. 

By this failure a total revolution ensued, of the most extraordinarynature, and to which your Committee wish to call the particularattention of the House. For the Council-General, in their letter of the8th of April, 1782, after stating that they were disappointed in theirexpectations, (how grounded it does not appear, ) "thought that theyshould be able to spare a sum to the Board of Trade, "--tell the Court ofDirectors, "that they had adopted a _new_ method of keeping up theinvestment, by private subscribers for eighty lacs of rupees, which willfind _cargoes for their ships_ on the usual terms of privilege, _at therisk of the individuals_, and is to be repaid to them _according to theproduce of the sales in England_, "--and they tell the Directors, that "acopy of the plan makes a number in their separate dispatches over land. "

It is impossible, in reporting this revolution to the House, to avoidremarking with what fidelity Mr. Hastings and his Council have adheredto the mode of transmitting their accounts which your Committee found itnecessary to mark and censure in their First Report. Its pernicioustendency is there fully set forth. They were peculiarly called on for amost accurate state of their affairs, in order to explain the necessityof having recourse to such a scheme, as well as for a full and correctaccount of the scheme itself. But they send only the above short minuteby one dispatch over land, whilst the copy of the plan itself, on whichthe Directors must form their judgment, is sent separately in anotherdispatch over land, which has never arrived. A third dispatch, whichalso contained the plan, was sent by a sea conveyance, and arrived late. The Directors have, for very obvious reasons, ordered, by a strictinjunction, that they should send _duplicates of all_ their dispatchesby _every ship_. The spirit of this rule, perhaps, ought to extend toevery mode of conveyance. In this case, so far from sending a duplicate, they do not send even one perfect account. They announce a plan by oneconveyance, and they send it by another conveyance, with other delaysand other risks. 

At length, at nearly four months' distance, the plan has been received, and appears to be substantially that which had been announced, butdeveloping in the particulars many new circumstances of the greatestimportance. By this plan it appears that the subscription, even in ideaor pretence, is not for the use of the Company, but that the subscribersare united into a sort of society for the remitting their _privatefortunes_: the goods, indeed, are said to be _shipped on the Company'saccount_, and they are directed to be sold on the same account, and atthe usual periods of sales; but, after the payment of duties, and suchother allowances as they choose to make, in the eleventh article theyprovide "that _the remainder of the sales shall revert to thesubscribers_, and be declared to be _their property_, and divided inproportion to _their_ respective shares. " The compensation which theyallow in this plan to their masters for their brokerage is, that, if, after deducting all the charges which they impose, "the amount of thesales _should be found_ to exceed two shillings and twopence for thecurrent rupee of the invoice account, it shall be taken by the Company. "For the management of this concern in Bengal they choose commissionersby their own authority. By the same authority they form them into abody, they put them under rules and regulations, and they empower themalso to make regulations of their own. They remit, by the likeauthority, the duties to which all private trade is subject; and theycharge the whole concern with seven per cent, to be paid from the netproduce of the sales in England, as a recompense to the commissioners:for this the commissioners contract to bear all the charges on the goodsto the time of shipping. 

The servants having formed this plan of trade, and a new commission forthe conduct of it, on their private account, it is a matter ofconsideration to know who the commissioners are. They turn out to be thethree senior servants of the Company's Board of Trade, who choose totake upon them to be the factors of others for large emoluments, whilstthey receive salaries of two thousand pounds and fifteen hundred poundsa year from the Company. As the Company have no other fund than the newinvestment from whence they are to be paid for the care of theirservants' property, this commission and those salaries being to takeplace of their brokerage, they in effect render it very difficult, ifnot impossible, for them to derive advantage from their new occupation. 

As to the benefit of this _plan_: besides preventing the loss which musthappen from the Company's ships returning empty to Europe, and thestopping of all trade between India and England, the authors of itstate, that it will "_open a new channel_ of remittance, and abolish thepractice, by precluding the necessity, of remitting _private fortunes_by _foreign bottoms_, and that it may lead to some _permanent mode_ forremittance of private fortunes, and of combining it with the regularprovision of the Company's investment, --that it will yield _some_ profitto the Company without risk, and the national gain will be the same asupon the regular trade. "

As to the combination of this mode of remittance with the Company'sinvestment, nothing can be affirmed concerning it until somesatisfactory assurance can be held out that such an investment can everbe realized. Mr. Hastings and the gentlemen of the Council have notafforded any ground for such an expectation. That the Indian trade maybecome a permanent vehicle of the private fortunes of the Company'sservants is very probable, --that is, as permanent as the means ofacquiring fortunes in India; but that _some profit_ will accrue to theCompany is absolutely impossible. The Company are to bear all the chargeoutwards, and a very great part of that homewards; and their onlycompensation is the surplus commission on the sale of other people'sgoods. The nation will undoubtedly avoid great loss and detriment, whichwould be the inevitable consequence of the total cessation of the tradewith Bengal and the ships returning without cargoes. But if thistemporary expedient should be improved into a system, no occasionaladvantages to be derived from it would be sufficient to balance themischiefs of finding a great Parliamentary corporation turned into avehicle for remitting to England the private fortunes of those for whosebenefit the territorial possessions in India are in effect and substanceunder this project to be _solely_ held. 

By this extraordinary scheme the Company is totally overturned, and allits relations inverted. From being a body concerned in trade on theirown account, and employing their servants as factors, the servants haveat one stroke taken the whole trade into their own hands, on their owncapital of 800, 000_l. _, at their own risk, and the Company are becomeagents and factors to them, to sell by commission _their_ goods for_their_ profit. 

To enable your Committee to form some judgment upon the profit which mayaccrue to the Company from its new relation and employment, theydirected that an estimate should be made of the probable proceeds of aninvestment conducted on the principles of that intended to be realizedfor 1783. By this estimate, which is subjoined, [5] it appears to yourCommittee, that, so far from any surplus profit from this transaction, the Bengal adventurers themselves, instead of realizing 2_s. _ 2_d. _ therupee, (the standard they fix for their payment, ) will not receive the1_s. _ 9_d. _ which is its utmost value in silver at the Mint, norprobably above 1_s. _ 5_d. _ With this certain loss before their eyes, itis impossible that they can ever complete their subscription, unless, bymanagement among themselves, they should be able to procure the goodsfor their own account upon other terms than those on which theypurchased them for their masters, or unless they have for the supply ofthe Company on their hands a quantity of goods which they cannototherwise dispose of. This latter case is not very improbable, fromtheir proposing to send ten sixteenths of the whole investment insilk, --which, as will be seen hereafter, the Company has prohibited tobe sent on their account, as a disadvantageous article. Nothing but theservants being overloaded can rationally account for their choice of sogreat a proportion of so dubious a commodity. 

On the state made by two reports of a committee of the General Court in1782, their affairs were even then reduced to a low ebb. But under thearrangement announced by Mr. Hastings and his colleagues, it does notappear, after this period of the servants' investment, from what fundthe proprietors are to make any dividend at all. The objects of the salefrom whence the dividend is to arise are not _their_ goods: they standaccountable to others for the whole probable produce. The state of theCompany's commerce will therefore become an object of seriousconsideration: an affair, as your Committee apprehends, of as muchdifficulty as ever tried the faculties of this House. For, on the onehand, it is plain that the system of providing the Company's import intoEurope, resting almost wholly by an investment from its territorialrevenues, has failed: during its continuance it was supported onprinciples fatal to the prosperity of that country. On the other hand, if the nominal commerce of the Company is suffered to be carried on forthe account of the servants abroad, by investing the emoluments made intheir stations, these emoluments are therefore inclusively authorized, and with them the practices from which they accrue. All Parliamentaryattempts to reform this system will be contradictory to its institution. If, for instance, five hundred thousand pounds sterling annually benecessary for this kind of investment, any regulation which may preventthe acquisition of that sum operates against the investment which is theend proposed by the plan. 

On this new scheme, (which is neither calculated for a future securitynor for a present relief to the Company, ) it is not visible in whatmanner the settlements in India can be at all upheld. The gentlemen inemployments abroad call for the whole produce of the year's investmentfrom Bengal; but for the payment of the counter-investment from Europe, which is for the far greater part sent out for the support of theirpower, no provision at all is made: they have not, it seems, agreed thatit should be charged to their account, or that any deduction should bemade for it from the produce of their sales in Leadenhall Street. Howfar such a scheme is preferable to the total suspension of trade yourCommittee cannot positively determine. In all likelihood, extraordinaryexpedients were necessary; but the causes which induced this necessityought to be more fully inquired into; for the last step in a series ofconduct may be justifiable upon principles that suppose great blame inthose which preceded it. 

After your Committee had made the foregoing observations upon the planof Mr. Hastings and his colleagues, transmitted to the Court ofDirectors, an extract of the Madras Consultations was a few days agolaid before us. This extract contains a letter from the Governor-Generaland Council of Bengal to the Presidency of Fort St. George, whichaffords a very striking, though to your Committee by no means anunexpected, picture of the instability of their opinions and conduct. Onthe 8th of April the servants had regularly formed and digested theabove-mentioned plan, which was to form the basis for the investment oftheir own fortunes, and to furnish the sole means of the commercialexistence of their masters. Before the 10th of the following May, whichis the date of their letter to Madras, they inform Lord Macartney thatthey had fundamentally altered the whole scheme. "Instead, " say they, "of allowing the subscribers to retain an interest in the goods, theyare to be provided entirely on account of the Company, and transported_at their risk_; and the subscribers, instead of receiving certificatespayable out of the produce of the sales in Europe, are to be grantedreceipts, on the payment of their advances, bearing an interest of eightper cent per annum, until exchanged for drafts on the Court ofDirectors, payable 365 days after sight, at the rate of two shillingsper current rupee, --which drafts shall be granted in the proper time, ofthree eighths of the amount subscribed, on the 31st of December next, and the remaining five eighths on the 31st of December, 1783. "

The plan of April divests the Company of all property in Bengal goodstransported to Europe: but in recompense they are freed from all therisk and expense, they are not loaded with interest, and they are notembarrassed with bills. The plan of May reinstates them in their oldrelation: but in return, their revenues in Bengal are charged with aninterest of eight per cent on the sum subscribed, until bills shall bedrawn; they are made proprietors of cargoes purchased, under thedisadvantage of that interest, at their own hazard; they are subjectedto all losses; and they are involved in Europe for payments of bills tothe amount of eighty lacs of rupees, at two shillings the rupee, --thatis, in bills for eight hundred thousand pounds sterling. It is probablyon account of the previous interest of eight per cent that the value ofthe rupee on this scheme is reduced. Mr. Hastings and his colleaguesannounce to Lord Macartney no other than the foregoing alteration intheir plan. 

It is discouraging to attempt any sort of observation on plans thusshifting their principle whilst their merits are under examination. Thejudgment formed on the scheme of April has nothing to do with theproject of May. Your Committee has not suppressed any part of thereflections which occurred to them on the former of these plans: first, because the Company knows of no other by any regular transmissions;secondly, because it is by no means certain that before the expirationof June the Governor-General and Council may not revert to the plan ofApril. They speak of that plan as likely to be, or make a part of onethat shall be, _permanent_. Many reasons are alleged by its authors inits favor, grounded on the state of their affairs; none whatever areassigned for the alteration. It is, indeed, morally certain thatpersons who had money to remit must have made the same calculation whichhas been made by the directions of your Committee, and the result musthave been equally clear to them, --which is, that, instead of realizingtwo shillings and twopence the rupee on their subscription, as theyproposed, they could never hope to see more than one shilling andninepence. This calculation probably shook the main pillar of theproject of April. But, on the other hand, as the subscribers to thesecond scheme can have no certain assurance that the Company will acceptbills so far exceeding their allowance in this particular, the necessityof remitting their fortunes may beat them back to their old ground. TheDanish Company was the only means of remitting which remained. Attemptshave been made with success to revive a Portuguese trade for thatpurpose. It is by no means clear whether Mr. Hastings and his colleagueswill adhere to either of the foregoing plans, or, indeed, whether anyinvestment at all to that amount can be realized; because nothing butthe convenience of remitting the gains of British subjects to London cansupport any of these projects. 

The situation of the Company, under this perpetual variation in thesystem of their investment, is truly perplexing. The manner in whichthey arrive at any knowledge of it is no less so. The letter to LordMacartney, by which the variation is discovered, was not intended fortransmission to the Directors. It was merely for the information ofthose who were admitted to a share of the subscription at Madras. WhenMr. Hastings sent this information to those subscribers, he might wellenough have presumed an event to happen which did happen, --that is, that a vessel might be dispatched from Madras to Europe: and indeed, bythat, and by every devisable means, he ought not only to have apprisedthe Directors of this most material change in the plan of theinvestment, but to have entered fully into the grounds and reasons ofhis making it. 

It appears to your Committee that the ships which brought to England theplan of the 8th of April did not sail from Bengal until the 1st of May. If the change had been in contemplation for any time before the 30th ofApril, two days would have sufficed to send an account of it, and itmight have arrived along with the plan which it affected. If, therefore, such a change was in agitation before the sailing of the ships, and yetwas concealed when it might have been communicated, the concealment iscensurable. It is not improbable that some change of the kind was madeor meditated before the sailing of the ships for Europe: for it ishardly to be imagined that reasons wholly unlooked-for should appear forsetting aside a plan concerning the success of which the Council-Generalseemed so very confident, that a new one should be proposed, that itsmerits should be discussed among the moneyed men, that it should beadopted in Council, and officially ready for transmission to Madras, intwelve or thirteen days. In this perplexity of plan and of transmission, the Court of Directors may have made an arrangement of their affairs onthe groundwork of the first scheme, which was officially andauthentically conveyed to them. The fundamental alteration of that planin India might require another of a very different kind in England, which the arrangements taken in consequence of the first might make itdifficult, if not impossible, to execute. What must add to the confusionis, that the alteration has not the regular and official authority ofthe original plan, and may be presumed to indicate with certaintynothing more than that the business is _again_ afloat, and that noscheme is finally determined on. Thus the Company is left without anyfixed data upon which they can make a rational disposition of theiraffairs. 

The fact is, that the principles and economy of the Company's trade havebeen so completely corrupted by turning it into a vehicle for tribute, that, whenever circumstances require it to be replaced again upon abottom truly commercial, hardly anything but confusion and disasters canbe expected as the first results. Even before the acquisition of theterritorial revenues, the system of the Company's commerce was notformed upon principles the most favorable to its prosperity; for, whilst, on the one hand, that body received encouragement by royal andParliamentary charters, was invested with several ample privileges, andeven with a delegation of the most essential prerogatives of thecrown, --on the other, its commerce was watched with an insidiousjealousy, as a species of dealing dangerous to the national interests. In that light, with regard to the Company's imports, there was a totalprohibition from domestic use of the most considerable articles of theirtrade, --that is, of all silk stuffs, and stained and painted cottons. The British market was in a great measure interdicted to the Britishtrader. Whatever advantages might arise to the general trading interestsof the kingdom by this restraint, its East India interest wasundoubtedly injured by it. The Company is also, and has been from avery early period, obliged to furnish the Ordnance with a quantity ofsaltpetre at a certain price, without any reference to the standard ofthe markets either of purchase or of sale. With regard to their export, they were put also under difficulties upon very mistaken notions; forthey were obliged to export annually a certain proportion of Britishmanufactures, even though they should find for them in India none or butan unprofitable want. This compulsory export might operate, and in someinstances has operated, in a manner more grievous than a tax to theamount of the loss in trade: for the payment of a tax is in generaldivided in unequal portions between the vender and consumer, the largestpart falling upon the latter; in the case before us the tax may be as adead charge on the trading capital of the Company. 

The spirit of all these regulations naturally tended to weaken, in thevery original constitution of the Company, the main-spring of thecommercial machine, _the principles of profit and loss_. And themischief arising from an inattention to those principles has constantlyincreased with the increase of its power. For when the Company hadacquired the rights of sovereignty in India, it was not to be expectedthat the attention to profit and loss would have increased. The idea ofremitting tribute in goods naturally produced an indifference to theirprice and quality, --the goods themselves appearing little else than asort of package to the tribute. Merchandise taken as tribute, or boughtin lieu of it, can never long be of a kind or of a price fitted to amarket which stands solely on its commercial reputation. Theindifference of the mercantile sovereign to his trading advantagesnaturally relaxed the diligence of his subordinate factor-magistratesthrough all their gradations and in all their functions; it gave rise, at least so far as the principal was concerned, to much neglect of priceand of goodness in their purchases. If ever they showed anyextraordinary degrees of accuracy and selection, it would naturally bein favor of that interest to which they could not be indifferent. TheCompany might suffer above, the natives might suffer below; theintermediate party must profit to the prejudice of both. 

Your Committee are of opinion that the Company is now arrived at thatpoint, when, the investment from surplus revenue or from the spoil ofwar ceasing, it is become much more necessary to fix its commerce upon acommercial basis. And this opinion led your Committee to a detailedreview of all the articles of the Indian traffic upon which the profitand loss was steady; and we have chosen a period of four years, duringthe continuance of the revenue investment, and prior to any borrowing orany extraordinary drawing of bills, in order to find out how far thetrade, under circumstances when it will be necessary to carry it on byborrowing, or by bills, or by exportation of bullion, can be sustainedin the former course, so as to secure the capital and to afford areasonable dividend. And your Committee find that in the first fouryears the investment from Bengal amounted to 4, 176, 525_l. _; upon2, 260, 277_l. _ there was a gain of 186, 337_l. _, and upon 1, 916, 248_l. _ aloss of 705, 566_l. _: so that the excess of loss above gain, upon thewhole of the foregoing capital, was in the four years no less than519, 229_l. _

If the trade were confined to Bengal, and the Company were to trade onthose terms upon a capital borrowed at eight per cent Indian interest, their revenues in that province would be soon so overpowered with debt, that those revenues, instead of supporting the trade, would be totallydestroyed by it. If, on the other hand, the Company traded upon billswith every advantage, far from being in a condition to divide thesmallest percentage, their bankruptcy here would be inevitable. 

Your Committee then turned to the trade of the other factories andPresidencies, and they constantly found, that, as the power and dominionof the Company was less, their profit on the goods was greater. Theinvestments of Madras, Bombay, and Bencoolen have, in the foregoing fouryears, upon a capital of 1, 151, 176_l. _, had a gain upon the whole of329, 622_l. _ The greatest of all is that of Bencoolen, which, on acapital of 76, 571_l. _, produced a profit of 107, 760_l. _ This, however, is but a small branch of the Company's trade. The trade to China, on acapital of 1, 717, 463_l. _, produced an excess of gain amounting to874, 096_l. _, which is about fifty per cent. But such was the evilinfluence of the Bengal investment, that not only the profits of theChinese trade, but of all the lucrative branches taken together, were sosunk and ingulfed in it, that the whole profit on a capital of7, 045, 164_l. _ reached to no more than 684, 489_l. _, that is, to189, 607_l. _ less than the profit on the Chinese trade alone, --less thanthe total profits on the gainful trades taken together, 520, 727_l. _

It is very remarkable, that in the year 1778, when the Bengal investmentstood at the highest, that is, so high as 1, 223, 316_l. _, though theChinese trade produced an excess of gain in that year of 209, 243_l. _, and that no loss of moment could be added to that of Bengal, (exceptabout 45, 000_l. _ on the Bombay trade, ) the whole profit of a capital of2, 040, 787_l. _ amounted only to the sum of 9, 480_l. _

The detail of the articles in which loss was incurred or gain made willbe found in the Appendix, No. 24. The circumstances of the time haverendered it necessary to call up a vigorous attention to this state ofthe trade of the Company between Europe and India. 

INTERNAL TRADE OF BENGAL. 

The internal trade of Bengal has next attracted the inquiries of yourCommittee. 

The great and valuable articles of the Company's investment, drawn fromthe articles of internal trade, are raw silk, and various descriptionsof piece-goods made of silk and cotton. These articles are not under anyformal monopoly; nor does the Company at present exercise a _declared_right of preëmption with regard to them. But it does not appear that thetrade in these particulars is or can be perfectly free, --not so much onaccount of any direct measures taken to prevent it as from thecircumstances of the country, and the manner of carrying on businessthere: for the present trade, even in these articles, is built from theruins of old monopolies and preëmptions, and necessarily partakes of thenature of its materials. 

In order to show in what manner manufactures and trade so constitutedcontribute to the prosperity of the natives, your Committee conceives itproper to take, in this place, a short general view of the progress ofthe English policy with relation to the commerce of Bengal, and theseveral stages and gradations by which it has been brought into itsactual state. The modes of abuse, and the means by which commerce hassuffered, will be considered in greater detail under the distinct headsof those objects which have chiefly suffered by them. 

During the time of the Mogul government, the princes of that race, whoomitted nothing for the encouragement of commerce in their dominions, bestowed very large privileges and immunities on the English East IndiaCompany, exempting them from several duties to which their natural-bornsubjects were liable. The Company's _dustuck_, or passport, secured tothem this exemption at all the custom-houses and toll-bars of thecountry. The Company, not being able or not choosing to make use oftheir privilege to the full extent to which it might be carried, indulged their servants with a qualified use of their passport, underwhich, and in the name of the Company, they carried on a private trade, either by themselves or in society with natives, and thus found acompensation for the scanty allowances made to them by their masters inEngland. As the country government was at that time in the fulness ofits strength, and that this immunity existed by a double connivance, itwas naturally kept within tolerable limits. 

But by the revolution in 1757 the Company's servants obtained a mightyascendant over the native princes of Bengal, who owed their elevation tothe British arms. The Company, which was new to that kind of power, andnot yet thoroughly apprised of its real character and situation, considered itself still as a trader in the territories of a foreignpotentate, in the prosperity of whose country it had neither interestnor duty. The servants, with the same ideas, followed their fortune inthe channels in which it had hitherto ran, only enlarging them with theenlargement of their power. For their first ideas of profit were notofficial; nor were their oppressions those of ordinary despotism. Thefirst instruments of their power were formed out of evasions of theirancient subjection. The passport of the Company in the hands of itsservants was no longer under any restraint; and in a very short timetheir immunity began to cover all the merchandise of the country. CossimAli Khân, the second of the Nabobs whom they had set up, was but illdisposed to the instruments of his greatness. He bore the yoke of thisimperious commerce with the utmost impatience: he saw his subjectsexcluded as aliens from their own trade, and the revenues of the princeoverwhelmed in the ruin of the commerce of his dominions. Finding hisreiterated remonstrances on the extent and abuse of the passportineffectual, he had recourse to an unexpected expedient, which was, todeclare his resolution at once to annul all the duties on trade, settingit equally free to subjects and to foreigners. 

Never was a method of defeating the oppressions of monopoly moreforcible, more simple, or more equitable: no sort of plausible objectioncould be made; and it was in vain to think of evading it. It wastherefore met with the confidence of avowed and determined injustice. The Presidency of Calcutta openly denied to the prince the power ofprotecting the trade of his subjects by the remission of his own duties. It was evident that his authority drew to its period: many reasons andmotives concurred, and his fall was hastened by the odium of theoppressions which he exercised voluntarily, as well as of those to whichhe was obliged to submit. 

When this example was made, Jaffier Ali Khân, who had been deposed tomake room for the last actor, was brought from penury and exile to astation the terms of which he could not misunderstand. During his life, and in the time of his children who succeeded to him, parts of theterritorial revenue were assigned to the Company; and the whole, underthe name of residency at the Nabob's court, was brought, directly orindirectly, under the control of British subjects. The Company'sservants, armed with authorities delegated from the nominal government, or attended with what was a stronger guard, the fame of their own power, appeared as magistrates in the markets in which they dealt as traders. It was impossible for the natives in general to distinguish, in theproceedings of the same persons, what was transacted on the Company'saccount from what was done on their own; and it will ever be sodifficult to draw this line of distinction, that as long as the Companydoes, directly or indirectly, aim at any advantage to itself in thepurchase of any commodity whatever, so long will it be impracticable toprevent the servants availing themselves of the same privilege. 

The servants, therefore, for themselves or for their employers, monopolized every article of trade, foreign and domestic: not only theraw merchantable commodities, but the manufactures; and not only these, but the necessaries of life, or what in these countries habit hasconfounded with them, --not only silk, cotton, piece-goods, opium, saltpetre, but not unfrequently salt, tobacco, betel-nut, and the grainof most ordinary consumption. In the name of the country governmentthey laid on or took off, and at their pleasure heightened or lowered, all duties upon goods: the whole trade of the country was eitherdestroyed or in shackles. The acquisition of the Duanné, in 1765, bringing the English into the immediate government of the country in itsmost essential branches, extended and confirmed all the former means ofmonopoly. 

In the progress of these ruinous measures through all their details, innumerable grievances were suffered by the native inhabitants, whichwere represented in the strongest, that is, their true colors, inEngland. Whilst the far greater part of the British in India were ineager pursuit of the forced and exorbitant gains of a trade carried onby power, contests naturally arose among the competitors: those who wereoverpowered by their rivals became loud in their complaints to the Courtof Directors, and were very capable, from experience, of pointing outevery mode of abuse. 

The Court of Directors, on their part, began, though very slowly, toperceive that the country which was ravaged by this sort of commerce wastheir own. These complaints obliged the Directors to a strictexamination into the real sources of the mismanagement of their concernsin India, and to lay the foundations of a system of restraint on theexorbitancies of their servants. Accordingly, so early as the year 1765, they confine them to a trade only in articles of export and import, andstrictly prohibit them from all dealing in objects of internalconsumption. About the same time the Presidency of Calcutta found itnecessary to put a restraint upon themselves, or at least to make showof a disposition (with which the Directors appear much satisfied) tokeep their own enormous power within bounds. 

But whatever might have been the intentions either of the Directors orthe Presidency, both found themselves unequal to the execution of a planwhich went to defeat the projects of almost all the English inIndia, --possibly comprehending some who were makers of the regulations. For, as the complaint of the country or as their own interestpredominated with the Presidency, they were always shifting from onecourse to the other; so that it became as impossible for the natives toknow upon what principle to ground any commercial speculation, from theuncertainty of the law under which they acted, as it was when they wereoppressed by power without any color of law at all: for the Directors, in a few months after they had given these tokens of approbation to theabove regulations in favor of the country trade, tell the Presidency, "It is with concern we see in _every page_ of your Consultations_restrictions, limitations, prohibitions, affecting various articles oftrade_. " On their side, the Presidency freely confess that thesemonopolies of inland trade "were the foundation of all the bloodsheds, massacres, and confusions which have happened of late in Bengal. "

Pressed in this urgent manner, the Directors came more specifically tothe grievance, and at once annul all the passports with which theirservants traded without duties, holding out means of compensation, ofwhich it does not appear that any advantage was taken. In order that theduties which existed should no longer continue to burden the tradeeither of the servants or natives, they ordered that a number ofoppressive toll-bars should be taken away, and the whole number reducedto nine of the most considerable. 

When Lord Clive was sent to Bengal to effect a reformation of the manyabuses which prevailed there, he considered monopoly to be so inveterateand deeply rooted, and the just rewards of the Company's servants to beso complicated with that injustice to the country, that the latter couldnot easily be removed without taking away the former. He adopted, therefore, a plan for dealing in certain articles, which, as heconceived, rather ought to be called "a regulated and restricted trade"than a formal monopoly. By this plan he intended that the profits shouldbe distributed in an orderly and proportioned manner for the reward ofservices, and not seized by each individual according to the measure ofhis boldness, dexterity, or influence. 

But this scheme of monopoly did not subsist long, at least in that modeand for those purposes. Three of the grand monopolies, those of opium, salt, and saltpetre, were successively by the Company taken into theirown hands. The produce of the sale of the two former articles wasapplied to the purchase of goods for their investment; the latter wasexported in kind for their sales in Europe. The senior servants had acertain share of emolument allotted to them from a commission on therevenues. The junior servants were rigorously confined to salaries, onwhich they were unable to subsist according to their rank. They werestrictly ordered to abstain from all dealing in objects of internalcommerce. Those of export and import were left open to young men withoutmercantile experience, and wholly unprovided with mercantile capitals, but abundantly furnished with large trusts of the public money, and withall the powers of an absolute government. In this situation, a religiousabstinence from all illicit game was prescribed to men at nine thousandmiles' distance from the seat of the supreme authority. 

Your Committee is far from meaning to justify, or even to excuse, theoppressions and cruelties used by many in supplying the deficiencies oftheir regular allowances by all manner of extortion; but many smallerirregularities may admit some alleviation from thence. Nor does yourCommittee mean to express any desire of reverting to the mode (contrivedin India, but condemned by the Directors) of rewarding the servants ofan higher class by a regulated monopoly. Their object is to point outthe deficiencies in the system, by which restrictions were laid thatcould have little or no effect whilst want and power were suffered to beunited. 

But the proceedings of the Directors at that time, though not altogetherjudicious, were in many respects honorable to them, and favorable, inthe intention at least, to the country they governed. For, finding theirtrading capital employed against themselves and against the natives, andstruggling in vain against abuses which were inseparably connected withthe system of their own preference in trade, in the year 1773 they cameto the manly resolution of setting an example to their servants, andgave up all use of power and influence in the two grand articles oftheir investment, silk and piece-goods. They directed that the articlesshould be bought at an equal and public market from the nativemerchants; and this order they directed to be published in all theprincipal marts of Bengal. 

Your Committee are clearly of opinion that no better method of purchasecould be adopted. But it soon appeared that in deep-rooted andinveterate abuses the wisest principles of reform may be made to operateso destructively as wholly to discredit the design, and to disheartenall persons from the prosecution of it. The Presidency, who seemed toyield with the utmost reluctance to the execution of these orders, soonmade the Directors feel their evil influence upon their own investment;for they found the silk and cotton cloths rose twenty-five per centabove their former price, and a further rise of forty per cent wasannounced to them. 

SILK. 

What happened with regard to raw silk is still more remarkable, andtends still more clearly to illustrate the effects of commercialservitude during its unchecked existence, and the consequences which maybe made to arise from its sudden reformation. On laying open the trade, the article of raw silk was instantly enhanced to the Company fulleighty per cent. The contract made for that commodity, wound off in theBengal method, which used to sell for less than six rupees, or thirteenshillings, for two pounds' weight, arose to nine rupees, or near twentyshillings, and the filature silk was very soon after contracted for atfourteen. 

The Presidency accounted for this rise by observing that the price hadbefore been _arbitrary_, and that the persons who purveyed for theCompany paid no more than "what was _judged_ sufficient for themaintenance of the first providers. " This fact explains more fully thanthe most labored description can do the dreadful effects of the monopolyon the cultivators. They had the _sufficiency_ of their maintenancemeasured out by the judgment of those who were to profit by their labor;and this measure was not a great deal more, by their own account, thanabout two thirds of the value of that labor. In all probability it wasmuch less, as these dealings rarely passed through intermediate handswithout leaving a considerable profit. These oppressions, it will beobserved, were not confined to the Company's share, which, however, covered a great part of the trade; but as this was an article permittedto the servants, the same power of arbitrary valuation must have beenextended over the whole, as the market must be equalized, if anyauthority at all is extended over it by those who have an interest inthe restraint. The price was not only raised, but in the manufacturesthe quality was debased nearly in an equal proportion. The Directorsconceived, with great reason, that this rise of price and debasement ofquality arose, not from the effect of a free market, but from theservants having taken that opportunity of throwing upon the market oftheir masters the refuse goods of their own private trade at suchexorbitant prices as by mutual connivance they were pleased to settle. The mischief was greatly aggravated by its happening at a time when theCompany were obliged to pay for their goods with bonds bearing an highinterest. 

The perplexed system of the Company's concerns, composed of so manyopposite movements and contradictory principles, appears nowhere in amore clear light. If trade continued under restraint, their territorialrevenues must suffer by checking the general prosperity of the country:if they set it free, means were taken to raise the price and debase thequality of the goods; and this again fell upon the revenues, out ofwhich the payment for the goods was to arise. The observations of theCompany on that occasion are just and sagacious; and they will notpermit the least doubt concerning the policy of these unnatural trades. "The amount of our Bengal cargoes, from 1769 to 1773, is 2, 901, 194_l. _sterling; and if the average increase of price be estimated attwenty-five per cent only, the amount of such increase is 725, 298_l. _sterling. The above circumstances are exceedingly alarming to us; butwhat must be our concern, to find by the advices of our President andCouncil of 1773, that a further advance of forty per cent on Bengalgoods was expected, and allowed to be the consequence of advertisementsthen published, authorizing a free trade in the service? We find theDuanné revenues are in general farmed for five years, and the aggregateincrease estimated at only 183, 170_l. _ sterling (on a supposition thatsuch increase will be realized); yet if the annual investment be sixtylacs, and the advance of price thirty per cent only, such advance will_exceed the increase of the revenue by no less than 829, 330l. Sterling_. "

The indignation which the Directors felt at being reduced to thisdistressing situation was expressed to their servants in very strongterms. They attributed the whole to their practices, and say, "We arefar from being convinced that the competition which tends to raise theprice of goods in Bengal is wholly between public European companies, orbetween merchants in general who export to foreign markets: we arerather of opinion that the sources of this grand evil have been theextraordinary privileges granted to individuals in our service or underour license to trade without restriction throughout the provinces ofBengal, and the encouragement they have had to extend their trade to theuttermost, even in such goods as were proper for our investment, byobserving the success of those persons who have from time to time _foundmeans to dispose of their merchandise to our Governor and Council_, though of so bad a quality as to be sold here with great difficulty, after having been frequently refused, and put up at the next salewithout price, to the very great discredit and disadvantage of theCompany. " In all probability the Directors were not mistaken; for, uponan inquiry instituted soon after, it was found that Cantû Babû, thebanian or native steward and manager to Mr. Hastings, (late President, )held two of these contracts in his own name and that of his son forconsiderably more than 150, 000_l. _ This discovery brought on aprohibition from the Court of Directors of that suspicious and dangerousdealing in the stewards of persons in high office. The same man heldlikewise farms to the amount of 140, 000_l. _ a year of the landedrevenue, with the same suspicious appearance, contrary to theregulations made under Mr. Hastings's own administration. 

In the mortifying dilemma to which the Directors found themselvesreduced, whereby the ruin of the revenues either by the freedom or therestraint of trade was evident, they considered the first as most rapidand urgent, and therefore once more revert to the system of theirancient preëmption, and destroy that freedom which they had so latelyand with so much solemnity proclaimed, and that before it could beabused or even enjoyed. They declare, that, "unwilling as we are toreturn to _the former coercive system_ of providing an investment, or toabridge that freedom of commerce which has been so lately established inBengal, yet at the same time finding it our indispensable duty to strikeat the _root_ of an evil which has been so severely felt by the Company, and which can no longer be supported, we hereby direct that all personswhatever in the Company's service, _or under our protection_, beabsolutely prohibited, by public advertisement, from trading in any ofthose articles which compose our investment, directly or indirectly, except on account of and for the East India Company, until theirinvestment is completed. "

As soon as this order was received in Bengal, it was construed, asindeed the words seemed directly to warrant, to exclude all natives aswell as servants from the trade, until the Company was supplied. TheCompany's preëmption was now authoritatively reëstablished, and somefeeble and ostensible regulations were made to relieve the weavers whomight suffer by it. The Directors imagined that the reëstablishment oftheir coercive system would remove the evil which fraud and artifice hadgrafted upon one more rational and liberal. But they were mistaken; forit only varied, if it did so much as vary, the abuse. The servants mightas essentially injure their interest by a direct exercise of their poweras by pretexts drawn from the freedom of the natives, --but with thisfatal difference, that the frauds upon the Company must be of shorterduration under a scheme of freedom. That state admitted, and indeed ledto, means of discovery and correction; whereas the system of coercionwas likely to be permanent. It carried force further than served thepurposes of those who authorized it: it tended to cover all frauds withobscurity, and to bury all complaint in despair. The next year, therefore, that is, in the year 1776, the Company, who complained thattheir orders had been extended beyond their intentions, made a thirdrevolution in the trade of Bengal. It was set free again, --so far, atleast, as regarded the native merchants, --but in so imperfect a manneras evidently to leave the roots of old abuses in the ground. The SupremeCourt of Judicature about this time (1776) also fulminated a chargeagainst monopolies, without any exception of those authorized by theCompany: but it does not appear that anything very material was done inconsequence of it. 

The trade became nominally free; but the course of business establishedin consequence of coercive monopoly was not easily altered. In order torender more distinct the principles which led to the establishment of acourse and habit of business so very difficult to change as long asthose principles exist, your Committee think it will not be useless hereto enter into the history of the regulations made in the first andfavorite matter of the Company's investment, the trade in _raw silk_, from the commencement of these regulations to the Company's perhapsfinally abandoning all share in the trade which was their object. 

RAW SILK

The trade in _raw silk_ was at all times more popular in England thanreally advantageous to the Company. In addition to the old jealousywhich prevailed between the Company and the manufactory interest ofEngland, they came to labor under no small odium on account of thedistresses of India. The public in England perceived, and felt with aproper sympathy, the sufferings of the Eastern provinces in all cases inwhich they might be attributed to the abuses of power exercised underthe Company's authority. But they were not equally sensible to the evilswhich arose from a system of sacrificing the being of that country tothe advantage of this. They entered very readily into the former, butwith regard to the latter were slow and incredulous. It is not, therefore, extraordinary that the Company should endeavor to ingratiatethemselves with the public by falling in with its prejudices. Thus theywere led to increase the grievance in order to allay the clamor. Theycontinued still, upon a larger scale, and still more systematically, that plan of conduct which was the principal, though not the mostblamed, cause of the decay and depopulation of the country committed totheir care. 

With that view, and to furnish a cheap supply of materials to themanufactures of England, they formed a scheme which tended to destroy, or at least essentially to impair, the whole manufacturing interest ofBengal. A policy of that sort could not fail of being highly popular, when the Company submitted itself as an instrument for the improvementof British manufactures, instead of being their most dangerous rival, asheretofore they had been always represented. 

They accordingly notified to their Presidency in Bengal, in their letterof the 17th of March, 1769, that "there was no branch of their tradethey more ardently wish to extend than that of raw silk. " Theydisclaim, however, all desire of employing compulsory measures for thatpurpose, but recommended every mode of encouragement, and particularlyby augmented wages, "_in order to induce manufacturers of wrought silkto quit that branch and take to the winding of raw silk_. "

Having thus found means to draw hands from the manufacture, andconfiding in the strength of a capital drawn from the public revenues, they pursue their ideas from the purchase of their manufacture to thepurchase of the material in its crudest state. "We recommend you to givean _increased price_, if necessary, _so as to take that trade out of thehands of other merchants and rival nations_. " A double bounty was thusgiven against the manufactures, both in the labor and in the materials. 

It is very remarkable in what manner their vehement pursuit of thisobject led the Directors to a speedy oblivion of those equitablecorrectives before interposed by them, in order to prevent the mischiefswhich were apparent in the scheme, if left to itself. They could ventureso little to trust to the bounties given from the revenues a trade whichhad a tendency to dry up their source, that, by the time they hadproceeded to the thirty-third paragraph of their letter, they revert tothose very compulsory means which they had disclaimed but threeparagraphs before. To prevent silk-winders from working in their privatehouses, where they might work for private traders, and to confine themto the Company's factories, where they could only be employed for theCompany's benefit, they desire that the newly acquired power ofgovernment should be effectually employed. "Should, " say they, "thispractice, through _inattention_, have been suffered to take place again, it will be proper to put a stop to it, which may _now be moreeffectually done by an absolute prohibition, under severe penalties, bythe authority of government_. "

This letter contains a perfect plan of policy, both of compulsion andencouragement, which must in a very considerable degree operatedestructively to the manufactures of Bengal. Its effect must be (so faras it could operate without being eluded) to change the whole face ofthat industrious country, in order to render it a field for the produceof crude materials subservient to the manufactures of Great Britain. Themanufacturing hands were to be seduced from their looms by high wages, in order to prepare a raw produce for our market; they were to be lockedup in the factories; and the commodity acquired by these operations was, in this immature state, carried out of the country, whilst its loomswould be left without any material but the debased refuse of a marketenhanced in its price and scanted in its supply. By the increase of theprice of this and other materials, manufactures formerly the mostflourishing gradually disappeared under the protection of Great Britain, and were seen to rise again and flourish on the opposite coast of India, under the dominion of the Mahrattas. 

These restraints and encouragements seem to have had the desired effectin Bengal with regard to the diversion of labor from manufacture tomaterials. The trade of raw silk increased rapidly. But the Company verysoon felt, in the increase of price and debasement of quality of thewrought goods, a loss to themselves which fully counterbalanced all theadvantages to be derived to the nation from the increase of the rawcommodity. The necessary effect on the revenue was also foretold veryearly: for their servants in the principal silk-factories declared thatthe obstruction to the private trade in silk must in the end provedetrimental to the revenues, and that the investment clashes with thecollection of these revenues. Whatsoever by bounties or immunities isencouraged out of a landed revenue has certainly some tendency to lessenthe net amount of that revenue, and to forward a produce which does notyield to the gross collection, rather than one that does. 

The Directors declare themselves unable to understand how this could be. Perhaps it was not so difficult. But, pressed as they were by thegreatness of the payments which they were compelled to make togovernment in England, the cries of Bengal could not be heard among thecontending claims of the General Court, of the Treasury, and ofSpitalfields. The speculation of the Directors was originally fair andplausible, --so far as the mere encouragement of the commodity extended. Situated as they were, it was hardly in their power to stop themselvesin the course they had begun. They were obliged to continue theirresolution, at any hazard, increasing the investment. "The state of ouraffairs, " say they, "requires the utmost extension of your investments. You are not to forbear sending even those sorts _which are attended withloss_, in case such should be necessary to supply an investment to asgreat an amount as _you can provide from your own resources_; and wehave not the least doubt of your being thereby enabled to increase yourconsignments of this valuable branch of national commerce, even to theutmost of your wishes. But it is our positive order that no part ofsuch investment be provided with borrowed money which is to be repaid by_drafts upon our treasury in London_; since the license which hasalready been taken in this respect has involved us in difficulties whichwe yet know not how we shall surmount. "

This very instructive paragraph lays open the true origin of theinternal decay of Bengal. The trade and revenues of that country were(as the then system must necessarily have been) of secondaryconsideration at best. Present supplies were to be obtained, and presentdemands in England were to be avoided, at every expense to Bengal. 

The spirit of increasing the investment from revenue at any rate, andthe resolution of driving all competitors, Europeans or natives, out ofthe market, prevailed at a period still more early, and prevailed notonly in Bengal, but seems, more or less, to have diffused itself throughthe whole sphere of the Company's influence. In 1768 they gave to thePresidency of Madras the following memorable instruction, stronglydeclaratory of their general system of policy. 

"We shall depend upon your prudence, " say they, "to discourageforeigners; and being intent, as you have been repeatedly acquainted, onbringing home as great a part of the revenues as possible in yourmanufactures, the outbidding them in those parts where they interferewith you would certainly prove an effectual step for answering that end. We therefore recommend it to you to offer such increase of price as youshall deem may be consistently given, --that, by beating them out of themarket, the quantities by you to be provided may be proportionallyenlarged; and if you take this method, it is to be so cautiouslypractised as not to enhance the prices in the places immediately underyour control. On this subject we must not omit the approval of yourprohibiting the weavers of Cuddalore from making up any cloth of thesame sortments that are provided for us; and if such prohibition is notnow, it should by all means be in future, _made general, and strictlymaintained_. "

This system must have an immediate tendency towards disordering thetrade of India, and must finally end in great detriment to the Companyitself. The effect of the restrictive system on the weaver is evident. The authority given to the servants to buy at an advanced price did ofnecessity furnish means and excuses for every sort of fraud in theirpurchases. The instant the servant of a merchant is admitted on his ownjudgment to overbid the market, or to send goods to his master whichshall sell at loss, there is no longer any standard upon which hisunfair practices can be estimated, or any effectual means by which theycan be restrained. The hope entertained by the Directors, of confiningthis destructive practice of giving an enhanced price to a particularspot, must ever be found totally delusive. Speculations will be affectedby this artificial price in every quarter in which markets can have theleast communication with each other. 

In a very few years the Court of Directors began to feel, even inLeadenhall Street, _the effects of trading to loss_ upon the revenues, especially on those of Bengal. In the letter of February, 1774, theyobserve, that, "looking back to their accounts for the four precedingyears, on several of the descriptions of silk there has been an_increasing loss_, instead of any alteration for the better in the lastyear's productions. This, " they say, "threatens the destruction of thatvaluable branch of national commerce. " And then they recommend _suchregulations_ (as if regulations in that state of things could be of anyservice) as may obtain "a profit in future, instead of so considerable aloss, which _we can no longer sustain_. "

Your Committee thought it necessary to inquire into the losses which hadactually been suffered by this unnatural forced trade, and find the lossso early as the season of 1776 to be 77, 650_l. _, that in the year 1777it arose to 168, 205_l. _ This was so great that worse could hardly beapprehended: however, in the season of 1778 it amounted to 255, 070_l. _In 1779 it was not so ruinously great, because the whole import was notso considerable; but it still stood enormously high, --so high as141, 800_l. _ In the whole four years it came to 642, 725_l. _ Theobservations of the Directors were found to be fully verified. It isremarkable that the same article in the China trade produced aconsiderable and uniform profit. On this circumstance little observationis necessary. 

During the time of their struggles for enlarging this losing trade, which they considered as a national object, --what in one point of viewit was, and, if it had not been grossly mismanaged, might have been inmore than one, --in this part it is impossible to refuse to the Directorsa very great share of merit. No degree of thought, of trouble, or ofreasonable expense was spared by them for the improvement of thecommodity. They framed with diligence, and apparently on very goodinformation, a code of manufacturing regulations for that purpose; andseveral persons were sent out, conversant in the Italian method ofpreparing and winding silk, aided by proper machines for facilitatingand perfecting the work. This, under proper care, and in course of time, might have produced a real improvement to Bengal; but in the firstinstance it naturally drew the business from native management, and itcaused a revulsion from the trade and manufactures of India which led asnaturally and inevitably to an European monopoly, in some hands orother, as any of the modes of coercion which were or could be employed. The evil was present and inherent in the act. The means of letting thenatives into the benefit of the improved system of produce was likely tobe counteracted by the general ill conduct of the Company's concernsabroad. For a while, at least, it had an effect still worse: for theCompany purchasing the raw cocoon or silk-pod at a fixed rate, the firstproducer, who, whilst he could wind at his own house, employed hisfamily in this labor, and could procure a reasonable livelihood bybuying up the cocoons for the Italian filature, now incurred theenormous and ruinous loss of fifty per cent. This appears in a letter tothe Presidency, written by Mr. Boughton Rouse, now a member of yourCommittee. But for a long time a considerable quantity of that in theold Bengal mode of winding was bought for the Company from contractors, and it continues to be so bought to the present time: but the Directorscomplain, in their letter of the 12th of May, 1780, that both species, and particularly the latter, had risen so extravagantly that it wasbecome more than forty per cent dearer than it had been fifteen yearsago. In that state of price, they condemn their servants, very justly, for entering into contracts for three years, --and that for severalkinds of silk, of very different goodness, upon averages unfairlyformed, where the commodities averaged at an equal price differed fromtwenty to thirty per cent on the sale. Soon after, they formed a regularscale of fixed prices, above which they found they could not tradewithout loss. 

Whilst they were continuing these methods to secure themselves againstfuture losses, the Bengal ships which arrived in that year announcednothing but their continuance. Some articles by the high price, andothers from their ill quality, were such "as never could answer to besent to Europe at any price. " The Directors renew their prohibition ofmaking fresh contracts, the present being generally to expire in theyear 1781. But this trade, whose fundamental policy might have admittedof a doubt, as applied to Bengal, (whatever it might have been withregard to England, ) was now itself expiring in the hands of the Company, so that they were obliged to apply to government for power to enlargetheir capacity of receiving bills upon Europe. The purchase by thesebills they entirely divert from raw silk, and order to be laid outwholly in piece-goods. 

Thus, having found by experience that this trade, whilst carried on uponthe old principles, of whatever advantage it might have been to theBritish manufacturers, or to the individuals who were concerned in it inBengal, had proved highly detrimental to the Company, the Directorsresolved to expunge the raw silk from their investment. They gave up thewhole to private traders, on condition of paying the freight, charges, and duties, --permitting them to send it to Europe in the Company's shipsupon their own account. 

The whole of this history will serve to demonstrate that all attempts, which in their original system or in their necessary consequences tendto the distress of India, must, and in a very short time will, makethemselves felt even by those in whose favor such attempts have beenmade. India may possibly in some future time bear and support itselfunder an extraction of measure [treasure?] or of goods; but much careought to be taken that the influx of wealth shall be greater in quantityand prior in time to the waste. 

On abandoning the trade in silk to private hands, the Directors issuedsome prohibitions to prevent monopoly, and they gave some directionsabout the improvement of the trade. The prohibitions were proper, andthe directions prudent; but it is much to be feared, that, whilst allthe means, instruments, and powers remain, by which monopolies weremade, and through which abuses formerly prevailed, all verbal orderswill be fruitless. 

This branch of trade, being so long principally managed by the Company'sservants for the Company and under its authority, cannot be easily takenout of their hands and pass to the natives, especially when it is to becarried on without the control naturally inherent in all participation. It is not difficult to conceive how this forced preference of traffic ina raw commodity must have injured the manufactures, while it was thepolicy of the Company to continue the trade on their own account. Theservants, so far from deviating from their course, since they have takenthe trade into their own management, have gone much further into it. Theproportion of raw silk in the investment is to be augmented. Theproportion of the whole cargoes for the year 1783, divided into sixteenparts, is ten of raw silk, and six only of manufactured goods. Such isthe proportion of this losing article in the scheme for the investmentof private fortunes. 

In the reformed scheme of sending the investment on account of theCompany, to be paid in bills upon Europe, no mention is made of anychange of these proportions. Indeed, some limits are attempted on thearticle of silk, with regard to its price; and it is not improbable thatthe price to the master and the servant will be very different: but theycannot make profitable purchases of this article without stronglycondemning all the former purchases of the Board of Trade. 

CLOTHS, OR PIECE-GOODS. 

The general system above stated, relative to the silk trade, mustmaterially have affected the manufactures of Bengal, merely as it was asystem of preference. It does by no means satisfactorily appear to yourCommittee that the freedom held out by the Company's various orders hasbeen ever fully enjoyed, or that the grievances of the native merchantsand manufacturers have been redressed; for we find, on good authority, that, at that very period at which it might be supposed that theseorders had their operation, the oppressions were in full vigor. Theyappear to have fallen heaviest on the city of Dacca, formerly the greatstaple for the finest goods in India, --a place once full of opulentmerchants and dealers of all descriptions. 

The city and district of Dacca, before the prevalence of the East IndiaCompany's influence and authority, manufactured annually to about threehundred thousand pounds' value in cloths. In the year 1776 it hadfallen to about two hundred thousand, or two thirds of its formerproduce. Of this the Company's demand amounted only to a fourth part, that is, about fifty thousand pounds yearly. This was at that timeprovided by agents for the Company, under the inspection of theircommercial servants. On pretence of securing an advantage for thisfourth part for their masters, they exerted a most violent and arbitrarypower over the whole. It was asserted, that they fixed the Company'smark to such goods as they thought fit, (to all goods, as stated in onecomplaint, ) and disposed of them as they thought proper, excluding notonly all the native dealers, but the Dutch Company, and private Englishmerchants, --that they made advances to the weavers often beyond theirknown ability to repay in goods within the year, and by this means, having got them in debt, held them in perpetual servitude. Theirinability to keep accounts left them at the discretion of the agents ofthe supreme power to make their balances what they pleased, and theyrecovered them, not by legal process, but by seizure of their goods andarbitrary imprisonment of their persons. One and the same dealer madethe advance, valued the return, stated the account, passed the judgment, and executed the process. 

Mr. Rouse, Chief of the Dacca Province, who struggled against thoseevils, says, that in the year 1773 there were no balances due, as thetrade was then carried on by the native brokers. In less than threeyears these balances amounted to an immense sum, --a sum lost to theCompany, but existing in full force for every purpose of oppression. Inthe amount of these balances almost every weaver in the country bore apart, and consequently they were almost all caught in this snare. "Theyare in general, " says Mr. Rouse, in a letter to General Clavering, delivered to your Committee, "a timid, helpless people; many of thempoor to the utmost degree of wretchedness; incapable of keepingaccounts; industrious as it were by instinct; unable to defendthemselves, if oppressed; and satisfied, if with continual labor theyderive from the fair dealing and humanity of their employer a moderatesubsistence for their families. "

Such were the people who stood accused by the Company's agents as_pretending_ grievances, in order to be excused the payment of theirbalances. As to the commercial state of the province in general, Mr. Rouse represents it "to be for those two years a perpetual scene ofcomplaint and disputation;--the Company's agents professing to payhigher rates to weavers, whilst the Leadenhall sales showed an heavyloss to the Company; the weavers have even travelled in multitudes toprefer their complaints at the Presidency; the amount of the investmentcomparatively small, with balances comparatively large, and, as Iunderstand, generally contested by the weavers; the native merchants, called _delâls_, removed from their influence, as prejudicial to theCompany's concerns; and European merchants complaining against undueinfluence of the Company's commercial agents, in preventing the freepurchase even of those goods which the Company never takes. "

The spirit of those agents will be fully comprehended from a state ofthe proceedings before Mr. Rouse and Council, on the complaint of a Mr. Cree, an English free merchant at Dacca, who had been twice treated inthe same injurious manner by the agents of Mr. Hurst, the CommercialChief at that place. On his complaint to the board of the seizure of thegoods, and imprisonment of his agents, Mr. Hurst was called upon for anexplanation. In return he informed them that he had sent to one of thevillages to inquire concerning the matter of fact alleged. The impartialperson sent to make this inquiry was the very man accused of theoppressions into which he was sent to examine. The answer of Mr. Hurstis in an high and determined tone. He does not deny that there are someinstances of abuse of power. "But I ask, " says he, "what _authority_ canguard against the conduct of individuals? but that a _single_ instancecannot be brought of a general depravity. " Your Committee have reason tobelieve these coercive measures to have been very general, thoughemployed according to the degree of resistance opposed to the monopoly;for we find at one time the whole trade of the Dutch involved in thegeneral servitude. But it appears very extraordinary that nothing butthe actual proof of a _general_ abuse could affect a practice the veryprinciple of which tends to make the coercion as general as the trade. Mr. Hurst's reflection concerning the abuse of _authority_ is just, butin this case it is altogether inapplicable; because the complaint wasnot of the abuse, but of the use of authority in matters of trade, whichought to have been free. He throws out a variety of invidiousreflections against the Council, as if they wanted zeal for theCompany's service; his justification of his practices, and hisdeclaration of his resolution to persevere in them, are firm anddetermined, --asserting the right and policy of such restraints, andlaying down a rule for his conduct at the factory, which, he says, willgive no cause of just complaint to private traders. He adds, "I have nodoubt but that they have hitherto provided investments, and it cannotturn to my interest to preclude them _now_, though I must ever think itmy duty to combat the private views of individuals who _set themselvesup as competitors_ under that very body under whose license andindulgence only they can derive their privilege of trade: all I contendfor is the _same influence_ my employers have ever had. " He ends bydeclining any reply to any of their future references of this nature. 

The whole of this extraordinary letter is inserted in the Appendix, No. 51, --and Mr. Rouse's minute of observations upon it in Appendix, No. 52, fully refuting the few pretexts alleged in that extraordinaryperformance in support of the trade by influence and authority. Mr. Hollond, one of the Council, joined Mr. Rouse in opinion that a letterto the purport of that minute should be written; but they were overruledby Messrs. Purling, Hogarth, and Shakespeare, who passed a resolution todefer sending any reply to Mr. Hurst: and none was ever sent. Thus theygave countenance to the doctrine contained in that letter, as well as tothe mischievous practices which must inevitably arise from the exerciseof such power. Some temporary and partial relief was given by thevigorous exertions of Mr. Rouse; but he shortly after removing from thatgovernment, all complaints were dropped. 

It is remarkable, that, during the long and warm contest between theCompany's agents and the dealers of Dacca, the Board of Trade seem tohave taken a decided part against the latter. They allow some sort ofjustice in the complaints of the manufacturers with regard to lowvaluation, and other particulars; but they say, that, "although" (duringthe time of preëmption) "it appears that the weavers _were not allowedthe same liberty of selling to individuals they before enjoyed_, ouropinion on the whole is, that these complaints have originated upon thepremeditated designs of the delâls [factors or brokers] _to thwart thenew mode_ of carrying on the Company's business, _and to renderthemselves necessary_. " They say, in another place, that there is noground for the dissatisfactions and difficulties of the weavers: "thatthey are owing to the delâls, _whose aim it is to be employed_. "

This desire of being employed, and of rendering themselves necessary, inmen whose only business it is to be employed in trade, is considered bythe gentlemen of the board as no trivial offence; and accordingly theydeclare, "they have established it as _an invariable rule_, that, _whatever deficiency_ there might be in the Dacca investment, nopurchase of the manufactures of _that quarter_ shall be made for accountof the Company from private merchants. We have passed this resolution, which we deem of importance, from a persuasion that private merchantsare often _induced_ to make advances for Dacca goods, not by theordinary chance of sale, but merely from an expectation of disposing ofthem at an enhanced price to the Company, against _whom a rivalship_ isby this manner encouraged"; and they say, "that they intend to observethe _same_ rule with respect to the investment of other of the factoriesfrom whence similar complaints may come. "

This positive rule is opposed to the positive directions of the Companyto employ those obnoxious persons by preference. How far this violentuse of authority for the purpose of destroying rivalship has succeededin reducing the price of goods to the Company has been made manifest bythe facts before stated in their place. 

The recriminatory charges of the Company's agents on the nativemerchants have made very little impression on your Committee. We havenothing in favor of them, but the assertion of a party powerful andinterested. In such cases of mutual assertion and denial, your Committeeare led irresistibly to attach abuse to power, and to presume thatsuffering and hardship are more likely to attend on weakness than thatany combination of unprotected individuals is of force to prevail overinfluence, power, wealth, and authority. The complaints of the nativemerchants ought not to have been treated in any of those modes in whichthey were then treated. And when men are in the situation ofcomplainants against unbounded power, their abandoning their suit is farfrom a full and clear proof of their complaints being groundless. It isnot because redress has been rendered impracticable that oppression doesnot exist; nor is the despair of sufferers any alleviation of theirafflictions. A review of some of the most remarkable of the complaintsmade by the native merchants in that province is so essential for layingopen the true spirit of the commercial administration, and the realcondition of those concerned in trade there, that your Committeeobserving the records on this subject and at this period full of them, they could not think themselves justifiable in not stating them to theHouse. 

Your Committee have found many heavy charges of oppression against Mr. Barwell, whilst Factory Chief at Dacca; which oppressions are stated tohave continued, and even to have been aggravated, on complaint atCalcutta. These complaints appear in several memorials presented to theSupreme Council of Calcutta, of which Mr. Barwell was a member. Theyappeared yet more fully and more strongly in a bill in Chancery filed inthe Supreme Court, which was afterwards recorded before theGovernor-General and Council, and transmitted to the Court of Directors. 

Your Committee, struck with the magnitude and importance of thesecharges, and finding that with regard to those before the Council noregular investigation has ever taken place, and finding also that Mr. Barwell had asserted in a Minute of Council that he had given a fullanswer to the allegations in that bill, ordered a copy of the answer tobe laid before your Committee, that they might be enabled to state tothe House how far it appeared to them to be full, how far the chargeswere denied as to the fact, or, where the facts might be admitted, whatjustification was set up. It appeared necessary, in order to determineon the true situation of the trade and the merchants of that great cityand district. 

The Secretary to the Court of Directors has informed your Committee thatno copy of the answer is to be found in the India House; nor has yourCommittee been able to discover that any has been transmitted. On thisfailure, your Committee ordered an application to be made to Mr. Barwellfor a copy of his answer to the bill, and any other information withwhich he might be furnished with regard to that subject. 

Mr. Barwell, after reciting the above letter, returned in answer whatfollows. 

"Whether the records of the Supreme Court of Judicature are lodged atthe India House I am ignorant, but on those records my answer iscertainly to be found. At this distance of time I am sorry I cannot frommemory recover the circumstances of this affair; but this I know, thatthe bill did receive a complete answer, and the people the fullestsatisfaction: nor is it necessary for me to remark, that [in?] the stateof parties at that time in Bengal, could party have brought forward anyparticle of that bill supported by any verified fact, the principle thatintroduced it in the proceedings of the Governor-General and Councilwould likewise have given the verification of that one circumstance, whatever that might have been. As I generally attend in my place in theHouse, I shall with pleasure answer any invitation of the gentlemen ofthe Committee to attend their investigations up stairs with everyinformation and light in my power to give them. 

"St. James's Square, 15th April, 1783. "

Your Committee considered, that, with regard to the matter charged inthe several petitions to the board, no sort of specific answer had beengiven at the time and place where they were made, and when and where theparties might be examined and confronted. It was considered also, thatthe bill had been transmitted, with other papers relating to the samematter, to the Court of Directors, with the knowledge and consent of Mr. Barwell, --and that he states that his answer had been filed, and noproceedings had upon it for eighteen months. In that situation it wasthought something extraordinary that no care was taken by him totransmit so essential a paper as his answer, and that he had no copy ofit in his hands. 

Your Committee, in this difficulty, thought themselves obliged todecline any verbal explanation from the person who is defendant in thesuit, relative to matters which on the part of the complainant appearupon record, and to leave the whole matter, as it is charged, to thejudgment of the House to determine how far it may be worthy of a furtherinquiry, or how far they may admit such allegations as your Committeecould not think themselves justified in receiving. To this effect yourCommittee ordered a letter to be written Mr. Barwell; from whom theyreceived the following answer. 

"Sir, --In consequence of your letter of the 17th, I must request thefavor of you to inform the Select Committee that I expect from theirjustice, on any matter of public record in which I am personally to bebrought forward to the notice of the House, that they will at the sametime point out to the House what part of such matter has been verified, and what parts have not nor ever were attempted to be verified, thoughintroduced in debate and entered on the records of the Governor-Generaland Council of Bengal. I am anxious the information should be complete, or the House will not be competent to judge; and if it is complete, itwill preclude all explanation as unnecessary. 

 "I am, Sir, "Your most obedient humble servant, "RICHARD BARWELL. 

 "St. James's Square, 22nd April, 1783. 

"P. S. As I am this moment returned from the country, I had it not in mypower to be earlier in acknowledging your letter of the 17th. "

Your Committee applied to Mr. Barwell to communicate any papers whichmight tend to the elucidation of matters before them in which he wasconcerned. This he has declined to do. Your Committee conceive thatunder the orders of the House they are by no means obliged to make acomplete state of all the evidence which may tend to criminate orexculpate every person whose transactions they may find it expedient toreport: this, if not specially ordered, has not hitherto been, as theyapprehend, the usage of any committee of this House. It is not for yourCommittee, but for the discretion of the party, to call for, and for thewisdom of the House to institute, such proceedings as may tend finallyto condemn or acquit. The Reports of your Committee are no charges, though they may possibly furnish _matter_ for charge; and norepresentations or observations of theirs can either clear or convict onany proceeding which may hereafter be grounded on the facts which theyproduce to the House. Their opinions are not of a judicial nature. YourCommittee has taken abundant care that every important fact in theirReport should be attended with the authority for it, either in thecourse of their reflections or in the Appendix: to report everythingupon every subject before them which is to be found on the records ofthe Company would be to transcribe, and in the event to print, almostthe whole of those voluminous papers. The matter which appears beforethem is in a summary manner this. 

The Dacca merchants begin by complaining that in November, 1773, Mr. Richard Barwell, then Chief of Dacca, had deprived them of theiremployment and means of subsistence; that he had extorted from them44, 224 Arcot rupees (4, 731_l. _) by the terror of his threats, by longimprisonment, and cruel confinement in the stocks; that afterwards theywere confined in a small room near the factory-gate, under a guard ofsepoys; that their food was stopped, and they remained starving a wholeday; that they were not permitted to take their food till next day atnoon, and were again brought back to the same confinement, in which theywere continued for six days, and were not set at liberty until they hadgiven Mr. Barwell's banian a certificate for forty thousand rupees; thatin July, 1774, when Mr. Barwell had left Dacca, they went to Calcutta toseek justice; that Mr. Barwell confined them in his house at Calcutta, and sent them back under a guard of peons to Dacca; that in December, 1774, on the arrival of the gentlemen from Europe, they returned toCalcutta, and preferred their complaint to the Supreme Court ofJudicature. 

The bill in Chancery filed against Richard Barwell, John Shakespeare, and others, contains a minute specification of the various acts ofpersonal cruelty said to be practised by Mr. Barwell's orders, to extortmoney from these people. Among other acts of a similar nature he ischarged with having ordered the appraiser of the Company's cloths, whowas an old man, and who asserts that he had faithfully served theCompany above sixteen years without the least censure on his conduct, tobe severely flogged without reason. 

In the _manner_ of confining the delâls, with ten of their servants, itis charged on him, that, "when he first ordered them to be put into thestocks, it was at a time when the weather was exceedingly bad and therain very heavy, without allowing them the least covering for theirheads or any part of their body, or anything to raise them from the wetground; in which condition they were continued for many hours, until thesaid Richard Barwell thought proper to remove them into a far worsestate, if possible, as if studying to exercise the most cruel acts ofbarbarity on them, &c. ; and that during their imprisonment they werefrequently carried to and tortured in the stocks in the middle of theday, when the scorching heat of the sun was insupportable, notwithstanding which they were denied the least covering. " These menassert that they had served the Company without blame for thirtyyears, --a period commencing long before the power of the Company inIndia. 

It was no slight aggravation of this severity, that the objects were notyoung, nor of the lowest of the people, who might, by the vigor of theirconstitutions, or by the habits of hardship, be enabled to bear upagainst treatment so full of rigor. They were aged persons; they weremen of a reputable profession. 

The account given by these merchants of their first journey to Calcutta, in July, 1774, is circumstantial and remarkable. They say, "that, ontheir arrival, _to their astonishment, they soon learned that theGovernor, who had formerly been violently enraged against the saidRichard Barwell for different improprieties in his conduct, was nowreconciled to him; and that ever since there was a certainty of hisMajesty's appointments taking place in India, from being the mostinveterate enemies they were now become the most intimate friends; andthat this account soon taught them to believe they were not any nearerjustice from their journey to Calcutta than they had been before atDacca_. "

When this bill of complaint was, in 1776, laid before the Council, to betransmitted to the Court of Directors, Mr. Barwell complained of theintroduction of such a paper, and asserted, _that he had answered toevery particular of it on oath about eighteen months, and that duringthis long period no attempt had been made to controvert, refute, or evento reply to it_. 

He did not, however, think it proper to enter his answer on the recordsalong with the bill of whose introduction he complained. 

On the declarations made by Mr. Barwell in his minute (September, 1776)your Committee observe, that, considering him only as an individualunder prosecution in a court of justice, it might be sufficient for himto exhibit his defence in the court where he was accused; but that, as amember of government, specifically charged before that very governmentwith abusing the powers of his office in a very extraordinary manner, and for purposes (as they allege) highly corrupt and criminal, itappears to your Committee hardly sufficient to say that he had answeredelsewhere. The matter was to go before the Court of Directors, to whomthe question of his conduct in that situation, a situation of thehighest power and trust, was as much at least a question of state as amatter of redress to be solely left to the discretion, capacity, orperseverance of individuals. Mr. Barwell might possibly be generousenough to take no advantage of his eminent situation; but theseunfortunate people would rather look to his power than his disposition. In general, a man so circumstanced and so charged (though we do not knowthis to be the case with Mr. Barwell) might easily contrive by legaladvantages to escape. The plaintiffs being at a great distance from theseat of government, and possibly affected by fear or fatigue, or seeingthe impossibility of sustaining with the ruins of fortunes never perhapsvery opulent a suit against wealth, power, and influence, a compromisemight even take place, in which circumstances might make thecomplainants gladly acquiesce. But the public injury is not in the leastrepaired by the acquiescence of individuals, as it touched the honor ofthe very highest parts of government. In the opinion of your Committeesome means ought to have been taken to bring the bill to a discussion onthe merits; or supposing that such decree could not be obtained byreason of any failure of proceeding on the part of the plaintiffs, thatsome process official or juridical ought to have been instituted againstthem which might prove them guilty of slander and defamation in asauthentic a manner as they had made their charge, before the Council aswell as the Court. 

By the determination of Mr. Hurst, and the resolutions of the Board ofTrade, it is much to be apprehended that the native mercantile interestmust be exceedingly reduced. The above-mentioned resolutions of theBoard of Trade, if executed in their rigor, must almost inevitablyaccomplish its ruin. The subsequent transactions are covered with anobscurity which your Committee have not been able to dispel. All whichthey can collect, but that by no means distinctly, is, that, as thosewho trade for the Company in the articles of investment may also tradefor themselves in the same articles, the old opportunities ofconfounding the capacities must remain, and all the oppressions by whichthis confusion has been attended. The Company's investments, as theGeneral Letter from Bengal of the 20th of November, 1775, par. 28, states the matter, "are never at a stand; advances are made and goodsare received all the year round. " Balances, the grand instrument ofoppression, naturally accumulate on poor manufacturers who are intrustedwith money. Where there is not a vigorous rivalship, not only tolerated, but encouraged, it is impossible ever to redeem the manufacturers fromthe servitude induced by those unpaid balances. 

No such rivalship does exist: the policy practised and avowed isdirectly against it. The reason assigned in the Board of Trade's letterof the 28th of November, 1778, for its making their advances early inthe season is, to prevent the foreign merchants and private traders_interfering_ with the purchase of their (the Company's) assortments. "They also refer to the means taken to prevent this interference intheir letter of 26th January, 1779. " It is impossible that the smallpart of the trade should not fall into the hands of those who, with thename and authority of the governing persons, have such extensivecontracts in their hands. It appears in evidence that natives can hardlytrade to the best advantage, (your Committee doubt whether they cantrade to any advantage at all, ) if not joined with or countenanced byBritish subjects. The Directors were in 1775 so strongly impressed withthis notion, and conceived the native merchants to have been even thenreduced to so low a state, that, notwithstanding the Company's earnestdesire of giving them a preference, they "doubt whether there are atthis time in Bengal native merchants possessed of property adequate tosuch undertaking, or of credit and responsibility sufficient to make itsafe and prudent to trust them with such sums as might be necessary toenable them to fulfil their engagements with the Company. "

The effect which so long continued a monopoly, followed by a preëmption, and then by partial preferences supported by power, must necessarilyhave in weakening the mercantile capital, and disabling the merchantsfrom all undertakings of magnitude, is but too visible. However, awitness of understanding and credit does not believe the capitals of thenatives to be yet so reduced as to disable them from partaking in thetrade, if they were otherwise able to put themselves on an equal footingwith Europeans. 

The difficulties at the outset will, however, be considerable. For thelong continuance of abuse has in some measure conformed the whole tradeof the country to its false principle. To make a sudden change, therefore, might destroy the few advantages which attend any trade, without securing those which must flow from one established upon soundmercantile principles, whenever such a trade can be established. Thefact is, that the forcible direction which the trade of India has hadtowards Europe, to the neglect, or rather to the total abandoning, ofthe Asiatic, has of itself tended to carry even the internal businessfrom the native merchant. The revival of trade in the native hands is ofabsolute necessity; but your Committee is of opinion that it willrather be the effect of a regular progressive course of endeavors forthat purpose than of any one regulation, however wisely conceived. 

After this examination into the condition of the trade and traders inthe principal articles provided for the investment to Europe, yourCommittee proceeded to take into consideration those articles theproduce of which, after sale in Bengal, is to form a part of the fundfor the purchase of other articles of investment, or to make a part ofit in kind. These are, 1st, Opium, --2ndly, Saltpetre, --and, 3rdly, Salt. These are all monopolized. 

OPIUM. 

The first of the internal authorized monopolies is that of opium. Thisdrug, extracted from a species of the poppy, is of extensive consumptionin most of the Eastern markets. The best is produced in the province ofBahar: in Bengal it is of an inferior sort, though of late it has beenimproved. This monopoly is to be traced to the very origin of ourinfluence in Bengal. It is stated to have begun at Patna so early as theyear 1761, but it received no considerable degree of strength orconsistence until the year 1765, when the acquisition of the Duannéopened a wide field for all projects of this nature. It was then adoptedand owned as a resource for persons in office, --was managed chiefly bythe civil servants of the Patna factory, and for their own benefit. Thepolicy was justified on the usual principles on which monopolies aresupported, and on some peculiar to the commodity, to the nature of thetrade, and to the state of the country: the security againstadulteration; the prevention of the excessive home consumption of apernicious drug; the stopping an excessive competition, which by anover-proportioned supply would at length destroy the market abroad; theinability of the cultivator to proceed in an expensive and precariousculture without a large advance of capital; and, lastly, the incapacityof private merchants to supply that capital on the feeble security ofwretched farmers. 

These were the principal topics on which the monopoly was supported. Thelast topic leads to a serious consideration on the state of the country;for, in pushing it, the gentlemen argued, that, in case such privatemerchants should advance the necessary capital, the lower cultivators"_would get money in abundance_. " Admitting this fact, it seems to be apart of the policy of this monopoly to prevent the cultivator fromobtaining the natural fruits of his labor. Dealing with a privatemerchant, he could not get _money in abundance_, unless his commoditycould produce an _abundant_ profit. Further reasons, relative to thepeace and good order of the province, were assigned for thus preventingthe course of trade from the equitable distribution of the advantages ofthe produce, in which the first, the poorest, and the most laboriousproducer ought to have his first share. The cultivators, they add, wouldsquander part of the money, and not be able to complete theirengagements to the full; lawsuits, and even battles, would ensue betweenthe factors, contending for a deficient produce; and the farmers woulddiscourage the culture of an object which brought so much disturbanceinto their districts. This competition, the operation of which theyendeavor to prevent, is the natural corrective of the abuse, and thebest remedy which could be applied to the disorder, even supposing itsprobable existence. 

Upon whatever reasons or pretences the monopoly of opium was supported, the real motive appears to be the profit of those who were in hopes tobe concerned in it. As these profits promised to be very considerable, at length it engaged the attention of the Company; and after manydiscussions, and various plans of application, it was at length takenfor their benefit, and the produce of the sale ordered to be employed inthe purchase of goods for their investment. 

In the year 1773 it had been taken out of the hands of the Council ofPatna, and leased to two of the natives, --but for a year only. Thecontractors were to supply a certain quantity of opium at a given price. Half the value was to be paid to those contractors in advance, and theother half on the delivery. 

The proceedings on this contract demonstrated the futility of all theprinciples on which the monopoly was founded. The Council, as a part oftheir plan, were obliged, by heavy duties, and by a limitation of theright of emption of foreign opium to the contractors for the homeproduce, to check the influx of that commodity from the territories ofthe Nabob of Oude and the Rajah of Benares. In these countries nomonopoly existed; and yet there the commodity was of such a quality andso abundant as to bear the duty, and even with the duty in some degreeto rival the monopolist even in his own market. There was no complaintin those countries of want of advances to cultivators, or of lawsuitsand tumults among the factors; nor was there any appearance of themultitude of other evils which had been so much dreaded from thevivacity of competition. 

On the other hand, several of the precautions inserted in this contract, and repeated in all the subsequent, strongly indicated the evils againstwhich it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to guard a monopolyof this nature and in that country. For in the first contract enteredinto with the two natives it was strictly forbidden to compel thetenants to the cultivation of this drug. Indeed, very shocking rumorshad gone abroad, and they were aggravated by an opinion universallyprevalent, that, even in the season immediately following that dreadfulfamine which swept off one third of the inhabitants of Bengal, severalof the poorer farmers were compelled to plough up the fields they hadsown with grain in order to plant them with poppies for the benefit ofthe engrossers of opium. This opinion grew into a strong presumption, when it was seen that in the next year the produce of opium (contrary towhat might be naturally expected in a year following such a dearth) wasnearly doubled. It is true, that, when the quantity of land necessaryfor the production of the largest quantity of opium is considered, it isnot just to attribute that famine to these practices, nor to any thatwere or could be used; yet, where such practices did prevail, they musthave been very oppressive to individuals, extremely insulting to thefeelings of the people, and must tend to bring great and deserveddiscredit on the British government. The English are a people whoappear in India as a conquering nation; all dealing with them istherefore, more or less, a dealing with power. It is such when theytrade on a private account; and it is much more so in any authorizedmonopoly, where the hand of government, which ought never to appear butto protect, is felt as the instrument in every act of oppression. Abusesmust exist in a trade and a revenue so constituted, and there is noeffectual cure for them but to entirely cut off their cause. 

Things continued in this train, until the great revolution in theCompany's government was wrought by the Regulating Act of the thirteenthof the king. In 1775 the new Council-General appointed by the act tookthis troublesome business again into consideration. General Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis expressed such strong doubts of thepropriety of this and of all other monopolies, that the Directors, intheir letter of the year following, left the Council at liberty to throwthe trade open, under a duty, if they should find it practicable. ButGeneral Clavering, who most severely censured monopoly in general, thought that this monopoly ought to be retained, --but for a reason whichshows his opinion of the wretched state of the country: for he supposedit impossible, with the power and influence which must attend Britishsubjects in all their transactions, that monopoly could be avoided; andhe preferred an avowed monopoly, which brought benefit to government, toa virtual engrossing, attended with profit only to individuals. But inthis opinion he did not seem to be joined by Mr. Francis, who thoughtthe suppression of this and of all monopolies to be practicable, andstrongly recommended their abolition in a plan sent to the Court ofDirectors the year following. [6]

The Council, however, submitting to the opinion of this necessity, endeavored to render that dubious engagement as beneficial as possibleto the Company. They began by putting up the contract to the highestbidder. The proposals were to be sealed. When the seals came to beopened, a very extraordinary scene appeared. Every step in this businessdevelops more and more the effect of this junction of public monopolyand private influence. Four English and eight natives were candidatesfor the contract; three of the English far overbid the eight natives. They who consider that the natives, from their superior dexterity, fromtheir knowledge of the country and of business, and from their extremeindustry, vigilance, and parsimony, are generally an over-match forEuropeans, and indeed are, and must ultimately be, employed by them inall transactions whatsoever, will find it very extraordinary that theydid not by the best offers secure this dealing to themselves. It can beattributed to this cause, and this only, --that they were conscious, that, without power and influence to subdue the cultivators of the landto their own purposes, they never could afford to engage on the lowestpossible terms. Those whose power entered into the calculation of theirprofits could offer, as they did offer, terms without comparison better;and therefore one of the English bidders, without partiality, securedthe preference. 

The contract to this first bidder, Mr. Griffiths, was prolonged fromyear to year; and as during that time frequent complaints were made byhim to the Council Board, on the principle that the years answered verydifferently, and that the business of one year ran into the other, reasons or excuses were furnished for giving the next contract to Mr. Mackenzie for three years. This third contract was not put up toauction, as the second had been, and as this ought to have been. Theterms were, indeed, something better for the Company; and the engagementwas subject to qualifications, which, though they did not remove theobjection to the breach of the Company's orders, prevented the hands ofthe Directors from being tied up. A proviso was inserted in thecontract, that it should not be anyways binding, if the Company byorders from home should alter the existing practice with regard to suchdealing. 

Whilst these things were going on, the evils which this monopoly was inshow and pretence formed to prevent still existed, and those which werenaturally to be expected from a monopoly existed too. Complaints weremade of the bad quality of the opium; trials were made, and on thosetrials the opium was found faulty. An office of inspection at Calcutta, to ascertain its goodness, was established, and directions given to theProvincial Councils at the places of growth to certify the quantity andquality of the commodity transmitted to the Presidency. 

In 1776, notwithstanding an engagement in the contract strictlyprohibiting all compulsory culture of the poppy, information was givento a member of the Council-General, that fields green with rice had beenforcibly ploughed up to make way for that plant, --and that this was donein the presence of several English gentlemen, who beheld the spectaclewith a just and natural indignation. The board, struck with thisrepresentation, ordered the Council of Patna to make an inquiry into thefact; but your Committee can find no return whatsoever to this order. The complaints were not solely on the part of the cultivators againstthe contractor. The contractor for opium made loud complaints againstthe inferior collectors of the landed revenue, stating their undue andvexatious exactions from the cultivators of opium, --their throwing theseunfortunate people into prison upon frivolous pretences, by which thetenants were ruined, and the contractor's advances lost. He stated, that, if the contractor should interfere in favor of the cultivator, then a deficiency would be caused to appear in the landed revenues, andthat deficiency would be charged on his interposition; he desired, therefore, that the cultivators of opium should be taken out of thegeneral system of the landed revenue, and put under "his _protection_. "Here the effect naturally to be expected from the clashing ofinconsistent revenues appeared in its full light, as well as the stateof the unfortunate peasants of Bengal between such rival protectors, where the ploughman, flying from the tax-gatherer, is obliged to takerefuge under the wings of the monopolist. No dispute arises amongst theEnglish subjects which does not divulge the misery of the natives; whenthe former are in harmony, all is well with the latter. 

This monopoly continuing and gathering strength through a succession ofcontractors, and being probably a most lucrative dealing, it grew to beevery day a greater object of competition. The Council of Patnaendeavored to recover the contract, or at least the agency, by the mostinviting terms; and in this eager state of mutual complaint andcompetition between private men and public bodies things continued untilthe arrival in Bengal of Mr. Stephen Sulivan, son of Mr. Sulivan, Chairman of the East India Company, which soon put an end to all strifeand emulation. 

To form a clear judgment on the decisive step taken at this period, itis proper to keep in view the opinion of the Court of Directorsconcerning monopolies, against which they had uniformly declared in themost precise terms. They never submitted to them, but as to a presentnecessity; it was therefore not necessary for them to express anyparticular approbation of a clause in Mr. Mackenzie's contract which wasmade in favor of their own liberty. Every motive led them to preserveit. On the security of that clause they could alone have suffered topass over in silence (for they never approved) the grant of the contractwhich contained it for three years. It must also be remembered that theyhad from the beginning positively directed that the contract should beput up to public auction; and this not having been done in Mr. Mackenzie's case, they severely reprimanded the Governor-General andCouncil in their letter of the 23rd December, 1778. 

The Court of Directors were perfectly right in showing themselvestenacious of this regulation, --not so much to secure the bestpracticable revenue from their monopoly whilst it existed, but for amuch more essential reason, that is, from the corrective which thismethod administered to that monopoly itself: it prevented the Britishcontractor from becoming doubly terrible to the natives, when theyshould see that his contract was in effect _a grant_, and thereforeindicated particular favor and private influence with the ruling membersof an absolute government. 

On the expiration of Mr. Mackenzie's term, and but a few months afterMr. Sulivan's arrival, the Governor-General, as if the contract was amatter of patronage, and not of dealing, pitched upon Mr. Sulivan as themost proper person for the management of this critical concern. Mr. Sulivan, though a perfect stranger to Bengal, and to that sort and toall sorts of local commerce, made no difficulty of accepting it. TheGovernor-General was so fearful that his true motives in this businessshould be mistaken, or that the smallest suspicion should arise of hisattending to the Company's orders, that, far from putting up thecontract (which, on account of its known profits, had become the objectof such pursuit) to _public auction_, he did not wait for receiving somuch as a _private proposal_ from Mr. Sulivan. The Secretary perceivedthat in the rough draught of the contract the old recital of a proposalto the board was inserted as a matter of course, but was contrary to thefact; he therefore remarked it to Mr. Hastings. Mr. Hastings, with greatindifference, ordered that recital to be _omitted_; and the omission, with the remark that led to it, has, with the same easy indifference, been sent over to his masters. 

The Governor-General and Council declare themselves apprehensive thatMr. Sulivan might be a loser by his bargain, upon account of troubleswhich they supposed existing in the country which was the object of it. This was the more indulgent, because the contractor was tolerablysecured against all losses. He received a certain price for hiscommodity; but he was not obliged to pay any certain price to thecultivator, who, having no other market than his, must sell it to him athis own terms. He was to receive half the yearly payment by _advance_, and he was not obliged to advance to the cultivator more than what hethought expedient; but if this should not be enough, he might, if hepleased, draw the _whole_ payment before the total delivery: such werethe terms of the engagement with him. He is a contractor of a newspecies, who employs no capital whatsoever of his own, and has themarket of compulsion at his entire command. But all these securitieswere not sufficient for the anxious attention of the Supreme Council toMr. Sulivan's welfare: Mr. Hastings had before given him the contractwithout any proposal on his part; and to make their gift perfect, in asecond instance they proceed a step beyond their former ill precedent, and they contract with Mr. Sulivan for _four_ years. 

Nothing appears to have been considered but the benefit of thecontractor, and for this purpose the solicitude shown in all theprovisions could not be exceeded. One of the first things that struckMr. Hastings as a blemish on his gift was the largeness of the penaltywhich he had on former occasions settled as the sanction of thecontract: this he now discovered to be so great as to be likely tofrustrate its end by the impossibility of recovering so large a sum. Howa large penalty can prevent the recovery of any, even the smallest partof it, is not quite apparent. In so vast a concern as that of opium, afraud which at first view may not appear of much importance, and whichmay be very difficult in the discovery, may easily counterbalance thereduced penalty in this contract, which was settled in favor of Mr. Sulivan at about 20, 000_l. _

Monopolies were (as the House has observed) only tolerated evils, and atbest upon trial; a clause, therefore, was inserted in the contracts toMackenzie, annulling the obligation, if the Court of Directors shouldresolve to abolish the monopoly; but at the request of Mr. Sulivan thecontract was without difficulty purged of this obnoxious clause. Theterm was made absolute, the monopoly rendered irrevocable, and thediscretion of the Directors wholly excluded. Mr. Hastings declared thereserved condition to be no longer necessary, "because the Directors hadapproved the monopoly. "

The Chiefs and Councils at the principal factories had been obliged tocertify the quantity and quality of the opium before its transport toCalcutta; and their control over the contractor had been assigned as thereason for not leaving to those factories the management of thismonopoly. Now things were changed. Orders were sent to discontinue thismeasure of invidious precaution, and the opium was sent to Calcuttawithout anything done to ascertain its quality or even its quantity. 

An office of inspection had been also appointed to examine the qualityof the opium on its delivery at the capital settlement. In order to easeMr. Sulivan from this troublesome formality, Mr. Hastings abolished theoffice; so that Mr. Sulivan was then totally freed from all examination, or control whatsoever, either first or last. 

These extraordinary changes in favor of Mr. Sulivan were attended withlosses to others, and seem to have excited much discontent. Thisdiscontent it was necessary in some manner to appease. Thevendue-master, who was deprived of his accustomed dues on the publicsales of the opium by the private dealing, made a formal complaint tothe board against this, as well as other proceedings relative to thesame business. He attributed the private sale to "_reasons of state_";and this strong reflection both on the Board of Trade and the CouncilBoard was passed over without observation. He was quieted by appointinghim to the duty of these very inspectors whose office had been justabolished as useless. The House will judge of the efficacy of therevival of this office by the motives to it, and by Mr. Hastings givingthat to _one_ as _a compensation_ which had been executed by several as_a duty_. However, the orders for taking away the precautionaryinspection at Patna still remained in force. 

Some benefits, which had been given to former contractors at thediscretion of the board, were no longer held under that looseindulgence, but were secured to Mr. Sulivan by his contract. Otherindulgences, of a lesser nature, and to which no considerable objectioncould be made, were on the application of a Mr. Benn, calling himselfhis attorney, granted. 

Your Committee, examining Mr. Higginson, late a member of the Board ofTrade, on that subject, were informed, that this contract, very soonafter the making, was generally understood at Calcutta to have been soldto this Mr. Benn, but he could not particularize the sum for which ithad been assigned, --and that Mr. Benn had afterwards sold it to a Mr. Young. By this transaction it appears clearly that the contract wasgiven to Mr. Sulivan for no other purpose than to supply him with a sumof money; and the sale and re-sale seem strongly to indicate that thereduction of the penalty, and the other favorable conditions, were notgranted for his ease in a business which he never was to execute, but toheighten the value of the object which he was to sell. Mr. Sulivan wasat the time in Mr. Hastings's family, accompanied him in his progresses, and held the office of Judge-Advocate. 

The monopoly given for these purposes thus permanently secured, allpower of reformation cut off, and almost every precaution against fraudand oppression removed, the Supreme Council found, or pretended to find, that the commodity for which they had just made such a contract was nota salable article, --and in consequence of this opinion, or pretence, entered upon a daring speculation hitherto unthought of, that of sendingthe commodity on the Company's account to the market of Canton. TheCouncil alleged, that, the Dutch being driven from Bengal, and the seasbeing infested with privateers, this commodity had none, or a very dulland depreciated demand. 

Had this been true, Mr. Hastings's conduct could admit of no excuse. Heought not to burden a falling market by long and heavy engagements. Heought studiously to have kept in his power the means of proportioningthe supply to the demand. But his arguments, and those of the Council onthat occasion, do not deserve the smallest attention. Facts, to whichthere is no testimony but the assertion of those who produce them inapology for the ill consequences of their own irregular actions, cannotbe admitted. Mr. Hastings and the Council had nothing at all to do withthat business: the Court of Directors had wholly taken the management ofopium out of his and their hands, and by a solemn adjudication fixed itin the Board of Trade. But after it had continued there some years, Mr. Hastings, a little before his grant of the monopoly to Mr. Sulivan, thought proper to reverse the decree of his masters, and by his ownauthority to recall it to the Council. By this step he becameresponsible for all the consequences. 

The Board of Trade appear, indeed, to merit reprehension for disposingof the opium by private contract, as by that means the unerring standardof the public market cannot be applied to it. But they justifiedthemselves by their success; and one of their members informed yourCommittee that their last sale had been a good one: and though heapprehended a fall in the next, it was not such as in the opinion ofyour Committee could justify the Council-General in having recourse tountried and hazardous speculations of commerce. It appears that theremust have been a market, and one sufficiently lively. They assign as areason of this assigned [alleged?] dulness of demand, that the Dutch hadbeen expelled from Bengal, and could not carry the usual quantity toBatavia. But the Danes were not expelled from Bengal, and Portugueseships traded there: neither of them were interdicted at Batavia, and thetrade to the eastern ports was free to them. The Danes actually appliedfor and obtained an increase of the quantity to which their purchaseshad been limited; and as they asked, so they received this indulgence asa great favor. It does not appear that they were not very ready tosupply the place of the Dutch. On the other hand, there is no doubt thatthe Dutch would most gladly receive an article, convenient, if notnecessary, to the circulation of their commerce, from the Danes, orunder any name; nor was it fit that the Company should use an extremestrictness in any inquiry concerning the necessary disposal of one oftheir own staple commodities. 

The supply of the Canton treasury with funds for the provision of thenext year's China investment was the ground of this plan. But theCouncil-General appear still to have the particular advantage of Mr. Sulivan in view, --and, not satisfied with breaking so many of theCompany's orders for that purpose, to make the contract an objectsalable to the greatest advantage, were obliged to transfer theirpersonal partiality from Mr. Sulivan to the contract itself, and to handit over to the assignees through all their successions. When the opiumwas delivered, the duties and emoluments of the contractor ended; but(it appears from Mr. Williamson's letter, 18th October, 1781, and it isnot denied by the Council-General) this new scheme _furnished them witha pretext of making him broker for the China investment, with the profitof a new commission_, --to what amount does not appear. But here theirconstant and vigilant observer, the vendue-master, met them again:--theyseemed to live in no small terror of this gentleman. To satisfy him forthe loss of his fee to which he was entitled upon the public sale, theygave _him_ also a commission of one per cent on the investment. Thus wasthis object loaded with a double commission; and every act of partialityto one person produced a chargeable compensation to some other for theinjustice that such partiality produced. Nor was this the whole. Thediscontent and envy excited by this act went infinitely further than tothose immediately affected, and something or other was to be found outto satisfy as many as possible. 

As soon as it was discovered that the Council entertained a design ofopening a trade on those principles, it immediately engaged theattention of such as had an interest in speculations of freight. 

A memorial seems to have been drawn early, as it is dated on the 29th ofMarch, though it was not the first publicly presented to the board. Thismemorial was presented on the 17th of September, 1781, by Mr. Wheler, conformably (as he says) to the desire of the Governor-General; and itcontained a long and elaborate dissertation on the trade to China, tending to prove the advantage of extending the sale of Englishmanufactures and other goods to the North of that country, beyond theusual emporium of European nations. This ample and not ill-reasonedtheoretical performance (though not altogether new either in speculationor attempt) ended by a practical proposition, very short, indeed, of theideas opened in the preliminary discourse, but better adapted to theimmediate effect. It was, that the Company should undertake the sale ofits own opium in China, and commit the management of the business to thememorialist, who offered to furnish them with a strong armed ship forthat purpose. The offer was accepted, and the agreement made with himfor the transport of two thousand chests. 

A proposal by another person was made the July following the date ofthis project: it appears to have been early in the formal delivery atthe board: this was for the export of one thousand four hundred andeighty chests. This, too, was accepted, but with new conditions andrestrictions: for in so vast and so new an undertaking greatdifficulties occurred. In the first place, all importation of thatcommodity is rigorously forbidden by the laws of China. The improprietyof a political trader, who is lord over a great empire, being concernedin a contraband trade upon his own account, did not seem in the least toaffect them; but they were struck with the obvious danger of subjectingtheir goods to seizure by the vastness of the prohibited import. Tosecure the larger adventure, they require of the China factory thatColonel Watson's ship should enter the port of Canton as an _armedship_, (they would not say a ship of war, though that must be meant, )that her cargo should not be reported; they also ordered that othermeasures should be adopted to secure this prohibited article fromseizure. If the cargo should get in safe, another danger was inview, --the overloading the Chinese market by a supply beyond the demand;for it is obvious that contraband trade must exist by small quantitiesof goods poured in by intervals, and not by great importations at onetime. To guard against this inconvenience, they divide their second, though the smaller adventure, into two parts; one of which was to go tothe markets of the barbarous natives which inhabit the coast of Malacca, where the chances of its being disposed of by robbery or sale were atleast equal. If the opium should be disposed of there, the produce wasto be invested in merchandise salable in China, or in dollars, if to behad. The other part (about one half) was to go in kind directly to theport of Canton. 

The dealing at this time seemed closed; but the gentlemen who charteredthe ships, always recollecting something, applied anew to the board tobe furnished with cannon from the Company's ordnance. Some wasdelivered to them; but the Office of Ordnance (so heavily expensive tothe Company) was not sufficient to spare a few iron guns for a merchantship. Orders were given to cast a few cannon, and an application made toMadras, at a thousand miles' distance, for the rest. Madras answers, that they cannot exactly comply with the requisition; but still theboard at Bengal _hopes_ better things from them than they promise, andflatter themselves that with their assistance they shall properly arm aship of thirty-two guns. 

Whilst these dispositions were making, the first proposer, perceivingadvantages from the circuitous voyage of the second which had escapedhis observation, to make amends for his first omission, improved both onhis own proposal and on that of the person who had improved on him. Hetherefore applied for leave to take two hundred and fifty chests on hisown account, which he said could "be _readily disposed of_ at theseveral places where it was necessary for the ship to touch for wood andwater, or intelligence, during her intended voyage through _the EasternIslands_. " As a corrective to this extraordinary request, he assured theboard, that, if he should meet with any unexpected delay at thesemarkets, he would send their cargo to its destination, having secured a_swift-sailing_ sloop for the _protection_ of his ship; and this sloophe proposed, in such a case, to leave behind. Such an extraordinaryeagerness to deal in opium lets in another view of the merits of thealleged dulness of the market, on which this trade was undertaken forthe Company's account. 

The Council, who had with great condescension and official facilityconsented to every demand hitherto made, were not reluctant with regardto this last. The quantity of opium required by the freighters, and thepermission of a trading voyage, were granted without hesitation. Thecargo having become far more valuable by this small infusion of privateinterest, the armament which was deemed sufficient to defend theCompany's large share of the adventure was now discovered to be unequalto the protection of the whole. For the convoy of these two ships theCouncil hire and arm another. How they were armed, or whether in factthey were properly armed at all, does not appear. It is true that theSupreme Council proposed that these ships should also convey supplies toMadras; but this was a secondary consideration: their primary object wasthe adventure of opium. To this they were permanently attached, and wereobliged to attend to its final destination. 

The difficulty of disposing of the opium according to this project beingthus got over, a material preliminary difficulty still stood in the wayof the whole scheme. The contractor, or his assignees, were to be paid. The Company's treasure was wholly exhausted, and even its credit wasexceedingly strained. The latter, however, was the better resource, andto this they resolved to apply. They therefore, at different times, opened two loans of one hundred thousand pounds each. The first wasreserved for the Company's servants, civil and military, to bedistributed in shares according to their rank; the other was moregeneral. The terms of both loans were, that the risk of the voyage wasto be on account of _the Company_. The payment was to be in bills (at arate of exchange settled from the supercargoes at Canton) upon the sameCompany. In whatever proportion the adventure should fail, either in theships not safely arriving in China or otherwise, in that proportion thesubscribers were to content themselves with the Company's bonds fortheir money, bearing eight per cent interest. A share in thissubscription was thought exceeding desirable; for Mr. Hastings writesfrom Benares, where he was employed in the manner already reported andhereafter to be observed upon, requesting that the subscription shouldbe left open to his officers who were employed in the militaryoperations against Cheyt Sing; and accordingly three majors, sevencaptains, twenty-three lieutenants, the surgeon belonging to thedetachment, and two civil servants of high rank who attended him, wereadmitted to subscribe. 

Bills upon Europe without interest are always preferred to the Company'sbonds, even at the high interest allowed in India. They are, indeed, sogreedily sought there, and (because they tend to bring an immediate andvisible distress in Leadenhall Street) so much dreaded here, that by anact of Parliament the Company's servants are restricted from drawingbills beyond a certain amount upon the Company in England. In Bengalthey have been restrained to about one hundred and eighty thousandpounds annually. The legislature, influenced more strongly with the sameapprehensions, has restrained the Directors, as the Directors haverestrained their servants, and have gone so far as to call in the powerof the Lords of the Treasury to authorize the acceptance of any billsbeyond an amount prescribed in the act. 

The false principles of this unmercantile transaction (to speak of it inthe mildest terms) were too gross not to be visible to those whocontrived it. That the Company should be made to borrow such a sum astwo hundred thousand pounds[7] at eight per cent, (or terms deemed bythe Company to be worse, ) in order first to buy a commodity representedby themselves as depreciated in its ordinary market, in order afterwardsto carry one half of it through a circuitous trading voyage, dependingfor its ultimate success on the prudent and fortunate management of twoor three sales, and purchases and re-sales of goods, and the chance oftwo or three markets, with all the risks of sea and enemy, was plainlyno undertaking for such a body. The activity, private interest, and thesharp eye of personal superintendency may now and then succeed in suchprojects; but the remote inspection and unwieldy movements of greatpublic bodies can find nothing but loss in them. Their gains, comparatively small, ought to be upon sure grounds; but here (as theCouncil states the matter) the private trader actually declines to deal, which is a proof more than necessary to demonstrate the extremeimprudence of such an undertaking on the Company's account. Stillstronger and equally obvious objections lay to that member of theproject which regards the introduction of a contraband commodity intoChina, sent at such a risk of seizure not only of the immediate objectto be smuggled in, but of all the Company's property in Canton, andpossibly at a hazard to the existence of the British factory at thatport. 

It is stated, indeed, that a monopolizing company in Canton, called theCohong, had reduced commerce there to a deplorable state, and hadrendered the gains of private merchants, either in opium or anythingelse, so small and so precarious that they were no longer able bypurchasing that article to furnish the Company with money for a Chinainvestment. For this purpose the person whose proposal is accepteddeclares his project to be to set up a monopoly on the part of theCompany against the monopoly of the Chinese merchants: but as theChinese monopoly is at home, and supported (as the minute referred toasserts) by the country magistrates, it is plain it is the Chinesecompany, not the English, which must prescribe the terms, --particularlyin a commodity which, if withheld from them at their market price, theycan, whenever they please, be certain of purchasing as a condemnedcontraband. 

There are two further circumstances in this transaction which stronglymark its character. The first is, that this adventure to China was notrecommended to them by the factory of Canton; it was dangerous toattempt it without their previous advice, and an assurance, grounded onthe state of the market and the dispositions of the government, that themeasure, in a commercial light, would be profitable, or at least safe. Neither was that factory applied to on the state of the bills which, upon their own account, they might be obliged to draw upon Europe, at atime when the Council of Bengal direct them to draw bills to so enormousan amount. 

The second remarkable circumstance is, that the Board of Trade inCalcutta (the proper administrator of all that relates to the Company'sinvestment) does not seem to have given its approbation to the project, or to have been at all consulted upon it. The sale of opium had beenadjudged to the Board of Trade for the express purpose of selling it inBengal, not in China, --and of employing the produce of such sale in themanufactures of the country in which the original commodity wasproduced. On the whole, it appears a mere trading speculation of theCouncil, invading the department of others, without lights of its own, without authority or information from any other quarter. In a commercialview, it straitened the Company's investment to which it was destined;as a measure of finance, it is a contrivance by which a monopoly formedfor the increase of revenue, instead of becoming one of its resources, involves the treasury, in the first instance, in a debt of two hundredthousand pounds. 

If Mr. Hastings, on the expiration of Mr. Mackenzie's contract, theadvantages of which to the Company had been long doubtful, had puthimself in a situation to do his duty, some immediate loss to therevenue would have been the worst consequence of the allegeddepreciation; probably it would not have been considerable. Mr. Mackenzie's contract, which at first was for three years, had been onlyrenewed for a year. Had the same course been pursued with Mr. Sulivan, they would have had it in their power to adopt some plan which mighthave secured them from any loss at all. But they pursued another plan:they carefully put all remedy still longer out of their reach by givingtheir contract for four years. To cover all these irregularities, theyinterest the settlement in their favor by holding out to them the mosttempting of all baits in a chance of bills upon Europe. 

In this manner the servants abroad have conducted themselves with regardto Mr. Sulivan's contract for opium, and the disposal of the commodity. In England the Court of Directors took it into consideration. First, asto the contract, in a letter dated 12th July, 1782, they say, that, "having condemned the contract entered into with Mr. Mackenzie for theprovision of opium, they cannot but be _surprised_ at your havingconcluded a new contract for _four_ years relative to that article withMr. Stephen Sulivan, without leaving the decision of it to the Court ofDirectors. "

The sentiments of the Directors are proper, and worthy of persons inpublic trust. Their _surprise_, indeed, at the disobedience to theirorders is not perfectly natural in those who for many years havescarcely been obeyed in a single instance. They probably asserted theirauthority at this time with as much vigor as their condition admitted. 

They proceed: "We do not mean, " say they, "to convey any censure on Mr. Sulivan respecting the transaction; but we cannot withhold ourdispleasure from the Governor-General and Council at such an instance of_contempt_ of our authority. " They then proceed justly to censure theremoval of the inspection, and some other particulars of this grossproceeding. As to the criminality of the parties, it is undoubtedly truethat a breach of duty in servants is highly aggravated by the rank, station, and trust of the offending party; but no party, in suchconspiracy to break orders, appear to us wholly free from fault. 

The Directors did their duty in reprobating this contract; but it is theopinion of your Committee that further steps ought to be taken toinquire into the legal validity of a transaction which manifestlyattempts to prevent the Court of Directors from applying any remedy toa grievance which has been for years the constant subject of complaints. 

Both Mr. Sulivan and Mr. Hastings are the Company's servants, bound bytheir covenants and their oaths to promote the interest of theirmasters, and both equally bound to be obedient to their orders. If theGovernor-General had contracted with a stranger, not apprised of theCompany's orders, and not bound by any previous engagement, the contractmight have been good; but whether a contract made between two servants, contrary to the orders of their common master, and to the prejudice ofhis known interest, be a breach of trust on both sides, and whether thecontract can in equity have force to bind the Company, whenever theyshall be inclined to free themselves and the country they govern fromthis mischievous monopoly, your Committee think a subject worthy offurther inquiry. 

With regard to the disposal of the opium, the Directors very properlycondemn the direct contraband, but they approve the trading voyage. TheDirectors have observed nothing concerning the loans: they probablyreserved that matter for future consideration. 

In no affair has the connection between servants abroad and persons inpower among the proprietors of the India Company been more discerniblethan in this. But if such confederacies, cemented by such means, aresuffered to pass without due animadversion, the authority of Parliamentmust become as inefficacious as all other authorities have proved torestrain the growth of disorders either in India or in Europe. 

SALT. 

The reports made by the two committees of the House which sat in theyears 1772 and 1773 of the state and conduct of the inland trade ofBengal up to that period have assisted the inquiries of your Committeewith respect to the third and last article of monopoly, viz. , that ofsalt, and made it unnecessary for them to enter into so minute a detailon that subject as they have done on some others. 

Your Committee find that the late Lord Clive constantly asserted thatthe salt trade in Bengal had been a monopoly time immemorial, --that itever was and ever must be a monopoly, --and that Coja Wazid, and othermerchants long before him, had given to the Nabob and his ministers twohundred thousand pounds per annum for the exclusive privilege. TheDirectors, in their letter of the 24th December, 1776, paragraph 76, say, "that it has ever been in a great measure an exclusive trade. "

The Secret Committee report, [8] that under the government of the Nabobsthe duty on salt made in Bengal was two and an half per cent paid byMussulmen, and five per cent paid by Gentoos. On the accession of MirCassim, in 1760, the claim of the Company's servants to trade in saltduty-free was first avowed. Mr. Vansittart made an agreement with him bywhich the duties should be fixed at nine per cent. The Council annulledthe agreement, and reduced the duty to two and an half per cent. On thisMir Cassim ordered that no customs or duties whatsoever should becollected for the future. But a majority of the Council (22nd March, 1763) resolved, that the making the exemption general was a breach ofthe Company's privileges, and that the Nabob should be positivelyrequired to recall it, and collect duties as before from the countrymerchants, and all other persons who had not the protection of theCompany's _dustuck_. The Directors, as the evident reason of the thingand as their duty required, disapproved highly of these transactions, and ordered (8th February, 1764) _a final and effectual stop to be putto the inland trade in salt_, and several other articles of commerce. But other politics and other interests prevailed, so that in the Mayfollowing a General Court resolved, that it should be recommended to theCourt of Directors to reconsider the preceding orders; in consequence ofwhich the Directors ordered the Governor and Council to form a plan, inconcert with the Nabob, for regulating the inland trade. 

On these last orders Lord Clive's plan was formed, in 1765, forengrossing the sole purchase of salt, and dividing the profits among theCompany's senior servants. The Directors, who had hitherto reluctantlygiven way to a monopoly under any ideas or for any purposes, disapprovedof this plan, and on the 17th May, 1766, ordered it to be abolished; butthey substituted no other in its room. [9] In this manner thingscontinued until November, 1767, when the Directors repeated their ordersfor excluding all persons whatever, excepting the natives only, frombeing concerned in the inland trade in salt; and they declared that(vide par. 90) "_such trade is hereby abolished and put a final endto_. " In the same letter (par. 92) they ordered that the salt tradeshould be laid open to the natives in general, subject to such a dutyas might produce one hundred and twenty thousand pounds a year. Thispolicy was adopted by the legislature. In the act of 1773 it wasexpressly provided, that it should not be lawful for any of hisMajesty's subjects to engage, intermeddle, or be any way concerned, directly or indirectly, in the inland trade in salt, except on the IndiaCompany's account. 

Under the positive orders of the Company, the salt trade appears to havecontinued open from 1768 to 1772. The act, indeed, contained anexception in favor of the Company, and left them a liberty of dealing insalt upon their own account. But still this policy remained unchanged, and their orders unrevoked. But in the year 1772, without anyinstruction from the Court of Directors indicating a change of opinionor system, the whole produce was again monopolized, professedly for theuse of the Company, by Mr. Hastings. Speaking of this plan, he says(letter to the Directors, 22d February, 1775): "No new hardship has beenimposed upon the salt manufacturers by taking the management of thatarticle into the hands of government; the only difference is, that theprofit which was before reaped by English gentlemen and by banians isnow acquired by the Company. " In May, 1766, the Directors had condemnedthe monopoly _on any conditions whatsoever_. "At that time they thoughtit neither consistent with their honor nor their dignity to promote suchan exclusive trade. "[10] "They considered it, too, as disgraceful, _andbelow the dignity of their present situation_, to allow of such amonopoly, and that, were they to allow it under any restrictions, theyshould consider themselves as assenting and subscribing to all themischiefs which Bengal had presented to them for four years past. "[11]

Notwithstanding this solemn declaration, in their letter of 24thDecember, 1776, they approve the plan of Mr. Hastings, and say, "thatthe monopoly, _on its present footing_, can be no considerable grievanceto the country, " &c. 

This, however, was a rigorous monopoly. The account given of it byGeneral Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis, in their minute of11th January, 1775, in which the situation of the _molungees_, orpersons employed in the salt manufacture, is particularly described, isstated at length in the Appendix. Mr. Hastings himself says, "The powerof obliging molungees to work has been customary from time immemorial. "

Nothing but great and clear advantage to government could account for, and nothing at all perhaps could justify, the revival of a monopoly thuscircumstanced. The advantage proposed by its revival was thetransferring the profit, which was before reaped by English gentlemenand banians, to the Company. The profits of the former were notproblematical. It was to be seen what the effect would be of a scheme totransfer them to the latter, even under the management of the projectorhimself. In the Revenue Consultations of September, 1776, Mr. Hastingssaid, "Many causes have since combined to reduce this article of revenue_almost to nothing_. The plan which I am _now_ inclined to recommend forthe future management of the salt revenue differs widely from thatwhich I adopted under different circumstances. "

It appears that the ill success of his former scheme did not deter himfrom recommending another. Accordingly, in July, 1777, Mr. Hastingsproposed, and it was resolved, that the salt mahls should be let, _with_the lands, to the farmers and zemindars for a ready-money rent, including duties, --the salt to be left to their disposal. After sometrial of this method, Mr. Hastings thought fit to abandon it. InSeptember, 1780, he changed his plan a third time, and proposed theinstitution of a _salt office_; the salt was to be again engrossed forthe benefit of the Company, and the management conducted by a number ofsalt agents. 

From the preceding facts it appears that in this branch of the Company'sgovernment little regard has been paid to the ease and welfare of thenatives, and that the Directors have nowhere shown greater inconsistencythan in their orders on this subject. Yet salt, considering it as anecessary of life, was by no means a safe and proper subject for so manyexperiments and innovations. For ten years together the Directorsreprobated the idea of suffering this necessary of life to be engrossedon _any condition whatsoever_, and strictly prohibited all Europeansfrom trading in it. Yet, as soon as they were made to expect from Mr. Hastings that the profits of the monopoly should be converted to theirown use, they immediately declared that it "could be no considerablegrievance to the country, " and authorized its continuance, until hehimself, finding it produced little or nothing, renounced it of his ownaccord. Your Committee are apprehensive that this will at all times, whatever flattering appearance it may wear for a time, be the fate ofany attempt to monopolize the salt for the profit of government. In thefirst instance it will raise the price on the consumer beyond its justlevel; but that evil will soon be corrected by means ruinous to theCompany as monopolists, viz. , by the embezzlement of their own salt, andby the importation of foreign salt, neither of which the government ofBengal may have power for any long time to prevent. In the endgovernment will probably be undersold and beaten down to a losing price. Or, if they should attempt to force all the advantages from this articleof which by every exertion it may be made capable, it may distress someother part of their possessions in India, and destroy, or at leastimpair, the natural intercourse between them. Ultimately it may hurtBengal itself, and the produce of its landed revenue, by destroying thevent of that grain which it would otherwise barter for salt. 

Your Committee think it hardly necessary to observe, that the manychanges of plan which have taken place in the management of the salttrade are far from honorable to the Company's government, --and that, even if the monopoly of this article were a profitable concern, itshould not be permitted. Exclusive of the general effect of this and ofall monopolies, the oppressions which the manufacturers of salt, called_molungees_, still suffer under it, though perhaps alleviated in someparticulars, deserve particular attention. There is evidence enough onthe Company's records to satisfy your Committee that these people havebeen treated with great rigor, and not only defrauded of the due paymentof their labor, but delivered over, like cattle, in succession, todifferent masters, who, under pretence of buying up the balances due totheir preceding employers, find means of keeping them in perpetualslavery. For evils of this nature there can be no perfect remedy as longas the monopoly continues. They are in the nature of the thing, andcannot be cured, or effectually counteracted, even by a just andvigilant administration on the spot. Many objections occur to thefarming of any branch of the public revenue in Bengal, particularlyagainst farming the salt lands. But the dilemma to which government bythis system is constantly reduced, of authorizing great injustice orsuffering great loss, is alone sufficient to condemn it. Eithergovernment is expected to support the farmer or contractor in all hispretensions by an exertion of power, which tends of necessity to theruin of the parties subjected to the farmer's contract, and to thesuppression of free trade, --or, if such assistance be refused him, hecomplains that he is not supported, that private persons interfere withhis contract, that the manufacturers desert their labor, and thatproportionate deductions must be allowed him. 

After the result of their examination into the general nature and effectof this monopoly, it remains only for your Committee to inquire whetherthere was any valid foundation for that declaration of Mr. Hastingswhich we conclude must have principally recommended the monopoly of saltto the favor of the Court of Directors, viz. , "that the profit, whichwas before reaped by English gentlemen, and by banians, was now acquiredby the Company. " On the contrary, it was proved and acknowledged beforethe Governor-General and Council, when they inquired into this matter, in March, 1775, that the Chiefs and Councils of those districts in whichthere were salt mahls reserved particular salt farms for their _own_use, and divided the profits, in certain stated proportions, amongthemselves and their assistants. But, unless a detail of thesetransactions, and of the persons concerned in them, should be called forby the House, it is our wish to avoid entering into it. On one exampleonly your Committee think it just and proper to insist, stating first tothe House on what principles they have made this selection. 

In pursuing their inquiries, your Committee have endeavored chiefly tokeep in view the conduct of persons in the highest station, particularlyof those in whom the legislature, as well as the Company, have placed aspecial confidence, --judging that the conduct of such persons is notonly most important in itself, but most likely to influence thesubordinate ranks of the service. Your Committee have also examined theproceedings of the Court of Directors on all those instances of thebehavior of their servants that seemed to deserve, and did sometimesattract, their immediate attention. They constantly find that thenegligence of the Court of Directors has kept pace with, and mustnaturally have quickened, the growth of the practices which they havecondemned. Breach of duty abroad will always go hand in hand withneglect of it at home. In general, the Court of Directors, thoughsufficiently severe in censuring offences, and sometimes in punishingthose whom they have regarded as offenders of a lower rank, appear tohave suffered the most conspicuous and therefore the most dangerousexamples of disobedience and misconduct in the first department of theirservice to pass with a feeble and ineffectual condemnation. In thosecases which they have deemed too apparent and too strong to bedisregarded even with safety to themselves, and against which theirheaviest displeasure has been declared, it appears to your Committeethat their interference, such as it was, had a mischievous rather than auseful tendency. A total neglect of duty in this respect, howeverculpable, is not to be compared, either in its nature or in itsconsequences, with the destructive principles on which they have acted. It has been their practice, if not system, to inquire, to censure, andnot to punish. As long as the misconduct of persons in power in Bengalwas encouraged by nothing but the hopes of concealment, it may bepresumed that they felt some restraint upon their actions, and that theystood in some awe of the power placed over them; whereas it is to beapprehended that the late conduct of the Court of Directors tells them, in effect, that they have nothing to fear from the certainty of adiscovery. 

On the same principle on which your Committee have generally limitedtheir researches to the persons placed by Parliament or raised or put innomination by the Court of Directors to the highest station in Bengal, it was also their original wish to limit those inquiries to the periodat which Parliament interposed its authority between the Company andtheir servants, and gave a new constitution to the Presidency of FortWilliam. If the Company's servants had taken a new date from thatperiod, and if from thenceforward their conduct had corresponded withthe views of the legislature, it is probable that a review of thetransactions of remoter periods would not have been deemed necessary, and that the remembrance of them would have been gradually effaced andfinally buried in oblivion. But the reports which your Committee havealready made have shown the House that from the year 1772, when thoseproceedings commenced in Parliament on which the act of the followingyear was founded, abuses of every kind have prevailed and multiplied inBengal to a degree unknown in former times, and are perfectly sufficientto account for the present distress of the Company's affairs both athome and abroad. The affair which your Committee now lays before theHouse occupies too large a space in the Company's records, and is of toomuch importance in every point of view, to be passed over. 

Your Committee find that in March, 1775, a petition was presented to theGovernor-General and Council by a person called Coja Kaworke, anArmenian merchant, resident at Dacca, (of which division Mr. RichardBarwell had lately been Chief, ) setting forth in substance, that inNovember, 1772, the petitioner had farmed a certain salt district, called Savagepoor, and had entered into a contract with the Committee ofCircuit for providing and delivering to the India Company the saltproduced in that district; that in 1773 he farmed another, calledSelimabad, on similar conditions. He alleges, that in February, 1774, when Mr. Barwell arrived at Dacca, he charged the petitioner with1, 25, 500 rupees, (equal to 13, 000_l. _, ) as a contribution, and, in orderto levy it, did the same year deduct 20, 799 rupees from the amount ofthe _advance money_ which was ordered to be paid to the petitioner, onaccount of the India Company, for the provision of salt in the twofarms, and, after doing so, compelled the petitioner to execute andgive him four different bonds for 77, 627 rupees, in the name of onePorran Paul, for the remainder of such contribution, or unjust profit. 

Such were the allegations of the petition relative to the unjustexaction. The harsh means of compelling the payment make another andvery material part; for the petitioner asserts, that, in order torecover the amount of these bonds, guards were placed over him, and thatMr. Barwell by ill usage and oppressions recovered from him at differenttimes 48, 656 Arcot rupees, besides 283 rupees extorted by theguard, --that, after this payment, two of the bonds, containing 36, 313rupees, were restored to him, and he was again committed to the chargeof four _peons_, or guards, to pay the amount of the remaining twobonds. The petition further charges, that the said gentleman and hispeople had also extorted from the petitioner other sums of money, which, taken together, amounted to 25, 000 rupees. 

But the heaviest grievance alleged by him is, that, after the sums ofmoney had been extorted on account of the farms, the faith usual in suchtransactions is allowed not to have been kept; but, after the petitionerhad been obliged to buy or compound for the farms, that they were takenfrom him, --"that the said Richard Barwell, Esquire, about his departurefrom Dacca, in October, 1774, for self-interest wrested from thepetitioner the aforesaid two mahls, (or districts, ) and farmed them toanother person, notwithstanding he had extorted from the petitioner aconsiderable sum of money on account of those purgunnahs. "

To this petition your Committee find two accounts annexed, in which thesums said to be paid to or taken by Mr. Barwell, and the respectivedates of the several payments, are specified; and they find that theaccount of particulars agrees with and makes up the gross sum charged inthe petition. 

Mr. Barwell's immediate answer to the preceding charge is contained intwo letters to the board, dated 23rd and 24th of March, 1775. The answeris remarkable. He asserts, that "the whole of Kaworke's relation is agross misrepresentation of facts;--that the simple fact was, that inJanuary, 1774, the salt mahls of Savagepoor and Selimabad became _his_, and were re-let by _him_ to this man, in the names of Bussunt Roy andKissen Deb, on condition that he should account with him [_Mr. Barwell_]for profits to a certain sum, and that he [_Mr. Barwell_] engaged forSavagepoor _in the persuasion of its being a very profitable farm_"; andhe concludes with saying, "If I am mistaken in my reasoning, and _thewish to add to my fortune has warped my judgment_, in a transaction thatmay appear to the board in a light different to what I view it in, it ispast, --I cannot recall it, --and I rather choose to admit an error thandeny a fact. " In his second letter he says, "To the Honorable Court ofDirectors I will submit all my rights in the salt contracts I engagedin; and if in their opinion those rights vest in the Company, I willaccount to them for the last shilling I have received from suchcontracts, my intentions being upright; and as I never did wish toprofit myself to the prejudice of my employers, by their judgment I willbe implicitly directed. "

The majority of the board desired that Kaworke's petition should betransmitted to England by the ship then under dispatch; and it wasaccordingly sent with Mr. Barwell's replies. Mr. Barwell moved that acommittee should be appointed to take into consideration what he had tooffer on the subject of Kaworke's petition; and a committee wasaccordingly appointed, consisting of all the members of the Councilexcept the Governor-General. 

The committee opened their proceedings with reading a second petitionfrom Kaworke, containing corrected accounts of cash said to be forciblytaken, and of the extraordinary and unwarrantable profits taken orreceived from him by Richard Barwell, Esquire; all which are inserted atlarge in the Appendix. By these accounts Mr. Barwell is charged with abalance or debt of 22, 421 rupees to Kaworke. The principal differencebetween him and Mr. Barwell arises from a different mode of stating theaccounts acknowledged to exist between them. In the account currentsigned by Mr. Barwell, he gives Kaworke credit for the receipt of 98, 426rupees, and charges him with a balance of 27, 073 rupees. 

The facts stated or admitted by Mr. Barwell are as follow: that the saltfarms of Selimabad and Savagepoor were _his_, and re-let by him to thetwo Armenian merchants, Michael and Kaworke, on condition of theirpaying him 1, 25, 000 rupees, exclusive of their engagements to theCompany; that the engagement was written in the name of Bussunt Roy andKissen Deb Sing; and Mr. Barwell says, that the reason of its being "inthese people's names was because _it was not thought consistent with thepublic regulations that the names of any Europeans should appear_. "

It is remarkable that this policy was carried to still greater length. Means were used to remove such an obnoxious proceeding, as far aspossible, from the public eye; and they were such as will stronglyimpress the House with the facility of abuse and the extreme difficultyof detection in everything which relates to the Indian administration. For these substituted persons were again represented by the furthersubstitution of another name, viz. , _Rada Churn Dey_, whom Mr. Barwellasserts to be a real person living at Dacca, and who _stood for thefactory of Dacca_; whereas the Armenian affirms that there was _no_ suchperson as _Rada Churn_, and that it was a fictitious name. 

Mr. Barwell, in his justification, proceeds to affirm, that Coja Kaworkenever had the management of the salt mahls, "_but on condition ofaccounting to the former Chief, and to Mr. Barwell, for a specifiedadvantage arising from them_, --that Mr. Barwell determined, _without hecould reconcile the interests of the public with his own privateemoluments_, that he would not engage in this concern, --and that, whenhe took an interest in it, _it was for specified benefit in money_, andevery condition in the public engagement to be answered. "

Your Committee have stated the preceding facts in the same terms inwhich they are stated by Mr. Barwell. The House is to judge how far theyamount to a defence against the charges contained in Kaworke's petition, or to an admission of the truth of the principal part of it. Mr. Barwelldoes not allow that compulsion was used to extort the money which hereceived from the petitioner, or that the latter was dispossessed of thefarms in consequence of an offer made to Mr. Barwell by another person(Ramsunder Paulet) to pay him a lac of rupees more for them. The truthof _these_ charges has not been ascertained. They were declared by Mr. Barwell to be false, but no attempt was made by him to invalidate orconfute them, though it concerned his reputation, and it was his duty, in the station wherein he was placed, that charges of such a natureshould have been disproved, --at least, the accuser should have beenpushed to the proof of them. Nothing of this kind appears to have beendone, or even attempted. 

The transaction itself, as it stands, is clearly collusive; the form inwhich it is conducted is clandestine and mysterious in an extraordinarydegree; and the acknowledged object of it a great illicit profit, to begained by an agent and trustee of the Company at the expense of hisemployers, and of which he confesses he has received a considerablepart. 

The committee of the Governor-General and Council appear to have closedtheir proceedings with several resolutions, which, with the answersgiven by Mr. Barwell as a defence, are inserted in the Appendix. Thewhole are referred thither together, on account of the ample extent ofthe answer. These papers will be found to throw considerable light notonly on the points in question, but on the general administration of theCompany's revenues in Bengal. On some passages in Mr. Barwell's defence, or account of his conduct, your Committee offer the following remarks tothe judgment of the House. 

In his letter of the 23rd March, 1775, he says, that he engaged forSavagepoor _in the persuasion of its being a very profitable farm_. Inthis place your Committee think it proper to state the 17th article ofthe regulations of the Committee of Circuit, formed in May, 1772, bythe President and Council, of which Mr. Barwell was a member, togetherwith their own observations thereupon. 

 17th. "That no peshcar, banian, or other servant, of whatever denomination, of the collector, or relation or dependant of any such servant, be allowed to farm lands, nor directly or indirectly to hold a concern in any farm, nor to be security for any farmer; that the collector be strictly enjoined to prevent such practices; and that, if it shall be discovered that any one, _under a false name, or any kind of collusion_, hath found means to evade this order, he shall be subject to an heavy fine, proportionate to the amount of the farm, and the farm shall be re-let, or made _khas_: and if it shall appear that the collector shall have countenanced, approved, or connived at a breach of this regulation, he shall stand _ipso facto_ dismissed from his collectorship. Neither shall any European, directly or indirectly, be permitted to rent lands in any part of the country. "

 _Remark by the Board. _

 17th. "If the collector, or any persons who partake of his authority, are permitted to be the farmers of the country, no other persons will dare to be their competitors: of course they will obtain the farms on their own terms. _It is not fit that the servants of the Company should be dealers with their masters. _ The collectors are checks on the farmers. If they themselves turn farmers, what checks can be found for _them_? What security will the Company have for their property, or where are the ryots to look for relief against oppressions?"

The reasons assigned for the preceding regulation seem to your Committeeto be perfectly just; but they can by no means be reconciled to thosewhich induced Mr. Barwell to engage in the salt farms of Selimabad andSavagepoor. In the first place, his doing so is at length a direct andavowed, though at first a covert, violation of the public regulation, towhich he was himself a party as a member of the government, as well asan act of disobedience to the Company's positive orders on this subject. In their General Letter of the 17th May, 1766, the Court of Directorssay, "We positively order, that no covenanted servant, or Englishmanresiding under our protection, shall be suffered to hold any land forhis own account, directly or indirectly, in his own name or that ofothers, or to be concerned in any farms or revenues whatsoever. "

Secondly, if, instead of letting the Company's lands or farms toindifferent persons, their agent or trustee be at liberty to hold themhimself, he will always (on principles stated and adhered to in thedefence) have a sufficient reason for farming them on his own account, since he can at all times make them as profitable as he pleases; or ifhe leases them to a third person, yet reserves an intermediate profitfor himself, that profit may be as great as he thinks fit, and must benecessarily made at the Company's expense. If at the same time he becollector of the revenues, it will be his interest to recommendremissions in favor of the nominal farmer, and he will have it in hispower to sink the amount of his collections. 

These principles, and the correspondent practices, leave the IndiaCompany without any security that all the leases of the lands of Bengalmay not have been disposed of, under that administration which made thefive years' settlement in 1772, in the same manner and for the samepurpose. 

To enable the House to judge how far this apprehension may be founded, it will be proper to state, that Mr. Nicholas Grueber, who preceded Mr. Barwell in the Chiefship of Dacca, in a letter dated 29th of April, 1775, declares that he paid to the Committee of Circuit twelve thousandrupees as their profit on a single salt farm, --which sum, he says, "Ipaid the Committee at their request, before their departure from Dacca, and reimbursed myself out of _the advances_ directed to be issued forthe provision of the salt. " Thus one illicit and mischievous transactionalways leads to another; and the irregular farming of revenue brings onthe misapplication of the commercial advances. 

Mr. Barwell professes himself to be sensible "_that a wish to add to hisfortune may possibly have warped his judgment_, and that _he ratherchooses to admit an error than deny a fact_. " But your Committee are ofopinion that the extraordinary caution and the intricate contrivanceswith which his share in this transaction is wrapped up form a sufficientproof that he was not altogether misled in his judgment; and thoughthere might be some merit in acknowledging an error before it wasdiscovered, there could be very little in a confession produced byprevious detection. 

The reasons assigned by Mr. Barwell, in defence of the clandestine partof this transaction, seem to your Committee to be insufficient inthemselves, and not very fit to be urged by a man in his station. In oneplace he says, that "_it was not thought consistent with the publicregulations that the names of any Europeans should appear_. " In anotherhe says, "I am aware of the objection that has been made to the Englishtaking farms under the names of natives, as prohibited by the Company'sorders; and I must _deviate_ a little upon this. It has been generallyunderstood that the scope and tendency of the Honorable Company'sprohibition of farms to Europeans was meant only to exclude such ascould not possibly, in their own persons, come under the jurisdiction ofthe Duanné courts of Adawlet, because, upon any failure of engagements, upon any complaint of unjust oppression, or other cause of discontentwhatever, it was supposed an European might screen himself from theprocess of the country judicature. But it was never supposed _that anEuropean of credit and responsibility_ was absolutely incapable fromholding certain tenures under the sanction and authority of the countrylaws, or from becoming security for such native farmers, contractors, &c. , &c. , as he might protect and employ. "

Your Committee have opposed this construction of Mr. Barwell's to thepositive order which the conduct it is meant to color has violated. "Europeans of credit and responsibility, " that is, Europeans armed withwealth and power, and exercising offices of authority and trust, insteadof being excepted from the spirit of the restriction, must be supposedthe persons who are chiefly meant to be comprehended in it; for abstractthe idea of an European from the ideas of power and influence, and therestriction is no longer rational. 

Your Committee are therefore of opinion that the nature of the evilwhich was meant to be prevented by the above orders and regulations wasnot altered, or the evil itself diminished, by the collusive methodsmade use of to evade them, --and that, if the regulations were proper, (as they unquestionably were, ) they ought to have been punctuallycomplied with, particularly by the members of the government, _whoformed the plan_, and who, as trustees of the Company, were especiallyanswerable for their being duly carried into execution. Your Committeehave no reason to believe that it could ever have been generallyunderstood "that the Company's prohibition of farms to Europeans wasmeant only to exclude such as could not possibly, in their own persons, come under the jurisdiction of the Duanné courts": no such restrictionis so much as hinted at. And if it had been so understood, Mr. Barwellwas one of the persons who, from their rank, station, and influence, must have been the principal objects of the prohibition. Since theestablishment of the Company's influence in Bengal, no Europeans, of anyrank whatever, have been subject to the process of the countryjudicature; and whether they act avowedly for themselves, and take farmsin their own name, or substitute native Indians to act for them, thedifference is not material. The same influence that screened an Europeanfrom the jurisdiction of the country courts would have equally protectedhis native agent and representative. For many years past the Company'sservants have presided in those courts, and in comparison with _their_authority the native authority is nothing. 

The earliest instructions that appear to have been given by the Court ofDirectors in consequence of these transactions in Bengal are dated the5th of February, 1777. In their letter of that date they applaud theproceedings of the board, meaning the majority, (then consisting ofGeneral Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis, ) _as highlymeritorious_, and promise them their _firmest support_. "Some of the_cases_" they say, "_are so flagrantly corrupt, and others attended withcircumstances so oppressive to the inhabitants, that it would be unjustto suffer the delinquents to go unpunished_. " With this observationtheir proceedings appear to have ended, and paused for more than a year. 

On the 4th of March, 1778, the Directors appear to have resumed thesubject. In their letter of that date they instructed the Governor andCouncil forthwith to commence a prosecution in the Supreme Court ofJudicature against the persons who composed the Committee of Circuit, ortheir representatives, and also against Mr. Barwell, in order torecover, for the use of the Company, the amount of all advantagesacquired by them from their several engagements in salt contracts andfarms. Adverting, however, to the declaration made by Mr. Barwell, thathe would account to the Court of Directors for the last shilling he hadreceived and abide implicity by their judgment, they thought itprobable, that, on being acquainted with their peremptory orders forcommencing a prosecution, he might be desirous of paying his share ofprofits into the Company's treasury; and they pointed out a precautionto be used in accepting such a tender on his part. 

On this part of the transaction your Committee observe, that the Courtof Directors appear blamable in having delayed till February, 1777, totake any measure in consequence of advices so interesting and important, and on a matter concerning which they had made so strong adeclaration, --considering that early in April, 1776, they say "they hadinvestigated the charges, and had then come to certain resolutionsconcerning them. " But their delaying to send out positive orders forcommencing a prosecution against the parties concerned till March, 1778, cannot be accounted for. In the former letter they promise, if theyshould find it necessary, to return the original covenants of such oftheir servants as had been any ways concerned in the undue receipt ofmoney, in order to enable the Governor-General and Council to recoverthe same by suits in the Supreme Court. But your Committee do not findthat the covenants were ever transmitted to Bengal. To whatever causethese instances of neglect and delay may be attributed, they could notfail to create an opinion in Bengal that the Court of Directors were notheartily intent upon the execution of their own orders, and todiscourage those members of government who were disposed to undertake soinvidious a duty. 

In consequence of these delays, even their first orders did not arrivein Bengal until some time after the death of Colonel Monson, when thewhole power of the board had devolved to Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell. When they sent what they call _their positive orders_, in March, 1778, they had long been apprised of the death of Colonel Monson, and musthave been perfectly certain of the effect which that event would have onthe subsequent measures and proceedings of the Governor-General andCouncil. Their opinion of the principles of those gentlemen appears intheir letter of the 28th of November, 1777, wherein they say "theycannot but express their concern that the power of granting away theirproperty in perpetuity should have devolved upon such persons. "

But the conduct of the Court of Directors appears to be open toobjections of a nature still more serious and important. A recovery ofthe amount of Mr. Barwell's profits seems to be the only purpose whichthey even professed to have in view. But your Committee are of opinionthat to preserve the reputation and dignity of the government of Bengalwas a much more important object, and ought to have been their firstconsideration. The prosecution was not the pursuit of mean andsubordinate persons, who might with safety to the public interest remainin their seats during such an inquiry into their conduct. It appearsvery doubtful, whether, if there were grounds for such a prosecution, aproceeding in Great Britain were not more politic than one in Bengal. Such a prosecution ought not to have been ordered by the Directors, butupon grounds that would have fully authorized the recall of thegentleman in question. This prosecution, supposing it to have beenseriously undertaken, and to have succeeded, must have tended to weakenthe government, and to degrade it in the eyes of all India. On the otherhand, to intrust a man, armed as he was with all the powers of hisstation, and indeed of the government, with the conduct of a prosecutionagainst himself, was altogether inconsistent and absurd. The same letterin which they give these orders exhibits an example which sets theinconsistency of their conduct in a stronger light, because the case issomewhat of a similar nature, but infinitely less pressing in itscircumstances. Observing that the Board of Trade had commenced aprosecution against Mr. William Barton, a member of that board, forvarious acts of peculation committed by him, they say, "We must be ofopinion, that, as _prosecutions are actually carrying on against him byour Board of Trade_, he is, during such prosecution at least, animproper person to hold a seat _at that board_; and therefore we directthat he be suspended from the Company's service until our furtherpleasure concerning him be known. " The principle laid down in thisinstruction, even before their own opinion concerning Mr. Barton's casewas declared, and merely on the prosecution of others, serves to rendertheir conduct not very accountable in the case of Mr. Barwell. Mr. Barton was in a subordinate situation, and his remaining or notremaining in it was of little or no moment to the prosecution. Mr. Barton was but one of seven; whereas Mr. Barwell was one of four, and, with the Governor-General, was in effect the Supreme Council. 

In the present state of power and patronage in India, and during therelations which are permitted to subsist between the judges, theprosecuting officers, and the Council-General, your Committee is verydoubtful whether the mode of prosecuting the highest members in theBengal government, before a court at Calcutta, could have been almost inany case advisable. 

It is possible that particular persons, in high judicial and politicalsituations, may, by force of an unusual strain of virtue, be placed farabove the influence of those circumstances which in ordinary cases areknown to make an impression on the human mind. But your Committee, sensible that laws and public proceedings ought to be made for generalsituations, and not for personal dispositions, are not inclined to haveany confidence in the effect of criminal proceedings, where no means areprovided for preventing a mutual connection, by dependencies, agencies, and employments, between the parties who are to prosecute and to judgeand those who are to be prosecuted and to be tried. 

Your Committee, in a former Report, have stated the consequences whichthey apprehended from the dependency of the judges on theGovernor-General and Council of Bengal; and the House has entered intotheir ideas upon this subject. Since that time it appears that SirElijah Impey has accepted of the guardianship of Mr. Barwell's children, and was the trustee for his affairs. There is no law to prevent thissort of connection, and it is possible that it might not at all affectthe mind of that judge, or (upon his account) indirectly influence theconduct of his brethren; but it must forcibly affect the minds of thosewho have matter of complaint against government, and whose cause theCourt of Directors appear to espouse, in a country where the authorityof the Court of Directors has seldom been exerted but to be despised, where the operation of laws is but very imperfectly understood, butwhere men are acute, sagacious, and even suspicious of the effect of allpersonal connections. Their suspicions, though perhaps not rightlyapplied to every individual, will induce them to take indications fromthe situations and connections of the prosecuting parties, as well as ofthe judges. It cannot fail to be observed, that Mr. Naylor, theCompany's attorney, lived in Mr. Barwell's house; the late Mr. Bogle, the Company's commissioner of lawsuits, owed his place to the patronageof Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell, by whom the office was created for him;and Sir John Day, the Company's advocate, who arrived in Bengal inFebruary, 1779, had not been four months in Calcutta, when Mr. Hastings, Mr. Barwell, and Sir Eyre Coote doubled his salary, contrary to theopinion of Mr. Francis and Mr. Wheler. 

If the Directors are known to devolve the whole cognizance of theoffences charged on their servants so highly situated upon the SupremeCourt, an excuse will be furnished, if already it has not beenfurnished, to the Directors for declining the use of their own properpolitical power and authority in examining into and animadverting on theconduct of their servants. Their true character, as strict masters andvigilant governors, will merge in that of prosecutors. Their force andenergy will evaporate in tedious and intricate processes, --in lawsuitswhich can never end, and which are to be carried on by the verydependants of those who are under prosecution. On their part, theseservants will decline giving satisfaction to their masters, because theyare already before another tribunal; and thus, by shiftingresponsibility from hand to hand, a confederacy to defeat the wholespirit of the law, and to remove all real restraints on their actions, may be in time formed between the servants, Directors, prosecutors, andcourt. Of this great danger your Committee will take farther notice inanother place. 

No notice whatever appears to have been taken of the Company's orders inBengal till the 11th of January, 1779, when Mr. Barwell moved, _that theclaim made upon him by the Court of Directors should be submitted to theCompany's lawyers, and that they should be perfectly instructed toprosecute upon it_. In his minute of that date he says, "_that the stateof his health had long since rendered it necessary for him to return toEurope_. "

Your Committee observe that he continued in Bengal another year. Hesays, "that he had hitherto waited for the arrival of Sir John Day, theCompany's advocate; but as the season was now far advanced, he wished tobring the trial speedily to issue. "

In this minute he retracts his original engagement to submit himself tothe judgment of the Court of Directors, "and to account to them for thelast shilling he had received": he says, "that no merit had been givenhim for the offer; that a most unjustifiable advantage had beenattempted to be made of it, by first declining it and _descending toabuse_, and then giving orders upon it as if it had been rejected, whencalled upon by him in the person of his agent to bring home the chargeof delinquency. "

Mr. Barwell's reflections on the proceedings of the Court of Directorsare not altogether clearly expressed; nor does it appear distinctly towhat facts he alludes. He asserts that a most unjustifiable advantagehad been attempted to be made of his offer. The fact is, the Court ofDirectors have nowhere declined accepting it; on the contrary, theycaution the Governor-General and Council about the manner of receivingthe tender of the money which they expect him to make. They say nothingof any call made on them by Mr. Barwell's agent in England; nor does itappear to your Committee that they "have descended to abuse. " They havea right, and it is their duty, to express, in distinct and appropriatedterms, their sense of all blamable conduct in their servants. 

So far as may be collected from the evidence of the Company's records, Mr. Barwell's assertions do not appear well supported; but even if theywere more plausible, your Committee apprehend that he could not bedischarged from his solemn recorded promise to abide by the judgment ofthe Court of Directors. Their judgment was declared by their resolutionto prosecute, which it depended upon himself to satisfy by making goodhis engagement. To excuse his not complying with the Company's claims, he says, "_that his compliance would be urged as a confession ofdelinquency, and to proceed from conviction of his having usurped on therights of the Company_. " Considerations of this nature might properlyhave induced Mr. Barwell to stand upon his right in the first instance, "_and to appeal_" (to use his own words) "_to the laws of his country, in order to vindicate his fame_. " But his performance could not havemore weight to infer delinquency than his promise. Your Committee thinkhis observation comes too late. 

If he had stood a trial, when he first acknowledged the facts, andsubmitted himself to the judgment of the Court of Directors, the suitwould have been carried on under the direction of General Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis; whereas in the year 1779 his influenceat the board gave him the conduct of it himself. In an interval of fouryears it may be presumed that great alterations might have happened inthe state of the evidence against him. 

In the subsequent proceedings of the Governor-General and Council theHouse will find that Mr. Barwell complained that his instances forcarrying on the prosecution were ineffectual, owing to the legaldifficulties and delays _urged by the Company's law officers_, whichyour Committee do not find have yet been removed. As far as the latestadvices reach, no progress appears to have been made in the business. InJuly, 1782, the Court of Directors found it necessary to order anaccount of all suits against Europeans depending in the Supreme Court ofJudicature to be transmitted to them, and that no time should be lost inbringing them to a determination. 

SALTPETRE. 

The next article of direct monopoly subservient to the Company's exportis saltpetre. This, as well as opium, is far the greater part theproduce of the province of Bahar. The difference between the managementand destination of the two articles has been this. Until the year 1782, the opium has been sold in the country, and the produce of the sale laidout in country merchandise for the Company's export. A great part of thesaltpetre is sent out in kind, and never has contributed to the interiorcirculation and commerce of Bengal. It is managed by agency on theCompany's account. The price paid to the manufacturer is invariable. Some of the larger undertakers receive advances to enable them toprosecute their work; but as they are not always equally careful orfortunate, it happens that large balances accumulate against them. Orders have been sent from Calcutta from time to time to recover theirbalances, with little or no success, but with great vexation to allconcerned in the manufacture. Sometimes they have imprisoned the failingcontractors in their own houses, --a severity which answers no usefulpurpose. Such persons are so many hands detached from the improvementand added to the burden of the country. They are persons of skill drawnfrom the future supply of that monopoly in favor of which they areprosecuted. In case of the death of the debtor, this rigorous demandfalls upon the ruined houses of widows and orphans, and may be easilyconverted into a means either of cruel oppression or a mercenaryindulgence, according to the temper of the exactors. Instead of thushaving recourse to imprisonment, the old balance is sometimes deductedfrom the current produce. This, in these circumstances, is a grievousdiscouragement. People must be discouraged from entering into abusiness, when, the commodity being fixed to one invariable standard andconfined to one market, the best success can be attended only with alimited advantage, whilst a defective produce can never be compensatedby an augmented price. Accordingly, very little of these advances hasbeen recovered, and after much vexation the pursuit has generally beenabandoned. It is plain that there can be no life and vigor in anybusiness under a monopoly so constituted; nor can the true productiveresources of the country, in so large an article of its commerce, evercome to be fully known. 

The supply for the Company's demand in England has rarely fallen shortof two thousand tons, nor much exceeded two thousand five hundred. Adiscretionary allowance of this commodity has been made to the French, Dutch, and Danes, who purchase their allotted shares at some smalladvance on the Company's price. The supply destined for the Londonmarket is proportioned to the spare tonnage; and to accommodate thattonnage, the saltpetre is sometimes sent to Madras and sometimes even toBombay, and that not unfrequently in vessels expressly employed for thepurpose. 

Mr. Law, Chief of Patna, being examined on the effect of that monopoly, delivered his opinion, that with regard to the Company's _trade_ themonopoly was advantageous, but as sovereigns of the country they must belosers by it. These two capacities in the Company are found in perpetualcontradiction. But much doubt may arise whether this monopoly will befound advantageous to the Company either in the one capacity or theother. The gross commodity monopolized for sale in London is procuredfrom the revenues in Bengal; the certain is given for the hazardous. Theloss of interest on the advances, sometimes the loss of theprincipal, --the expense of carriage from Patna to Calcutta, --the variousloadings and unloadings, and insurance (which, though borne by theCompany, is still insurance), --the engagement for the Ordnance, limitedin price, and irregular in payment, --the charge of agency andmanagement, through all its gradations and successions, --when all theseare taken into consideration, it may be found that the gain of theCompany as traders will be far from compensating their loss assovereigns. A body like the East India Company can scarcely, in anycircumstance, hope to carry on the details of such a business, from itscommencement to its conclusion, with any degree of success. In thesubjoined estimate of profit and loss, the value of the commodity isstated at its invoice price at Calcutta. But this affords no justestimate of the whole effect of a dealing, where the Company's chargecommences in the first rudiments of the manufacture, and not at thepurchase at the place of sale and valuation: for they [there?] may beheavy losses on the value at which the saltpetre is estimated, when, shipped off on their account, without any appearance in the account; andthe inquiries of your Committee to find the charges on the saltpetreprevious to the shipping have been fruitless. 

BRITISH GOVERNMENT IN INDIA. 

The other link by which India is bound to Great Britain is thegovernment established there originally by the authority of the EastIndia Company, and afterwards modified by Parliament by the acts of 1773and 1780. This system of government appears to your Committee to be atleast as much disordered, and as much perverted from every good purposefor which lawful rule is established, as the trading system has beenfrom every just principle of commerce. Your Committee, in tracing thecauses of this disorder through its effects, have first considered thegovernment as it is constituted and managed within itself, beginningwith its most essential and fundamental part, the order and disciplineby which the supreme authority of this kingdom is maintained. 

The British government in India being a subordinate and delegated power, it ought to be considered as a fundamental principle in such a system, that it is to be preserved in the strictest obedience to the governmentat home. Administration in India, at an immense distance from the seatof the supreme authority, --intrusted with the most extensivepowers, --liable to the greatest temptations, --possessing the amplestmeans of abuse, --ruling over a people guarded by no distinct orwell-ascertained privileges, whose language, manners, and radicalprejudices render not only redress, but all complaint on their part, amatter of extreme difficulty, --such an administration, it is evident, never can be made subservient to the interests of Great Britain, or eventolerable to the natives, but by the strictest rigor in exactingobedience to the commands of the authority lawfully set over it. 

But your Committee find that this principle has been for some years verylittle attended to. Before the passing the act of 1773, the professedpurpose of which was to secure a better subordination in the Company'sservants, such was the firmness with which the Court of Directorsmaintained their authority, that they displaced Governor Cartier, confessedly a meritorious servant, for disobedience of orders, althoughhis case was not a great deal more than a question by whom the orderswere to be obeyed. [12] Yet the Directors were so sensible of thenecessity of a punctual and literal obedience, that, conceiving theirorders went to the parties who were to obey, as well as to the act to bedone, they proceeded with a strictness that, in all cases except that oftheir peculiar government, might well be considered as rigorous. But inproportion as the necessity of enforcing obedience grew stronger andmore urgent, and in proportion to the magnitude and importance of theobjects affected by disobedience, this rigor has been relaxed. Acts ofdisobedience have not only grown frequent, but systematic; and they haveappeared in such instances, and are manifested in such a manner, as toamount, in the Company's servants, to little less than absoluteindependence, against which, on the part of the Directors, there is nostruggle, and hardly so much as a protest to preserve a claim. 

Before your Committee proceed to offer to the House their remarks on themost distinguished of these instances, the particulars of which theyhave already reported, they deem it necessary to enter into some detailof a transaction equally extraordinary and important, though not yetbrought into the view of Parliament, which appears to have laid thefoundation of the principal abuses that ensued, as well as to have givenstrength and encouragement to those that existed. To this transaction, and to the conclusions naturally deducible from it, your Committeeattribute that general spirit of disobedience and independence which hassince prevailed in the government of Bengal. 

Your Committee find that in the year 1775 Mr. Lauchlan Macleane was sentinto England as agent to the Nabob of Arcot and to Mr. Hastings. Theconduct of Mr. Hastings, in assisting to extirpate, for a sum of moneyto be paid to the Company, the innocent nation of the Rohillas, haddrawn upon him the censure of the Court of Directors, and the unanimouscensure of the Court of Proprietors. The former had even resolved toprepare an application to his Majesty for Mr. Hastings's dismission. 

Another General Court was called on this proceeding. Mr. Hastings wasthen openly supported by a majority of the Court of Proprietors, whoprofessed to entertain a good opinion of his general ability andrectitude of intention, notwithstanding the unanimous censure passedupon him. In that censure they therefore seemed disposed to acquiesce, without pushing the matter farther. But, as the offence was far fromtrifling, and the condemnation of the measure recent, they did notdirectly attack the resolution of the Directors to apply to his Majesty, but voted in the ballot that it should be reconsidered. The businesstherefore remained in suspense, or it rather seemed to be dropped, forsome months, when Mr. Macleane took a step of a nature not in the leastto be expected from the condition in which the cause of his principalstood, which was apparently as favorable as the circumstances couldbear. Hitherto the support of Mr. Hastings in the General Court was onlyby a majority; but if on application from the Directors he should beremoved, a mere majority would not have been sufficient for hisrestoration. The door would have been barred against his return to theCompany's service by one of the strongest and most substantial clausesin the Regulating Act of 1778. Mr. Macleane, probably to prevent themanifest ill consequences of such a step, came forward with a letter tothe Court of Directors, declaring his provisional powers, and offeringon the part of Mr. Hastings an immediate resignation of his office. 

On this occasion the Directors showed themselves extremely punctiliouswith regard to Mr. Macleane's powers. They probably dreaded the chargeof becoming accomplices to an evasion of the act by which Mr. Hastings, resigning the service, would escape the consequences attached by law toa dismission; they therefore demanded Mr. Macleane's written authority. This he declared he could not give into their hands, as the lettercontained other matters, of a nature extremely confidential, but that, if they would appoint a committee of the Directors, he would readilycommunicate to them the necessary parts of the letter, and give themperfect satisfaction with regard to his authority. A deputation wasaccordingly named, who reported that they had seen Mr. Hastings'sinstructions, contained in a paper in _his own handwriting_, and thatthe authority for the act now done by Mr. Macleane was clear andsufficient. Mr. Vansittart, a very particular friend of Mr. Hastings, and Mr. John Stewart, his most attached and confidential dependant, attended on this occasion, and proved that directions perfectlycorrespondent to this written authority had been given by Mr. Hastingsin their presence. By this means the powers were fully authenticated;but the letter remained safe in Mr. Macleane's hands. 

Nothing being now wanting to the satisfaction of the Directors, theresignation was formally accepted. Mr. Wheler was named to fill thevacancy, and presented for his Majesty's approbation, which wasreceived. The act was complete, and the office that Mr. Hastings hadresigned was legally filled. This proceeding was officially notified inBengal, and General Clavering, as senior in Council, was in course tosucceed to the office of Governor-General. 

Mr. Hastings, to extricate himself from the difficulties into which thisresignation had brought him, had recourse to one of those unlooked-forand hardy measures which characterize the whole of his administration. He came to a resolution of disowning his agent, denying his letter, anddisavowing his friends. He insisted on continuing in the execution ofhis office, and supported himself by such reasons as could be furnishedin such a cause. An open schism instantly divided the Council. GeneralClavering claimed the office to which he ought to succeed, and Mr. Francis adhered to him: Mr. Barwell stuck to Mr. Hastings. The twoparties assembled separately, and everything was running fast into aconfusion which suspended government, and might very probably have endedin a civil war, had not the judges of the Supreme Court, on a referenceto them, settled the controversy by deciding that the resignation was aninvalid act, and that Mr. Hastings was still in the legal possession ofhis place, which had been actually filled up in England. It wasextraordinary that the nullity of this resignation should not have beendiscovered in England, where the act authorizing the resignation thenwas, where the agent was personally present, where the witnesses wereexamined, and where there was and could be no want of legal advice, either on the part of the Company or of the crown. The judges took nolight matter upon them in superseding, and thereby condemning thelegality of his Majesty's appointment: for such it became by the royalapprobation. 

On this determination, such as it was, the division in the meeting, butnot in the minds of the Council, ceased. General Clavering uniformlyopposed the conduct of Mr. Hastings to the end of his life. But Mr. Hastings showed more temper under much greater provocations. Indisclaiming his agent, and in effect accusing him of an imposture themost deeply injurious to his character and fortune, and of the grossestforgery to support it, he was so very mild and indulgent as not to showany active resentment against his unfaithful agent, nor to complain tothe Court of Directors. It was expected in Bengal that some strongmeasures would have immediately been taken to preserve the just rightsof the king and of the Court of Directors; as this proceeding, unaccompanied with the severest animadversion, manifestly struck adecisive blow at the existence of the most essential powers of both. Butyour Committee do not find that any measures whatever, such as the caseseemed to demand, were taken. The observations made by the Court ofDirectors on what they call "_these extraordinary transactions_" arejust and well applied. They conclude with a declaration, "_that themeasures which it might be necessary for them to take, in order toretrieve the honor of the Company, and to prevent the like abuse frombeing practised in future, should have their most serious and earliestconsideration_"; and with this declaration they appear to have closedthe account, and to have dismissed the subject forever. 

A sanction was hereby given to all future defiance of every authority inthis kingdom. Several other matters of complaint against Mr. Hastings, particularly the charge of peculation, fell to the ground at the sametime. Opinions of counsel had been taken relative to a prosecution atlaw upon this charge, from the then Attorney and the thenSolicitor-General and Mr. Dunning, (now the Lords Thurlow, Loughborough, and Ashburton, ) together with Mr. Adair (now Recorder of London). Noneof them gave a positive opinion against the grounds of the prosecution. The Attorney-General doubted on _the prudence_ of the proceedings, andcensured (as it well deserved) the ill statement of the case. Three ofthem, Mr. Wedderburn, Mr. Dunning, and Mr. Adair, were clear in favor ofthe prosecution. No prosecution, however, was had, and the Directorscontented themselves with censuring and admonishing Mr. Hastings. 

With regard to the Supreme Council, the members who chose (for it waschoice only) to attend to the orders which were issued from thelanguishing authority of the Directors continued to receive unprofitableapplauses and no support. Their correspondence was always filled withcomplaints, the justice of which was always admitted by the Court ofDirectors; but this admission of the existence of the evil showed onlythe impotence of those who were to administer the remedy. The authorityof the Court of Directors, resisted with success in so capital aninstance as that of the resignation, was not likely to be respected inany other. What influence it really had on the conduct of the Company'sservants may be collected from the facts that followed it. 

The disobedience of Mr. Hastings has of late not only become uniform andsystematical in practice, but has been in principle, also, supported byhim, and by Mr. Barwell, late a member of the Supreme Council in Bengal, and now a member of this House. 

In the Consultation of the 20th of July, 1778, Mr. Barwell gives it ashis solemn and deliberate opinion, that, "while Mr. Hastings is in thegovernment, the respect and dignity of his station should be supported. In these sentiments, I must decline an acquiescence in _any_ order whichhas a _tendency_ to bring the government into disrepute. As the Companyhave the means and power of forming their own administration in India, they may at pleasure place whom they please at the head; but in myopinion they are not authorized to treat a person in that post with_indignity_. "

By treating them with indignity (in the particular cases wherein theyhave declined obedience to orders) they must mean those orders whichimply a censure on any part of their conduct, a reversal of any of theirproceedings, or, as Mr. Barwell expresses himself in words verysignificant, in any orders that have a _tendency_ to bring _their_government into _disrepute_. The amplitude of this latter description, reserving to them the judgment of any orders which have so much as that_tendency_, puts them in possession of a complete independence, anindependence including a despotic authority over the subordinates andthe country. The very means taken by the Directors for enforcing theirauthority becomes, on this principle, a cause of further disobedience. It is observable, that their principles of disobedience do not refer toany local consideration, overlooked by the Directors, which mightsupersede their orders, or to any change of circumstances, which mightrender another course advisable, or even perhaps necessary, --but itrelates solely to their own interior feelings in matters relative tothemselves, and their opinion of their own dignity and reputation. It isplain that they have wholly forgotten who they are, and what the natureof their office is. Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell are servants of theCompany, and as such, by the duty inherent in that relation, as well asby their special covenants, were obliged to yield obedience to theorders of their masters. They have, as far as they were able, cancelledall the bonds of this relation, and all the sanctions of thesecovenants. 

But in thus throwing off the authority of the Court of Directors, Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell have thrown off the authority of the wholelegislative power of Great Britain; for, by the Regulating Act of thethirteenth of his Majesty, they are expressly "directed and required topay due obedience to _all_ such orders as they shall receive from theCourt of Directors of the said United Company. " Such is the declarationof the law. But Mr. Barwell declares that he declines obedience to _any_orders which he shall interpret to be indignities on a Governor-General. To the clear injunctions of the legislature Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwellhave thought proper to oppose their pretended reputation and dignity; asif the chief honor of public ministers in every situation was not toyield a cheerful obedience to the laws of their country. Your Committee, to render evident to this House the general nature and tendency of thispretended dignity, and to illustrate the real principles upon which theyappear to have acted, think it necessary to make observations on threeor four of the cases, already reported, of marked disobedience toparticular and special orders, on one of which the above extraordinarydoctrine was maintained. 

These are the cases of Mr. Fowke, Mr. Bristow, and Mahomed Reza Khân. Ina few weeks after the death of Colonel Monson, Mr. Hastings havingobtained a majority in Council by his casting vote, Mr. Fowke and Mr. Bristow were called from their respective offices of Residents atBenares and Oude, places which have become the scenes of otherextraordinary operations under the conduct of Mr. Hastings in person. For the recall of Mr. Bristow no reason was assigned. The reasonassigned for the proceeding with regard to Mr. Fowke was, that "thepurposes for which he was appointed were then fully accomplished. "

An account of the removal of Mr. Fowke was communicated to the Court ofDirectors in a letter of the 22d of December, 1776. On thisnotification the Court had nothing to conclude, but that Mr. Hastings, from a rigid pursuit of economy in the management of the Company'saffairs, had recalled a useless officer. But, without alleging anyvariation whatsoever in the circumstances, in less than twenty daysafter the order for the recall of Mr. Fowke, and _the very day after thedispatch_ containing an account of the transaction, Mr. Hastingsrecommended Mr. Graham to this very office, the end of which, hedeclared to the Directors but the day before, had been fullyaccomplished; and not thinking this sufficient, he appointed Mr. D. Barwell as his assistant, at a salary of about four hundred pounds ayear. Against this extraordinary act General Clavering and Mr. Francisentered a protest. 

So early as the 6th of the following January the appointment of thesegentlemen was communicated in a letter to the Court of Directors, without any sort of color, apology, or explanation. That court found aservant removed from his station without complaint, contrary to thetenor of one of their standing injunctions. They allow, however, andwith reason, that, "if it were possible to suppose that a saving, &c, had been his motive, they would have approved his proceeding. But thatwhen immediately afterwards two persons, with _two_ salaries, had beenappointed to execute the office which had been filled with reputation byMr. Fowke alone, and that Mr. Graham enjoys all the emoluments annexedto the office of Mr. Fowke, "--they properly conclude that Mr. Fowke wasremoved without just cause, to make way for Mr. Graham, and strictlyenjoin that the former be reinstated in his office of Resident asPost-master of Benares. In the same letter they assert their rights ina tone of becoming firmness, and declare, that "on no account we canpermit our orders to be disobeyed or our authority disregarded. "

It was now to be seen which of the parties was to give way. The orderswere clear and precise, and enforced by a strong declaration of theresolution of the Court to make itself obeyed. Mr. Hastings fairlyjoined issue upon this point with his masters, and, having disobeyed thegeneral instructions of the Company, determined to pay no obedience totheir special order. 

On the 21st July, 1778, he moved, and succeeded in his proposition, thatthe execution of these orders should be suspended. The reason heassigned for this suspension lets in great light upon the true characterof all these proceedings: "That his consent to the recall of Mr. Grahamwould be adequate to his own resignation of the service, as it wouldinflict such a wound on _his authority and influence_ that he could notmaintain it. "

If that had been his opinion, he ought to have resigned, and notdisobeyed: because it was not necessary that he should hold his office;but it was necessary, that, whilst he hold it, he should obey hissuperiors, and submit to the law. Much more truly was his conduct avirtual resignation of his lawful office, and at the same time anusurpation of a situation which did not belong to him, to hold asubordinate office, and to refuse to act according to its duties. Hadhis authority been self-originated, it would have been wounded by hissubmission; but in this case the true nature of his authority wasaffirmed, not injured, by his obedience, because it was a power derivedfrom others, and, by its essence, to be executed according to theirdirections. 

In this determined disobedience he was supported by Mr. Barwell, who onthat occasion delivered the dangerous doctrine to which your Committeehave lately adverted. Mr. Fowke, who had a most material interest inthis determination, applied by letter to be informed concerning it. Ananswer was sent, acquainting him coldly, and without any reasonassigned, of what had been resolved relative to his office. Thiscommunication was soon followed by another letter from Mr. Fowke, withgreat submission and remarkable decency asserting his right to hisoffice under the authority of the Court of Directors, and for solidreasons, grounded on the Company's express orders, praying to beinformed of the charge against him. This letter appears to have beenreceived by Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell very loftily. Mr. Hastingssaid, "that such applications were irregular; that they are notaccountable to Mr. Fowke for their resolution respecting him. Thereasons for suspending the execution of the orders of the Court ofDirectors contain _no charge, nor the slightest imputation of a charge_, against Mr. Fowke; _but I see no reason why the board should condescendto tell him so_. " Accordingly, the proposition of Mr. Francis and Mr. Wheler, to inform Mr. Fowke "that they had no reason to be dissatisfiedwith his conduct, " on the previous question was rejected. 

By this resolution Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell discovered anotherprinciple, and no less dangerous than the first: namely, that personsderiving a valuable interest under the Company's orders, so far frombeing heard in favor of their right, are not so much as to be informedof the grounds on which they are deprived of it. 

The arrival soon after of Sir Eyre Coote giving another opportunity oftrial, the question for obedience to the Company's orders was again[13]brought on by Mr. Francis, and again received a negative. Sir EyreCoote, though present, and declaring, that, had he been at the originalconsultation, he should have voted for the immediate execution of theCompany's orders, yet he was resolved to avoid what he called _any kindof retrospect_. His neutrality gained the question in favor of this, thethird resolution for disobedience to orders. 

The resolution in Bengal being thus decisively taken, it came to theturn of the Court of Directors to act their part. They did act theirpart exactly in their old manner: they had recourse to their old remedyof repeating orders which had been disobeyed. The Directors declare toMr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell, though without any apparent reason, that"they have read _with astonishment their formal resolution_ to suspendthe execution of their orders; that they shall take such measures asappear necessary for _preserving the authority of the Court ofDirectors_, and for preventing _such instances of direct and wilful_disobedience in their servants in time to come. " They then renew theirdirections concerning Mr. Fowke. The event of this _sole_ measure takento preserve their authority, and to prevent instances of direct andwilful disobedience, your Committee will state in its properplace, --taking into consideration, for the present, the proceedingsrelative to Mr. Bristow, and to Mahomed Reza Khân, which werealtogether in the same spirit; but as they were diversified in thecircumstances of disobedience, as well from the case of Mr. Fowke asfrom one another, and as these circumstances tend to discover otherdangerous principles of abuse, and the general prostrate condition ofthe authority of Parliament in Bengal, your Committee proceed first tomake some observations upon them. 

The province of Oude, enlarged by the accession of several extensive andonce flourishing territories, that is, by the country of the Rohillas, the district of Corah and Allahabad, and other provinces betwixt theGanges and Jumna, is under the nominal dominion of one of the princes ofthe country, called Asoph ul Dowlah. But a body of English troops iskept up in his country; and the greatest part of his revenues are, byone description or another, substantially under the administration ofEnglish subjects. He is to all purposes a dependent prince. The personto be employed in his dominions to act for the Committee [Company?] wastherefore of little consequence in his capacity of negotiator; but hewas vested with a trust, great and critical, in all pecuniary affairs. These provinces of dependence lie out of the system of the Company'sordinary administration, and transactions there cannot be so readilybrought under the cognizance of the Court of Directors. This renders itthe more necessary that the Residents in such places should be personsnot disapproved of by the Court of Directors. They are to manage apermanent interest, which is not, like a matter of politicalnegotiation, variable, and which, from circumstances, might possiblyexcuse some degree of discretionary latitude in construing their orders. During the lifetime of General Clavering and Colonel Monson, Mr. Bristow was appointed to this Presidency, and that appointment, beingapproved and confirmed by the Court of Directors, became in effect theirown. Mr. Bristow appears to have shown himself a man of talents andactivity. He had been principally concerned in the negotiations by whichthe Company's interest in the higher provinces had been established; andthose services were considered by the Presidency of Calcutta as someritorious, that they voted him ten thousand pounds as a reward, withmany expressions of esteem and honor. 

Mr. Bristow, however, was recalled by Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell, whohad then acquired the majority, without any complaint having beenassigned as the cause of his removal, and Mr. Middleton was sent in hisstead to reside at the capital of Oude. The Court of Directors, as soonas they could be apprised of this extraordinary step, in their letter ofthe 4th of July, 1777, express their strongest disapprobation of it:they order Mr. Middleton to be recalled, and Mr. Bristow to bereinstated in his office. In December, 1778, they repeat their order. Ofthese repeated orders no notice was taken. Mr. Bristow, fatigued withunsuccessful private applications, which met with a constant refusal, did at length, on the 1st of May, 1780, address a letter to the board, making his claim of right, entitling himself to his offices [office?]under the authority of the Court of Directors, and complaining of thehardships which he suffered by the delay in admitting him to theexercise of it. This letter your Committee have inserted at large in theFifth Report, having found nothing whatsoever exceptionable in it, although it seems to have excited the warmest resentment in Mr. Hastings. 

This claim of the party gave no new force to the order of the Directors, which remained without any attention from the board from Mr. Bristow'sarrival until the 1st of May, and with as little from the 1st of May tothe 2nd of October following. On that day, Mr. Francis, after havingcaused the repeated orders of the Court of Directors to be first read, moved that Mr. Bristow should be reinstated in his office. This motion, in itself just and proper in the highest degree, and in which no faultcould be found, but that it was not made more early, was received by Mr. Hastings with the greatest marks of resentment and indignation. Hedeclares in his minute, that, "were the most determined adversary of theBritish nation to possess, by whatever means, a share in theadministration, he could not devise a measure in _itself_ so pernicious, or _time_ it so effectually for the _ruin_ of the British interests inIndia. " Then turning to the object of the motion, he says, "I will ask, Who is Mr. Bristow, that a member of the administration should, at sucha time, hold him forth, as _an instrument for the degradation of thefirst executive member of this government?_ What are the professedobjects of his appointment? What are the _merits_ and services, or whatthe _qualifications_, which entitle him to such uncommon distinction? Isit for his superior _integrity_, or from his eminent _abilities_, thathe is to be dignified at such hazard of every consideration that oughtto influence the members of this administration? Of the former (hisintegrity) I know _no proofs_; I am sure it is not an evidence of it, that he has been _enabled_ to make himself the principal in such a_competition:_ and for the test of his abilities I appeal to the letterwhich he has _dared_ to write to this board, and which I am ashamed tosay we have _suffered_. I desire that a copy of it may be inserted inthis day's proceedings, that it may stand before the eyes of everymember of the board, when he shall give his vote upon a question forgiving their confidence to a man, _their servant_, who has publiclyinsulted _them, his masters_, and the members of the government to whomhe owes _his obedience_, --who, assuming an association with the Court ofDirectors, and erecting himself into a _tribunal_, has _arraigned_ themfor _disobedience_ of orders, _passed judgment_ upon them, _andcondemned or acquitted them, as their magistrate or superior_. Let theboard consider, whether a man possessed of so _independent_ a spirit, who has already shown a _contempt_ of their authority, who has shownhimself _so wretched an advocate for his own cause and negotiator forhis own interest_, is fit to be trusted with the guardianship of _their_honor, the execution of _their_ measures, and as _their_ confidentialmanager and negotiator with the princes of India. As the motion has beenunaccompanied by any reasons which should induce the board to pass theiracquiescence in it, I presume the motion which preceded it, for _readingthe orders of the Court of Directors, was intended to serve as anargument for it, as well as an introduction to it_. The last of thosewas dictated the 23rd December, 1778, almost two years past. They weredictated at a time when, I am sorry to say, the Court of Directors werein _the habit of casting reproach upon my conduct and heapingindignities upon my station_. "

Had the language and opinions which prevail throughout this part of theminute, as well as in all the others to which your Committee refer, beenuttered suddenly and in a passion, however unprovoked, some sort ofapology might be made for the Governor-General. But when it was producedfive months after the supposed offence, and then delivered in writing, which always implies the power of a greater degree of recollection andself-command, it shows how deeply the principles of disobedience hadtaken root in his mind, and of an assumption to himself of exorbitantpowers, which he chooses to distinguish by the title of "_hisprerogative_. " In this also will be found an obscure hint of the causeof his disobedience, which your Committee conceive to allude to the maincause of the disorders in the government of India, --namely, an underhandcommunication with Europe. 

Mr. Hastings, by his confidence in the support derived from this source, or from the habits of independent power, is carried to such a length asto consider a motion to obey the Court of Directors as a degradation ofthe executive government in his person. He looks upon a claim under thatauthority, and a complaint that it has produced no effect, as a piece ofdaring insolence which he is ashamed that the board has suffered. Thebehavior which your Committee consider as so intemperate and despotic heregards as a culpable degree of patience and forbearance. Major Scott, his agent, enters so much into the principles of Mr. Hastings's conductas to tell your Committee that in his opinion Lord Clive would have senthome Mr. Bristow a prisoner upon such an occasion. It is worthy ofremark, that, in the very same breath that Mr. Hastings so heavilycondemns a junior officer in the Company's service (not a _servant_ ofthe Council, as he hazards to call him, but _their fellow-servant_) formerely complaining of a supposed injury and requiring redress, he so farforgets his own subordination as to reject the orders of the Court ofDirectors even as an _argument_ in favor of appointing a person to anoffice, to presume to censure _his_ undoubted masters, and to accusethem of having been "in a habit of casting reproaches upon him, andheaping indignities on _his_ station. " And it is to be observed, thatthis censure was not for the purpose of seeking or obtaining redress forany injury, but appeared rather as a reason for refusing to obey theirlawful commands. It is plainly implied in that minute, that no servantof the Company, in Mr. Bristow's rank, would dare to act in such amanner, if he had not by indirect means obtained a premature fortune. This alone is sufficient to show the situation of the Company's servantsin the subordinate situations, when the mere claim of a right, derivedfrom the sovereign legal power, becomes fatal not only to the objectswhich they pursue, but deeply wounds that reputation both for abilityand integrity by which alone they are to be qualified for any other. 

If anything could add to the disagreeable situation of those who aresubmitted to an authority conducted on such principles, it is this: TheCompany has ordered that no complaint shall be made in Europe againstany of the Council without being previously communicated to them: aregulation formed upon grave reasons; and it was certainly made in_favor_ of that board. But if a person, having ground of complaintagainst the Council, by making use of the mode prescribed in favor ofthat very Council, and by complaining to themselves, commits an offencefor which he may be justly punished, the Directors have not regulatedthe mode of complaint, they have actually forbidden it; they have, onthat supposition, renounced their authority; and the whole system oftheir officers is delivered over to the arbitrary will of a few of theirchief servants. 

During the whole day of that deliberation things wore a decided face. Mr. Hastings stood to his principles in their full extent, and seemedresolved upon unqualified disobedience. But as the debate was adjournedto the day following, time was given for expedients; and such anexpedient was hit upon by Mr. Hastings as will, no doubt, be unexpectedby the House; but it serves to throw new lights upon the motives of allhis struggles with the authority of the legislature. 

The next day the Council met upon the adjournment. Then Mr. Hastingsproposed, as a compromise, a division of the object in question. Onehalf was to be surrendered to the authority of the Court of Directors, the other was reserved for his dignity. But the choice he made of hisown share in this partition is very worthy of notice. He had taken his_sole_ ground of objection against Mr. Bristow on the supposed illeffect that such an appointment would have on the minds of the Indianpowers. He said, "that these powers could have no dependence on hisfulfilling his engagements, _or maintaining the faith of treaties_ whichhe might offer for their acceptance, if they saw him treated with suchcontempt. " Mr. Bristow's appearing in a political character was the_whole_ of his complaint; yet, when he comes to a voluntary distributionof the duties of the office, he gives Mr. Bristow those very politicalnegotiations of which but the day before he had in such strong termsdeclared him personally incapable, whose appointment he considered to befatal to those negotiations, and which he then spoke of as a measure in_itself_ such as the bitterest adversary to Great Britain would haveproposed. But having thus yielded his whole ground of ostensibleobjection, he reserved to his own appointment the entire management ofthe pecuniary trust. Accordingly he named Mr. Bristow for the former, and Mr. Middleton for the latter. On his own principles he ought to havedone the very reverse. On every justifiable principle he ought to havedone so; for a servant who for a long time resists the orders of hismasters, and when he reluctantly gives way obeys them by halves, oughtto be remarkably careful to make his actions correspond with his words, and to put himself out of all suspicion with regard to the purity of hismotives. It was possible that the political reasons, which were solelyassigned against Mr. Bristow's appointment, might have been the realmotives of Mr. Hastings's opposition. But these he totally abandons, andholds fast to the pecuniary department. Now, as it is notorious thatmost of the abuses of India grow out of money-dealing, it was peculiarlyunfit for a servant, delicate with regard to his reputation, to requirea _personal_ and confidential agent in a situation merely official, inwhich secrecy and personal connections could be of no possible use, andcould only serve to excite distrust. Matters of account cannot be madetoo public; and it is not the most confidential agent, but the mostresponsible, who is the fittest for the management of pecuniary trusts. That man was the fittest at once to do the duty, and to remove allsuspicions from the Governor-General's character, whom, by not being ofhis appointment, he could not be supposed to favor for private purposes, who must naturally stand in awe of his inspection, and whose misconductcould not possibly be imputable to him. Such an agency in a pecuniarytrust was the very last on which Mr. Hastings ought to have risked hisdisobedience to the orders of the Direction, --or, what is even worse forhis motives, a direct contradiction to all the principles upon which hehad attempted to justify that bold measure. 

The conduct of Mr. Hastings in the affair of Mahomed Reza Khân was anact of disobedience of the same character, but wrought by otherinstruments. When the Duanné (or universal perception, and management ofthe revenues) of Bengal was acquired to the Company, together with thecommand of the army, the Nabob, or governor, naturally fell into therank rather of a subject than that even of a dependent prince. Yet thepreservation of such a power in such a degree of subordination, with thecriminal jurisdiction, and the care of the public order annexed to it, was a wise and laudable policy. It preserved a portion of the governmentin the hands of the natives; it kept them in respect; it rendered themquiet on the change; and it prevented that vast kingdom from wearing thedangerous appearance, and still more from sinking into the terriblestate, of a country of conquest. Your Committee has already reported themanner in which the Company (it must be allowed, upon pretences thatwill not bear the slightest examination) diverted from its purposes agreat part of the revenues appropriated to the country government; butthey were very properly anxious that what remained should be welladministered. In the lifetime of General Clavering and Colonel Monson, Mahomed Reza Khân, a man of rank among the natives, was judged by themthe fittest person to conduct the affairs of the Nabob, as his Naib, ordeputy: an office well known in the ancient constitution of theseprovinces, at a time when the principal magistrates, by nature andsituation, were more efficient. This appointment was highly approved, and in consequence confirmed, by the Court of Directors. Mr. Hastingsand Mr. Barwell, however, thought proper to remove him. To the authorityof the Court of Directors they opposed the request of the Nabob, statingthat he was arrived at the common age of maturity, and stood _in no needof a deputy to manage his affairs_. On former occasions Mr. Hastingsconceived a very low opinion of the condition of the person whom he thusset up against the authority of his masters. "On a former occasion, " asthe Directors tell him, "and to serve a very different purpose, he hadnot scrupled to declare it as visible as the sun that the Nabob was amere pageant, without even _the shadow of authority_. " But on thisoccasion he became more substantial. Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwellyielded to his representation that a deputy was not necessary, andaccordingly Mahomed Reza Khân was removed from his office. 

However, lest any one should so far mistrust their understanding as toconceive them the dupes of this pretext, they who had disobeyed theCompany's orders under color that _no deputy was necessary_ immediatelyappoint another deputy. This independent prince, who, as Mr. Hastingssaid, "had an incontestable right to his situation, and that it was hisby inheritance, " suddenly shrunk into his old state of insignificance, and was even looked upon in so low a light as to receive a severereprimand from Mr. Hastings for _interposing_ in the duties of his (thedeputy's) office. 

The Company's orders, censuring this transaction in the strongest terms, and ordering Mahomed Reza Khân to be immediately restored to the officeof Naib Subahdar, were received in Calcutta in November, 1779. Mr. Hastings acted on this with the firmness which he had shown on otheroccasions; but in his principles he went further. Thinking himselfassured of some extraordinary support, suitable to the open anddetermined defiance with which he was resolved to oppose the lawfulauthority of his superiors, and to exercise a despotic power, he nolonger adhered to Mr. Barwell's distinction of the orders which had atendency to bring his government into disrepute. This distinctionafforded sufficient latitude to disobedience; but here he disdained allsorts of colors and distinctions. He directly set up an independentright to administer the government according to his pleasure; and hewent so far as to bottom his claim to act independently of the Court ofDirectors on the very statute which commanded his obedience to them. 

He declared roundly, "that he should _not_ yield to the authority of theCourt of Directors in _any_ instance in which it should require hisconcession of the rights which he held under an act of Parliament. " Itis too clear to stand in need of proof, that he neither did or couldhold any authority that was not subject, in every particle of it, and inevery instance in which it could be exercised, to the orders of theCourt of Directors. 

He therefore refused to back the Company's orders with any requisitionfrom himself to the Nabob, but merely suffered them to be transmitted tohim, leaving it to him to do just as he thought proper. The Nabob, whocalled Mr. Hastings "his patron, and declared he would never do anythingwithout his consent and approbation, " perfectly understood this kind ofsignification. For the second time the Nabob recovered from his tranceof pageantry and insignificance, and collected courage enough to writeto the Council in these terms: "I administer the affairs of the Nizamut, (the government, ) which are the affairs of _my own family_, by _my ownauthority_, and shall do so; and I never can _on any account agree_ tothe appointment of the Nabob Mahomed Reza Khân to the Naib Subahship. "Here was a second independent power in Bengal. This answer from thatpower proved as satisfactory as it was resolute. No further notice wastaken of the orders of the Court of Directors, and Mahomed Reza Khânfound their protection much more of a shadow than the pageant of powerof which he aspired to be the representative. 

This act of disobedience differs from the others in one particularwhich, in the opinion of your Committee, rather aggravates thanextenuates the offence. In the others, Messrs. Hastings and Barwell tookthe responsibility on themselves; here they held up the pretext of thecountry government. However, they obtained thereby one of the objectswhich they appear to have systematically pursued. As they had in theother instances shown to the British servants of the Company that theDirectors were not able to protect them, here the same lesson was taughtto the natives. Whilst the matter lay between the native power and theservants, the former was considered by Mr. Hastings in the mostcontemptible light. When the question was between the servants and theCourt of Directors, the native power was asserted to be a self-derived, hereditary, uncontrollable authority, and encouraged to act as such. 

In this manner the authority of the British legislature was at that timetreated with every mark of reprobation and contempt. But soon after amost unexpected change took place, by which the persons in whose favorthe Court of Directors had in vain interposed obtained specific objectswhich had been refused to them; things were, however, so well contrived, that legal authority was nearly as much affronted by the apparentcompliance with their orders as by the real resistance they had beforemet with. After long and violent controversies, an agreement took placebetween Mr. Hastings and Mr. Francis. It appears that Mr. Hastings, embarrassed with the complicated wars and ruinous expenses into whichhis measures had brought him, began to think of procuring peace at home. The agreement originated in a conversation held on Christmas-Day, 1779, between Major Scott, then aide-de-camp, and now agent, to Mr. Hastings, and Mr. Ducarrel, a gentleman high in the Company's service at Calcutta. Mr. Scott, in consequence of this conversation, was authorized to makeovertures to Mr. Francis through Mr. Ducarrel: to declare Mr. Hastingstired of controversy; expressing his wish to have the Mahratta warentirely left to him; that there were certain points _he could not giveup_; that he could _not_ (for reasons he then assigned) _submit_ to therestoration of Mr. Fowke, Mahomed Reza Khân, and Mr. Bristow; that _hehad not the smallest personal objection to them_, and would willinglyprovide for them in any other line. Mr. Francis in this treaty insistedon those very points which Mr. Hastings declared he could never give up, and that his conditions were the Company's orders, --that is, therestoration of the persons whom they had directed to be restored. Theevent of this negotiation was, that Mr. Hastings at length submitted toMr. Francis, and that Mr. Fowke and Mahomed Reza Khân were reinstated intheir situations. 

Your Committee observe on this part of the transaction of Mr. Hastings, that as long as the question stood upon his obedience to his lawfulsuperiors, so long he considered the restoration of these persons as agross indignity, the submitting to which would destroy all his creditand influence in the country; but when it was to accommodate his ownoccasions in a treaty with a fellow-servant, all these difficultiesinstantly vanish, and he finds it perfectly consistent with his dignity, credit, and influence, to do for Mr. Francis what he had refused to thestrict and reiterated injunctions of the Court of Directors. Tranquillity was, however, for a time restored by this measure, thoughit did not continue long. In about three months an occasion occurred inwhich Mr. Francis gave some opposition to a measure proposed by Mr. Hastings, which brought on a duel, upon the mischievous effects of whichyour Committee have already made their observations. 

The departure of Mr. Francis soon after for Europe opened a new scene, and gave rise to a third revolution. Lest the arrangement with theservants of the Company should have the least appearance of beingmistaken for obedience to their superiors, Mr. Francis was little morethan a month gone, when Mr. Fowke was again recalled from Benares, _andMr. Bristow soon after from Oude_. In these measures Mr. Hastings hascombined the principles of disobedience which he had used in all thecases hitherto stated. In his Minute of Consultation on this recall herefers to his former Minutes; and he adds, that he has "a recent motivein the necessity of removing any circumstance which may contribute tolessen his _influence_ in the effect of any negotiations in which he maybe engaged in the prosecution of his intended visit to Lucknow. " He herereverts to his old plea of preserving his influence; not content withthis, as in the case of Mahomed Reza Khân he had called in the aid ofthe Nabob of Bengal, he here calls in the aid of the Nabob of Oude, who, on reasons exactly tallying with those given by Mr. Hastings, desiresthat Mr. Bristow may be removed. The true weight of these requisitionswill appear, if not sufficiently apparent from the known situation ofthe parties, by the following extract of a letter from this Nabob ofOude to his agent at Calcutta, desiring him to acquaint Mr. Hastings, that, "if it is proper, I will write to the king [of Great Britain], andthe vizier [one of his Majesty's ministers], and the chief of theCompany, _in such a manner as he shall direct, and in the words that heshall order_, that Mr. Bristow's views may be thwarted there. " There isno doubt of the entire coöperation of the Nabob Asoph ul Dowlah in allthe designs of Mr. Hastings, and in thwarting the views of any personswho place their reliance on the authority of this kingdom. 

As usual, the Court of Directors appear in their proper order in theprocession. After this third act of disobedience with regard to thesame person and the same office, and after calling the proceedingsunwarrantable, "_in order to vindicate and uphold their own authority, and thinking it a duty incumbent on them to maintain the authority ofthe Court of Directors_, " they again order Mr. Bristow to be reinstated, and Mr. Middleton to be recalled: in this circle the whole moves withgreat regularity. 

The extraordinary operations of Mr. Hastings, that soon after followedin every department which was the subject of all these acts ofdisobedience, have made them appear in a light peculiarly unpropitiousto his cause. It is but too probable, from his own accounts, that hemeditated some strong measure, both at Benares and at Oude, at the verytime of the removal of those officers. He declares he knew that hisconduct in those places was such as to lie very open to maliciousrepresentations; he must have been sensible that he was open to suchrepresentations from the beginning; he was therefore impelled by everymotive which ought to influence a man of sense by no means to disturbthe order which he had last established. 

Of this, however, he took no care; but he was not so inattentive to thesatisfaction of the sufferers, either in point of honor or of interest. This was most strongly marked in the case of Mr. Fowke. His reparationto that gentleman, in point of honor, is as full as possible. Mr. Hastings "declared, that he approved his character and his conduct inoffice, and believed that he might _depend_ upon _his exact and literalobedience and fidelity_ in the execution of the functions annexed toit. " Such is the character of the man whom Mr. Hastings a second timeremoved from the office to which he told the Court of Directors, in hisletter of the 3rd of March, 1780, he had appointed him in conformity totheir orders. On the 14th of January, 1781, he again finds it anindispensable obligation in him to exercise powers "_inherent_ in theconstitution of his government. " On this principle he claimed "the rightof nominating the agent of his own choice to the Residence of Benares;that it is a representative situation: that, speaking for myself_alone_, it may be _sufficient_ to say, that Mr. Francis Fowke is not_my_ agent; _that I cannot give him my confidence_; that, while hecontinues at Benares, he stands as a screen between the Rajah and thisgovernment, instead of an instrument of control; that the Rajah himself, and every chief in Hindostan, will regard it as the pledge andfoundation of his independence. " Here Mr. Hastings has got back to hisold principles, where he takes post as on strong ground. This hedeclares "to be his objection to Mr. Fowke, and that it is insuperable. "The very line before this paragraph he writes of this person, to whom he_could_ not give his _confidence_, that "he believed he might _depend_upon _his fidelity_, and his exact and literal obedience. " Mr. Scott, who is authorized to defend Mr. Hastings, supported the same principlesbefore your Committee by a comparison that avowedly reduces the Court ofDirectors to the state of a party against their servants. He declared, that, in his opinion, "it would be just as _absurd_ to _deprive him_ ofthe power of nominating his ambassador at Benares as it would be toforce on _the ministry_ of this country an ambassador from _theopposition_. " Such is the opinion entertained in Bengal, and that buttoo effectually realized, of the relation between the principal servantsof the Company and the Court of Directors. 

So far the reparation, in point of honor, to Mr. Fowke was complete. Thereparation in point of interest your Committee do not find to have beenequally satisfactory; but they do find it to be of the mostextraordinary nature, and of the most mischievous example. Mr. Fowke hadbeen deprived of a place of rank and honor, --the place of a public_Vackeel_, or representative. The recompense provided for him is asuccession to a contract. Mr. Hastings moved, that, on the expiration ofColonel Morgan's contract, he should be appointed agent to all the boatsemployed for the military service of that establishment, with acommission of _fifteen per cent on all disbursements in thatoffice_, --permitting Mr. Fowke, at the same time, to draw his allowanceof an hundred pounds a month, as Resident, until the expiration of thecontract, and for three months after. 

Mr. Hastings is himself struck, as every one must be, with soextraordinary a proceeding, the principle of which, he observes, "isliable to _one_ material objection. " That one is material indeed; for, no limit being laid down for the expense in which the percentage is toarise, it is the direct interest of the person employed to make hisdepartment as expensive as possible. To this Mr. Hastings answers, that"he is convinced by experience it will be better performed"; and yet heimmediately after subjoins, "This _defect_ can _only_ be corrected bythe probity of the person intrusted with so important a charge; and I amwilling to have it understood, as a proof of _the confidence I repose inMr. Fowke_, that I have proposed his appointment, in opposition _to ageneral principle_, to a trust so constituted. "

In the beginning of this very Minute of Consultation, Mr. Hastingsremoves Mr. Fowke from the Residency of Benares because "he cannot givehim his confidence"; and yet, before the pen is out of his hand, heviolates one of the soundest general principles in the whole system ofdealing, in order to give a proof of the confidence he reposes in thatgentleman. This apparent gross contradiction is to be reconciled but byone way, --which is, that confidence with Mr. Hastings comes and goeswith his opposition to legal authority. Where that authority recommendsany person, his confidence in him vanishes; but to show that it is theauthority, and not the person, he opposes, when that is out of sight, there is no rule so sacred which is not to be violated to manifest hisreal esteem and perfect trust in the person whom he has rejected. However, by overturning general principles to compliment Mr. Fowke'sintegrity, he does all in his power to corrupt it; at the same time heestablishes an example that must either subject all future dealings tothe same pernicious clause, or which, being omitted, must become astrong implied charge on the integrity of those who shall hereafter beexcluded from a trust so constituted. 

It is not foreign to the object of your Committee, in this part of theirobservations, which relates to the obedience to orders, to remark uponthe manner in which the orders of the Court of Directors with regard tothis kind of dealing in contracts are observed. These orders relate tocontracts; and they contain two standing regulations. 

1st, That all contracts shall be publicly advertised, and that the mostreasonable proposals shall be accepted. 

2ndly, That two contracts, those of provisions and for carriagebullocks, shall be only annual. 

These orders are undoubtedly some correctives to the abuses which mayarise in this very critical article of public dealing. But the Housewill remark, that, if the business usually carried on by contracts canbe converted at pleasure into agencies, like that of Mr. Fowke, allthese regulations perish of course, and there is no direction whatsoeverfor restraining the most prodigal and corrupt bargains for the public. 

Your Committee have inquired into the observance of these necessaryregulations, and they find that they have, like the rest, been entirelycontemned, and contemned with entire impunity. After the period ofColonel Monson's death, and Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell obtaining thelead in the Council, the contracts were disposed of without at alladvertising for proposals. Those in 1777 were given for three years; andthe gentlemen in question growing by habit and encouragement into moreboldness, in 1779 the contracts were disposed of for five years: andthis they did at the eve of the expiration of their own appointment tothe government. This increase in the length of the contracts, thoughcontrary to orders, might have admitted some excuse, if it had beenmade, even in appearance, the means of lessening the expense. But theadvantages allowed to the contractors, instead of being diminished, wereenlarged, and in a manner far beyond the proportion of the enlargementof terms. Of this abuse and contempt of orders a judgment may be formedby the single contract for supplying the army with draught and carriagebullocks. As it stood at the expiration of the contract in 1779, theexpense of that service was about one thousand three hundred pounds amonth. By the new contract, given away in September of that year, theservice was raised to the enormous sum of near six thousand pounds amonth. The monthly increase, therefore, being four thousand sevenhundred pounds, it constitutes a total increase of charges for theCompany, in the five years of the contract, of no less a sum than twohundred and thirty-five thousand pounds. Now, as the former contractwas, without doubt, sufficiently advantageous, a judgment may be formedof the extravagance of the present. The terms, indeed, pass the boundsof all allowance for negligence and ignorance of office. 

The case of Mr. Belli's contract for supplying provisions to the Fort isof the same description; and what exceedingly increases the suspicionagainst this profusion, in contracts made in direct violation of orders, is, that they are always found to be given in favor of persons closelyconnected with Mr. Hastings in his family, or even in his actualservice. 

The principles upon which Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell justify thisdisobedience, if admitted, reduce the Company's government, so far as itregards the Supreme Council, to a mere patronage, --to a mere power ofnominating persons to or removing them from an authority which, is notonly despotic with regard to those who are subordinate to it, but in allits acts entirely independent of the legal power which is nominallysuperior. These are principles directly leading to the destruction ofthe Company's government. A correspondent practice being established, (as in this case of contracts, as well as others, it has been, ) themeans are furnished of effectuating this purpose: for the commonsuperior, the Company, having no power to regulate or to support theirown appointments, nor to remove those whom they wish to remove, nor toprevent the contracts from being made use of against their interest, allthe English in Bengal must naturally look to the next in authority; theymust depend upon, follow, and attach themselves to him solely; and thusa party may be formed of the whole system of civil and military servantsfor the support of the subordinate, and defiance of the supreme power. 

Your Committee being led to attend to the abuse of contracts, which aregiven upon principles fatal to the subordination of the service, and indefiance of orders, revert to the disobedience of orders in the case ofMahomed Reza Khân. 

This transaction is of a piece with those that preceded it. On the 6thof July, 1781, Mr. Hastings announced to the board the arrival of amessenger and introduced a requisition from the young Nabob Mobarek ulDowlah, "that he might be _permitted to dispose of his own stipend, without being made to depend on the will of another_. " In favor of thisrequisition Mr. Hastings urged various arguments:--that the Nabob couldno longer be deemed a minor;--that he was twenty-six years of age, andfather of many children;--that his understanding was much improved _oflate_ by an attention to his education;--that these circumstances gavehim a claim to the uncontrolled exercise of domestic authority; and itmight reasonably be supposed that he would pay a greater regard to ajust economy in his own family than had been observed by those who werealiens to it. For these reasons Mr. Hastings recommended to the boardthat Mahomed Reza Khân should be immediately divested of the office ofsuperintendent of the Nabob's household, _and that the Nabob Mobarek ulDowlah should be intrusted with the exclusive and entire receipts anddisbursements of his stipend, and the uncontrolled management andregulation of his household_. Thus far your Committee are of opinion, that the conclusion corresponds with the premises; for, supposing thefact to be established or admitted, that the Nabob, in point of age, capacity, and judgment, was qualified to act for himself, it seemsreasonable that the management of his domestic affairs should not bewithheld from him. On this part of the proceeding your Committee willonly observe, that, if it were strictly true that the Nabob'sunderstanding had been much improved _of late_ by an attention to hiseducation, (which seems an extraordinary way of describing thequalifications of a man of six-and-twenty, the father of many children, )the merit of such improvement must be attributed to Mahomed Reza Khân, who was the only person of rank and character connected with him, or whocould be supposed to have any influence over him. Mr. Hastings himselfreproaches the Nabob with _raising mean men to be his companions_, andtells him plainly, _that some persons, both of bad character and baseorigin, had found the means of insinuating themselves into his companyand constant fellowship_. In such society it is not likely that eitherthe Nabob's morals or his understanding could have been _much improved_;nor could it be deemed prudent to leave him without any check upon hisconduct. Mr. Hastings's opinion on this point may be collected from whathe did, but by no means from what he said, on the occasion. 

The House will naturally expect to find that the Nabob's request wasgranted, and that the resolution of the board was conformable to theterms of Mr. Hastings's recommendation. Yet the fact is directly thereverse. Mr. Hastings, after advising _that the Nabob should beintrusted with the exclusive and entire receipts and disbursements ofhis stipend_, immediately corrects that advice, _being aware that sosudden and unlimited a disposal of a large revenue might at firstencourage a spirit of dissipation in the Nabob_, --and reserves to_himself_ a power of establishing, _with the Nabob's consent_, such aplan for the regulation and equal distribution of the Nabob's expenses_as should be adapted to the dissimilar appearances of preserving hisinterests and his independence at the same time_. On the samecomplicated principles the subsequent resolution of the board professesto allow the Nabob the management of his stipend and expenses, --with _anhope_, however, (which, considering the relative situation of theparties, could be nothing less than an injunction, ) that he would submitto such a plan _as should be agreed on between him_ and theGovernor-General. 

The drift of these contradictions is sufficiently apparent. Mahomed RezaKhân was to be divested of his office at all events, and the managementof the Nabob's stipend committed to other hands. To accomplish thefirst, the Nabob is said to be "now arrived at that time of life when aman may be supposed capable, _if ever_, of managing his own concerns. "When this principle has answered the momentary purpose for which it wasproduced, we find it immediately discarded, and an opposite resolutionformed on an opposite principle, viz. , that he shall _not_ have themanagement of his own concerns, _in consideration of his want ofexperience_. 

Mr. Hastings, on his arrival at Moorshedabad, gives Mr. Wheler anaccount of his interview with the Nabob, and of the Nabob's implicitsubmission to his advice. The principal, if not the sole, object of thewhole operation appears from the result of it. Sir John D'Oyly, agentleman in whom Mr. Hastings places particular confidence, succeeds tothe office of Mahomed Reza Khân, and to the same control over theNabob's expenses. Into the hands of this gentleman the Nabob's stipendwas _to be immediately paid, as every intermediate channel would be anunavoidable cause of delay_; and to _his_ advice the Nabob was requiredto give the same attention as if it were given by Mr. Hastings himself. One of the conditions prescribed to the Nabob was, that he should admitno Englishman to his presence without previously consulting Sir JohnD'Oyly; _and he must forbid any person of that nation to be intrudedwithout his introduction_. On these arrangements it need only beobserved, that a measure which sets out with professing to relieve theNabob from a state of _perpetual pupilage_ concludes with delivering notonly his fortune, but his person, to the custody of a particular friendof Mr. Hastings. 

The instructions given to the Nabob contain other passages that meritattention. In one place Mr. Hastings tells him, "You have offered togive up the sum of four lacs of rupees to be allowed the free use of theremainder; but this we have refused. " In another he says, that, "_asmany matters will occur which cannot be so easily explained by letter asby conversation_, I desire that you will on such occasions give yourorders to Sir John D'Oyly respecting such points as you may desire tohave imparted to _me_. " The offer alluded to in the first passage doesnot appear in the Nabob's letters, therefore must have been inconversation, and declined by Mr. Hastings without consulting hiscolleague. A refusal of it might have been proper; but it supposes adegree of incapacity in the Nabob not to be reconciled to the principleson which Mahomed Reza Khân was removed from the management of hisaffairs. Of the matters alluded to in the second, and which, it is said, _could not be so easily explained by letters as in conversation_, noexplanation is given. Your Committee will therefore leave them, as Mr. Hastings has done, to the opinion of the House. 

As soon as the Nabob's requisition was communicated to the board, it wasmoved and resolved that Mahomed Reza Khân should be divested of hisoffice; and the House have seen in what manner it was disposed of. TheNabob had stated various complaints against him:--that he had dismissedthe old established servants of the Nizamut, and filled their placeswith his own dependants;--that he had _regularly received_ the stipendof the Nizamut from the Company, yet had kept the Nabob involved in debtand distress, and exposed to the clamors of his creditors, and sometimeseven in want of a dinner. All these complaints were recorded at large inthe proceedings of the Council; but it does not appear that they wereever communicated to Mahomed Reza Khân, or that he was ever called upon, in any shape, to answer them. This circumstance inclines your Committeeto believe that all of these charges were groundless, --especially as itappears on the face of the proceedings, that the chief of them were notwell founded. Mr. Hastings, in his letter to Mr. Wheler, urges theabsolute necessity of the monthly payment of the Nabob's stipend _beingregularly made_, and says, that, to relieve the Nabob's present wants, he had directed the Resident to raise an immediate supply on the creditof the Company, to be repaid from the first receipts. From hence yourCommittee conclude that the monthly payments had _not_ been regularlymade, and that whatever distresses the Nabob might have suffered musthave been owing to the Governor-General and Council, not to Mahomed RezaKhân, who, for aught that appears to the contrary, paid away the stipendas fast as he received it. Had it been otherwise, that is, if MahomedReza Khân had reserved a balance of the Nabob's money in his hands, heshould, and undoubtedly he would, have been called upon to pay it in;and then there would have been no necessity for raising an immediatesupply by other means. 

The transaction, on the whole, speaks very sufficiently for itself. Itis a gross instance of repeated disobedience to repeated orders; and itis rendered particularly offensive to the authority of the Court ofDirectors by the frivolous and contradictory reasons assigned for it. But whether the Nabob's requisition was reasonable or not, theGovernor-General and Council were precluded by a special instructionfrom complying with it. The Directors, in their letter of the 14th ofFebruary, 1779, declare, that a resolution of Council, (taken by Mr. Francis and Mr. Wheler, in the absence of Mr. Barwell, ) viz. , "that theNabob's letter should be referred to _them_ for _their_ decision, andthat no resolution should be taken in Bengal on his requisitions withouttheir special orders and instructions, " was very proper. They prudentlyreserved to themselves the right of deciding on such questions; butthey reserved it to no purpose. In England the authority is purelyformal. In Bengal the power is positive and real. When they clash, theiropposition serves only to degrade the authority that ought topredominate, and to exalt the power that ought to be dependent. 

 * * * * *

Since the closing of the above Report, many material papers have arrivedfrom India, and have been laid before your Committee. That which theythink it most immediately necessary to annex to the Appendix to thisReport is the resolution of the Council-General to allow to the membersof the Board of Trade resident in Calcutta a charge of five per cent onthe sale in England of the investment formed upon their second plan, namely, that plan which had been communicated to Lord Macartney. Theinvestment on this plan is stated to be raised from 800, 000_l. _ to1, 000, 000_l. _ sterling. 

It is on all accounts a very memorable transaction, and tends to bringon a heavy burden, operating in the nature of a tax laid by their ownauthority on the goods of their masters in England. If such acompensation to the Board of Trade was necessary on account of theirengagement to take no further (that is to say, no unlawful) emolument, it implies that the practice of making such unlawful emolument hadformerly existed; and your Committee think it very extraordinary thatthe first notice the Company had received of such a practice should bein taxing them for a compensation for a partial abolition of it, securedon the parole of honor of those very persons who are supposed to havebeen guilty of this unjustifiable conduct. Your Committee consider thisengagement, if kept, as only a partial abolition of the implied corruptpractice: because no part of the compensation is given to the members ofthe Board of Trade who reside at the several factories, though theirmeans of abuse are without all comparison greater; and if the corruptionwas supposed so extensive as to be bought off at that price where themeans were fewer, the House will judge how far the tax has purchased offthe evil. 

FOOTNOTES:

[1] See the Secret Committee's Reports on the Mahratta War. 

[2] Vide Secret Committee Reports. 

[3] Vide Select Committee Reports, 1781

[4] The sale, to the amount of about one hundred thousand poundsannually, of the export from Great Britain ought to be deducted fromthis million. 

[5] Estimate of the Sale Amount and Net Proceeds in England of theCargoes to be sent from Bengal, agreeable to the Plan received by Letterdated the 8th April, 1782. 

This calculation supposes the eighty lac investments will be equal tothe tonnage of five ships. 

[B] 2. To custom £320, 000 |[A] 1. By sale amount of[C] 3. " freight 200, 000 | piece-goods and[D] 4. " 5 per cent duty on | raw silk £1, 300, 000 £1, 300, 000 65, 000 | Discount 61/2 per[E] 5. " 2 do. Warehouse | cent allowed the room do. 26, 000 | buyers 84, 500 7 do. Commission | on £604, 500 42, 315 | ---------- | £653, 315 |[F] 6. " Balance 562, 185 | ---------- | ---------- £1, 215, 500 | £1, 215, 500

[A] 1. The sale amount is computed on an average of the sales of the twolast years' imports. 

[B] 2. The custom is computed on an average of what was paid onpiece-goods and raw silk of said imports, adding additional imposts. 

[C] 3. The ships going out of this season, (1782, ) by which the aboveinvestment is expected to be sent home, are taken up at 47_l. _ 5_s. _ perton, for the homeward cargo; this charge amounts to 35, 815_l. _ eachship; the additional wages to the men, which the Company pay, and a verysmall charge for demurrage, will increase the freight, &c. , to40, 000_l. _ per ship, agreeable to above estimate. 

[D] 4. The duty of five per cent is charged by the Company on the grosssale amount of all private trade licensed to be brought from India: theamount of this duty is the only benefit the Company are likely toreceive from the subscription investment. 

[E] 5. This charge is likewise made on private trade goods, and islittle, if anything, more than the real expense the Company are at onaccount of the same; therefore no benefit will probably arise to theCompany from it on the sale of the said investment. 

[F] 6. This is the sum which will probably be realized in England, andis only equal to 1_s. _ 6_d. _ per rupee, on the eighty lacs subscribed. 

[6] Vide Mr. Francis's plan in Appendix, No. 14, to the SelectCommittee's Sixth Report. 

[7] The whole sum has not been actually raised; but the deficiency isnot very considerable. 

[8] Fourth Report, page 106. 

[9] Par. 36. Vide Fourth Report from Com. Of Secrecy in 1773, Appendix, No. 45. 

[10] Vide Sel. Letter to Bengal, 17 May, 1766, Par. 36, in Fourth Reportfrom Com. Of Secrecy, in 1773, Appendix, No. 45. 

[11] Ibid. Par. 37. 

[12] Vide Committee's Fifth Report, page 21, and Appendix to thatReport, No. 12. 

[13] 1st and 5th April, 1779. 

ELEVENTH REPORT

OF THE

SELECT COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

ON

THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 

WITH EXTRACTS FROM THE APPENDIX. 

November 18, 1783. 

ELEVENTH REPORT

 From the SELECT COMMITTEE appointed to take into consideration the state of the administration of justice in the provinces of Bengal, Bahar, and Orissa, and to report the same, as it shall appear to them, to the House, with their observations thereupon; and who were instructed to consider how the British possessions in the East Indies may be held and governed with the greatest security and advantage to this country, and by what means the happiness of the native inhabitants may be best protected. 

Your Committee, in the course of their inquiry into the obedienceyielded by the Company's Servants to the orders of the Court ofDirectors, (the authority of which orders had been strengthened by theRegulating Act of 1773, ) could not overlook one of the most essentialobjects of that act and of those orders, namely, _the taking of giftsand presents_. These pretended free gifts from the natives to theCompany's servants in power had never been authorized by law; they arecontrary to the covenants formerly entered into by the President andCouncil, they are strictly forbidden by the act of Parliament, andforbidden upon grounds of the most substantial policy. 

Before the Regulating Act of 1773, the allowances made by the Company tothe Presidents of Bengal were abundantly sufficient to guaranty themagainst anything like a necessity for giving into that perniciouspractice. The act of Parliament which appointed a Governor-General inthe place of a President, as it was extremely particular in enforcingthe prohibition of those presents, so it was equally careful in makingan ample provision for supporting the dignity of the office, in order toremove all excuse for a corrupt increase of its emoluments. 

Although evidence on record, as well as verbal testimony, has appearedbefore your Committee of presents to a large amount having been receivedby Mr. Hastings and others before the year 1775, they were not able tofind distinct traces of that practice in him or any one else for a fewyears. 

The inquiries set on foot in Bengal, by order of the Court of Directors, in 1775, with regard to all corrupt practices, and the vigor with whichthey were for some time pursued, might have given a temporary check tothe receipt of presents, or might have produced a more effectualconcealment of them, and afterwards the calamities which befell almostall who were concerned in the first discoveries did probably prevent anyfurther complaint upon the subject; but towards the close of the lastsession your Committee have received much of new and alarminginformation concerning that abuse. 

The first traces appeared, though faintly and obscurely, in a letter tothe Court of Directors from the Governor-General, Mr. Hastings, writtenon the 29th of November, 1780. [14] It has been stated in a former Reportof your Committee, [15] that on the 26th of June, 1780, Mr. Hastingsbeing very earnest in the prosecution of a particular operation in theMahratta war, in order to remove objections to that measure, which weremade on account of the expense of the contingencies, he offered to_exonerate_ the Company from that "charge. " Continuing his Minute ofCouncil, he says, "That sum" (a sum of about 23, 000_l. _) "I have alreadydeposited, within a small amount, in the hands of the sub-treasurer; andI _beg_ that the board will _permit_ it to be accepted for thatservice. " Here he offers in his own person; he deposits, or pretendsthat he deposits, in his own person; and, with the zeal of a man eagerto pledge his private fortune in support of his measures, he prays thathis offer may be accepted. Not the least hint that he was deliveringback to the Company money of their own, which he had secreted from them. Indeed, no man ever made it a request, much less earnestly entreated, "begged to be permitted, " to pay to any persons, public or private, money that was their own. 

It appeared to your Committee that the money offered for that service, which was to forward the operations of a detachment under Colonel Camacin an expedition against one of the Mahratta chiefs, was not accepted. And your Committee, having directed search to be made for any sums ofmoney paid into the Treasury by Mr. Hastings for this service, found, that, notwithstanding his assertion of having deposited "two lacs ofrupees, or within a trifle of that sum, in the hands of thesub-treasurer, " no entry whatsoever of that or any other payment by theGovernor-General was made in the Treasury accounts at or about thattime. [16] This circumstance appeared very striking to your Committee, asthe non-appearance in the Company's books of the article in questionmust be owing to one or other of these four causes:--That the assertionof Mr. Hastings, of his having paid in near two lacs of rupees at thattime, was not true; or that the sub-treasurer may receive great sums indeposit without entering them in the Company's Treasury accounts; orthat the Treasury books themselves are records not to be depended on;or, lastly, that faithful copies of these books of accounts are nottransmitted to Europe. The defect of an entry corresponding with Mr. Hastings's declaration in Council can be attributed only to one of thesefour causes, --of which the want of foundation in his recorded assertion, though very blamable, is the least alarming. 

On the 29th of November following, Mr. Hastings communicated to theCourt of Directors some sort of notice of this transaction. [17] In hisletter of that date he varies in no small degree the aspect under whichthe business appeared in his Minute of Consultation of the 26th of June. In his letter he says to the Directors, "The subject is now becomeobsolete; the fair hopes which I had built upon the prosecution of theMahratta war have been blasted by the dreadful calamities which havebefallen your Presidency of Fort St. George, and changed the object ofour pursuit from the _aggrandizement_ of your power to itspreservation. " After thus confessing, or rather boasting, of his motivesto the Mahratta war, he proceeds: "My present reason for reverting to myown conduct on the occasion which I have mentioned" (namely, hisoffering a sum of money for the Company's service) "is to obviate _thefalse conclusions or purposed misrepresentations_ which may be made ofit, either as an artifice of _ostentation_ or the effect of _corruptinfluence_, by assuring you that the money, _by whatever means it cameinto my possession, was not my own_, that I had myself _no right_ to it, nor would or could have received it but for the occasion which promptedme to avail myself _of the accidental means_ which were at that instantafforded me of accepting and converting it to the property and use ofthe Company: and with this brief apology I shall dismiss the subject. "

The apology is brief indeed, considering the nature of the transaction;and what is more material than its length or its shortness, it is in allpoints unsatisfactory. The matter becomes, if possible, more obscure byhis explanation. Here was money received by Mr. Hastings, which, according to his own judgment, he had no right to receive; it was moneywhich, "but for the occasion that prompted him, he could not haveaccepted"; it was money which came into his, and from his into theCompany's hands, by ways and means undescribed, and from personsunnamed: yet, though apprehensive of false conclusions and purposedmisrepresentations, he gives his employers no insight whatsoever into amatter which of all others stood in the greatest need of a full andclear elucidation. 

Although he chooses to omit this essential point, he expresses the mostanxious solicitude to clear himself of the charges that might be madeagainst him, of the artifices of ostentation, and of corrupt influence. To discover, if possible, the ground for apprehending such imputations, your Committee adverted to the circumstances in which he stood at thetime: they found that this letter was dispatched about the time thatMr. Francis took his passage for England; his fear of misrepresentationmay therefore allude to something which passed in conversation betweenhim and that gentleman at the time the offer was made. 

It was not easy, on the mere face of his offer, to give an ill turn toit. The act, as it stands on the Minute, is not only disinterested, butgenerous and public-spirited. If Mr. Hastings apprehendedmisrepresentation from Mr. Francis, or from any other person, yourCommittee conceive that he did not employ proper means for defeating theill designs of his adversaries. On the contrary, the course he has takenin his letter to the Court of Directors is calculated to excite doubtsand suspicions in minds the most favorably disposed to him. Some degreeof ostentation is not extremely blamable at a time when a man advanceslargely from his private fortune towards the public service. It is humaninfirmity at the worst, and only detracts something from the lustre ofan action in itself meritorious. The kind of ostentation which iscriminal, and criminal only because it is fraudulent, is where a personmakes a show of giving when in reality he does not give. This impositionis criminal more or less according to the circumstances. But if themoney received to furnish such a pretended gift is taken from any thirdperson without right to take it, a new guilt, and guilt of a much worsequality and description, is incurred. The Governor-General, in order tokeep clear of ostentation, on the 29th of November, 1780, declares, thatthe sum of money which he offered on the 26th of the preceding June ashis own was not his own, and that he had no right to it. Clearinghimself of vanity, he convicts himself of deceit, and of injustice. 

The other object of this brief apology was to clear himself of _corruptinfluence_. Of all ostentation he stands completely acquitted in themonth of November, however he might have been faulty in that respect inthe month of June; but with regard to the other part of the apprehendedcharge, namely, _corrupt influence_, he gives no satisfactory solution. A great sum of money "not his own, "--money to which "he had noright, "--money which came into his possession "by whatever means":--ifthis be not money obtained by corrupt influence, or by something worse, that is, by violence or terror, it will be difficult to fix uponcircumstances which can furnish a presumption of unjustifiable use ofpower and influence in the acquisition of profit. The last part of theapology, that he had converted this money ("which he had no right toreceive") to the Company's use, so far as your Committee can discover, _does nowhere appear_. He speaks, in the Minute of the 26th of June, ashaving _then_ actually deposited it for the Company's service; in theletter of November he says that he converted it to the Company'sproperty: but there is no trace in the Company's books of its being everbrought to their credit in the expenditure for any specific service, even if any such entry and expenditure could justify him in taking moneywhich he had by his own confession, "no right to receive. "

The Directors appear to have been deceived by this representation, andin their letter of January, 1782, [18] consider the money as actuallypaid into their Treasury. Even under their error concerning theapplication of the money, they appear rather alarmed than satisfiedwith the brief apology of the Governor-General. They consider the wholeproceeding as _extraordinary and mysterious_. They, however, do notcondemn it with any remarkable asperity; after admitting that he mightbe induced to a temporary secrecy _respecting the members of the board_, from a fear of their resisting the proposed application, or anyapplication of this money to the Company's use, yet they write to theGovernor-General and Council as follows:--"It does not appear to us thatthere could be any real necessity for delaying to communicate to _us_immediate information of the _channel_ by which the money came into Mr. Hastings's possession, with a complete illustration of the cause orcauses of so _extraordinary_ an event. " And again: "The means proposedof defraying the extra expenses are very _extraordinary_; and the money, we conceive, must have come into his hands by an _unusual_ channel; andwhen more complete information comes before us, we shall give oursentiments fully on the transaction. " And speaking of this and othermoneys under a similar description, they say, "We shall suspend ourjudgment, without approving it in the least degree, or proceeding tocensure our Governor-General for this transaction. " The expectationsentertained by the Directors of a more complete explanation werenatural, and their expression tender and temperate. But the morecomplete information which they naturally expected they never have tothis day received. 

Mr. Hastings wrote two more letters to the Secret Committee of the Courtof Directors, in which he mentions this transaction: the first dated (ashe asserts, and a Mr. Larkins swears) on the 22d of May, 1782;[19] thelast, which accompanied it, so late as the 16th of December in the sameyear. [20] Though so long an interval lay between the transaction of the26th of June, 1780, and the middle of December, 1782, (upwards of twoyears, ) no further satisfaction is given. He has written, since thereceipt of the above letter of the Court of Directors, (which demanded, what they had a right to demand, a clear explanation of the particularsof this sum of money which he had no right to receive, ) without givingthem any further satisfaction. Instead of explanation or apology, heassumes a tone of complaint and reproach, to the Directors: he laysbefore them a kind of an account of presents received, to the amount ofupwards of 200, 000_l. _, --some at a considerable distance of time, andwhich had not been hitherto communicated to the Company. 

In the letter which accompanied that very extraordinary account, whichthen for the first time appeared, he discovers no small solicitude toclear himself from the imputation of having these discoveries drawn fromhim by the terrors of the Parliamentary inquiries then on foot. Toremove all suspicion of such a motive for making these discoveries, Mr. Larkins swears, in an affidavit made before Mr. Justice Hyde, bearingeven date with the letter which accompanies the account, that is, of the16th of December, 1782, that this letter had been written by him on the22d of May, several months before it was dispatched. [21] It appears thatMr. Larkins, who makes this voluntary affidavit, is neither secretary tothe board, nor Mr. Hastings's private secretary, but an officer of theTreasury of Bengal. 

Mr. Hastings was conscious that a question would inevitably arise, howhe came to delay the sending intelligence of so very interesting anature from May to December. He therefore thinks it necessary to accountfor so suspicious a circumstance. He tells the Directors, "that thedispatch of the 'Lively' having been protracted from time to time, theaccompanying address, which was originally designed and prepared forthat dispatch, _and no other since occurring_, has of course been thuslong delayed. "

The Governor-General's letter is dated the 22d May, and the "Resolution"was the last ship of the season dispatched for Europe. The publicletters to the Directors are dated the 9th May; but it appears by theletter of the commander of the ship that he did not receive hisdispatches from Mr. Lloyd, then at Kedgeree, until the 26th May, andalso that the pilot was not discharged from the ship until the 11thJune. Some of these presents (now for the first time acknowledged) hadbeen received eighteen months preceding the date of this letter, --noneless than four months; so that, in fact, he might have sent this accountby all the ships of that season; but the Governor-General chose to writethis letter thirteen days after the determination in Council for thedispatch of the last ship. 

It does not appear that he has given any communication whatsoever to hiscolleagues in office of those extraordinary transactions. Nothingappears on the records of the Council of the receipt of the presents;nor is the transmission of this account mentioned in the general letterto the Court of Directors, but in a letter from himself to their SecretCommittee, consisting generally of two persons, but at most of three. Itis to be observed that the Governor-General states, "that the dispatchof the 'Lively' had been protracted from time to time; that this delaywas of no public consequence; but that it produced a situation whichwith respect to himself he regarded as unfortunate, because it exposedhim to the meanest imputations, from the occasion which the lateParliamentary inquiries have since furnished, but which were unknownwhen his letter was written. " If the Governor-General thought hissilence exposed him to the _meanest imputations_, he had the means inhis own power of avoiding those imputations: he might have sent thisletter, dated the 22d May, by the Resolution. For we find, that, in aletter from Captain Poynting, of the 26th May, he states it not possiblefor him to proceed to sea with the smallest degree of safety without asupply of anchors and cables, and most earnestly requests they may besupplied from Calcutta; and on the 28th May we find a minute from theSecretary of the Council, Mr. Auriol, requesting an order of Council tothe master-attendant to furnish a sloop to carry down those cables;which order was accordingly issued on the 30th May. There requires noother proof to show that the Governor-General had the means of sendingthis letter seven days after he wrote it, instead of delaying it fornear seven months, and because no conveyance had offered. Your Committeemust also remark, that the conveyance by land to Madras was certain; andwhilst such important operations were carrying on, both by sea and land, upon the coast, that dispatches would be sent to the Admiralty or to theCompany was highly probable. 

If the letter of the 22d May had been found in the list of packets sentby the Resolution, the Governor General would have established in asatisfactory manner, and far beyond the effect of any affidavit, thatthe letter had been written at the time of the date. It appears that theResolution, being on her voyage to England, met with so severe a gale ofwind as to be obliged to put back to Bengal, and to unload her cargo. This event makes no difference in the state of the transaction. Whateverthe cause of these new discoveries might have been, at the time ofsending them the fact of the Parliamentary inquiry was publicly known. 

In the letter of the above date Mr. Hastings laments the mortificationof being reduced to take precautions "to guard his reputation fromdishonor. "--"If I had, " says he, "_at any time_ possessed that degree ofconfidence from my _immediate_ employers which they have never withheldfrom the _meanest_ of my predecessors, I should have disdained to usethese attentions. "

Who the _meanest_ of Mr. Hastings's predecessors were does not appear toyour Committee; nor are they able to discern the ground of propriety ordecency for his assuming to himself a right to call any of them meanpersons. But if such mean persons have possessed that degree ofconfidence from his immediate employers which for so many years he hadnot possessed "_at any time_, " inferences must be drawn from thence veryunfavorable to one or the other of the parties, or perhaps to both. Theattentions which he practises and disdains can in this case be of noservice to himself, his employers, or the public; the only attention atall effectual towards extenuating, or in some degree atoning for, theguilt of having taken money from individuals illegally was to be fulland fair in his confession of all the particulars of his offence. Thismight not obtain that confidence which at no time he has enjoyed, butstill the Company and the nation might derive essential benefit from it;the Directors might be able to afford redress to the sufferers; and byhis laying open the concealed channels of abuse, means might befurnished for the better discovery, and possibly for the prevention, orat least for the restraint, of a practice of the most dangerousnature, --a practice of which the mere prohibition, without the means ofdetection, must ever prove, as hitherto it had proved, altogetherfrivolous. 

Your Committee, considering that so long a time had elapsed without anyof that information which the Directors expected, and perceiving thatthis receipt of sums of money under color of gift seemed a growing evil, ordered the attendance of Mr. Hastings's agent, Major Scott. They hadfound, on former occasions, that this gentleman was furnished with muchmore early and more complete intelligence of the Company's affairs inIndia than was thought proper for the Court of Directors; they thereforeexamined him concerning every particular sum of money the receipt ofwhich Mr. Hastings had confessed in his account. It was to theirsurprise that Mr. Scott professed himself perfectly uninstructed uponalmost every part of the subject, though the express object of hismission to England was to clear up such matters as might be objected toMr. Hastings; and for that purpose he had early qualified himself by theproduction to your Committee of his powers of agency. The ignorance inwhich Mr. Hastings had left his agent was the more striking, because hemust have been morally certain, that, if his conduct in these pointsshould have escaped animadversion from the Court of Directors, it mustbecome an object of Parliamentary inquiry; for, in his letter of the15th [16th?] of December, 1782, to the Court of Directors, he expresslymentions his fears that those Parliamentary inquiries might be thoughtto have extorted from him the confessions which he had made. 

Your Committee, however, entering on a more strict examinationconcerning the two lacs of rupees, which Mr. Hastings declares he had noright to take, but had taken from some person then unknown, Major Scottrecollected that Mr. Hastings had, in a letter of the 7th of December, 1782, (in which he refers to some former letter, ) acquainted him withthe name of the person from whom he had received these two lacs ofrupees, mentioned in the minute of June, 1780. It turned out to be theRajah of Benares, the unfortunate Cheyt Sing. 

In the single instance in which Mr. Scott seemed to possess intelligencein this matter, he is preferred to the Court of Directors. Under theircensure as Mr. Hastings was, and as he felt himself to be, for notinforming them of the channel in which he received that money, heperseveres obstinately and contemptuously to conceal it from them;though he thought fit to intrust his agent with the secret. 

Your Committee were extremely struck with this intelligence. They weretotally unacquainted with it, when they presented to the House theSupplement to their Second Report, on the affairs of Cheyt Sing. A giftreceived by Mr. Hastings from the Rajah of Benares gave rise in theirminds to serious reflections on the condition of the princes of Indiasubjected to the British authority. Mr. Hastings was, at the very timeof his receiving this gift, in the course of making on the Rajah ofBenares a series of demands, unfounded and unjustifiable, and constantlygrowing in proportion as they were submitted to. To these demands theRajah of Benares, besides his objections in point of right, constantlysat up a plea of poverty. Presents from persons who hold up poverty as ashield against extortion can scarcely in any case be considered asgratuitous, whether the plea of poverty be true or false. In this casethe presents might have been bestowed; if not with an assurance, atleast with a rational hope, of some mitigation in the oppressiverequisitions that were made by Mr. Hastings; for to give muchvoluntarily, when it is known that much will be taken away forcibly, isa thing absurd and impossible. On the other [one?] hand, the acceptanceof that gift by Mr. Hastings must have pledged a tacit faith for somedegree of indulgence towards the donor: if it was a free gift, gratitude, if it was a bargain, justice obliged him to do it. If, on theother hand, Mr. Hastings originally destined (as he says he did) thismoney, given to himself secretly and for his private emolument, to theuse of the Company, the Company's favor, to whom he acted as trustee, ought to have been purchased by it. In honor and justice he bound andpledged himself for that power which was to profit by the gift, and toprofit, too, in the success of an expedition which Mr. Hastings thoughtso necessary to their aggrandizement. The unhappy man found his moneyaccepted, but no favor acquired on the part either of the Company or ofMr. Hastings. 

Your Committee have, in another Report, stated to the House that Mr. Hastings attributed the extremity of distress which the detachmentsunder Colonel Camac had suffered, and the great desertions which ensuedon that expedition, to the want of punctuality of the Rajah in makingpayment of one of the sums which had been extorted from him; and thiswant of punctual payment was afterwards assigned as a principal reasonfor the ruin of this prince. Your Committee have shown to the House, bya comparison of facts and dates, that this charge is wholly withoutfoundation. But if the cause of Colonel Camac's failure had been true asto the sum which was the object of the public demand, the failure couldnot be attributed to the Rajah, when he had on the _instant_ privatelyfurnished at least 23, 000_l. _ to Mr. Hastings, --that is, furnished theidentical money which he tells us (but carefully concealing the name ofthe giver) he had from the beginning destined, as he afterwards publiclyoffered, for this very expedition of Colonel Camac's. The complicationof fraud and cruelty in the transaction admits of few parallels. Mr. Hastings at the Council Board of Bengal displays himself as a zealousservant of the Company, bountifully giving from his own fortune, and inhis letter to the Directors (as he says himself) as going out of theordinary roads for their advantage;[22] and all this on the credit ofsupplies derived from the gift of a man whom he treats with the utmostseverity, and whom he accuses, in this particular, of disaffection tothe Company's cause and interests. 

With 23, 000_l. _ of the Rajah's money in his pocket, he persecutes him tohis destruction, --assigning for a reason, that his reliance on theRajah's faith, and his breach of it, were the principal causes that _noother_ provision was made for the detachment on the specific expeditionto which the Rajah's specific money was to be applied. The Rajah hadgiven it to be disposed of by Mr. Hastings; and if it was not disposedof in the best manner for the accomplishing his objects, the accuserhimself is the criminal. 

To take money for the forbearance of a just demand would have beencorrupt only; but to urge unjust public demands, --to accept privatepecuniary favors in the course of those demands, --and, on the pretenceof delay or refusal, without mercy to persecute a benefactor, --to refuseto hear his remonstrances, --to arrest him in his capital, in his palace, in the face of all the people, --thus to give occasion to aninsurrection, and, on pretext of that insurrection, to refuse all treatyor explanation, --to drive him from his government and his country, --toproscribe him in a general amnesty, --and to send him all over India afugitive, to publish the shame of British government in all the nationsto whom he successively fled for refuge, --these are proceedings towhich, for the honor of human nature, it is hoped few parallels are tobe found in history, and in which the illegality and corruption of theacts form the smallest part of the mischief. 

Such is the account of the first sum _confessed_ to be taken as apresent by Mr. Hastings, since the year 1775; and such are itsconsequences. Mr. Hastings apologizes for this action by declaring "thathe would not have received the money but for the _occasion_, whichprompted him to avail himself of the accidental means which were at thatinstant afforded him of accepting and converting it to the use of theCompany. "[23] By this account, he considers the act as excusable only bythe particular occasion, by the temptation of accidental means, and bythe suggestion of the _instant_. How far this is the case appears by thevery next paragraph of this letter in which the account is given and inwhich the apology is made. If these were his sentiments in June, 1780, they lasted but a very short time: his accidental means appear to begrowing habitual. 

To point out in a clear manner the spirit of the second moneytransaction to which your Committee adverted, which is represented byMr. Hastings as having some "affinity with the former _anecdote_, "[24](for in this light kind of phrase he chooses to express himself to hismasters, ) your Committee think it necessary to state to the House, thatthe business, namely, this business, which was the second object oftheir inquiry, appears in three different papers and in three differentlights: on comparing of these authorities, in every one of which Mr. Hastings is himself the voucher, if one of the three be true, the othertwo must necessarily be false. 

These three authorities, which your Committee has accurately compared, are, first, his minutes on the Consultations;[25] secondly, his letterto the Court of Directors on the 29th of November, 1780;[26] thirdly, his account, transmitted on the 16th of December, 1782. [27]

About eight months after the first transaction relative to Cheyt Sing, and which is just reported, that is, on the 5th of January, 1781, Mr. Hastings produced a demand to the Council for money of his own expendedfor the Company's service. [28] Here was no occasion for secrecy. Mr. Francis was on his passage to Europe; Mr. Wheler was alone left, who nolonger dissented from anything; Mr. Hastings was in effect himself thewhole Council. He declared that _he_ had disbursed three lacs of rupees, that is, thirty-four thousand five hundred pounds, in secretservices, --which having, he says, "been advanced from _my own privatecash_, I request that the same may be repaid to me in the followingmanner. " He accordingly desires three bonds, for a lac of Sicca rupeeseach, to be given to him in two of the Company's subscriptions, --one tobear interest on the eight per cent loan, the other two in the four percent: the bonds were antedated to the beginning of the precedingOctober. On the 9th of the same month, that is, on the 9th of January, 1781, the three bonds were accordingly ordered. [29] So far the wholetransaction appears clear, and of a piece. Private money is subscribed, and a public security is taken for it. When the Company's Treasuryaccounts[30] are compared with the proceedings of their Council-General, a perfect correspondence also appears. The three bonds are then [there?]entered to Mr. Hastings, and he is credited for principal and intereston them, in the exact terms of the order. So far the officialaccounts, --which, because of their perfect harmony, are considered asclear and consistent evidence to one body of fact. 

The second sort of document relative to these bonds (though the first inorder of time) is Mr. Hastings's letter of the 29th of November, 1780. [31] It is written between the time of the expenditure of the moneyfor the Company's use and the taking of the bonds. Here, for the firsttime, a very material difference appears; and the difference is the morestriking, because Mr. Hastings claimed the _whole_ money as his own, andtook bonds for it as such, _after_ this representation. The letter tothe Company discovers that part of the money (the whole of which he haddeclared on record to be his own, and for which he had taken bonds) wasnot his, but the property of his masters, from whom he had taken thesecurity. It is no less remarkable that the letter which represents themoney as belonging to the Company was written about six weeks before theMinute of Council in which he claims that money as his own. It is thisletter on which your Committee is to remark. 

Mr. Hastings, after giving his reasons for the application of the threelacs of rupees, and for his having for some time concealed the fact, says, "Two thirds of that sum I have raised _by my own credit_, andshall charge it in my official account; _the other third_ I havesupplied from the cash in my hands belonging to the HonorableCompany. "[32]

The House will observe, that in November he tells the Directors that heshall charge only _two thirds_ in his official accounts; in thefollowing January he charges the _whole_. [33] For the other third, although he admitted that to belong to the Company, we have seen that hetakes a bond to _himself_. 

It is material that he tells the Company in his letter that these twolacs of rupees were _raised on his credit_. His letter to the Councilsays that they were advanced from his _private cash_. What he raises onhis credit may, on a fair construction, be considered as his own: but inthis, too, he fails; for it is certain he has never transferred thesebonds to any creditor; nor has he stated any sum he has paid, or forwhich he stands indebted, on that account, to any specific person. Indeed, it was out of his power; for the first two thirds of the money, which he formerly stated as raised upon his credit, he now confesses tohave been from the beginning the Company's property, and therefore couldnot have been raised on his private credit, or borrowed from any personwhatsoever. 

To these two accounts, thus essentially varying, he has added athird, [34] varying at least as essentially from both. In his last orthird account, which is a statement of all the sums he has received inan extraordinary manner, and confessed to be the Company's property, hereverses the items of his first account, and, instead of allowing theCompany but one third and claiming two thirds for himself, he enters twoof the bonds, each for a lac of rupees, as belonging to the Company: ofthe third bond, which appears so distinctly in the Consultations and inthe Treasury accounts, not one word is said; ten thousand pounds isabsorbed, sinks, and disappears at once, and no explanation whatsoeverconcerning it is given; Mr. Hastings seems not yet to have decided towhose account it ought to be placed. In this manner his debt to theCompany, or the Company's to him, is just what he thinks fit. In asingle article he has varied three times. In one account he states thewhole to be his own; in another he claims two thirds; in the last hegives up the claim of the two thirds, and says nothing to the remainingportion. 

To make amends, however, for the suppression of this third bond, givenwith the two others in January, 1781, and antedated to the beginning ofOctober, Mr. Hastings, in the above-mentioned general account subjoinedto his letter of the 22d May, 1782, has brought to the Company's credita new bond. [35]

This bond is for 17, 000_l. _ It was taken from the Company (and so itappears on their Treasury accounts) on the 23d of November, 1780. Hetook no notice of this, when, in January following, he called upon hisown Council for the three others. What is more extraordinary, he wasequally silent with regard to it, when, only six days after its date, hewrote concerning the subject of the three other bonds to the Court ofDirectors; yet now it comes out, that that bond also was taken by Mr. Hastings from the Company for money which he declares he had received onthe Company's account, and that he entered himself as creditor when heought to have made himself debtor. 

Your Committee examined Major Scott concerning this money, which Mr. Hastings must have obtained in some clandestine and irregular mode; butthey could obtain no information of the persons from whom it was taken, nor of the occasion or pretence of taking this large sum; nor does anyMinute of Council appear for its application to any service. The wholeof the transaction, whatever it was, relative to this bond, is coveredwith the thickest obscurity. 

Mr. Hastings, to palliate the blame of his conduct, declares that hehas not received any interest on these bonds, --and that he has indorsedthem as not belonging to himself, but to the Company. [36] As to thefirst part of this allegation, whether he received the interest or letit remain in arrear is a matter of indifference, as he entitled himselfto it; and so far as the legal security he has taken goes, he may, whenever he pleases, dispose both of principal and interest. What he hasindorsed on the bonds, or when he made the indorsement, or whether infact he has made it at all, are matters known only to himself; for thebonds must be in his possession, and are nowhere by him stated to begiven up or cancelled, --which is a thing very remarkable, when heconfesses that he had no right to receive them. 

These bonds make but a part of the account of private receipts of moneyby Mr. Hastings, formerly paid into the Treasury as his own property, and now allowed not to be so. This account brings into view other veryremarkable matters of a similar nature and description. [37]

In the public records, a sum of not less than 23, 871_l. _ is set to hiscredit as a _deposit_ for his private account, paid in by him into theTreasury in gold, and coined at the Company's mint. [38] This appears inthe account furnished to the Directors, under the date of May, 1782, notto be lawfully his money, and he therefore transfers it to the Company'scredit: it still remains as a deposit. [39]

That the House may be apprised of the nature of this article ofdeposit, it may not be improper to state that the Company receive intotheir treasury the cash of private persons, placed there as in a bank. On this no interest is paid, and the party depositing has a right toreceive it upon demand. Under this head of account no public money isever entered. Mr. Hastings, neither at making the deposit as his own, nor at the time of his disclosure of the real proprietor, (which hemakes to be the Company, ) has given any information of the persons fromwhom this money had been received. Mr. Scott was applied to by yourCommittee, but could not give any more satisfaction in this particularthan in those relative to the bonds. 

The title of the account of the 22d of May purports not only that thosesums were paid into the Company's treasury by Mr. Hastings's order, butthat they were applied to the Company's service. No service isspecified, directly or by any reference, to which this great sum ofmoney has been applied. 

Two extraordinary articles follow this, in the May account, amounting toabout 29, 000_l. _[40] These articles are called Receipts for DurbarCharges. The general head of Durbar Charges, made by persons in office, when analyzed into the particulars, contains various expenses, includingbounties and presents made by government, chiefly in the foreigndepartment. But in the last account he confesses that this sum also isnot his, but the Company's property; but as in all the rest, so in this, he carefully conceals the means by which he acquired the money, the timeof his taking it, and the persons from whom it was taken. This is themore extraordinary, because, in looking over the journals and ledgersof the Treasury, the presents received and carried to the account of theCompany (which were generally small and complimental) were preciselyentered, with the name of the giver. 

Your Committee, on turning to the account of Durbar charges in theledger of that month, find the sum, as stated in the account of May 22d, to be indeed paid in; but there is no specific application whatsoeverentered. 

The account of the whole money thus clandestinely received, as stated onthe 22d of May, 1782, (and for a great part of which Mr. Hastings tothat time took credit for, and for the rest has accounted in anextraordinary manner as his own, ) amounts in the whole to upwards ofninety-three thousand pounds sterling: a vast sum to be so obtained, andso loosely accounted for! If the money taken from the Rajah of Benaresbe added, (as it ought, ) it will raise the sum to upwards of116, 000_l. _; if the 11, 600_l. _ bond in October be added, it will beupwards of 128, 000_l. _ received in a secret manner by Mr. Hastings inabout one year and five months. To all these he adds another sum of onehundred thousand pounds, received as a present from the Subah of Oude. Total, upwards of 228, 000_l. _

Your Committee find that this last is the only sum the giver of whichMr. Hastings has thought proper to declare. It is to be observed, thathe did not receive this 100, 000_l. _ in money, but in bills on a greatnative money-dealer resident at Benares, and who has also an house atCalcutta: he is called Gopâl Dâs. The negotiation of these bills tendedto make a discovery not so difficult as it would have been in othercases. 

With regard to the application of this last sum of money, which is saidto be carried to the Durbar charges of April, 1782, your Committee arenot enabled to make any observations on it, as the account of thatperiod has not yet arrived. 

Your Committee have, in another Report, remarked fully upon most of thecircumstances of this extraordinary transaction. Here they only bring somuch of these circumstances again into view as may serve to throw lightupon the true nature of the sums of money taken by British subjects inpower, under the name of _presents_, and to show how far they areentitled to that description in any sense which can fairly imply in thepretended donors either willingness or ability to give. The condition ofthe bountiful parties who are not yet discovered may be conjectured fromthe state of those who have been made known: as far as that stateanywhere appears, their generosity is found in proportion, not to theopulence they possess or to the favors they receive, but to theindigence they feel and the insults they are exposed to. The House willparticularly attend to the situation of the principal giver, the Subahof Oude. 

"When the knife, " says he, "had penetrated to the bone, and I wassurrounded with such heavy distresses that I could no longer live inexpectations, I wrote you an account of my difficulties. 

"The answer which I have received to it is such that it has given meinexpressible grief and affliction. I never had the least idea orexpectation from you and the Council that you would ever have given yourorders in so afflicting a manner, in which you never before wrote, andwhich I could not have imagined. As I am resolved to _obey_ your orders, and directions of the Council, without any delay, as long as I live, Ihave, agreeably to those _orders_, delivered up _all my private papers_to him [the Resident], that, when he shall have examined my receipts andexpenses, _he may take whatever remains_. As I know it to be my duty tosatisfy you, the Company, and Council, I have not failed to _obey_ inany instance, but requested of him that it might be done so as not to_distress me in my necessary expenses_: there being no other funds butthose for the expenses of my mutseddies, household expenses, andservants, &c. He demanded these in such a manner, that, being_remediless_, I was obliged to comply with what he required. He hasaccordingly _stopped the pensions of my old servants for thirty years, whether sepoys, mutseddies, or household servants, and the expenses ofmy family and kitchen, together with the jaghires of my grandmother, mother, and aunts, and of my brothers and dependants, which were fortheir support_. I had raised thirteen hundred horse and three battalionsof sepoys to attend upon me; but as I have no resources to support them, I have been obliged to remove the people stationed in the mahals[districts] and to send his people [the Resident's people] into themahals, so that I have not now one single servant about me. Should Imention to what further difficulties I have been reduced, it would layme open to contempt. "

In other parts of this long remonstrance, as well as in otherremonstrances no less serious, he says, "that it is difficult for him tosave himself alive; that in all his affairs _Mr. Hastings had given fullpowers to the gentlemen here_, " (meaning the English Resident andAssistants, ) "_who have done whatever they chose, and still continue todo it_. I never expected that _you_ would have brought me into suchapprehension, and into so weak a state, without _writing to me on anyone of those subjects_; since I have not the smallest connection withanybody except yourself. I am in such distress, both day and night, thatI see not the smallest prospect of deliverance from it, since you are sodispleased with me _as not to honor me with a single letter_. "

In another remonstrance he thus expresses himself. "The affairs of thisworld are unstable, and soon pass away: it would therefore be incumbenton the _English_ gentlemen to show _some_ friendship for me in my_necessities_, --I, who have always exerted my very life in the serviceof the English, _assigned over to them all the resources left in mycountry_, stopped my very household expenses, together with the jaghiresof my servants and dependants, to the amount of 98, 98, 375 rupees. Besides this, as to the jaghires of my grandmother, mother, and uncle, which were granted to them for their support, _agreeable toengagements_, you are the _masters_, --if the Council have sent ordersfor the stopping their jaghires also, stop them. I have no resourcesleft in my country, and have no friends by me, being even distressed inmy daily subsistence. I have some elephants, horses, and the houseswhich I inhabit: if they can be of any service to my friends, they areready. Whenever you can discover any resources, seize upon them: I shallnot interfere to prevent you. In my present distress for my dailyexpenses, I was in hopes that they would have excused some part of mydebt. Of what use is it for me to relate my situation, which is known tothe whole world? This much is sufficient. "

The truth of all these representations is nowhere contested by Mr. Hastings. It is, indeed, admitted in something stronger than words;for, upon account of the Nabob's condition, and the no less distressedcondition of his dominions, he thought it fit to withdraw from him andthem a large body of the Company's troops, together with all the Englishof a civil description, who were found no less burdensome than themilitary. This was done on the declared inability of the country anylonger to support them, --a country not much inferior to England inextent and fertility, and, till lately at least, its equal in populationand culture. 

It was to a prince, in a state so far remote from freedom, authority, and opulence, so penetrated with the treatment he had received, and thebehavior he had met with from Mr. Hastings, that Mr. Hastings has chosento attribute a disposition so very generous and munificent as, of hisown free grace and mere motion, to make him a present, at one donation, of upwards of one hundred thousand pounds sterling. This vast privatedonation was given at the moment of vast instant demands severelyexacted on account of the Company, and accumulated on immense debts tothe same body, --and all taken from a ruined prince and almost desolatedterritory. 

Mr. Hastings has had the firmness, with all possible ease and apparentunconcern, to request permission from the Directors to legalize thisforbidden present for his own use. This he has had the courage to do ata time when he had abundant reason to look for what he has sincereceived, --their censure for many material parts of his conduct towardsthe people from whose wasted substance this pretended free gift wasdrawn. He does not pretend that he has reason to expect the smallestdegree of partiality, in this or any other point, from the Court ofDirectors. For, besides his complaint, first stated, of having neverpossessed their confidence, in a late letter[41] (in which, notwithstanding the censures of Parliament, he magnifies his ownconduct) he says, that, in all the long period of his service, "he hasalmost unremittedly wanted the support which all his predecessors hadenjoyed from their constituents. From mine, " says he, "I have received_nothing but reproach, hard_ epithets, _and indignities_, instead ofrewards and encouragement. " It must therefore have been from some othersource of protection than that which the law had placed over him that helooked for countenance and reward in violating an act of Parliamentwhich forbid him from _taking gifts or presents on any accountwhatsoever_, --much less a gift of this magnitude, which, from thedistress of the giver, must be supposed the effect of the most cruelextortion. 

The Directors did wrong in their orders to appropriate money, which theymust know could not have been acquired by the consent of the pretendeddonor, to their own use. [42] They acted more properly in refusing toconfirm this grant to Mr. Hastings, and in choosing rather to refer himto the law which he had violated than to his own sense of what hethought he was entitled to take from the natives: putting him in mindthat the Regulating Act had expressly declared "that noGovernor-General, or any of the Council, shall, directly or indirectly, accept, receive, or take, of or from any person or persons, or on anyaccount whatsoever, any present, gift, donation, gratuity, or reward, pecuniary or otherwise, or any promise or engagement for any of theaforesaid. " Here is no reserve for the case of a disclosure to theDirectors, and for the legalizing the breach of an act of Parliament bytheir subsequent consent. The illegality attached to the action at itsvery commencement, and it could never be afterwards legalized: theDirectors had no such power reserved to them. Words cannot be devised ofa stronger import or studied with more care. To these words of the actare opposed the declaration and conduct of Mr. Hastings, who, in hisletter of January, 1782, thinks fit to declare, that "an offer of a veryconsiderable sum of money was made to him, both on the part of the Naboband his ministers, as _a present_, which he _accepted withouthesitation_. " The plea of his pretended necessity is of no avail. Thepresent was not in ready money, nor, as your Committee conceive, applicable to his immediate necessities. Even his credit was notbettered by bills at long periods; he does not pretend that he raisedany money upon them; nor is it conceivable that a banker at Benareswould be more willing to honor the drafts of so miserable, undone, anddependent a person as the Nabob of Oude than those of theGovernor-General of Bengal, which might be paid either on the receipt ofthe Benares revenue, or at the seat of his power, and of the Company'sexchequer. Besides, it is not explicable, upon any grounds that can beavowed, why the Nabob, who could afford to give these bills as _apresent_ to Mr. Hastings, could not have equally given them in dischargeof the debt which he owed to the Company. It is, indeed, very much to befeared that the people of India find it sometimes turn more to theiraccount to give presents to the English in authority than to pay theirdebts to the public; and this is a matter of a very seriousconsideration. 

No small merit is made by Mr. Hastings, and that, too, in a high andupbraiding style, of his having come to a voluntary discovery of thisand other unlawful practices of the same kind. "That honorable court, "says Mr. Hastings, addressing himself to his masters, in his letter ofDecember, 1782, "ought to know whether I possess the integrity and honorwhich are the first requisites of such a station. If I wanted these, they have afforded me too powerful incentives to suppress theinformation which I now convey to them through you, and to appropriateto my own use the sums which I have already passed to their credit, bytheir _unworthy_, and pardon me if I add _dangerous reflections_, whichthey have passed upon me for the first communication of this kind"; andhe immediately adds, what is singular and striking, and savors of arecriminatory insinuation, "_and your own experience_ will suggest toyou that there are persons who would profit by such a warning. "[43] Towhat Directors in particular this imputation of experience is applied, and what other persons they are in whom _experience_ has shown adisposition to profit of such a warning, is a matter highly proper to beinquired into. What Mr. Hastings says further on this subject is no lessworthy of attention:--"_that he could have concealed these transactions, if he had a wrong motive, from theirs and the public eye forever_. "[44]It is undoubtedly true, that, whether the observation be applicable tothe particular case or not, practices of this corrupt nature areextremely difficult of detection anywhere, but especially in India; butall restraint upon that grand fundamental abuse of presents is goneforever, if the servants of the Company can derive safety from adefiance of the law, when they can no longer hope to screen themselvesby an evasion of it. All hope of reformation is at an end, if, confidingin the force of a faction among Directors or proprietors to bear themout, and possibly to vote them the fruit of their crimes as a reward oftheir discovery, they find that their bold avowal of their offences isnot only to produce indemnity, but to be rated for merit. If once apresumption is admitted, that, wherever something is divulged, nothingis hid, the discovering of one offence may become the certain means ofconcealing a multitude of others. The contrivance is easy and trivial, and lies open to the meanest proficient in this kind of art; it will notonly become an effectual cover to such practices, but will tendinfinitely to increase them. In that case, sums of money will be takenfor the purpose of discovery and making merit with the Company, andother sums will be taken for the private advantage of the receiver. 

It must certainly be impossible for the natives to know what presentsare for one purpose, or what for the other. It is not for a Gentoo or aMahometan landholder at the foot of the remotest mountains in India, whohas no access to our records and knows nothing of our language, todistinguish what lacs of rupees, which he has given _eo nomine_ as apresent to a Company's servant, are to be authorized by his masters inLeadenhall Street as proper and legal, or carried to their publicaccount at their pleasure, and what are laid up for his own emolument. 

The legislature, in declaring all presents to be the property of theCompany, could not consider corruption, extortion, and fraud as any partof their resources. The property in such presents was declared to betheirs, not as a fund for their benefit, but in order to found a legaltitle to a civil suit. It was declared theirs, to facilitate therecovery out of corrupt and oppressive hands of money illegally taken;but this legal fiction of property could not nor ought by thelegislature to be considered in any other light than as a trust held bythem for those who suffered the injury. Upon any other construction, theCompany would have a right, first, to extract money from the subjects ordependants of this kingdom committed to their care, by means ofparticular conventions, or by taxes, by rents, and by monopolies; andwhen they had exhausted every contrivance of public imposition, thenthey were to be at liberty to let loose upon the people all theirservants, from the highest rank to the lowest, to prey upon them atpleasure, and to draw, by personal and official authority, by influence, venality, and terror, whatever was left to them, --and that all this wasjustified, provided the product was paid into the Company's exchequer. 

This prohibition and permission of presents, with this declaration ofproperty in the Company, would leave no property to any man in India. If, however, it should be thought that this clause in the act[45] shouldbe capable, by construction and retrospect, of so legalizing and thusappropriating these presents, (which your Committee conceiveimpossible, ) it is absolutely necessary that it should be very fullyexplained. 

The provision in the act was made in favor of the natives. If suchconstruction prevails, the provision made as their screen fromoppression will become the means of increasing and aggravating itwithout bounds and beyond remedy. If presents, which when they are givenwere unlawful, can afterwards be legalized by an application of them tothe Company's service, no sufferer can even resort to a remedial processat law for his own relief. The moment he attempts to sue, the money maybe paid into the Company's treasury; it is then lawfully taken, and theparty is non-suited. 

The Company itself must suffer extremely in the whole order andregularity of their public accounts, if the idea upon which Mr. Hastingsjustifies the taking of these presents receives the smallestcountenance. On his principles, the same sum may become private propertyor public, at the pleasure of the receiver; it is in his power, Mr. Hastings says, to conceal it forever. [46] He certainly has it in hispower not only to keep it back and bring it forward at his own times, but even to shift and reverse the relations in the accounts (as Mr. Hastings has done) in what manner and proportion seems good to him, andto make himself alternately debtor or creditor for the same sums. 

Of this irregularity Mr. Hastings himself appears in some degreesensible. He conceives it possible that his transactions of this naturemay to the Court of Directors seem unsatisfactory. He, however, puts ithypothetically: "If to you, " says he, "who are accustomed to viewbusiness in an _official and regular light, they should appearunprecedented, if not improper_. "[47] He just conceives it possible thatin an official money transaction the Directors may expect a proceedingofficial and regular. In what other lights than those which are officialand regular matters of public account ought to be regarded by those whohave the charge of them, either in Bengal or in England, does not appearto your Committee. Any other is certainly "unprecedented and improper, "and can only serve to cover fraud both in the receipt and in theexpenditure. The acquisition of 58, 000 rupees, or near 6000_l. _, whichappears in the sort of _unofficial and irregular account_ that hefurnishes of his presents, in his letter of May, 1782, [48] must appearextraordinary indeed to those who expect from men in office somethingofficial and something regular. "This sum, " says he, "I received while Iwas on my journey to Benares. "[49] He tells it with the same carelessindifference as if things of this kind were found by accident on thehigh-road. 

Mr. Hastings did not, indeed he could not, doubt that this unprecedentedand improper account would produce much discussion. He says, "Why thesesums were taken by me, why they were (except the second) _quietly_transferred to the Company's account, why bonds were taken for the firstand not for the rest, might, were this matter to be exposed to the viewof the public, _furnish a variety of conjectures_. "[50]

This matter has appeared, and has furnished, as it ought to do, something more serious than conjectures. It would in any other case besupposed that Mr. Hastings, expecting such inquiries, and consideringthat the questions are (even as they are imperfectly stated by himself)far from frivolous, would condescend to give some information uponthem; but the conclusion of a sentence so importantly begun, and whichleads to such expectations, is, "that to these conjectures it would beof little use to reply. " This is all he says to public conjecture. 

To the Court of Directors he is very little more complaisant, and not atall more satisfactory; he states merely as a supposition their inquiryconcerning matters of which he positively knew that they had called foran explanation. He knew it, because he presumed to censure them fordoing so. To the hypothesis of a further inquiry he gives a conjecturalanswer of such a kind as probably, in an account of a doubtfultransaction, and to a superior, was never done before. 

"_Were_ your Honorable Court to question me upon these points, I _would_answer, that the sums were taken for the Company's benefit, at times inwhich the Company very much stood in need of them; that I _either_ choseto conceal the first receipts from public curiosity by receiving bondsfor the amount, or _possibly acted without any studied design_ which mymemory could at this distance of time verify. "[51]

He here professes not to be certain of the motives by which he washimself actuated in so extraordinary a concealment, and in the use ofsuch extraordinary means to effect it; and as if the acts in questionwere those of an absolute stranger, and not his own, he gives variousloose conjectures concerning the motive to them. He even supposes, intaking presents contrary to law, and in taking bonds for them as hisown, contrary to what he admits to be truth and fact, that he might haveacted without any distinct motive at all, or at least such as hismemory could reach at that distance of time. That immense distance, inthe faintness of which his recollection is so completely lost as to sethim guessing at his motives for his own conduct, was from the 15th ofJanuary, 1781, when the bonds at his own request were given, to the dateof this letter, which is the 22d of May, 1782, --that is to say, aboutone year and four months. 

As to the other sums, for which no bond was taken, the ground for thedifference in his explanation is still more extraordinary: he says, "Idid not think it worth my care to observe the same means with _therest_. "[52] The rest of these sums, which were not worth his care, arestated in his account to be greater than those he was so solicitous (forsome reason which he cannot guess) to cover under bonds: these sumsamount to near 53, 000_l. _; whereas the others did not much exceed40, 000_l. _ For these actions, attended with these explanations, heventures to appeal to their (the Directors') breasts for a candidinterpretation, and "he assumes the freedom to add, that he thinkshimself, on _such_ a subject, and on _such_ an occasion, entitled toit";[53] and then, as if he had performed some laudable exploit, in theaccompanying letter he glories in the integrity of his conduct; andanticipating his triumph over injustice, and the applauses which at afuture time he seems confident he shall receive, says he, "The applauseof my own breast is my surest reward: your applause and that of mycountry is my next wish in life. "[54] He declares in that very letterthat he had not _at any time_ possessed the confidence with them whichthey never withheld from the meanest of his predecessors. With wishes sonear his heart perpetually disappointed, and, instead of applauses, (ashe tells us, ) receiving nothing but reproaches and disgraceful epithets, his steady continuance for so many years in their service, in a placeobnoxious in the highest degree to suspicion and censure, is a thingaltogether singular. 

It appears very necessary to your Committee to observe upon the greatleading principles which Mr. Hastings assumes, to justify the irregulartaking of these vast sums of money, and all the irregular means he hademployed to cover the greater part of it. These principles are the morenecessary to be inquired into, because, if admitted, they will serve tojustify every species of improper conduct. His words are, "that thesources from which these reliefs to the public service have come wouldnever have yielded them to the Company _publicly_; and that theexigencies of their service (exigencies created by the exposition oftheir affairs, and faction in their divided councils) required thosesupplies. "[55]

As to the first of these extraordinary positions, your Committee cannotconceive what motive could actuate any native of India dependent on theCompany, in assisting them privately, and in refusing to assist thempublicly. If the transaction was fair and honest, every native must havebeen desirous of making merit with the great governing power. If he gavehis money as a free gift, he might value himself upon very honorable andvery acceptable service; if he lent it on the Company's bonds, it wouldstill have been of service, and he might also receive eight per centfor his money. No native could, without some interested view, give tothe Governor-General what he would refuse to the Company as a grant, oreven as a loan. It is plain that the powers of government must, in someway or other, be understood by the natives to be at sale. TheGovernor-General says that he took the money with an originaldestination to the purposes to which he asserts he has since applied it. But this original destination was in his own mind only, --not declared, nor by him pretended to be declared, to the party who gave the presents, and who could perceive nothing in it but money paid to the suprememagistrate for his private emolument. All that the natives couldpossibly perceive in such a transaction must be highly dishonorable tothe Company's government; for they must conceive, when they gave moneyto Mr. Hastings, that they bought from Mr. Hastings either what wastheir own right or something that was not so, or that they redeemedthemselves from some acts of rigor inflicted, threatened, orapprehended. If, in the first case, Mr. Hastings gave them the objectfor which they bargained, his act, however proper, was corrupt, --if hedid not, it was both corrupt and fraudulent; if the money was extortedby force or threats, it was oppressive and tyrannical. The very natureof such transactions has a tendency to teach the natives to pay acorrupt court to the servants of the Company; and they must thereby berendered less willing, or less able, or perhaps both, to fulfil theirengagements to the state. Mr. Scott's evidence asserts that they wouldrather give to Mr. Hastings than lend to the Company. It is veryprobable; but it is a demonstration of their opinion of his power andcorruption, and of the weak and precarious state of the Company'sauthority. 

The second principle assumed by Mr. Hastings for his justification, namely, that factious opposition and a divided government might createexigencies requiring such supplies, is full as dangerous as the first;for, if, in the divisions which must arise in all councils, one memberof government, when he thinks others factiously disposed, shall beentitled to take money privately from the subject for the purposes ofhis politics, and thereby to dispense with an act of Parliament, pretences for that end cannot be wanting. A dispute may always be raisedin council in order to cover oppression and peculation elsewhere. Butthese principles of Mr. Hastings tend entirely to destroy the characterand functions of a council, and to vest them in one of the dissentientmembers. The law has placed the sense of the whole in the majority; andit is not a thing to be suffered, that any of the members shouldprivately raise money for the avowed purpose of defeating that sense, orfor promoting designs that are contrary to it: a more alarmingassumption of power in an individual member of any deliberative orexecutive body cannot be imagined. Mr. Hastings had no right, in orderto clear himself of peculation, to criminate the majority with faction. No member of any body, outvoted on a question, has, or can have, a rightto direct any part of his public conduct by that principle. The membersof the Council had a common superior, to whom they might appeal in theirmutual charges of faction: they did so frequently; and the imputation offaction has almost always been laid on Mr. Hastings himself. 

But there were periods, very distinguished periods too, in the recordsof the Company, in which the clandestine taking of money could not besupported even by this pretence. Mr. Hastings has been charged withvarious acts of peculation, perpetrated at a time he could not excusehimself by the plea of any public purpose to be carried on, or of anyfaction in council by which it was traversed. It may be necessary hereto recall to the recollection of the House, that, on the cry whichprevailed of the ill practices of the Company's servants in India, (which general cry in a great measure produced the Regulating Act of1773, ) the Court of Directors, in their instructions of the 29th ofMarch, 1774, gave it as an injunction to the Council-General, that "they_immediately_ cause the _strictest_ inquiry to be made into _all_oppressions which may have been committed either against natives orEuropeans, and into _all_ abuses which may have prevailed in thecollection of the revenues or _any part of the civil government_ of thePresidency; and that you communicate to us _all information_ which youmay be able to obtain relative thereto, or any embezzlement ordissipation of the Company's money. "

In this inquiry, by far the most important abuse which appeared on anyof the above heads was that which was charged relative to the sale ingross by Mr. Hastings of nothing less than the whole authority of thecountry government in the disposal of the guardianship of the Nabob ofBengal. 

The present Nabob, Mobarek ul Dowlah, was a minor when he succeeded tothe title and office of Subahdar of the three provinces in 1770. Although in a state approaching to subjection, still his rank andcharacter were important. Much was necessarily to depend upon a personwho was to preserve the moderation of a sovereign not supported byintrinsic power, and yet to maintain the dignity necessary to carry onthe representation of political government, as well as the substance ofthe whole criminal justice of a great country. A good education, conformably to the maxims of his religion and the manners of his people, was necessary to enable him to fill that delicate place with reputationeither to the Mahometan government or to ours. He had still to manage arevenue not inconsiderable, which remained as the sole resource for thelanguishing dignity of persons any way distinguished in rank amongMussulmen, who were all attached and clung to him. These considerationsrendered it necessary to put his person and affairs into proper hands. They ought to have been men who were able by the gravity of their rankand character to preserve his morals from the contagion of low andvicious company, --men who by their integrity and firmness might beenabled to resist in some degree the rapacity of Europeans, as well asto secure the remaining fragments of his property from the attempts ofthe natives themselves, who must lie under strong temptation of takingtheir share in the last pillage of a decaying house. 

The Directors were fully impressed with the necessity of such anarrangement. Your Committee find, that, on the 26th of August, 1771, they gave instructions to the President and Council to appoint "aminister to transact the political affairs of the circar[government], --and to select for that purpose some person well qualifiedfor the affairs of government to be the minister of the government, andguardian of the Nabob's minority. "

The order was so distinct as not to admit of a mistake; it was (for itsmatter) provident and well considered; and the trust which devolved onMr. Hastings was of such a nature as might well stimulate a mansensible to reputation to fulfil it in a manner agreeably to thedirections he had received, and not only above just cause of exception, but out of the reach of suspicion and malice. In that situation it wasnatural to suppose he would cast his eyes upon men of the first reputeand consideration among the Mussulmen of high rank. 

Mr. Hastings, instead of directing his eyes to the durbar, employed hisresearches in the seraglio. In the inmost recesses of that place hediscovered a woman secluded from the intercourse and shut up from theeyes of men, whom he found to correspond with the orders he had receivedfrom the Directors, as a person well "qualified for the affairs ofgovernment, fit to be a minister of government and the guardian of theNabob's minority. " This woman he solemnly invests with these functions. He appoints Rajah Gourdas, whom some time after he himself qualifiedwith a description of a young man of mean abilities, to be her duan, orsteward of the household. The rest of the arrangement was correspondentto this disposition of the principal offices. 

It seems not to have been lawful or warrantable in Mr. Hastings to setaside the arrangement positively prescribed by the Court of Directors, which evidently pointed to a man, not to any woman whatever. As a womanconfined in the female apartment, the lady he appointed could not becompetent to hold or qualified to exercise any active employment: shestood in need of guardians for herself, and had not the ability for theguardianship of a person circumstanced as the Subah was. GeneralClavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis declare in their minute, "that they believe there never was an instance in India of such a trustso disposed of. " Mr. Hastings has produced no precedent in answer tothis objection. 

It will be proper to state to the House the situation and circumstancesof the women principally concerned, who were in the seraglio of JaffierAli Khân at his death. The first of these was called Munny Begum, aperson originally born of poor and obscure parents, who delivered herover to the conductress of a company of dancing girls; in whichprofession being called to exhibit at a festival, the late Nabob took aliking to her, and, after some cohabitation, she obtained such influenceover him that he took her for one of his wives and (she seems to havebeen the favorite) put her at the head of his harem; and having a son byher, this son succeeded to his authority and estate, --Munny Begum, themother, being by his will a devisee of considerable sums of money, andother effects, on which he left a charge, which has since been appliedto the service of the East India Company. The son of this lady dying, and a son by another wife succeeding, and dying also, the present Nabob, Mobarek ul Dowlah, son by a third wife, succeeded. This woman was thenalive, and in the seraglio. 

It was Munny Begum that Mr. Hastings chose, and not the natural motherof the Nabob. Whether, having chosen a woman in defiance of theCompany's orders, and in passing by the natural parent of the minorprince, he was influenced by respect for the disposition made by thedeceased Nabob during his life, or by other motives, the House willdetermine upon a view of the facts which follow. It will be matter ofinquiry, when the question is stated upon the appointment of astepmother in exclusion of the parent, whether the usage of the Eastconstantly authorizes the continuance of that same distribution of rankand power which was settled in the seraglio during the life of adeceased prince, and which was found so settled at his death, andafterwards, to the exclusion of the mother of the successor. In case offemale guardianship, her claim seems to be a right of Nature, and whichnothing but a very clear positive law will (if that can) authorize thedeparture from. The history of Munny Begum is stated on the records ofthe Council-General, and no attempt made by Mr. Hastings to controvertthe truth of it. 

That was charged by the majority of Council to have happened which mightbe expected inevitably to happen: the care of the Nabob's education wasgrossly neglected, and his fortune as grossly mismanaged and embezzled. What connection this waste and embezzlement had with the subsequentevents the House will judge. 

On the 2d of May, 1775, Mr. James Grant, accountant to the ProvincialCouncil of Moorshedabad, produced to the Governor-General and Councilcertain Persian papers which stated nine lacs of rupees (upwards ofninety thousand pounds sterling) received by Munny Begum, on herappointment to the management of the Nabob's household, over and abovethe balance due at that time, and not accounted for by her. These Granthad received from Nuned Roy, who had been a writer in the Begum'sTreasury Office. Both Mr. Grant and Nuned Roy were called before theboard, and examined respecting the authenticity of the papers. Amongother circumstances tending to establish the credit of these papers, itappears that Mr. Grant offered to make oath that the chief eunuch of theBegum had come to him on purpose to prevail on him not to send thepapers, and had declared _that the accounts were not to be disputed_. 

On the 9th of May it was resolved by a majority of the board, againstthe opinion and solemn protest of the Governor-General, that a gentlemanshould be sent up to the city of Moorshedabad to demand of Munny Begumthe accounts of the nizamut and household, from April, 1764, to thelatest period to which they could be closed, and to divest the Begum ofthe office of guardian to the Nabob; and Mr. Charles Goring wasappointed for this purpose. 

The preceding facts are stated to the House, not as the foundation of aninquiry into the conduct of the Begum, but as they lead to and aretherefore necessary to explain by what means a discovery was made of asum of money given by her to Mr. Hastings. 

Mr. Goring's first letter from the city, dated 17th May, 1775, mentions, among other particulars, the young Nabob's joy at being delivered out ofthe hands of Munny Begum, of the mean and indigent state of confinementin which he was kept by her, of the distress of his mother, and that hehad told Mr. Goring that the "Begum's eunuch had instructed the servantsnot to suffer him to learn anything by which he might make himselfacquainted with business": and he adds, "Indeed, I believe there isgreat truth in it, as his Excellency seems to be ignorant of almosteverything a man of his rank ought to know, --not from a want ofunderstanding, but of being properly educated. "

On the 21st of May, Mr. Goring transmitted to the Governor-General andCouncil an account of sums given by the Begum under her seal, deliveredto Mr. Goring by the Nabob in her apartments. The account is as follows. 

 Memorandum of Disbursements to English Gentlemen, from the Nabob's Sircar, in the Bengal Year 1179. 

 +--------------------+ |Seal of Munny Begum, | |Mother of the Nabob | |Nudjuf ul Dowlah, | |deceased. | +--------------------+

 To the Governor, Mr. Hastings, for an entertainment 1, 50, 000

 To Mr. Middleton, on account of an agreement entered into by Baboo Begum 1, 50, 000 -------- Rupees 3, 00, 000

When this paper was delivered, the Governor-General moved that Mr. Goring might be asked _how he came by it_, and _on what account thispartial selection was made by him_; also, that the Begum should bedesired _to explain the sum laid to his charge_, and that he should ask_the Nabob or the Begum their reasons for delivering this separateaccount_. 

The substance of the Governor's proposal was agreed to. 

Mr. Goring's answer to this requisition of the board is as follows. 

"In compliance with your orders to explain the delivery of the papercontaining an account of three lacs of rupees, I am to inform you, ittook its rise from a message sent me by the Begum, requesting I wouldinterest myself with the Nabob to have Akbar Ali Khân released to herfor a few hours, having something of importance to communicate to me, onwhich she wished to consult him. Thinking the service might be benefitedby it, I accordingly desired the Nabob would be pleased to deliver himto my charge, engaging to return him the same night, --which I did. Iheard no more till next day, when the Begum requested to see hisExcellency and myself, desiring Akbar Ali might attend. 

"On our first meeting, she entered into a long detail of heradministration, endeavoring to represent it in the fairest light; atlast she came to the point, and told me, my urgent and repeatedremonstrances to her to be informed how the balance arose of which I wasto inquire induced her from memory to say what she had herselfgiven, --then mentioning the sum of a lac and a half to the Governor tofeast him whilst he stayed there, and a lac and a half to Mr. Middletonby the hands of Baboo Begum. As I looked on this no more than a matterof conversation, I arose to depart, but was detained by the Begum'srequesting the Nabob to come to her. A scene of weeping and complaintthen began, which made me still more impatient to be gone, and Irepeatedly sent to his Excellency for that purpose: he at last came outand delivered me the paper I sent you, declaring it was given him by theBegum to be delivered me. "

Munny Begum also wrote a letter to General Clavering, in which shedirectly asserts the same. "Mr. Goring has pressed me on the subject ofthe balances; in answer to which I informed him, that all theparticulars, being on record, would in the course of the inquiry appearfrom the papers. He accordingly received from the Nabob Mobarek ulDowlah a list of three lacs of rupees given to the Governor and Mr. Middleton. I now send you inclosed a list of the dates when it waspresented, and through whose means, which you will receive. "

The Governor-General then desired that the following questions might beproposed to the Begum by Mr. Martin, then Resident at the Durbar. 

1st. Was any application made to you for the account which you havedelivered, of three lacs of rupees said to have been paid to theGovernor and Mr. Middleton, or did you deliver the account of your ownfree will, and unsolicited?

2d. In what manner was the application made to you, and by whom?

3d. On what account was the sum of one and half lacs given to theGovernor-General, which you have laid to his account? Was it inconsequence of any requisition from him, or of any previous agreement, or of any established usage?

The Governor-General objected strongly to Mr. Goring's being presentwhen the questions were put to the Begum; but it was insisted on by themajority, and it was resolved accordingly, that he ought to be present. The reasons on both sides will best appear by the copy of the debate, inserted in the Appendix. 

The Begum's answer to the preceding questions, addressed to theGovernor-General and Council, where it touched the substance, was asfollows. 

"The case is this. Mr. Goring, on his arrival here, _seized all thepapers, and secured them under his seal; and all the mutsuddies [clerksor accountants] attended him, and explained to him all the particularsof them_. Mr. Goring inquired of me concerning the arrears due to thesepoys, &c. , observing, that the nizamut and bhela money [Nabob'sallowance] was received from the Company; from whence, then, could thebalance arise? I made answer, that the sum was not adequate to theexpenses. Mr. Goring then asked, What are those expenses which exceedthe sum received from the Company? I replied, _All the particulars willbe found in the papers_. The affair of the three lacs of rupees, _onaccount of entertainment for the Governor and Mr. Middleton_, has been, I am told, related to you by Rajah Gourdas; besides which there are manyother expenses, which will appear from the papers. As the custom ofentertainment is of long standing, and accordingly every Governor ofCalcutta who came to Moorshedabad received a daily sum of two thousandrupees for entertainment, which, was in fact instead of provisions; andthe lac and an half of rupees laid to Mr. Middleton's charge was _apresent on account of an agreement entered into by the Bhow Begum_. Itherefore affixed my seal to the account, and forwarded it to Mr. Goringby means of the Nabob. "

In this answer, the accounts given to Mr. Goring she asserts to begenuine. They are explained, in all the particulars, by all thesecretaries and clerks in office. They are secured under Mr. Goring'sseal. To them she refers for everything; to them she refers for thethree lacs of rupees given to Mr. Hastings and Mr. Middleton. It isimpossible to combine together a clearer body of proof, composed ofrecord of office and verbal testimony mutually supporting andillustrating each other. 

The House will observe that the receipt of the money is indirectlyadmitted by one of the Governor's own questions to Munny Begum. 

If the money was not received, it would have been absurd to ask _on whataccount it was given_. Both the question and the answer relate to someestablished usage, the appeal to which might possibly be used to justifythe acceptance of the money, if it was accepted, but would besuperfluous, and no way applicable to the charge, if the money was nevergiven. 

On this point your Committee will only add, that, in all the controversybetween Mr. Hastings and the majority of the Council, he _nowhere deniesthe receipt of this money_. In his letter to the Court of Directors ofthe 31st of July, 1775, he says that the Begum was compelled by the illtreatment of one of her servants, which he calls _a species of torture_, to deliver the paper to Mr. Goring; but he nowhere affirms that thecontents of the paper were false. 

On this conduct the majority remark, "We confess it appears veryextraordinary that Mr. Hastings should employ so much time and labor toshow that the discoveries against him have been obtained by impropermeans, but that he should take no step whatsoever _to invalidate thetruth of them_. He does not deny the receipt of the money: the Begum'sanswers to the questions put to her at his own desire make it impossiblethat he should deny it. It seems, he has formed some plan of defenceagainst this and similar charges, which he thinks will avail him in acourt of justice, and which it would be imprudent in him to anticipateat this time. If he has not received the money, we see no reason forsuch a guarded and cautious method of proceeding. An innocent man wouldtake a shorter and easier course. He would voluntarily exculpatehimself by his oath. "

Your Committee entertain doubts whether the refusal to exculpate by oathcan be used as a circumstance to infer any presumption of guilt. Butwhere the charge is direct, specific, circumstantial, supported bypapers and verbal testimony, made before his lawful superiors, to whomhe was accountable, by persons competent to charge, if innocent, he wasobliged at least to oppose to it a clear and formal denial of the fact, and to make a demand for inquiry. But if he does not deny the fact, andeludes inquiry, just presumptions will be raised against him. 

Your Committee, willing to go to the bottom of a mode of corruption deepand dangerous in the act and the example, being informed that Mr. Goringwas in London, resolved to examine him upon the subject. Mr. Goring notonly agreed with all the foregoing particulars, but even produced toyour Committee what he declared to be the original Persian papers in hishands, delivered from behind the curtain through the Nabob himself, who, having privilege, as a son-in-law, to enter the women's apartment, received them from Munny Begum as authentic, --the woman all the whilelamenting the loss of her power with many tears and much vociferation. She appears to have been induced to make discovery of the abovepractices in order to clear herself of the notorious embezzlement of theNabob's effects. 

Your Committee examining Mr. Scott and Mr. Baber on this subject, theyalso produced a Persian paper, which Mr. Baber said he had received fromthe hands of a servant of Munny Begum, --and along with it a paperpurporting to be a translation into English of the Persian original. Inthe paper given as the translation, Munny Begum is made to allege manymatters of hardship and cruelty against Mr. Goring, and an attempt tocompel her to make out a false account, but does not at all deny thegiving the money: very far from it. She is made to assert, indeed, "thatMr. Goring desired her to put down three lacs of rupees, as dividedbetween Mr. Hastings and Mr. Middleton. I begged to be excused, observing to him that this money had neither been tendered or _accepted_with any criminal or improper view. " After some lively expressions inthe European manner, she says, "that it had been customary to furnish atable for the Governor and his attendants, during their stay at court. With respect to the sum mentioned to Mr. Middleton, it was a _free gift_from my own _privy purse_. Purburam replied, he understood this money tobe paid to these gentlemen as a gratuity for _secret services_; and assuch he should assuredly represent it. " Here the payments to Mr. Hastings are fully admitted, and excused as agreeable to usage, and forkeeping a table. The present to Mr. Middleton is justified as a freegift. The paper produced by Mr. Scott is not referred to by yourCommittee as of any weight, but to show that it does not prove what itis produced to prove. 

Your Committee, on reading the paper delivered in by Mr. Scott as atranslation, perceive it to be written in a style which they conceivedwas little to be expected in a faithful translation from a Persianoriginal, being full of quaint terms and idiomatic phrases, whichstrongly bespeak English habits in the way of thinking, and of Englishpeculiarities and affectations in the expression. Struck with thesestrong internal marks of a suspicious piece, they turned to the Persianmanuscript produced by Mr. Scott and Mr. Baber, and comparing it withMr. Goring's papers, they found the latter carefully sealed upon everyleaf, as they believe is the practice universal in all authentic pieces. They found on the former no seal or signature whatsoever, either at thetop or bottom of the scroll. This circumstance of a want of signaturenot only takes away all authority from the piece as evidence, butstrongly confirmed the suspicions entertained by your Committee, onreading the translation, of unwarrantable practices in the whole conductof this business, even if the translation should be found substantiallyto agree with the original, such an original as it is. The Persian rollis in the custody of the clerk of your Committee for furtherexamination. 

Mr. Baber and Mr. Scott, being examined on these material defects in theauthentication of a paper produced by them as authentic, could give nosort of account how it happened to be without a signature; nor did Mr. Baber explain how he came to accept and use it in that condition. 

On the whole, your Committee conceive that all the parts of thetransaction, as they appear in the Company's records, are consistent, and mutually throw light on each other. 

The Court of Directors order the President and Council to appoint a_minister_ to transact the _political_ affairs of the government, and to_select_ for that purpose some person well qualified for the _affairs ofgovernment_, and to be the _minister of government_. Mr. Hastingsselects for the minister so described and so qualified a woman locked upin a seraglio. He is ordered to appoint a guardian to the Nabob'sminority. Mr. Hastings passes by his natural parent, and appointsanother woman. These acts would of themselves have been liable tosuspicion. But a great deficiency or embezzlement soon appears in thiswoman's account. To exculpate herself, she voluntarily declares that shegave a considerable sum to Mr. Hastings, who never once denies thereceipt. The account given by the principal living witness of thetransaction in his evidence is perfectly coherent, and consistent withthe recorded part. The original accounts, alleged to be delivered by thelady in question, were produced by him, properly sealed andauthenticated. Nothing is opposed to all this but a paper withoutsignature, and therefore of no authority, attended with a translation ofa very extraordinary appearance; and this paper, in apologizing for it, confirms the facts beyond a doubt. 

Finally, your Committee examined the principal living witness of thetransaction, and find his evidence consistent with the record. YourCommittee received the original accounts, alleged to be delivered by thelady in question, properly sealed and authenticated, and find opposed tothem nothing but a paper without signature, and therefore of noauthority, attended with a translation of a very extraordinaryappearance. 

In Europe the Directors ordered opinions to be taken on a prosecution:they received one doubtful, and three positively for it. 

They write, in their letter of 5th February, 1777, paragraphs 32 and33:--

"Although it is rather our wish to prevent evils in future than to enterinto a severe retrospection of the past, and, where facts are doubtful, or attended with alleviating circumstances, to proceed with lenity, rather than to prosecute with rigor, --yet some of the cases are soflagrantly corrupt, and others attended with circumstances so oppressiveto the inhabitants, that it would be unjust to suffer the delinquents togo unpunished. The principal facts[56] have been communicated to oursolicitor, whose report, confirmed by our standing counsel, we send youby the present conveyance, --authorizing you, at the same time, to takesuch steps as shall appear proper to be pursued. 

"If we find it necessary, we shall return you the original covenants ofsuch of our servants as remain in India, and have been anyways concernedin the undue receipt of money, in order to enable you to recover thesame for the use of the Company by a suit or suits at law, to beinstituted in the Supreme Court of Judicature in Bengal. "

Your Committee do not find that the covenants have been sent, or thatany prosecution has been begun. 

A vast scene of further peculation and corruption, as well in thisbusiness as in several other instances, appears in the evidence of theRajah Nundcomar. That evidence, and all the proceedings relating to it, are entered in the Appendix. It was the last evidence of the kind. Theinformant was hanged. An attempt was made by Mr. Hastings to indict himfor a conspiracy; this failing of effect, another prosecutor appearedfor an offence not connected with these charges. Nundcomar, the objectof that charge, was executed, at the very crisis of the inquiry, for anoffence of another nature, not capital by the laws of the country. Aslong as it appeared safe, several charges were made (which are insertedat large in the Appendix); and Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell seemedapprehensive of many more. General Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis declared, in a minute entered on the Consultations of the 5thMay, 1775, that, "in the late proceedings of the Revenue Board, it willappear that there is no species of peculation from which the HonorableGovernor-General has thought proper to abstain. " A charge of offences ofso heinous a nature, so very extensive, so very deliberate, made onrecord by persons of great weight, appointed by act of Parliament hisassociates in the highest trust, --a charge made at his own board, to hisown face, and transmitted to their common superiors, to whom they werejointly and severally accountable, this was not a thing to be passedover by Mr. Hastings; still less ought it to have perished in otherhands. It ought to have been brought to an immediate and strictdiscussion. General Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis ought tohave been punished for a groundless accusation, if such it had been. Ifthe accusation were founded, Mr. Hastings was very unfit for the highoffice of Governor-General, or for any office. 

After this comprehensive account by his colleagues of theGovernor-General's conduct, these gentlemen proceeded to theparticulars, and they produced the case of a corrupt bargain of Mr. Hastings concerning the disposition of office. This transaction is herestated by your Committee in a very concise manner, being on thisoccasion merely intended to point out to the House the absolutenecessity which, in their opinion, exists for another sort of inquiryinto the corruptions of men in power in India than hitherto has beenpursued. The proceedings may be found at large in the Appendix. 

A complaint was made that Mr. Hastings had sold the office of Phousdarof Hoogly to a person called Khân Jehan Khân on a corrupt agreement, --whichwas, that from his emoluments of seventy-two thousand rupees ayear he was to pay to the Governor-General thirty-six thousand rupeesannually, and to his banian, Cantoo Baboo, four thousand more. Thecomplainant offers to pay to the Company the forty thousand rupees whichwere corruptly paid to these gentlemen, and to content himself with theallowance of thirty-two thousand. Mr. Hastings was, if on any occasionof his life, strongly called upon to bring this matter to the mostdistinct issue; and Mr. Barwell, who supported his administration, andas such ought to have been tender for his honor, was bound to help himto get to the bottom of it, if his enemies should be ungenerous enoughto countenance such an accusation, without permitting it to be detectedand exposed. But the course they held was directly contrary. They beganby an objection to receive the complaint, in which they obstinatelypersevered as far as their power went. Mr. Barwell was of opinion thatthe Company's instructions to inquire into peculation were intended forthe public interests, --that it could not forward the public interests toenter into these inquiries, --and that "he never would be a channel ofaspersing any character, while it cannot conduce to the good ofgovernment. " Here was a new mode of reasoning found out by Mr. Barwell, which might subject all inquiry into peculation to the discretion ofthe very persons charged with it. By that reasoning all orders of hissuperiors were at his mercy; and he actually undertook to set asidethose commands which by an express act of Parliament he was bound toobey, on his opinion of what would or would not conduce to the good ofgovernment. On his principles, he either totally annihilates theauthority of the act of Parliament, or he entertains so extravagant asupposition as that the Court of Directors possessed a more absoluteauthority, when their orders were not intended for the public good, thanwhen they were. 

General Clavering was of a different opinion. He thought "he should bewanting to the legislature, and to the Court of Directors, if he was notto receive the complaints of the inhabitants, when properlyauthenticated, and to prefer them to the board for investigation, as theonly means by which these grievances can be redressed, and the Companyinformed of the conduct of their servants. "

To these sentiments Colonel Monson and Mr. Francis adhered. Mr. Hastingsthought it more safe, on principles similar to those assumed by Mr. Barwell, to refuse to hear the charge; but he reserved his remarks onthis transaction, because they will be equally applicable to _manyothers which in the course of this business are likely to be broughtbefore the board_. There appeared, therefore, to him a probability thatthe charge about the corrupt bargain was no more than the commencementof a whole class of such accusations; since he was of opinion (and whatis very extraordinary, previous to any examination) that the sameremarks would be applicable to several of those which were to follow. Hemust suppose this class of charges very uniform, as well as veryextensive. 

The majority, however, pressed their point; and notwithstanding hisopposition to all inquiry, as he was supported only by Mr. Barwell, thequestion for it was carried. He was then desired to name a day for theappearance of the accuser, and the institution of the inquiry. Thoughbaffled in his attempt to stop the inquiry in the first stage, Mr. Hastings made a second stand. He seems here to have recollectedsomething inherent in his own office, that put the matter more in hispower than at first he had imagined; for he speaks in a positive andcommanding tone: "I will not, " says his minute, "name a day for Mir Zinul ab Dien to appear before the board; _nor will I suffer him to appearbefore the board_. "

The question for the inquiry had been carried; it was declared fit toinquire; but there was, according to him, a power which might preventthe appearance of witnesses. On the general policy of obstructing suchinquiries, Mr. Francis, on a motion to that effect, made a sound remark, which cannot fail of giving rise to very serious thoughts: "That, supposing it agreed among ourselves that the board shall not hear anycharges or complaints against a member of it, a case or cases mayhereafter happen, in which, by a reciprocal complaisance to each other, our respective misconduct may be effectually screened from inquiry; andthe Company, whose interest is concerned, or the parties who may havereason to complain of any one member individually, may be left withoutremedy. "

Mr. Barwell was not of the opinion of that gentleman, nor of the makerof the motion, General Clavering, nor of Mr. Monson, who supported it. He entertains sentiments with regard to the orders of the Directors inthis particular perfectly correspondent with those which he had givenagainst the original inquiry. He says, "Though it may in some littledegree save the Governor-General from personal insult, where there is nojudicial power lodged, that of inquisition can never answer any goodpurpose. " This is doctrine of a most extraordinary nature and tendency, and, as your Committee conceive, contrary to every sound principle to beobserved in the constitution of judicatures and inquisitions. The powerof inquisition ought rather to be wholly separated from the judicial, the former being a previous step to the latter, which requires otherrules and methods, and ought not, if possible, to be lodged in the samehands. The rest of his minute (contained in the Appendix) is filled witha censure on the native inhabitants, with reflections on the illconsequences which would arise from an attention to their complaints, and with an assertion of the authority of the Supreme Court, assuperseding the necessity and propriety of such inquiries in Council. With regard to his principles relative to the natives and theircomplaints, if they are admitted, they are of a tendency to cut off thevery principle of redress. The existence of the Supreme Court, as ameans of relief to the natives under all oppressions, is held out toqualify a refusal to hear in the Council. On the same pretence, Mr. Hastings holds up the authority of the same tribunal. But this and otherproceedings show abundantly of what efficacy that court has been for therelief of the unhappy people of Bengal. A person in delegated authorityrefuses a satisfaction to his superiors, throwing himself on a court ofjustice, and supposes that nothing but what judicially appears againsthim is a fit subject of inquiry. But even in this Mr. Hastings fails inhis application of his principle; for the majority of the Council wereundoubtedly competent to order a prosecution against him in the SupremeCourt, which they had no ground for without a previous inquiry. Buttheir inquiry had other objects. No private accuser might choose toappear. The party who was the subject of the peculation might be (ashere is stated) the accomplice in it. No popular action or popular suitwas provided by the charter under whose authority the court wasinstituted. In any event, a suit might fail in the court for thepunishment of an actor in an abuse for want of the strictest legalproof, which might yet furnish matter for the correction of the abuse, and even reasons strong enough not only to justify, but to require, theDirectors instantly to address for the removal of aGovernor-General. --The opposition of Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell provedas ineffectual in this stage as the former; and a day was named by themajority for the attendance of the party. 

The day following this deliberation, on the assembling of the Council, the Governor-General, Mr. Hastings, said, "he would not sit to beconfronted by such accusers, nor to _suffer_ a judicial inquiry into hisconduct at the board of which he is the president. " As on the formeroccasions, he declares the board dissolved. As on the former occasions, the majority did not admit his claim to this power; they proceeded inhis absence to examine the accuser and witnesses. Their proceedings arein Appendix K. 

It is remarkable, that, during this transaction, Khân Jehan Khân, theparty with whom the corrupt agreement was made, declined an attendanceunder excuses which the majority thought pretences for delay, thoughthey used no compulsory methods towards his appearance. At length, however, he did appear, and then a step was taken by Mr. Hastings of avery extraordinary nature, after the steps which he had taken before, and the declarations with which those steps had been accompanied. Mr. Hastings, who had absolutely refused to be present in the foregoing partof the proceeding, appeared with Khân Jehan Khân. And now the affairtook another turn; other obstructions were raised. General Claveringsaid that the informations hitherto taken had proceeded upon oath. KhânJehan Khân had previously declared to General Clavering his readiness tobe so examined; but when called upon by the board, he changed his mind, and alleged a delicacy, relative to his rank, with regard to the oath. In this scruple he was strongly supported by Mr. Hastings. He and Mr. Barwell went further: they contended that the Council had no right toadminister an oath. They must have been very clear in that opinion, whenthey resisted the examination on oath of the very person who, if hecould safely swear to Mr. Hastings's innocence, owed it as a debt to hispatron not to refuse it; and of the payment of this debt it wasextraordinary in the patron not only to enforce, but to support, theabsolute refusal. 

Although the majority did not acquiesce in this doctrine, they appearedto have doubts of the prudence of enforcing it by violent means; but, construing his refusal into a disposition to screen the peculations ofthe Governor-General, they treated him as guilty of a contempt of theirboard, dismissed him from the service, and recommended another (not theaccuser) to his office. 

The reasons on both sides appear in the Appendix. Mr. Hastings accusesthem bitterly of injustice to himself in considering the refusal of thisperson to swear as a charge proved. How far they did so, and under whatqualifications, will appear by reference to the papers in the Appendix. But Mr. Hastings "thanks God that they are not his judges. " His greathold, and not without reason, is the Supreme Court; and he "blesses thewisdom of Parliament, that constituted a court of judicature at soseasonable a time, to check the despotism of the new Council. " It wasthought in England that the court had other objects than the protectionof the Governor-General against the examinations of those sent out withinstructions to inquire into the peculations of men in power. 

Though Mr. Hastings did at that time, and avowedly did, everything toprevent any inquiry that was instituted merely for the information ofthe Court of Directors, yet he did not feel himself thoroughly satisfiedwith his own proceedings. It was evident that to them his and Mr. Barwell's reasonings would not appear very respectful or satisfactory;he therefore promises to give them full satisfaction at some futuretime. In his letter of the 14th of September, 1775, he reiterates aformer declaration, and assures them of his resolution to this purposein the strongest terms. "I now _again_ recur to the declaration which Ihave before made, that it is my fixed determination to carry _literally_into execution, and _most fully and liberally explain every circumstanceof my conduct on the points upon which I have been injuriouslyarraigned_, --and to afford you the clearest conviction of my ownintegrity, and of the propriety of my motives for my declining a presentdefence of it. "

These motives, as far as they can be discovered, were the violence ofhis adversaries, the interested character and views of the accuser, andthe danger of a prosecution in the Supreme Court, which made it prudentto reserve his defence. These arguments are applicable to any charge. Notwithstanding these reasons, it is plain by the above letter that hethought himself bound at some time or other to give satisfaction to hismasters: till he should do this, in his own opinion, he remained in anunpleasant situation. But he bore his misfortune, it seems, patiently, with a confidence in their justice for his future relief. He says, "Whatever evil may fill the _long interval_ which may precede it. " Thatinterval he has taken care to make long enough; for near eight years arenow elapsed, and he has not yet taken the smallest step towards givingto the Court of Directors any explanation whatever, much less that fulland liberal explanation which he had so repeatedly and solemnlypromised. 

It is to be observed, that, though Mr. Hastings talks in these lettersmuch of his integrity, and of the purity of his motives, and of fullexplanations, he nowhere denies the fact of this corrupt traffic ofoffice. Though he had adjourned his defence, with so much pain tohimself, to so very long a day, he was not so inattentive to the ease ofKhân Jehan Khân as he has shown himself to his own. He had been accusedof corruptly reserving to himself a part of the emoluments of this man'soffice; it was a delicate business to handle, whilst his defence stoodadjourned; yet, in a very short time after a majority came into hishands, he turned out the person appointed by General Clavering, &c, andreplaced the very man with whom he stood accused of the corrupt bargain;what was worse, he had been charged with originally turning outanother, to make room for this man. The whole is put in strong terms bythe then majority of the Council, where, after charging him with everyspecies of peculation, they add, "We believe the proofs of hisappropriating four parts in seven of the salary with which the Companyis charged for the Phousdar of Hoogly are such as, whether sufficient ornot to convict him in a court of justice, will not leave the shadow of adoubt concerning his guilt in the mind of any unprejudiced person. Thesalary is seventy-two thousand rupees a year; the Governor takesthirty-six thousand, and allows Cantoo Baboo four thousand more for thetrouble he submits to in conducting the negotiation with the Phousdar. This also is the common subject of conversation and derision through thewhole settlement. It is our firm opinion and belief, that the latePhousdar of Hoogly, a relation of Mahomed Reza Khân, was turned out ofthis office merely because his terms were not so favorable as thosewhich the Honorable Governor-General has obtained from the presentPhousdar. The Honorable Governor-General is pleased to assert, with aconfidential spirit peculiar to himself, that his measures hithertostand unimpeached, except by us. We know not how this assertion is to bemade good, unless _the most daring and flagrant prostitution in everybranch_ be deemed an honor to his administration. "

The whole style and tenor of these accusations, as well as the nature ofthem, rendered Mr. Hastings's first postponing, and afterwards totallydeclining, all denial, or even defence or explanation, veryextraordinary. No Governor ought to hear in silence such charges; andno Court of Directors ought to have slept upon them. 

The Court of Directors were not wholly inattentive to this business. They condemned his act as it deserved, and they went into the businessof his legal right to dissolve the Council. Their opinions seemedagainst it, and they gave precise orders against the use of any suchpower in future. On consulting Mr. Sayer, the Company's counsel, he wasof a different opinion with regard to the legal right; but he thought, very properly, that the use of a right, and the manner and purposes forwhich it was used, ought not to have been separated. What he thought onthis occasion appears in his opinion transmitted by the Court ofDirectors to Mr. Hastings and the Council-General. "But it was as greata _crime_ to dissolve the Council upon _base and sinister motives_ as itwould be to assume the power of dissolving, if he had it not. I believehe is _the first governor that ever_ dissolved a council inquiring intohis behavior, when he was innocent. Before he could summon threecouncils and dissolve them, he had time fully to consider what would bethe result of such conduct, _to convince everybody, beyond a doubt, ofhis conscious guilt_. "

It was a matter but of small consolation to Mr. Hastings, during thepainful interval he describes, to find that the Company's learnedcounsel admitted that he had legal powers of which he made an use thatraised an universal presumption of his guilt. 

Other counsel did not think so favorably of the powers themselves. Butthis matter was of less consequence, because a great difference ofopinion may arise concerning the extent of official powers, even amongmen professionally educated, (as in this case such a difference didarise, ) and well-intentioned men may take either part. But the use thatwas made of it, in systematical contradiction to the Company's orders, has been stated in the Ninth Report, as well as in many of the othersmade by two of your committees. 

FOOTNOTES:

[14] Appendix B. No. 1. 

[15] Vide Supplement to the Second Report, page 7. 

[16] Appendix. B. No. 2. 

[17] Vide Appendix B. No. 1. 

[18] Appendix B. No. 7. 

[19] Appendix B. No. 3 and No. 5. 

[20] Appendix B. No 6. 

[21] Vide Larkins's Affidavit, Appendix B. No. 5. 

[22] Vide Appendix B. No. 1. 

[23] Vide Appendix B. No. 1. 

[24] Ibid. 

[25] Ibid. , No. 8. 

[26] Ibid. , No. 1. 

[27] Ibid. , No. 4. 

[28] Appendix B. No. 8. 

[29] Ibid. 

[30] Ibid. , No. 9. 

[31] Appendix B. No. 1. 

[32] Ibid. 

[33] Ibid. , No. 8. 

[34] Appendix B. No. 4: The Governor-General's Account of Moneysreceived, dated 22d May, 1782. Also, Appendix B. No. 9: The Auditor'sAccount of Bonds granted to the Governor-General. 

[35] Vide Appendix B. No. 4. 

[36] Vide Mr. Hastings's Account, in Appendix B. No. 4. 

[37] Vide Hastings's Account, dated 22d May, 1782, in Appendix B. No. 4. 

[38] Vide above Appendix, and B. No. 2. 

[39] Vide above Appendix. 

[40] Vide Appendix B. No. 4. 

[41] Vide Appendix B. No. 6. 

[42] Ibid. , No. 7. 

[43] Vide Appendix B. No. 6. 

[44] Ibid. 

[45] Act 13 Geo. III. Cap 63. 

[46] Vide Mr. Hastings's Letter of 16 December, 1782, in Appendix B. No. 6. 

[47] Vide Appendix B. No. 6. 

[48] Vide Appendix B. No. 3. 

[49] Ibid. 

[50] Ibid. 

[51] Vide Appendix B. No. 3. 

[52] Vide Appendix B. No. 3. 

[53] Ibid. 

[54] Ibid. , No. 6. 

[55] Vide Appendix B. No. 6. 

[56] Relative to salt farms, charges of the Ranny of Burdwan, and thecharges of Nundcomar and Munny Begum. 

APPENDIX. 

B. No. 1. [57]

_Copy of a Letter from the Governor-General to the Court of Directors. _

To the Honorable the Court of Directors of the Honorable United EastIndia Company. 

FORT WILLIAM, 29th November, 1780. 

HONORABLE SIRS, --

You will be informed by our Consultations of the 26th of June of a veryunusual tender which was made by me to the board on that day, for thepurpose of indemnifying the Company for the extraordinary expense whichmight be incurred by supplying the detachment under the command of MajorCamac in the invasion of the Mahratta dominions, which lay beyond thedistrict of Gohud, and drawing the attention of Mahdajee Sindia, to whomthat country immediately appertained, from General Goddard, while hiswas employed in the reduction of Bassein, and in securing the conquestsmade by your arms in Guzerat. I was desirous to remove the onlyobjection which has been or could be ostensibly made to the measure, which I had very much at heart, as may be easily conceived from themeans which I took to effect it. For the reasons at large which inducedme to propose that diversion, it will be sufficient to refer to myminute recommending it, and to the letters received from General Goddardnear the same period of time. The subject is now become obsolete, andall the fair hopes which I had built upon the prosecution of theMahratta war, of its termination in a speedy, honorable, andadvantageous peace, have been blasted by the dreadful calamities whichhave befallen your arms in the dependencies of your Presidency of FortSt. George, and changed the object of our pursuit from theaggrandizement of your power to its preservation. My present reason forreverting to my own conduct on the occasion which I have mentioned is toobviate the false conclusions or purposed misrepresentations which maybe made of it, either as an artifice of ostentation or as the effect ofcorrupt influence, by assuring you that the money, _by whatever means itcame into your possession_, was not my own, --that I had myself no rightto it, nor would or could have received it, but for the occasion whichprompted me to avail myself of the accidental means which were at thatinstant afforded me of accepting and converting it to the property anduse of the Company; and with this brief apology I shall dismiss thesubject. 

Something of affinity to this anecdote may appear in the first aspect of_another_ transaction, which I shall proceed to relate, and of which itis more immediately my duty to inform you. 

You will have been advised, by repeated addresses of this government, ofthe arrival of an army at Cuttack, under the command of ChimnajeeBoosla, the second son of Moodajee Boosla, the Rajah of Berar. Theorigin and destination of this force have been largely explained anddetailed in the correspondence of the government of Berar, and invarious parts of our Consultations. The minute relation of these wouldexceed the bounds of a letter; I shall therefore confine myself to theprincipal fact. 

About the middle of the last year, a plan of confederacy was formed bythe Nabob Nizam Ali Khân, by which it was proposed, that, while the armyof the Mahrattas, under the command of Mahdajee Sindia and TuckoojeeHoolkar, was employed to check the operations of General Goddard in theWest of India, Hyder Ali Khân should invade the Carnatic, MoodajeeBoosla the provinces of Bengal, and he himself the Circars of Rajamundryand Chicacole. 

The government of Berar was required to accept the part assigned it inthis combination, and to march a large body of troops immediately intoBengal. To enforce the request on the part of the ruling member of theMahratta state, menaces of instant hostility by the combined forces wereadded by Mahdajee Sindia, Tuckoojee Hoolkar, and Nizam Ali Khân, inletters written by them to Moodajee Boosla on the occasion. He was notin a state to sustain the brunt of so formidable a league, andostensibly yielded. Such at least was the turn which he gave to hisacquiescence, in his letters to me; and his subsequent conduct hasjustified his professions. I was early and progressively acquainted byhim with the requisition, and with the measures which were intended tobe taken, and which were taken, by him upon it. The army professedlydestined for Bengal marched on the Dusserra of the last year, corresponding with the 7th of October. Instead of taking the directcourse to Bahar, which had been prescribed, it proceeded by varieddeviations and studied delays to Cuttack, where it arrived late in Maylast, having performed a practicable journey of three mouths in seven, and concluded it at the instant commencement of the rains, which ofcourse would preclude its operations, and afford the government of Berara further interval of five months to provide for the part which it wouldthen be compelled to choose. 

In the mean time letters were continually written by the Rajah and hisminister to this government, explanatory of their situation and motives, proposing their mediation and guaranty for a peace and alliance with thePeshwa, and professing, without solicitation on our part, the mostfriendly disposition towards us, and the most determined resolution tomaintain it. Conformably to these assurances, and the acceptance of aproposal made by Moodajee Boosla to depute his minister to Bengal forthe purpose of negotiating and concluding the proposed treaty of peace, application had been made to the Peshwa for credentials to the sameeffect. 

In the mean time the fatal news arrived of the defeat of your army atConjeveram. It now became necessary that every other object should giveplace or be made subservient to the preservation of the Carnatic; norwould the measures requisite for that end admit an instant of delay. Peace with the Mahrattas was the first object; to conciliate theiralliance, and that of every other power in natural enmity with HyderAli, the next. Instant measures were taken (as our general advices willinform you) to secure both these points, and to employ the governmentof Berar as the channel and instrument of accomplishing them. Its armystill lay on our borders, and in distress for a long arrear of pay, notless occasioned by the want of pecuniary funds than a stoppage ofcommunication. An application had been made to us for a supply of money;and the sum specified for the complete relief of the army was sixteenlacs. We had neither money to spare, nor, in the apparent state of thatgovernment in its relation to ours, would it have been either prudent orconsistent with our public credit to have afforded it. It wasnevertheless my decided opinion that some aid should be given, --not lessas a necessary relief than as an indication of confidence, and a returnfor the many instances of substantial kindness which we had within thecourse of the last two years experienced from the government of Berar. Ihad an assurance that such a proposal would receive the acquiescence ofthe board; but I knew that it would not pass without opposition, and itwould have become public, which might have defeated its purpose. Convinced of the necessity of the expedient, and assured of thesincerity of the government of Berar, from evidences of stronger proofto me than I could make them appear to the other members of the board, Iresolved to adopt it, and take the entire responsibility of it uponmyself. In this mode a less considerable sum would suffice. Iaccordingly caused three lacs of rupees to be delivered to the ministerof the Rajah of Berar, resident in Calcutta: he has transmitted it toCuttack. Two thirds of this sum I have raised by my own credit, andshall charge it in my official accounts; the other third I have suppliedfrom the cash in my hands belonging to the Honorable Company. I havegiven due notice to Moodajee Boosla of this transaction, and explainedit to have been a private act of my own, unknown to the other members ofthe Council. I have given him expectations of the remainder of theamount required for the arrears of his army, proportioned to the extentto which he may put it in my power to propose it as a public gratuity byhis effectual orders for the recall of these troops, or for theirjunction with ours. 

I hope I shall receive your approbation of what I have done for yourservice, and your indulgence for the length of this narrative, which Icould not comprise within a narrower compass. 

 I have the honor to be, Honorable Sirs, Your most faithful, obedient, and humble servant, WARREN HASTINGS. 

B. No. 2. 

_An Account of Money paid into the Company's Treasury by theGovernor-General, since the Year 1773. _

May April CRs. | CRs. |1774 to 1775. For interest bonds 2, 175[58]| For bills of exchange on the | Court 1, 43, 937 | For money refunded by | order of Court, account | General Coote's commission 8, 418 | -------- | 1, 54, 530 | |1775-1776. For bills of exchange on the Court | 1, 80, 4801776-1777. Do. Do. Do. | 1, 96, 8001777-1778. Do. Do. Do. | 1, 08, 0001778-1779. Do. Do. Do. | 1, 43, 0001779-1780. Do. Do. Do. | 1, 21, 6001780-1781. For bills of exchange 43, 000 | For deposits 2, 38, 715 | For interest bonds, at 8 per | cent 4, 75, 600 | For do. 4 per | cent 1, 66, 000 | For Durbar charges 2, 32, 000 | -------- | 11, 55, 315May, 1782. For interest bonds | 35, 000 | --------- | 20, 94, 725 (Errors excepted. )

JOHN ANNIS, _Auditor of Indian Accounts. _ EAST INDIA HOUSE, 11th June, 1783. 

B. No. 3. 

To the Honorable the Secret Committee of the Honorable Court ofDirectors. 

FORT WILLIAM, 22d May, 1782. 

HONORABLE SIRS, --

In a letter which I have had the honor to address you in duplicate, andof which a triplicate accompanies this, dated 20th January, 1782, Iinformed you that I had received the offer of a sum of money from theNabob Vizier and his ministers to the nominal amount of ten lacs ofLucknow siccas, and that bills on the house of Gopaul Doss had beenactually given me for the amount, which I had accepted for the use ofthe Honorable Company; and I promised to account with you for the sameas soon as it should be in my power, after the whole sum had come intomy possession. This promise I now perform; and deeming it consistentwith the spirit of it, I have added such _other_ sums as have beenoccasionally converted to the Company's property through my means, andin consequence of the like original destination. Of the second of theseyou have been already advised in a letter which I had the honor toaddress the Honorable Court of Directors, dated 29th November, 1780. Both this and the third article were paid immediately to the Treasury, by my order to the sub-treasurer to receive them on the Company'saccount, but never passed through my hands. The three sums for whichbonds were granted were in like manner paid to the Company's Treasurywithout passing through my hands; but their appropriation was notspecified. The sum of 58, 000 current rupees was received while I was onmy journey to Benares, and applied as expressed in the account. 

As to the manner in which these sums have been expended, the referencewhich I have made of it, in the accompanying account, to the severalaccounts in which they are credited, renders any other specification ofit unnecessary; besides that those accounts either have or will havereceived a much stronger authentication than any that I could give tomine. 

Why these sums were taken by me, --why they were, except the second, quietly transferred to the Company's use, --why bonds were taken for thefirst, and not for the rest, --might, were this matter to be exposed tothe view of the public, furnish a variety of conjectures, to which itwould be of little use to reply. Were your Honorable Court to questionme upon these points, I would answer, that the sums were taken for theCompany's benefit at times in which the Company very much neededthem, --that I either chose to conceal the first receipts from publiccuriosity by receiving bonds for the amount, or possibly acted withoutany studied design which my memory could at this distance of timeverify, and that I did not think it worth my care to observe the samemeans with the rest. I trust, Honorable Sirs, to your breasts for acandid interpretation of my actions, and assume the freedom to add, thatI think myself, on such a subject, and on such an occasion, entitled toit. 

 I have the honor to be, Honorable Sirs, Your most faithful, most obedient, and most humble servant, WARREN HASTINGS. 

B. No. 4. 

_An Account of Sums received on the Account of the Honorable Company ofthe Governor-General, or paid to their Treasury by his Order, andapplied to their Service. _

-------------------------------------------------+----------------1780. |October. | The following sums were paid into the |Treasury, and bonds granted for the same, in the |name of the Governor-General, in whose possession|the bonds remain, with a declaration upon each |indorsed and signed by him, that he has no claim |on the Company for the amount either of principal|or interest, no part of the latter having been |received: | |One bond, dated the 1st October, | 1780, No. 1539 1, 16, 000 0 0 | |One bond, dated the 2d October, | 1780, No. 1540 1, 16, 000 0 0 | |One bond, dated the 23d November, | 1780, No. 1354 1, 74, 000 0 0 | -------------- | 4, 06, 000 0 0November. | Paid into the Treasury, and carried |to the Governor-General's credit in the |12th page of the Deposits Journal of 1780-81, |mohurs of sorts which had been coined in the |Mint, and produced, as per 358 and 359 |pages of the Company's General Journal of |1780-81: | Gold mohurs, 12, 861 12 11, or | Calcutta siccas 2, 05, 788 14 9 | Batta, 16 per cent 32, 926 3 6 | -------------- | 2, 38, 715 2 31781. |30 April. | Paid into the Treasury, and credited |in the 637th page of the Company's General |Journal, as money received from the |Governor-General on account of Durbar charges: | Sicca rupees 2, 00, 000 0 0 | Batta, 16 per cent 32, 000 0 0 | 2, 32, 000 0 0 -------------- | -------------- Carried forward | 8, 76, 715 2 3

 Brought forward | 8, 76, 715 2 3August. | Received in cash, and employed in |defraying my public disbursements, and credited |in the Governor-General's account of |Durbar charges for April, 1782 | 58, 000 0 0

 Produce of the sum mentioned in the |Governor-General's letter to the Honorable |Secret Committee, dated 20th January, 1782, |and credited in the Governor-General's account |of Durbar charges for April, 1782 | 10, 30, 275 1 3 |---------------- Current rupees | 19, 64, 990 3 6 ( Errors excepted. )

 WARREN HASTINGS. FORT WILLIAM, 22d May, 1782. 

B. No. 5. 

I, William Larkins, do make oath and say, that the letter and account towhich this affidavit is affixed were written by me at the request of theHonorable Warren Hastings, Esquire, on the 22d May, 1782, from roughdraughts written by himself in my presence; that the cover of the letterwas sealed up by him in my presence, and was then intended to have beentransmitted to England by the "Lively, " when that vessel was firstordered for dispatch; and that it has remained closed until this day, when it was opened for the express purpose of being accompanied by thisaffidavit. 

 So help me God. WILLIAM LARKINS. 

 CALCUTTA, 16th December 1782. 

 Sworn this 16th day of December, 1782, before me, J. HYDE. 

B. No. 6. 

To the Honorable the Secret Committee of the Honorable Court ofDirectors. 

FORT WILLIAM, 16 December, 1782. 

HONORABLE SIRS, --

The dispatch of the "Lively" having been protracted by various causesfrom time to time, the accompanying address, which was originallydesigned and prepared for that dispatch, (no other conveyance sinceoccurring, ) has of course been thus long detained. The delay is of nopublic consequence; but it has produced a situation which with respectto myself I regard as unfortunate, because it exposes me to the meanestimputation from the occasion which the late Parliamentary Inquiries havesince furnished, but which were unknown when my letter was written, andwritten in the necessary consequence of a promise made to that effect ina former letter to your Honorable Committee, dated 20th January last. However, to preclude the possibility of such reflections from affectingme, I have desired Mr. Larkins, who was privy to the whole transaction, to affix to the letter his affidavit of the date in which it waswritten. I own I feel most sensibly the mortification of being reducedto the necessity of using such precautions to guard my reputation fromdishonor. If I had at any time possessed that degree of confidence frommy immediate employers which they never withheld from the meanest of mypredecessors, I should have disdained to use these attentions. How Ihave drawn on me a different treatment I know not; it is sufficient thatI have not merited it: and in the course of a service of thirty-twoyears, and ten of these employed in maintaining the powers anddischarging the duties of the first office of the British government inIndia, that Honorable Court ought to know whether I possess theintegrity and honor which are the first requisites of such a station. IfI wanted these, they have afforded me but too powerful incentives tosuppress the information which I now convey to them through you, and toappropriate to my own use the sums which I have already passed to theircredit, by the unworthy, and, pardon me if I add, dangerous, reflectionswhich they have passed upon me for the first communication of this kind:and your own experience will suggest to you, that there are persons whowould profit by such a warning. 

Upon the whole of these transactions, which to you, who are accustomedto view business in an official and regular light, may appearunprecedented, if not improper, I have but a few short remarks tosuggest to your consideration. 

If I appear in any unfavorable light by these transactions, I resign thecommon and legal security of those who commit crimes or errors. I amready to answer every particular question that may be put againstmyself, upon honor or upon oath. 

The sources from which these reliefs to the public service have comewould never have yielded them to the Company publicly; and theexigencies of your service (exigencies created by the exposition of youraffairs, and faction in your councils) required those supplies. 

I could have concealed them, had I had a wrong motive, from yours andthe public eye forever; and I know that the difficulties to which aspirit of injustice may subject me for my candor and avowal are greaterthan any possible inconvenience that could have attended theconcealment, except the dissatisfaction of my own mind. Thesedifficulties are but a few of those which I have suffered in yourservice. The applause of my own breast is my surest reward, and was thesupport of my mind in meeting them: your applause, and that of mycountry, are my next wish in life. 

 I have the honor to be, Honorable Sirs, Your most faithful, most obedient, and most humble servant, WARREN HASTINGS. 

B. No. 7. 

_Extract of the Company's General Letter to Bengal, dated the 25thJanuary, 1782. _

Par. 127. We have received a letter from our Governor-General, dated the 29th of November, 1780, relative to an unusual tender andadvance of money made by him to the Council, as entered on yourConsultation of the 26th of June, for the purpose of indemnifying theCompany from the extraordinary charge which might be incurred bysupplying the detachment under the command of Major Camac in theinvasion of the Mahratta dominions, which lay beyond the district ofGohud, and thereby drawing the attention of Mahdajee Sindia (to whom thecountry appertained) from General Goddard, while the General wasemployed in the reduction of Bassein, and in securing the conquestsmade in the Guzerat country; and also respecting the sum of three lacsof rupees advanced by the Governor-General for the use of the army underthe command of Chimnajee Boosla without the authority or knowledge ofthe Council; with the reasons for taking these extraordinary steps underthe circumstances stated in his letter. 

128. In regard to the first of these transactions, we readily conceive, that, in the then state of the Council, the Governor-General might beinduced to temporary secrecy respecting the members of the board, notonly because he might be apprehensive of opposition to the proposedapplication of the money, but, perhaps, because doubts might have arisenconcerning the propriety of appropriating it to the Company's use on anyaccount; but it does _not appear to us_ that there could be any realnecessity for delaying to communicate to us immediate information of thechannel by which the money came into his possession, with a completeillustration of the cause or causes of so extraordinary an event. 

129. Circumstanced as affairs were at the moment, it appears that theGovernor-General had the measure much at heart, and judged it absolutelynecessary. The means proposed of defraying the extra expense were veryextraordinary; and the money, as we conceive, must have come into hishands by an unusual channel: and when more complete information comesbefore us, we shall give our sentiments fully upon the wholetransaction. 

130. In regard to the application of the Company's money to the army ofChimnajee Boosla by the sole authority of the Governor-General, he knewthat it was entirely at his own risk, and he has taken theresponsibility upon himself; nothing but the most urgent necessitycould warrant the measure; nor can anything short of full proof of suchnecessity, and of the propriety and utility of the extraordinary steptaken on the occasion, entitle the Governor-General to the approbationof the Court of Directors; and therefore, as in the former instancerelative to the sum advanced and paid into our Treasury, we must alsofor the present _suspend_ our judgment respecting the money sent to theBerar army, without approving it in the least degree, or proceeding tocensure our Governor-General for this transaction. 

B. No. 8. 

_Extract of Bengal Secret Consultations, the 9th January, 1781. _

The following letter from the Governor-General having been circulated, and the request therein made complied with, an order on the Treasurypassed accordingly. 

HONORABLE SIR AND SIRS, --

Having had occasion to disburse the sum of three lacs of sicca rupees onaccount of secret services, which having been advanced from my ownprivate cash, I request that the same may be repaid to me in thefollowing manner:--A bond to be granted me upon the terms of the secondloan, bearing date from the 1st October, for one lac of sicca rupees; abond to be granted me upon the terms of the first loan, bearing datefrom the 1st October, for one lac of sicca rupees; a bond to be grantedme upon the terms of the first loan, bearing date from the 2d October, for one lac of sicca rupees. 

 I have the honor to be, &c. , &c. , (Signed) WARREN HASTINGS. 

 Fort William, 5th January, 1781. 

B. No. 9. 

_An Account of Bonds granted to the Governor-General, from 1st January, 1779, to 31st May, 1782, with Interest paid or credited thereon. _

-------------------+----------+------------------+------------------When paid into the | Sum. | Date of Bond. | Rate of Interest. Treasury. | | |-------------------+----------+------------------+------------------ | CRs. | |23d Nov. , 1780 | 1, 74, 000 | 23d Nov. , 1780 | at 8 per cent. 15th Dec. | 69, 600 | 15th Dec. | Do. 15th Jan. , 1781 | 1, 16, 000 | 1st Oct. , 1780 | Do. Do. | 1, 16, 000 | 2d Do. | Do. Do. | 1, 16, 000 | 1st Do. | 4 per cent. 17th March | 50, 000 | 17th Mar. , 1781 | Do. 8th May, 1782 | 20, 000 | 15th Sept. , 1781 | 8 per cent. Do. | 15, 000 | 8th Dec. , 1781 | Do. |----------| | | 6, 76, 600 | |

There does not appear to have been any interest paid on the above bondsto 31st May, 1782, the last accounts received. In the Interest Books, 1780-81, the last received, the Governor-General has credit for intereston the first six to April, 1781, to the amount of CRs. 21, 964 12 8. 

 (Errors excepted. )

 JOHN ANNIS, _Auditor of Indian Accounts. _ EAST INDIA HOUSE, 5th June, 1783. 

FOOTNOTES:

[57] As the Appendixes originally printed with the foregoing Reports, and which consist chiefly of official documents, would have swelled thisvolume to an enormous size, it has been thought proper to omit them, with the exception of the first nine numbers of the Appendix B. To theEleventh Report, the insertion of which has been judged necessary forthe elucidation of the subject-matter of that Report. 

[58] {Received 19th May, {Cancelled 30th July, 1774. 

ARTICLES OF CHARGE

OF

HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS

AGAINST

WARREN HASTINGS, ESQUIRE

LATE GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF BENGAL:

PRESENTED TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

IN APRIL AND MAY, 1786. 

ARTICLES I. -VI. 

ARTICLES OF CHARGE

AGAINST

WARREN HASTINGS, ESQ. , LATE GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF BENGAL. 

I. --ROHILLA WAR. 

That the Court of Directors of the East India Company, from a just senseof the danger and odium incident to the extension of their conquests inthe East Indies, and from an experience of the disorders and corruptpractices which intrigues and negotiations to bring about revolutionsamong the country powers had produced, did positively and repeatedlydirect their servants in Bengal not to engage in any offensive warwhatsoever. That the said Court laid it down as _an invariable maxim, which ought ever to be maintained, that they were to avoid taking partin the political schemes of any of the country princes_, --and did, inparticular, order and direct that they should not engage with a certainprince called Sujah ul Dowlah, Nabob of Oude, and Vizier of the Empire, in any operations beyond certain limits in the said orders speciallydescribed. 

That Warren Hastings, Esquire, then Governor of Fort William in Bengal, did, with other members of the Council, declare his clear understandingof the true intent and meaning of the said positive and repeated ordersand injunctions, --did express to the Court of Directors his approbationof the policy thereof, --did declare that he adopted the same _withsincerity and satisfaction_, and that he was _too well aware of theruinous tendency of all schemes of conquest ever to adopt them, or everto depart from the absolute line of self-defence, unless impelled to itby the most obvious necessity_, --did signify to the Nabob of Oude thesaid orders, and his obligation to yield punctual obediencethereto, --and did solemnly engage and promise to the Court of Directors, with the _unanimous concurrence_ of the whole Council, "that no objector consideration should either tempt or compel him to pass the politicalline which they [the Directors] had laid down for his operations withthe Vizier, " assuring the Court of Directors that he "scarce saw apossible advantage which could compensate the hazard and expense to beincurred by a contrary conduct, "--that he did frequently repeat the samedeclarations, or declarations to the same effect, particularly in aletter to the Nabob himself, of the 22d of November, 1773, in thefollowing words: "The commands of my superiors are, as I have repeatedlyinformed you, peremptory, that I shall not suffer their arms to becarried beyond the line of their own boundaries, and those of yourExcellency, their ally. "

That the said Warren Hastings, in direct contradiction to the saidorders, and to his own sense of their propriety and coercive authority, and in breach of his express promises and engagements, did, inSeptember, 1773, enter into a private engagement with the said Nabob ofOude, who was the special object of the prohibition, to furnish him, fora stipulated sum of money to be paid to the East India Company, with abody of troops for the declared purpose of "thoroughly extirpating thenation of the Rohillas": a nation from whom the Company had neverreceived, or pretended to receive or apprehend, any injury whatsoever;whose country, in the month of February, 1773, by an unanimousresolution of the said Warren Hastings and his Council, was included inthe line of defence against the Mahrattas; and from whom the Nabob nevercomplained of an aggression or act of hostility, nor pretended adistinct cause of quarrel, other than the non-payment of a sum of moneyin dispute between him and that people. 

That, supposing the sum of money in question to have been strictly dueto the said Nabob by virtue of any engagement between him and theRohilla chiefs, the East India Company, or their representatives, werenot parties to that engagement, or guaranties thereof, nor bound by anyobligation whatever to enforce the execution of it. 

That, previous to the said Warren Hastings's entering into the agreementor bargain aforesaid to extirpate the said nation, he did not make, orcause to be made, a due inquiry into the validity of the sole pretextused by the said Nabob; nor did he give notice of the said claims ofdebt to the nation of the Rohillas, in order to receive an explanationon their part of the matter in litigation; nor did he offer anymediation, nor propose, nor afford an opportunity of proposing, anagreement or submission by which the calamities of war might be avoided, as, by the high state in which the East India Company stood as asovereign power in the East, and the honor and character it ought tomaintain, as well as by the principles of equity and humanity, and bythe true and obvious policy of uniting the power of the Mahometanprinces against the Mahrattas, he was bound to do. That, instead ofsuch previous inquiry, or tender of good offices, the said WarrenHastings did stimulate the ambition and ferocity of the Nabob of Oude tothe full completion of the inhuman end of the said unjustifiableenterprise, by informing him "that it would be absolutely necessary topersevere in it until it should be accomplished"; pretending that a fearof the Company's displeasure was his motive for annexing theaccomplishment of the enterprise as a condition of his assistance, andasserting "that he could not hazard or answer for the displeasure of theCompany, his masters, if they should find themselves involved in a_fruitless_ war, or in an expense for prosecuting it, "--a pretencetending to the high dishonor of the East India Company, as if the gainto be acquired was to reconcile that body to the breach of their ownorders prohibiting all such enterprises;--and in order further toinvolve the said Nabob beyond the power of retreating, he did, in thecourse of the proceeding, purposely put the said Nabob underdifficulties in case he should decline that war, and did oblige him toaccept even the permission to relinquish the execution of this unjustproject as a favor, and _to make concessions for it_; thereby acting asif the Company were principals in the hostility; and employing for thispurpose much double dealing and divers unworthy artifices to entangleand perplex the said Nabob, but by means of which he found himself (ashe has entered it on record) _hampered and embarrassed in a particularmanner_. 

That the said compact for offensive alliance in favor of a great princeagainst a considerable nation was not carried on by projects andcounter-projects in writing; nor were the articles and conditionsthereof formed into any regular written instrument, signed and sealedby the parties; but the whole (both the negotiation and the compact ofoffensive alliance against the Rohillas) was a mere verbal engagement, the purport and conventions whereof nowhere appeared, except insubsequent correspondence, in which certain of the articles, as theywere stated by the several parties, did materially differ: a proceedingnew and unprecedented, and directly leading to mutual misconstruction, evasion, and ill faith, and tending to encourage and protect everyspecies of corrupt, clandestine practice. That, at the time when thisprivate verbal agreement was made by the said Warren Hastings with theNabob of Oude, a public ostensible treaty was concluded by him with thesaid Nabob, in which there is no mention whatever of such agreement, orreference whatever to it: in defence of which omission, it is assertedby the said Warren Hastings, that _the multiplication of treatiesweakens their efficacy, and therefore they should be reserved only forvery important and permanent obligations_; notwithstanding he hadpreviously declared to the said Nabob, "that the points which he hadproposed required much consideration, and the previous ratification of aformal agreement, before he could consent to them. " That the whole ofthe said verbal agreement with the Nabob of Oude in his own person, without any assistance on his part, was carried on and concluded by thesaid Warren Hastings alone, without any person who might witness thesame, without the intervention even of an interpreter, though heconfesses that he spoke the Hindostan language _imperfectly_, andalthough he had with him at that time and place several persons high inthe Company's service and confidence, namely, the commander-in-chief oftheir forces, two members of their Council, and the Secretary to theCouncil, who were not otherwise acquainted with the proceedings betweenhim and the said Nabob than by such communications as he thought fit tomake to them. 

That the object avowed by the said Warren Hastings, and the motivesurged by him for employing the British arms in the utter extirpation ofthe Rohilla nation, are stated by himself in the following terms:--"Theacquisition of forty lacs of rupees to the Company, and of so muchspecie added to the exhausted currency of our provinces;--that it wouldgive wealth to the Nabob of Oude, of which we should participate;--thatthe said Warren Hastings _should_ always be ready to profess that he didreckon the probable acquisition of wealth among his reasons for takingup arms against his _neighbors_;--that it would ease the Company of aconsiderable part of their military expense, and preserve their troopsfrom inaction and relaxation of discipline;--that the weak state of theRohillas promised an easy conquest of them;--and, finally, that such washis idea of the Company's distress at home, added to his knowledge oftheir wants abroad, that he should have been glad of _any_ occasion toemploy their forces which saved so much of their pay and expenses. "

That, in the private verbal agreement aforesaid for offensive war, thesaid Warren Hastings did transgress the bounds of the authority givenhim by his instructions from the Council of Fort William, which hadlimited his powers to such compacts "as were consistent with the spiritof the Company's orders"; which Council he afterwards persuaded, andwith difficulty drew into an acquiescence in what he had done. 

That the agreement to the effect aforesaid was settled in the saidsecret conferences before the 10th of September, 1773; but the saidWarren Hastings, concealing from the Court of Directors a matter ofwhich it was his duty to afford them the earliest and fullestinformation, did, on the said 10th of September, 1773, write to theDirectors, and dispatched his letter over land, giving them an accountof the public treaty, but taking not the least notice of his agreementfor a mercenary war against the nation of the Rohillas. 

That, in order to conceal the true purport of the said clandestineagreement the more effectually, and until he should find means ofgaining over the rest of the Council to a concurrence in hisdisobedience of orders, he entered a minute in the Council books, givinga false account of the transaction; in which minute he represented thatthe Nabob had indeed _proposed_ the design aforesaid, and that he, thesaid Warren Hastings, _was pleased that he urged the scheme of thisexpedition no further_, when in reality and truth he had absolutelyconsented to the said enterprise, and had engaged to assist him in it, which he afterwards admitted, and confessed that he did act inconsequence of the same. 

That the said Warren Hastings and his Council were sensible of the truenature of the enterprise in which they had engaged the Company's arms, and of the heavy responsibility to which it would subject himself andthe Council, --"the personal hazard they, the Council, run, inundertaking so _uncommon_ a measure without _positive_ instructions, attheir own risk, with the eyes of the whole nation on the affairs of theCompany, and the passions and prejudices of almost every man in Englandinflamed against the conduct of the Company and the character of itsservants"; yet they engaged in the very practice which had brought suchodium on the Company, and on the character of its servants, though theyfurther say that they had continually before _their eyes the dread offorfeiting the favor of their employers_, and becoming the "objects of_popular_ invectives. " The said Warren Hastings himself says, at thevery time when he proposed the measure, "I must confess I entertain somedoubts as to its expediency at this time, from the circumstances of the_Company_ at home, exposed to _popular_ clamor, and all its measuresliable to be canvassed in _Parliament_, their charter drawing to aclose, and his Majesty's ministers unquestionably ready to takeadvantage of every unfavorable circumstance in the negotiations of itsrenewal. " All these considerations did not prevent the said WarrenHastings from making and carrying into execution the said mercenaryagreement for a sum of money, the payment of which the Nabob endeavoredto evade on a construction of the verbal treaty, and was so far frombeing insisted on, as it ought to have been, by the said WarrenHastings, that, when, after the completion of the service, thecommander-in-chief was directed to make a demand of the money, the agentof the said Warren Hastings at the same time assured the Nabob "that thedemand was nothing more than matter of form, common, and even necessary, in all public transactions, and that, although the board considered theclaim of the government literally due, it was not the intention ofadministration to prescribe to his Excellency _the mode, or evenlimits, of payment_. " Nor was any part of the money recovered, until theestablishment of the Governor-General and Council by act of Parliament, and their determination to withdraw the brigade from the Nabob'sservice, --the Resident at his court, appointed by the said WarrenHastings, having written, _that he had experienced much duplicity anddeceit in most of his transactions with his Excellency_; and the saidNabob and his successors falling back in other payments in the same orgreater proportion as he advanced in the payment of this debt, theconsideration of lucre to the Company, the declared motive to thisshameful transaction, totally failed, and no money in effect andsubstance (as far as by any account to be depended on appears) has beenobtained. 

That the said Nabob of Oude did, in consequence of the said agreement, and with the assistance of British troops, which were ordered to marchand subjected to his disposal by the said Warren Hastings and theCouncil, unjustly enter into and invade the country of the Rohillas, anddid there make war in a barbarous and inhuman manner, "by an abuse ofvictory, " "by the unnecessary destruction of the country, " "by a wantondisplay of violence and oppression, of inhumanity and cruelty, " and "bythe sudden expulsion and casting down of an whole race of people, towhom the slightest benevolence was denied. " When prayer was made not todishonor the Begum (a princess of great rank, whose husband had beenkilled in battle) and other women, by _dragging them about the country, to be loaded with the scoffs of the Nabob's rabble, and otherwise stillworse used_, the Nabob refused to listen to the entreaties of a Britishcommander-in-chief in their favor; and the said women of high rank wereexposed not only to the vilest personal indignities, but even toabsolute want: and these transactions being by Colonel Championcommunicated to the said Warren Hastings, instead of commendations forhis intelligence, and orders to redress the said evils, and to preventthe like in future, by means which were suggested, and which appear tohave been proper and feasible, he received a reprimand from the saidWarren Hastings, who declared that we had no authority to control theconduct of the Vizier in the treatment of his subjects; and that ColonelChampion desisted from making further representations on this subject tothe said Warren Hastings, being apprehensive of having already run somerisk of displeasing by perhaps a too free communication of sentiments. That, in consequence of the said proceedings, not only the eminentfamilies of the chiefs of the Rohilla nation were either cut off orbanished, and their wives and offspring reduced to utter ruin, but thecountry itself, heretofore distinguished above all others for the extentof its cultivation as a _garden_, not having _one spot_ in it of_uncultivated_ ground, and from being _in the most flourishing statethat a country could be_, was by the inhuman mode of carrying on thewar, and the ill government during the consequent usurpation, reduced toa state of great decay and depopulation, in which it still remains. 

That the East India Company, having had reason to conceive, that, forthe purpose of concealing corrupt transactions, their servants in Indiahad made unfair, mutilated, and garbled communications ofcorrespondence, and sometimes had wholly withheld the same, made anorder in their letter of the 23d of March, 1770, in the followingtenor:--"The Governor singly shall correspond with the country powers;but _all_ letters, before they shall be by him sent, must becommunicated to the other members of the Select Committee, and receivetheir approbation; and also _all_ letters _whatsoever_ which may bereceived by the Governor, in answer to or in course of correspondence, shall likewise be laid before the said Select Committee for theirinformation and consideration"; and that in their instructions to theirGovernor-General and Council, dated 30th March, 1774, they did repeattheir orders to the same purpose and effect. 

That the said Warren Hastings did not obey, as in duty he was bound todo, the said standing orders; nor did communicate all his correspondencewith Mr. Middleton, the Company's agent at the court of the Subah ofOude, or with Colonel Champion, the commander-in-chief of the Company'sforces in the Rohilla war, to the Select Committee: and when afterwards, that is to say, on the 25th of October, 1774, he was required by themajority of the Council appointed by the act of Parliament of 1773, whose opinion was by the said act directed to be taken as the act of thewhole Council, to produce _all_ his correspondence with Mr. Middletonand Colonel Champion for the direction of their future proceedingsrelative to the obscure, intricate, and critical transaction aforesaid, he did positively and pertinaciously refuse to deliver any other thansuch parts of the said correspondence as he thought convenient, coveringhis said illegal refusal under general vague pretences of secrecy anddanger from the communication, although the said order and instructionof the Court of Directors above mentioned was urged to him, and althoughit was represented to him by the said Council, that they, as well ashe, were bound by an oath of secrecy: which refusal to obey the ordersof the Court of Directors (orders specially, and on weighty grounds ofexperience, pointed to cases of this very nature) gave rise to muchjealousy, and excited great suspicions relative to the motives andgrounds on which the Rohilla war had been undertaken. 

That the said Warren Hastings, in the grounds alleged in hisjustification of his refusal to communicate to his colleagues in theSuperior Council his correspondence with Mr. Middleton, the Company'sResident at Oude, was guilty of a new offence, arrogating to himselfunprecedented and dangerous powers, on principles utterly subversive ofall order and discipline in service, and introductory to corruptconfederacies and disobedience among the Company's servants; the saidWarren Hastings insisting that Mr. Middleton, the Company's covenantedservant, the public Resident for transacting the Company's affairs atthe court of the Subah of Oude, and as such receiving from the Company asalary for his service, was no other than the _official agent_ of him, the said Warren Hastings, and that, being such, he was not obliged tocommunicate his correspondence. 

That the Court of Directors, and afterwards a General Court of theProprietors of the East India Company, (although the latter showedfavorable dispositions towards the said Warren Hastings, and expressed, but without assigning any ground or reason, the highest opinion of hisservices and integrity, ) did unanimously condemn, along with his conductrelative to the Rohilla treaty and war, his refusal to communicate hiswhole correspondence with Mr. Middleton to the Superior Council: yet thesaid Warren Hastings, in defiance of the opinion of the Directors, andthe unanimous opinion of the General Court of the said East IndiaCompany, as well as the precedent positive orders of the Court ofDirectors, and the injunctions of an act of Parliament, has, from thattime to the present, never made any communication of the whole of hiscorrespondence to the Governor-General and Council, or to the Court ofDirectors. 

II. --SHAH ALLUM. 

That, in a solemn treaty of peace, concluded the 16th of August, 1765, between the East India Company and the late Nabob of Oude, Sujah ulDowlah, and highly approved of, confirmed, and ratified by the saidCompany, it is agreed, "that the King Shah Allum shall remain in fullpossession of Corah, and such part of the province of Allahabad as henow possesses, which are ceded to his Majesty as a royal demesne for thesupport of his dignity and expenses. " That, in a separate agreement, concluded at the same time, between the King Shah Allum and the thenSubahdar of Bengal, under the immediate security and guaranty of theEnglish Company, the faith of the Company was pledged to the said Kingfor the annual payment of twenty-six lac of rupees for his support outof the revenues of Bengal; and that the said Company did then receivefrom the said King a grant of the duanné of the provinces of Bengal, Bahar, and Orissa, on the express condition of their being security forthe annual payment above mentioned. That the East India Company haveheld, and continue to hold, the duanné so granted, and for some yearshave complied with the conditions on which they accepted of the grantthereof, and have at all times acknowledged that they held the duanné_in virtue of the Mogul's grants_. That the said Court of Directors, intheir letter of the 30th June, 1769, to Bengal, declared, "that theyesteemed themselves bound by treaty to protect the King's person, and tosecure him the possession of the Corah and Allahabad districts"; andsupposing an agreement should be made respecting these provinces betweenthe King and Sujah ul Dowlah, the Directors then said, "that they shouldbe subject to no further claim or requisition from the King, exceptingfor the stipulated tribute for Bengal, which they [the Governor andCouncil] were to pay to his agent, or remit to him in such manner as hemight direct. "

That, in the year 1772, the King Shah Allum, who had hitherto resided atAllahabad, trusting to engagements which he had entered into with theMahrattas, quitted that place, and removed to Delhi; but, having soonquarrelled with those people, and afterwards being taken prisoner, hadbeen treated by them with very great disrespect and cruelty. That, amongother instances of their abuse of their immediate power over him, theGovernor and Council of Bengal, in their letter of the 16th of August, 1773, inform the Court of Directors that he had been _compelled, while aprisoner in their hands, to grant sunnuds for the surrender of Corah andAllahabad to them_; and it appears from sundry other minutes of theirown that the said Governor and Council did at all times consider thesurrender above mentioned as _extorted_ from the King, and_unquestionably an act of violence_, which could not alienate or impairhis right to those provinces, and that, when they took possessionthereof, it was at the request of the King's Naib, or viceroy, who putthem under the Council's _protection_. That on this footing they wereaccepted by the said Warren Hastings and his Council, and for some timeconsidered by them as a deposit committed to their care by a prince towhom the possession thereof was particularly guarantied by the EastIndia Company. In their letter of the 1st of March, 1773, they (the saidWarren Hastings and his Council) say, "In no shape can this compulsatorycession by the King release us from the obligation we are under todefend the provinces which we have so particularly guarantied to him. "But it appears that they soon adopted other ideas and assumed otherprinciples concerning this object. In the instructions, dated the 23d ofJune, 1773, which the Council of Fort William gave to the said WarrenHastings, previous to his interview with the Nabob Sujah ul Dowlah atBenares, they say, that, "while the King continued at Delhi, whither heproceeded in opposition to their most strenuous remonstrances, theyshould certainly consider the engagements between him and the Company asdissolved by his alienation from them and their interest; that thepossession of so remote a country could never be expected to yield anyprofit to the Company, and the defence of it must require a perpetualaid of their forces": yet in the same instructions they declare theiropinion, that, "if the King should make overtures to renew his formerconnection, _his right to reclaim the districts of Corah and Allahabadcould not with propriety be disputed_, " and they authorize the saidWarren Hastings to restore them to him _on condition that he shouldrenounce his claim to the annual tribute of twenty-six lac of rupees_, herein before mentioned, _and to the arrears which might be due_, thereby acknowledging the justice of a claim which they determined notto comply with but in return for the surrender of another equallyvalid;--that, nevertheless, in the treaty concluded by the said WarrenHastings with Sujah ul Dowlah on the 7th of September, 1773, it isasserted, that his Majesty, (meaning the King Shah Allum, ) "havingabandoned the districts of Corah and Allahabad, and given a sunnud forCorah and Currah to the Mahrattas, had thereby forfeited his right tothe said districts, " although it was well known to the said WarrenHastings, and had been so stated by him to the Court of Directors, thatthis surrender on the part of the King had been extorted from him byviolence, while he was a prisoner in the hands of the Mahrattas, andalthough it was equally well known to the said Warren Hastings thatthere was nothing in the original treaty of 1765 which could restrainthe King from changing the place of his residence, consequently that hisremoval to Delhi could not occasion a forfeiture of his right to theprovinces secured to him by that treaty. 

That the said Warren Hastings, in the report which he made of hisinterview and negotiations with Sujah ul Dowlah, dated the 4th ofOctober, 1773, declared, "that the administration would have beenculpable in the highest degree in retaining possession of Corah andAllahabad _for any other purpose than that of making an advantage by thedisposal of them_, " and therefore he had ceded them to the Vizier forfifty lac of rupees: a measure for which he had no authority whateverfrom the King Shah Allum, and in the execution of which no reservewhatever was made in favor of the rights of that prince, nor any caretaken of his interests. 

That the sale of these provinces to Sujah Dowlah involved the East IndiaCompany in a triple breach of justice; since by the same act theyviolated a treaty, they sold the property of another, and they alienateda deposit committed to their friendship and good faith, and as suchaccepted by them. That a measure of this nature is not to be defended onmotives of policy and convenience, supposing such motives to haveexisted, without a total loss of public honor, and shaking all securityin the faith of treaties; but that in reality the pretences urged by thesaid Warren Hastings for selling the King's country to Sujah Dowlah werefalse and invalid. It could not strengthen our alliance with Sujah ulDowlah; since, paying a price for a purchase, he received no favor andincurred no obligation. It did not free the Company from all the dangersattending either a remote property or a remote connection; since, themoment the country in question became part of Sujah Dowlah's dominions, it was included in the Company's former guaranty of those dominions, andin case of invasion the Company were obliged to send part of their armyto defend it at the requisition of the said Sujah Dowlah; and if theremote situation of those provinces made the defence of them difficultand dangerous, much more was it a difficult and dangerous enterprise toengage the Company's force in an attack and invasion of the Rohillas, whose country lay at a much greater distance from the Company'sfrontier, --which, nevertheless, the said Warren Hastings agreed to andundertook at the very time when, under pretence of the difficulty ofdefending Corah and Allahabad, he sold those provinces to Sujah Dowlah. It did not relieve the Company from the _expense_ of defending thecountry; since the revenues thereof far exceeded the subsidy to be paidby Sujah Dowlah, and these revenues justly belonged to the Company aslong as the country continued under their protection, and would haveanswered the expense of defending it. Finally, that the sum of fifty lacof rupees, stipulated with the said Sujah Dowlah, was inadequate to thevalue of the country, the annual revenues of which were stated attwenty-five lac of rupees, which General Sir Robert Barker, thencommander-in-chief of the Company's forces, affirms _was certain, andtoo generally known to admit of a doubt_. 

That the King Shah Allum received for some years the annual tribute oftwenty-six lac of rupees above mentioned, and was entitled to continueto receive it by virtue of an engagement deliberately, and for anadequate consideration, entered into with him by the Company's servants, and approved of and ratified by the Company themselves;--that thisengagement was absolute and unconditional, and did neither express norsuppose any case in which the said King should forfeit or the Companyshould have a right to resume the tribute;--that, nevertheless, the saidWarren Hastings and his Council, immediately after selling the King'scountry to Sujah Dowlah, resolved to withhold, and actually withheld, the payment of the said tribute, of which the King Shah Allum has neversince received any part;--that this resolution of the Council is notjustified even by themselves on principles of right and justice, but byarguments of policy and convenience, by which the best founded claimsof right and justice may at all times be set aside and defeated. "Theyjudged it highly impolitic and unsafe to answer the drafts of the King, until they were satisfied of his amicable intentions, and those of hisnew allies. " But neither had they any reason to question the King'samicable intentions, nor was he pledged to answer for those of theMahrattas; his trusting to the good faith of that people, and relying ontheir assistance to reinstate him in the possession of his capital, might have been imprudent and impolitic, but these measures, howeverruinous to himself, indicated no enmity to the English, nor were theyproductive of any effects injurious to the English interests. And it isplain that the said Warren Hastings and his Council were perfectly awarethat their motives or pretences for withholding the tribute were tooweak to justify their conduct, having principally insisted on thereduced state of their treasury, which, as they said, _rendered itimpracticable to comply with those payments_. The _right_ of a creditordoes not depend on the circumstances of the debtor: on the contrary, theplea of inability includes a virtual acknowledgment of the debt; since, if the creditor's right were denied, the plea would be superfluous. 

That the East India Company, having on their part violated theengagements and renounced the conditions on which they received and havehitherto held and enjoyed the duanné of Bengal, Bahar, and Orissa fromthe King Shah Allum, have thereby forfeited all right and title to thesaid duanné arising from the said grant, and that it is free and open tothe said King to resume such grant, and to transfer it to any otherprince or state;--that, notwithstanding any distress or weakness towhich he may be actually reduced, his lawful authority, as sovereign ofthe Mogul Empire, is still acknowledged in India, and that his grant ofthe duanné would sufficiently authorize and materially assist any princeor state that might attempt to dispossess the East India Companythereof, since it would convey a right which could not be disputed, andto which nothing but force could be opposed. Nor can these opinions bemore strongly expressed than they have been lately by the said WarrenHastings himself, who, in a minute recorded the 1st of December, 1784, has declared, that, "fallen as the House of Timur is, it is yet therelic of the most illustrious line of the Eastern world; that _itssovereignty is universally acknowledged_, though the substance of it nolonger exists; and that the Company itself derives its constitutionaldominion from its ostensible bounty. "

That the said Warren Hastings by this declaration has renounced andcondemned the principle on which he avowedly acted towards the Mogul inthe year 1773, when he denied that the sunnuds or grants of the Mogul, if they were in the hands of another nation, would avail themanything, --and when he declared "that the sword which gave us thedominion of Bengal must be the instrument of its preservation, and that, if it should ever cease to be ours, the next proprietor would derive his_right_ and possession from the same _natural charter_. " That the saidWarren Hastings, to answer any immediate purpose, adopts any principleof policy, however false or dangerous, without any regard to formerdeclarations made, or to principles avowed on other occasions byhimself; and particularly, that in his conduct to Shah Allum he firstmaintained that the grants of that prince were of no avail, --that weheld the dominion of Bengal by the sword, which he has falsely declaredthe source of _right_, and the _natural charter_ of dominion, --whereasat a later period he has declared that the sovereignty of the family ofShah Allum is universally acknowledged, and that the Company itselfderives its constitutional dominion from their ostensible bounty. 

III. --BENARES. 

PART I. 

RIGHTS AND TITLES OF THE RAJAH OF BENARES. 

I. That the territory of Benares is a fruitful, and has been, not longsince, an orderly, well-cultivated, and improved province, of greatextent; and its capital city, as Warren Hastings, Esquire, has informedthe Court of Directors, in his letter of the 21st of November, 1781, "ishighly revered by the natives of the Hindoo persuasion, so that many whohave acquired independent fortunes retire to close their days in a placeso eminently distinguished for its sanctity"; and he further acquaintsthe Directors, "that it may rather be considered as the seat of theHindoo religion than as the capital of a province. But as itsinhabitants are not composed of Hindoos only, the _former_ wealth whichflowed into it from the offerings of pilgrims, as well as from thetransactions of exchange, for which its central situation is adapted, has attracted numbers of Mahomedans, who still continue to reside in itwith their families. " And these circumstances of the city of Benares, which not only attracted the attention of all the differentdescriptions of men who inhabit Hindostan, but interested them warmly inwhatever it might suffer, did in a peculiar manner require that theGovernor-General and Council of Calcutta should conduct themselves withregard to its rulers and inhabitants, when it became dependent on theCompany, on the most distinguished principles of good faith, equity, moderation, and mildness. 

II. That the Rajah Bulwant Sing, late prince or Zemindar of the provinceaforesaid, was a great lord of the Mogul Empire, dependent on the same, through the Vizier of the Empire, the late Sujah ul Dowlah, Nabob ofOude; and the said Bulwant Sing, in the commencement of the Englishpower, did attach himself to the cause of the English Company; and theCourt of Directors of the said Company did acknowledge, in their letterof the 26th of May, 1768, that "Bulwant Sing's joining us at the time hedid was of _signal service_, and the stipulation in his favor was whathe was justly entitled to"; and they did commend "the care that had beentaken [by the then Presidency] of those that had shown their attachmentto them [the Company] during the war"; and they did finally expresstheir hope and expectation in the words following: "The moderation andattention paid to those who have espoused our interests in this war will_restore_ our reputation in Hindostan, and that the Indian powers willbe convinced _NO breach of treaty will ever have our sanction_. "

III. That the Rajah Bulwant Sing died on the 23d of August, 1770, andhis son, Cheyt Sing, succeeding to his rights and pretensions, thePresidency of Calcutta (John Cartier, Esquire, being then President) didinstruct Captain Gabriel Harper to procure a confirmation of thesuccession to his son Cheyt Sing, "as it was of the utmost politicalimport to the Company's affairs; and that the young man ought not toconsider the price to be paid to satisfy _the Vizier's jealousy andavarice_. " And they did further declare as follows: "The strong andinviolable attachment which subsisted betwixt the Company and the fathermakes us most readily interpose our good offices for the son. " And theyoung Rajah aforesaid having agreed, under the mediation of CaptainHarper, to pay near two hundred thousand pounds as a gift to the saidVizier, and to increase his tribute by near thirty thousand poundsannually, a deed of confirmation was passed by the said Vizier to thesaid Rajah and his heirs, by which he became a purchaser, for valuableconsiderations, of his right and inheritance in the zemindary aforesaid. In consequence of this grant, so by him purchased, the Rajah wassolemnly invested with the government in the city of Benares, "amidstthe acclamations of a numerous people, and to the great satisfaction ofall parties. " And the said Harper, in his letter of the 8th October, 1770, giving an account of the investiture aforesaid, did expresshimself in these words: "I will leave the young Rajah and others toacquaint you how I have conducted myself; only thus much let me say, that I have kept a strict eye not to diminish our national honor, disinterestedness, and justice, which I will conclude has had a greatereffect in securing to the Company their vast possessions than even theforce of arms, however formidable, could do. " The President of Calcuttatestified his approbation of the said Harper's conduct in the strongestterms, that is, in the following: "Your disinterestedness has beenequally distinguishable as your abilities, and both do you the greatesthonor. "

IV. That the agreement between the Rajah and Nabob aforesaid continuedon both sides without any violation, under the sanction and guaranty ofthe East India Company, for three years, when Warren Hastings, Esquire, being then President, did propose a further confirmation of the saidgrant, and did, on the 12th of October, 1773, obtain a delegation forhimself to be the person to negotiate the same: it being his opinion, asexpressed in his report of October 4th, 1773, that the Rajah was notonly entitled to the inheritance of his zemindary by the grants throughCaptain Harper, but that the preceding treaty of Allahabad, thoughliterally expressing no more than a security personal to Bulwant Sing, did, notwithstanding, in the true sense and import thereof, extend tohis posterity; "and that it had been differently understood" (that is, not literally) "by the Company, and by this administration; and theVizier had _before_ put it out of all dispute by the solemn act passedin the Rajah's favor on his succession to the zemindary. "

V. That the Council, in their instructions to the said GovernorHastings, did empower him "to _renew_, in behalf of the Rajah CheytSing, the stipulation which was formerly made with the Vizier inconsideration of his services in 1764"; and the government wasaccordingly settled on the Rajah and his posterity, or to his heirs, onthe same footing on which it was granted to his said father, exceptingthe addition aforesaid to the tribute, with an express provision "that_no increase_ shall ever hereafter be demanded. " And the grant andstipulation aforesaid was further confirmed by the said Sujah ul Dowlah, under the Company's guaranty, by the most solemn and awful form of oathknown in the Mahomedan religion, inserted in the body of the deed orgrant; and the said Warren Hastings, strongly impressed with the opinionof the propriety of protecting the Rajah, and of the injustice, malice, and avarice of the said Sujah Dowlah, and the known family enmitysubsisting between him and the Rajah, did declare, in his report to theCouncil, as follows: "I am well convinced that the Rajah's inheritance, and perhaps his life, are no longer safe than while he enjoys theCompany's protection, which is his due by the ties of justice and theobligations of public faith. "

VI. That some time after the new confirmation aforesaid, that is to say, in the year 1774, the Governor-General and Council, which had beenformed and the members thereof appointed by act of Parliament, didobtain the assignment of the sovereignty paramount of the saidgovernment by treaty with the Nabob of Oude, by which, although thesupreme dominion was changed, the terms and the conditions of the tenureof the Rajah of Benares remained; as the said Nabob of Oude couldtransfer to the East India Company no other or greater estate than hehimself possessed in or over the said zemindary. But to obviate anymisconstruction on the subject, the said Warren Hastings did propose tothe board, that, whatever provision might in the said treaty be madefor the interest of the Company, the same should be "without anencroachment on the just rights of the Rajah, or _the engagementsactually subsisting with him_. "

VII. That the said Warren Hastings, then having, or pretending to have, an extraordinary care of the interest of the Rajah of Benares, did, onhis transfer of the sovereignty, propose a new grant, to be conveyed innew instruments to the said Rajah, conferring upon him furtherprivileges, namely, the addition of the sovereign rights of the mint, and of the right of criminal justice of life and death. And he, the saidWarren Hastings, as Governor-General, did himself propose the resolutionfor that purpose in Council, in the following words, with remarksexplanatory of the principles upon which the grants aforesaid were made, namely:--

MINUTE. 

VIII. "That the perpetual and _independent_ possession of the zemindaryof Benares and its dependencies be _confirmed_ and guarantied to theRajah Cheyt Sing and his heirs forever, _subject only to the annualpayment of the revenues hitherto paid to the late Vizier_, amounting toBenares Sicca Rupees 23, 71, 656. 12, to be disposed of as is expressed inthe following article: _That no other demand be made on him either bythe Nabob of Oude or this government; nor any kind of authority orjurisdiction be exercised by either within the districts assigned him_. "To which minute he, the said Warren Hastings, did subjoin the followingobservation in writing, and recorded therewith in the Council books, that is to say: "_The Rajah of Benares, from the situation of hiscountry, which is a frontier to the provinces of Oude and Bahar, may bemade a serviceable ally to the Company, whenever their affairs shallrequire it. He has always been considered in this light both by theCompany and the successive members of the late Council; but to insurehis attachment to the Company, his interest must be connected with it, which cannot be better effected than by freeing him totally from theREMAINS of his present vassalage under the guaranty and protection ofthe Company, and at the same time guarding him against any apprehensionsfrom this government, by thus pledging its faith that no encroachmentshall ever be made on his rights by the Company. _" And the said WarrenHastings, on the 5th of July, 1775, did himself propose, among otherarticles of the treaty relative to this object, one of the followingtenor: "That, whilst the Rajah shall continue faithful to theseengagements and punctual in his payments, and shall pay due obedience tothe authority of this government, _no more demands_ shall be made uponhim by the Honorable Company of ANY KIND, or, on any pretencewhatsoever, shall any person be allowed to interfere with his authority, or to disturb the peace of his country. " And the said article was by theother members of the Council assented to without debate. 

IX. On transferring the Rajah's tribute from the Nabob to the Company, the stipulation with the Nabob was renewed on the proposition of thesaid Warren Hastings himself, and expressed in a yet more distinctmanner, namely: "That no more demands shall be made upon him by theHonorable Company of any kind. " And the said Warren Hastings, injustification of his proposal of giving the Rajah "a complete anduncontrolled authority over his zemindary, " did enter on the Councilbook the following reasons for investing him with the same, stronglyindicating the situation in which he must be left under any othercircumstances, whether under the Nabob of Oude, or under the English, orunder the double influence of both: "That the security of his person andpossessions from the Company's protection may be rated equal to manylacs of rupees, _which, though saved to him, are no loss to thegovernment on which he depends, being all articles of invisibleexpense_: in fees to the ministers and officers of the Nabob; in thecharges of a double establishment of vackeels to both governments; inpresents and charges of accommodation to the Nabob, during his residenceat any place within the boundaries of his zemindary; in _the frauds, embezzlements, and oppressions exercised in the mint and cutwally_;besides the allowed profits of those officers, and the advantages whichevery man _in occasional power, or in the credit of it, might make ofthe Rajah's known weakness_, and the dread he stood in both of thedispleasure of the Nabob _and the ill-will of individuals among theEnglish, who were all considered, either in their present stations orconnections, or the right of succession, as members of the state ofBengal_. It would be scarce possible to enumerate all the inconveniencesto which the Rajah was liable _in his former situation_, or to estimatethe precise effect which they produced on his revenue and on the grossamount of his expense; but it may be easily conceived that both wereenormous, and of a nature the most likely to lessen the profits ofgovernment, instead of adding to them. " And in justification of hisproposal of giving the Rajah the symbols of sovereignty in the power oflife and death, and in the coining of money, as pledges of his_independence_, he states the deplorable situation of princes reduced todependence on the Vizier or the Company, and obliged to entertain anEnglish Resident at their court, in the following words: "It is proposedto receive the payment of his [the Rajah's] rents at Patna, because thatis the nearest provincial station, and because it would not frustrate_the intention of rendering the Rajah independent_. If a Resident wasappointed to receive the money, as it became due, at Benares, _such aResident_ would unavoidably acquire an influence over the Rajah, andover his country, _which would in effect render him the master of both_. This consequence might not perhaps be brought completely to pass without_a struggle and many appeals to the Council_, which, in a governmentconstituted like this, _cannot fail to terminate against the Rajah, and, by the construction to which his opposition to the agent would beliable, might eventually draw on him severe restrictions, and end inreducing him to the mean and depraved state of a mere zemindar_. "

X. That, in order to satisfy the said Rajah of the intentions of theCompany towards him, and of the true sense and construction of thegrants to him, the said Rajah, to be made, the Governor-General (he, thesaid Warren Hastings) and Council did, on the 24th August, 1775, instruct Mr. Fowke, the Resident at the Rajah's court, in the followingwords: "It is proper to assure the Rajah, we do not mean to increase histribute, but to require from him an exact sum; that, under thesovereignty of the Company, we are determined to leave him the free anduncontrolled management of the internal government of his country, andthe collection and regulation of the revenues, so long as he adheres tothe terms of his engagement; and will _never_ demand _any_ augmentationof the annual tribute which may be fixed. "

XI. That the said Warren Hastings and the Council-General, not beingsatisfied with having instructed the Resident to make the representationaforesaid, to remove all suspicion that by the new grants any attemptshould insidiously be made to change his former tenure, did resolve thata letter should be written by the Governor-General himself to the Rajahof Benares, to be delivered to Mr. Fowke, the Resident, together withhis credentials; in which letter they declare "the board willing tocontinue the grant of the zemindary to him _in as full and ample amanner as he possessed it from former sovereigns_; and on his paying theannual tribute, " &c;--and in explaining the reasons for granting to himthe mint and criminal justice, they inform him that this is done inorder "that he may possess an _uncontrolled and free authority_ in theregulation and government of his zemindary. "

XII. That on the 26th February, 1776, the Board and Council did orderthat the proper instruments should be prepared for conveying to theRajah aforesaid the government and criminal justice and mint of Benares, with its dependencies, "in the usual form, _expressing the conditionsalready resolved on in the several proceedings of the board_. " And onthe same day a letter was written to the Resident at Benares, signifyingthat they had ordered the proper instruments to be prepared, specifyingthe terms concerning the remittance of the Rajah's tribute to Calcutta, as well as "_the several other conditions which had been already agreedto_, --and that they should forward it to him, to be delivered to theRajah. " And on the 20th of March following, the board did again explainthe terms of the said tribute, in a letter to the Court of Directors, and did add, "that a _sunnud_ [grant or patent] for his [Cheyt Sing's]zemindary should be furnished him _on these and the conditions beforeagreed on_. "

XIII. That during the course of the transactions aforesaid in Council, and the various assurances given to the Rajah and the Court ofDirectors, certain improper and fraudulent practices were used withregard to the symbols of investiture which ought to have been given, andthe form of the deeds by which the said zemindary ought to have beengranted. For it appears that the original deeds were signed by the boardon the 4th September, 1775, and transmitted to Mr. Fowke, the Residentat the Rajah's court, and that on the 20th of November following theCourt of Directors were acquainted by the said Warren Hastings and theCouncil that Rajah Cheyt Sing had been invested with the _sunnud_(charters or patents) for his zemindary, and the _kellaut_, (or robes ofinvestiture, ) in all the proper forms; but on the 1st of October, 1775, the Rajah did complain to the Governor-General and Council, that the_kellaut_, (or robes, ) with which he was to be invested according totheir order, "_is not of the same kind_ as that which he received fromthe late Vizier on the like occasion. " In consequence of the saidcomplaint, the board did, in their letter to the Resident of the 11th ofthe same month, desire him "to make inquiry respecting the nature ofthe kellaut, and invest him with _one of the same sort_, on the part ofthis government, instead of that which they formerly described to him. "And it appears highly probable that the instruments which accompaniedthe said robes of investiture were made in a manner conformable to theorders and directions of the board, and the conditions by them agreedto; as the Rajah, who complained of the insufficiency of the robes, didmake no complaint of the insufficiency of the instruments, or of anydeviation in them from those he had formerly received from the Vizier. _But a copy or duplicate of the said deeds or instruments were in somemanner surreptitiously disposed of, and withheld from the records of theCompany, and never were transmitted to the Court of Directors. _

XIV. That several months after the said settlement and investiture, namely, on the 15th of April, 1776, the Secretary informed the Courtthat he had prepared a _sunnud_, _cabbolut_, and _pottah_ (that is, apatent, an agreement, and a rent-roll) for Cheyt Sing's zemindary, andthe board ordered the same to be executed; but the Resident, onreceiving the same, did transmit the several objections made by theRajah thereto, and particularly to a clause in the patent, made indirect contradiction to the engagements of the Council so solemnly andrepeatedly given, by which clause the former patents _are declared to benull_. That, on the representation aforesaid, on the 29th July, theSecretary was ordered to prepare new and proper instruments, _omittingthe clause declaring the former patents to be null_, and the said newpatents were delivered to the Rajah; and the others, which he objectedto, as well as those which had been delivered to him originally, werereturned to the Presidency. But neither the first set of deeds, nor thefraudulent patent aforesaid, nor the new instruments made out on thecomplaint of the Rajah, omitting the exceptionable words, have beeninserted in the records, although it was the particular duty of the saidWarren Hastings that all transactions with the country powers should befaithfully entered, as well as to take care that all instrumentstransmitted to them on the faith of the Company should be honestly, candidly, and fairly executed, according to the true intent and meaningof the engagements entered into on the part of the Company, --giving bythe said complicated, artificial, and fraudulent management, as well asby his said omitting to record the said material document, strong reasonto presume that he did even then meditate to make some evil use of thedeeds which he thus withheld from the Company, and which he didafterwards in reality make, when he found means and opportunity toeffect his evil purpose. 

PART II. 

DESIGNS OF MR. HASTINGS TO RUIN THE RAJAH OF BENARES. 

I. That the tribute transferred to the Company by the treaty with theNabob of Oude, being 250, 000_l. _ a year sterling, and upwards, withoutany deductions whatsoever, was paid monthly, with such punctualexactness as had no parallel in the Company's dealings with any of thenative princes or with any subject zemindar, being the only one whonever was in arrears; and according to all appearance, a perfectharmony did prevail between the Supreme Council at Calcutta and theRajah. But though the Rajah of Benares furnished no occasion ofdispleasure to the board, yet it since appears that the said WarrenHastings did, at some time in the year 1777, conceive displeasureagainst him. In that year, he, the said Warren Hastings, retracted hisown act of resignation of his office, made to the Court of Directorsthrough his agent, Mr. Macleane, and, calling in the aid of the militaryto support him in his authority, brought the divisions of thegovernment, according to his own expression, "to an extremity borderingon civil violence. " This extremity he attributes, in a narrative by himtransmitted to the Court of Directors, and printed, not to his own fraudand prevarication, but to what he calls "an attempt to wrest from himhis authority"; and in the said narrative he pretends that the Rajah ofBenares had deputed an agent with an express commission to his opponent, Sir John Clavering. This fact, if it had been true, (which is notproved, ) was in no sort criminal or offensive to the Company'sgovernment, but was at first sight nothing more than a proper mark ofduty and respect to the supposed succession of office. Nor is itpossible to conceive in what manner it could offend the said Hastings, if he did not imagine that the express commission to which in the saidnarrative he refers might relate to the discovery to Sir John Claveringof some practice which he might wish to conceal, --the said Clavering, whom he styles "_his opponent_, " having been engaged, in obedience tothe Company's express orders, in the discovery of sundry peculations andother evil practices charged upon the said Hastings. But although, atthe time of the said pretended deputation, he dissembled hisresentment, it appears to have rankled in his mind, and that he neverforgave it, of whatever nature it might have been (the same never havingbeen by him explained); and some years after, he recorded it in hisjustification of his oppressive conduct towards the Rajah, urging thesame with great virulence and asperity, as a proof or presumption ofhis, the said Rajah's, disaffection to the Company's government; and byhis subsequent acts, he seems from the first to have resolved, whenopportunity should occur, on a severe revenge. 

II. That, having obtained, in his casting vote, a majority in Council onthe death of Sir John Clavering and Mr. Monson, he did suddenly, andwithout any previous general communication with the members of theboard, by a Minute of Consultation of the 9th of July, 1778, make anextraordinary demand, namely: "That the Rajah of Benares should_consent_ to the establishment of three regular battalions of sepoys, _to be raised and maintained at his own expense_"; and the said expensewas estimated at between fifty and sixty thousand pounds sterling. 

III. That the said requisition did suppose the _consent_ of theRajah, --the very word being inserted in the body of his, the said WarrenHastings's, minute; and the same was agreed to, though with some doubtson the parts of two of his colleagues, Mr. Francis and Mr. Wheler, concerning the right of making the same, even worded as it was. But Mr. Francis and Mr. Wheler, soon after, finding that the Rajah was muchalarmed by this departure from the treaty, the requisition aforesaid wasstrenuously opposed by them. The said Hastings did, notwithstandingthis opposition, persevere, and by his casting vote alone did carry thesaid unjust and oppressive demand. The Rajah submitted, after somemurmuring and remonstrance, to pay the sum required, --but on the expresscondition (as has been frequently asserted by him to the said WarrenHastings without any contradiction) that the exaction should continue_but for one year, and should not be drawn into precedent_. He alsorequested that the extraordinary demand should be paid along with theinstalments of his monthly tribute: but although the said WarrenHastings did not so much as pretend that the instant payment was at allnecessary, and though he was urged by his before-mentioned colleagues tomoderate his proceedings, he did insist upon immediate payment of thewhole; and did deliver his demand in proud and insulting language, wholly unfit for a governor of a civilized nation to use towards eminentpersons in alliance with and in honorable and free dependence upon itsgovernment; and did support the same with arguments full ofunwarrantable passion, and with references to reports affecting merelyhis own personal power and consideration, which reports were not proved, nor attempted to be proved, and, if proved, furnishing reasonsinsufficient for his purpose, and indecent in any public proceedings. That the said Hastings did cause the said sums of money to be rigorouslyexacted, although no such regular battalions as he pretended toestablish, as a color for his demand on the Rajah, were then raised, orany steps taken towards raising them; and when the said Rajah pleadedhis inability to pay the whole sum at once, he, the said Hastings, persevering in his said outrageous and violent demeanor, did order theResident to wait on the Rajah forthwith, and "demand of him in person, and by writing, the full payment in specie to be made to him within fivedays of such demand, and to declare to him, in the name of thisgovernment, that his evading or neglecting to accomplish the paymentthereof within that space of time should be deemed _equivalent to anabsolute refusal_; and in case of non-compliance with this [theResident's] demand, _we peremptorily enjoin you to refrain from allfurther intercourse with him_": the said Hastings appearing by all hisproceedings to be more disposed to bring on a quarrel with the Prince ofBenares, than to provide money for any public service. 

IV. That the said demand was complied with, and the whole thereof paidon the 10th of October that year. And the said Rajah did write to thesaid Hastings a letter, in order to mitigate and mollify him, declaringto the said Hastings that his sole reliance was on him, "and that inevery instance he depended on his faith, religion, promises, andactions. " But he, the said Warren Hastings, as if the being reminded ofhis faith and promises were an incentive to him to violate the same, although he had agreed that his demand should not be drawn intoprecedent, and the payment of the fifty thousand pounds aforesaid shouldcontinue only for one year, did, the very day after he had received theletter aforesaid, renew a demand of the same nature and on the samepretence, this year even less plausible than the former, of threebattalions _to be_ raised. The said Rajah, on being informed of thisrequisition, did remind the said Warren Hastings that he engaged in thelast year that but one payment should be made, and that he should not becalled upon in future, and, pleading inability to discharge the newdemand, declared himself in the following words to the said WarrenHastings: "I am therefore hopeful you will be kindly pleased to excuseme the five lacs now demanded, and that nothing may be demanded of mebeyond the amount expressed in the pottah. "

V. That on the day after the receipt of this letter, that is, on the28th August, 1779, he, the said Warren Hastings, made a reply to thesaid letter; and without any remark whatsoever on the allegation of theRajah, stating to him his engagement, that he, the said Rajah, shouldnot be called upon in future, he says, "I now repeat my demand, that youdo, on the receipt of this, without evasion or delay, pay the five lacof rupees into the hands of Mr. Thomas Graham, who has orders to receiveit from you, and, in case of your refusal, to summon the two battalionsof sepoys under the command of Major Camac to Benares, that measures maybe taken to oblige you to a compliance; and in this case, the wholeexpense of the corps, from the time of its march, will fall on you. "

VI. That the said Rajah did a second and third time represent to thesaid Warren Hastings that he had broke his promise, and the saidHastings did in no manner deny the same, but did, in contempt thereof, as well as of the original treaty between the Company and the Rajah, order two battalions of troops to march into his territories, and in amanner the most harsh, insulting, and despotic, as if to provoke thatprince to some act of resistance, did compel him to the payment of thesaid second unjust demand; and did extort also the sum of two thousandpounds, on pretence of the charge of the troops employed to coerce him. 

VII. That the third year, that is to say, in the year 1780, the samedemand was, with the same menaces, renewed, and did, as before, produceseveral humble remonstrances and submissive complaints, which the saidHastings did always treat as crimes and offences of the highest order;and although in the regular subsidy or tribute, which was monthlypayable by treaty, fifty days of grace were allowed on each payment, andafter the expiration of the said fifty days one quarter par cent onlywas provided as a penalty, he, the said Warren Hastings, on some shortdelay of payment of his third arbitrary and illegal demand, did presumeof his own authority to impose a fine or mulct of ten thousand pounds onthe said Rajah; and though it does not appear whether or no the same wasactually levied, the said threat was soon after followed by an orderfrom the said Hastings for the march of troops into the country ofBenares, as in the preceding year. 

VIII. That, these violent and insulting measures failing to provoke theRajah, and he having paid up the whole demand, the said Warren Hastings, being resolved to drive him to extremities, did make on the said Rajah asudden demand, over and above the ordinary tribute or subsidy of260, 000_l. _ per annum, and over and above the 50, 000_l. _ extraordinary, to provide a body of cavalry for the service of the Bengal government. 

IX. The demand, as expressed in the Minute of Consultation, and in thepublic instructions of the board to the Resident to make therequisition, is "for such part of the cavalry entertained in his serviceas he can spare"; and the demand is in this and in no other mannerdescribed by the Governor-General and Council in their letter to theCourt of Directors. But in a Narrative of the said Warren Hastings's, addressed to Edward Wheler, Esquire, it appears, that, upon the Rajah'smaking difficulties, according to the representation of the saidHastings, relative to the said requisition, the correspondenceconcerning which the said Hastings hath fraudulently suppressed, he, thesaid Hastings, instead of adhering to the requisition of such cavalry_as the Rajah could spare_, and which was all that by the order ofCouncil he was authorized to make, did, of his own private and arbitraryauthority, in some letter which he hath suppressed, instruct theResident, Markham, to make a peremptory demand for two thousand cavalry, which he well knew to be more than the Rajah's finances could support, estimating the provision for the same at 96, 000_l. _ a year at thelowest, though the expense of the same would probably have been muchmore: which extravagant demand the said Hastings could only have made inhopes of provoking the Rajah to some imprudent measure or passionateremonstrance. And this arbitrary demand of cavalry was made, andperemptorily insisted on, although in the original treaty with the saidRajah it was left entirely optional whether or not he should keep up anycavalry at all, and in the Minute of Consultation it was expresslymentioned to be thus optional, and that for whatsoever cavalry he, thesaid Rajah, should furnish, he should be paid fifteen rupees per monthfor each private, and so in proportion for officers: yet the demandaforesaid was made without any offer whatsoever of providing the saidpayment according to treaty. 

X. That the said Hastings did soon after, but upon what grounds does notappear by any Minute of Council, or from any correspondence contained inhis Narrative, reduce the demand to fifteen hundred, and afterwards toone thousand: by which he showed himself to be sensible of theextravagance of his first requisition. 

XI. That, in consequence of these requisitions, as he asserts in hisNarrative aforesaid, the Rajah "did offer two hundred and fifty horse, but sent none. " But the said Hastings doth not accompany his saidNarrative with any voucher or document whatever; and therefore theaccount given by the Rajah, and delivered to the said Warren Hastingshimself, inserted by the said Warren Hastings himself in his Narrative, and in no part thereof attempted to be impeached, is more worthy ofcredit: that is to say, --

"With respect to the horse, you desired me in your letter to inform youof what number I could afford to station with you. I sent you aparticular account of all that were in my service, amounting to onethousand three hundred horse, of which several were stationed at distantplaces; but I received no answer to this. Mr. Markham delivered me anorder to prepare a thousand horse. In compliance with your wishes Icollected five hundred horse, and a substitute for the remainder, fivehundred _burkundasses_ [matchlock-men], of which I sent you information;and I told Mr. Markham that they were ready to go to whatever place theyshould be sent. No answer, however, came from you on this head, and Iremained astonished at the cause of it. Repeatedly I asked Mr. Markhamabout an answer to my letter about the horse; but he told me that he didnot know the reason of no answer having been sent. I remainedastonished. "

XII. That the said Hastings is guilty of an high offence in not givingan answer to letters of such importance, and in concealing the saidletters from the Court of Directors, as well as much of hiscorrespondence with the Residents, --and more particularly in notdirecting to what place the cavalry and matchlock-men aforesaid shouldbe sent, when the Rajah had declared they were ready to go to whateverservice should be destined for them, and afterwards in maliciouslyaccusing the Rajah for not having sent the same. 

XIII. That, on the 3d of February, 1781, a new demand for the support ofthe three fictitious battalions of sepoys aforesaid was made by the saidWarren Hastings; but whilst the Rajah was paying by instalments the saidarbitrary demand, the said Rajah was alarmed with some intelligence ofsecret projects on foot for his ruin, and, being well apprised of themalicious and revengeful temper of the said Hastings, in order to pacifyhim, if possible, offered to redeem himself by a large ransom, to theamount of two hundred thousand pounds sterling, to be paid for the useof the Company. And it appears that the said alarm was far fromgroundless; for Major Palmer, one of the secret and confidential agentsof the said Hastings, hath sworn, on the 4th of December, 1781, at thedesire of the said Warren Hastings, before Sir Elijah Impey, to thefollowing effect, that is to say: "That the said Warren Hastings hadtold him, the said Palmer, that he, the said Hastings, had rejected theoffer of two hundred thousand pounds made by the Rajah of Benares forthe public service, and that he was resolved _to convert the faultscommitted by the Rajah into a public benefit_, and would exact the sumof five hundred thousand pounds, as a punishment for his breach ofengagements with the government of Bengal, and acts of misconduct in hiszemindary; and if the Rajah should absolutely refuse the demand, that hewould deprive him of his zemindary, or transfer the sovereignty thereofto the Nabob of Oude. "

XIV. And Mr. Anderson, in his declaration from Sindia's camp, of the 4thof January, 1782, did also, at the desire of Mr. Hastings, depose(though not on oath) concerning a conversation between him and the saidHastings (but mentioning neither the time nor place where the same washeld); in which conversation, after reciting the allegations of the saidHastings relative to several particulars of the delay and backwardnessof the Rajah in paying the aforesaid extra demand, and his resolution toexact from the Rajah "a considerable sum of money to the relief of theCompany's exigencies, " he proceeds in the following words: "That, if he[the Rajah] consented, you [the said Warren Hastings] were desirous of_establishing his possessions on the most permanent and eligiblefooting_; but if he refused, you had it in your power to _raise a largesum_ for the Company by accepting an offer which had been made for hisdistricts by the Vizier. " And the said Anderson, in the declarationaforesaid, made at the request of the said Hastings, and addressed tohim, expressed himself as follows: "That you told me you hadcommunicated our designs to Mr. Wheler [his only remaining colleague];and I believe, but I do not positively recollect, you said he concurredin them. " But no trace of any such communication or concurrence did, atthe time referred to, or at any time ever after, appear on theConsultations, as it ought to have done; and the said Hastings iscriminal for having omitted to enter and record the proceeding. That thesaid Wheler did also declare, but a considerable time after the date ofthe conversations aforesaid, that, "on the eve of the Governor-General'sdeparture, the said Hastings had told him that the Rajah's offences (notstating what offences, he having paid up all the demands, ordinary andextraordinary) _were declared_ to require early punishment; and as _hiswealth was great, and the Company's exigencies pressing_, it was thoughta measure of policy and of justice to exact from him a large pecuniarymulct for their relief. The sum to which the Governor declared hisresolution to extend the fine was forty _or_ fifty lacs; his ability topay it was stated as a fact that could not admit of a doubt; and the twoalternatives on which the Governor declared himself to have resolvedwere, to the best of my recollection, either a removal from hiszemindary entirely, or, by taking immediate possession of all hisforts, to obtain out of the treasure deposited in them the above sum forthe Company. "

XV. That in the declaration of the said Wheler the time of theconversation aforesaid is stated to be on the eve of the Governor'sdeparture, and then said to be confidential; nor is it said orinsinuated that he knew or ever heard thereof at a more early period, though it appears by Major Palmer's affidavit that the design of taking, not four _or_ five, but absolutely five, hundred thousand pounds fromthe Rajah, was communicated to him as early as the month of June. And itdoes not appear by the declarations of the said Wheler he did evercasually or officially approve of the measure; which long concealmentand late communication, time not being allowed to his colleague toconsider the nature and consequences of such a project, or to advise anyprecaution concerning the same, is a high misdemeanor. 

XVI. That the said Hastings, having formed a resolution to execute oneof the three violent and arbitrary resolutions aforesaid, --namely, tosell the Company's sovereignty over Benares to the Nabob of Oude, or todispossess the Rajah of his territories, or to seize upon his forts, andto plunder them of the treasure therein contained, to the amount of fouror five hundred thousand pounds, --did reject the offer of two hundredthousand pounds, tendered by the said Rajah for his redemption from theinjuries which he had discovered that the said Hastings hadclandestinely meditated against him, although the sum aforesaid wouldhave been a considerable and seasonable acquisition at that time: thesaid Hastings being determined, at a critical period, to risk theexistence of the British empire, rather than fail in the gratificationof his revenge against the said Rajah. 

XVII. That the first of his three instituted projects, namely, thedepriving the Rajah of his territories, was by himself considered as ameasure likely to be productive of much odium to the British government:he having declared, whatever opinions he might entertain of its justice, "that it would have an appearance of _severity_, and might furnishgrounds _unfavorable to the credit of our government, and to his ownreputation_, from the natural influence which every _act of rigor_, exercised in the persons of men in _elevated situations_, is apt toimpress on those who are too remote from the scene of action to judge, by any evidence of the facts themselves, of their motives or propriety. "And the second attempt, the sum of money which he aimed at by attackingthe fortresses of the Rajah, and plundering them of the treasuresupposed to be there secured, besides the obvious uncertainty ofacquiring what was thus sought, would be liable to the same imputationswith the former. And with regard to the third project, namely, the saleof the Company's sovereignty to the Nabob of Oude, and his havingactually received proposals for the same, it was an high offence to theCompany, as presuming, without their authority or consent, to put up tosale their sovereign rights, and particularly to put them up to sale tothat very person against whom the independence of the said province hadbeen declared by the Governor-General and Council to be necessary, as abarrier for the security of the other provinces, in case of a futurerupture with him. [59] It was an heinous injury to the said Rajah toattempt to change his relation without his consent, especially onaccount of the person to whom he was to be made over for money, byreason of the known enmity subsisting between his family and that of theNabob, who was to be the purchaser; and it was a grievous outrage on theinnocent inhabitants of the zemindary of Benares to propose putting themunder a person long before described by himself to the Court ofDirectors "to want the qualities of the head and heart requisite for hisstation"; and a letter from the British Resident at Oude, transmitted tothe said Court, represents him "to have wholly lost, by his_oppressions_, the confidence and affections of his own subjects"; andwhose distresses, and the known disorders in his government, he, thesaid Hastings, did attribute solely to his own bad conduct and evilcharacter; admitting also, in a letter written to Edward Wheler, Esquire, and transmitted to the Court of Directors, "that manycircumstances did favor suspicion of his [the said Nabob's] fidelity tothe English interest, the Nabob being surrounded by men base in theircharacters and improvident in their understandings, his favorites, andhis companions of his looser hours. These had every cause to dread theeffect of my influence on theirs; and both these, and the relations ofthe family, whose views of consequence and power were intercepted by ourparticipation in the administration of his affairs, entertained a mortalhatred to our nation, and openly avowed it. " And the said Hastings waswell aware, that, in case the Nabob, by him described in the manneraforesaid, on making such purchase, should continue to observe theterms of his father's original covenants and engagements with the Rajah, and should pay the Company the only tribute which he could lawfullyexact from the said Rajah, it was impossible that he could, for the merenaked and unprofitable rights of a sovereignty paramount, afford tooffer so great a sum as the Rajah did offer to the said Hastings for hisredemption from oppression; such an acquisition to the Nabob (while hekept his faith) could not possibly be of any advantage whatever to him;and that therefore, if a great sum was to be paid by the Nabob of Oude, it must be for the purpose of oppression and violation of public faith, to be perpetrated in the person of the said Nabob, to an extent and in amanner which the said Hastings was then apprehensive he could notjustify to the Court of Directors as his own personal act. 

PART III. 

EXPULSION OF THE RAJAH OF BENARES. 

I. That the said Warren Hastings, being resolved on the ruin of theRajah aforesaid, as a preliminary step thereto, did, against the expressorders of the Court of Directors, remove Francis Fowke, Esquire, theCompany's Resident at the city of Benares, without any complaint orpretence of complaint whatsoever, but merely on his own declaration thathe must have as a Resident at Benares a person of his own special andpersonal nomination and confidence, and not a man of the Company'snomination, --and in the place of the said Francis Fowke, thus illegallydivested of his office, did appoint thereto another servant of theCompany of his own choice. 

II. That, soon after he had removed the Company's Resident, he preparedfor a journey to the upper provinces, and particularly to Benares, inorder to execute the wicked and perfidious designs by him beforemeditated and contrived: and although he did communicate his purposeprivately to such persons as he thought fit to intrust therewith, he didnot enter anything on the Consultations to that purpose, or record theprinciples, real or pretended, on which he had resolved to act, nor didhe state any guilt in the Rajah which he intended to punish, or chargehim, the said Rajah, with entertaining any hostile intentions, theeffects of which were to be prevented by any strong measure; but, on thecontrary, he did industriously conceal his real designs from the Courtof Directors, and did fallaciously enter on the Consultations a minutedeclaratory of purposes wholly different therefrom, and which supposednothing more than an amicable adjustment, founded on the treatiesbetween the Company and the Rajah, investing himself by his said minutewith "full power and authority to form _such_ arrangements _with_ theRajah of Benares for the _better_ government and management of hiszemindary, and to perform such acts for the improvement of the interestwhich the Company possesses in it, as he shall think _fit and consonantto the mutual engagements subsisting between the Company and theRajah_"; and for this and other purposes he did invest himself with thewhole power of the Council, giving to himself an authority as if hisacts had been the acts of the Council itself: which, though a power of adangerous, unwarrantable, and illegal extent, yet does plainly imply thefollowing limits, namely, that the acts done should be _arranged with_the Rajah, that is, _with his consent_; and, secondly, that they shouldbe consonant to the actual engagements between the parties; and nothingappears in the minute conferring the said power, which did express orimply any authority for depriving the Rajah of his government, orselling the sovereignty thereof to his hereditary enemy, or for theplunder of his fort-treasures. 

III. That the said Warren Hastings, having formed the plans aforesaidfor the ruin of the Rajah, did set out on a journey to the city ofBenares with a great train, but with a very small force, not muchexceeding six companies of regular black soldiers, to perpetrate some ofthe unjust and violent acts by him meditated and resolved on; and thesaid Hastings was met, according to the usage of distinguished personsin that country, by the Rajah of Benares with a very great attendance, both in boats and on shore, which attendance he did apparently intend asa mark of honor and observance to the place and person of the saidHastings, but which the said Hastings did afterwards groundlessly andmaliciously represent as an indication of a design upon his life; andthe said Rajah came into the pinnace in which the said Hastings wascarried, and in a lowly and suppliant manner, alone, and without anyguard or attendance whatsoever, entreated his favor; and being receivedwith great sternness and arrogance, he did put his turban in the lap ofthe said Hastings, thereby signifying that he abandoned his life andfortune to his disposal, and then departed, the said Hastings notapprehending, nor having any reason to apprehend, any violencewhatsoever to his person. 

IV. That the said Hastings, in the utmost security and freedom fromapprehension, did pursue his journey, and did arrive at the city ofBenares on the 14th of August, 1781, some hours before the Rajah, who, soon after his arrival, intended to pay him a visit of honor and respectat his quarters, but was by the said Hastings rudely and insolentlyforbid, until he should receive his permission. And the said Hastings, although he had previously determined on the ruin of the said Rajah, inorder to afford some color of regularity and justice to his proceedings, did, on the day after his arrival, that is, on the 15th day of August, 1781, send to the Rajah a charge in writing, which, though informal andirregular, may be reduced to four articles, two general, and two moreparticular: the first of the general being, "That he [the Rajah] had, bythe means of his secret agents, endeavored to excite disorders in thegovernment on which he depended"; the second, "That he had suffered the_daily_ perpetration of robberies and murders, even in the streets ofBenares, to the great and public scandal of the English name. "

V. That it appears that the said Warren Hastings is guilty of an highoffence, contrary to the fundamental principles of justice, in the saidmode of charging misdemeanors, without any specification of person orplace or time or act, or any offer of specification or proofs by whichthe party charged may be enabled to refute the same, in order tounjustly load his reputation, and to prejudice him with regard to thearticles more clearly specified. 

VI. That the two specified articles relate to certain delays: thefirst, with regard to the payment of the sums of money unjustly extortedas aforesaid; and the second, the non-compliance with a requisition ofcavalry, --which non-compliance the said Hastings (even if the saidcharges had been founded) did falsely, and in contradiction to all law, affirm and maintain (in his accusation against the Rajah, and addressinghimself to him) "to amount to a _direct_ charge of disaffection and_infidelity_ to the government on which you depend": and furtherproceeded as follows: "I therefore judged it proper to state them [thesaid charges] thus fully to you in writing, and to _require_ youranswer; and this I expect _immediately_. " That the said Hastings, stating his pretended facts to amount to a charge of the nature (as hewould have it understood) of high treason, and _therefore_ calling foran _immediate_ answer, did wilfully act against the rules of naturaljustice, which requires that a convenient time should be given toanswer, proportioned to the greatness of the offence alleged, and theheavy penalties which attend it; and when he did arrogate to himself aright both to charge and to judge in his own person, he ought to haveallowed the Rajah full opportunity for conferring with his ministers, his doctors of law, and his accountants, on the facts charged, and onthe criminality inferred in the said accusation of disloyalty anddisaffection, or offences of that quality. 

VII. That the said Rajah did, under the pressure of the disadvantagesaforesaid, deliver in, upon the very evening of the day of the charge, afull, complete, and specific answer to the two articles thereinspecified; and did allege and offer proof that the whole of theextraordinary demands of the said Hastings had been actually long beforepaid and discharged; and did state a proper defence, with regard to thecavalry, even supposing him bound (when he was not bound) to furnishany. And the said Rajah did make a direct denial of the truth, of thetwo _general_ articles, and did explain himself on the same in assatisfactory a manner and as fully as their nature could permit, offering to enter into immediate trial of the points in issue betweenhim and the said Hastings, in the remarkable words following. "Myenemies, with a view to my ruin, have made false representations to you. Now that, _happily for me_, you have yourself arrived at this place, youwill be able to ascertain all the circumstances: first, relative to thehorse; secondly, to my people going to Calcutta; and thirdly, the datesof the receipts of the particular sums above mentioned. You will thenknow whether I have amused you with a false representation, or made ajust report to you. " And in the said answer the said Rajah complained, but in the most modest terms, of an injury to him of the most dangerousand criminal nature in transactions of such moment, namely, his notreceiving any answer to his letters and petitions, and concluded in thefollowing words. "I have never swerved in the smallest degree from myduty to you. It remains with you to decide on all these matters. I am inevery case your slave. What is just I have represented to you. May yourprosperity increase!"

VIII. That the said Warren Hastings was bound by the essentialprinciples of natural justice to attend to the claim made by the Rajahto a fair and impartial trial and inquiry into the matter of accusationbrought against him by the said Hastings, at a time and place whichfurnished all proper materials and the presence of all necessarywitnesses; but the said Hastings, instead of instituting the saidinquiry and granting trial, did receive an humble request for justicefrom a great prince as a fresh offence, and as a personal insult tohimself, and did conceive a violent passion of anger and a strongresentment thereat, declaring that he did consider the said answer asnot only unsatisfactory in substance, but offensive in style. "Thisanswer you will perceive to be not only unsatisfactory in substance, butoffensive in style, and less a vindication of himself than arecrimination on me. It expresses no concern for the causes of complaintcontained in my letter, or desire to atone for them, nor the smallestintention to pursue a different line of conduct. An answer couchednearly _in terms of defiance_ to requisitions of so serious a nature Icould not but consider as _a strong indication of that spirit ofindependency_ which the Rajah has for some years past assumed, and ofwhich indeed I had early observed other manifest symptoms, both beforeand from the instant of my arrival. " Which representation is altogetherand in all parts thereof groundless and injurious; as the substance ofthe answer is a justification proper to be pleaded, and the style, if inanything exceptionable, it is in its extreme humility, resulting ratherfrom an unmanly and abject spirit than from anything of an offensiveliberty; but being received as disrespectful by the said Hastings, itabundantly indicates the tyrannical arrogance of the said Hastings, andthe depression into which the natives are sunk under the Britishgovernment. 

IX. That the said Warren Hastings, pretending to have been much alarmedat the offensive language of the said Rajah's defence, and at certainappearances of independency which he had observed, not only on formeroccasions, but since his arrival at Benares, (where he had been butlittle more than one day, ) and which appearances he never has specifiedin any one instance, did assert that he conceived himself indispensablyobliged to adopt some decisive plan; and without any farther inquiry orconsultation (which appears) with any person, did, at ten o'clock of thevery night on which he received the before-mentioned full andsatisfactory as well as submissive answer, send an order to the BritishResident (then being a public minister representing the Britishgovernment at the court of the said Rajah, and as such bound by the lawof nations to respect the prince at whose court he was Resident, and notto attempt anything against his person or state, and who ought not, therefore, to have been chosen by the said Hastings, and compelled toserve in that business) that he should on the next morning arrest thesaid prince in his palace, and keep him in his custody until furtherorders; which said order being conceived in the most peremptory terms, the Rajah was put under arrest, with a guard of about thirty orderlysepoys, with their swords drawn; and the particulars thereof werereported to him as follows. 

"HONORABLE SIR, --I this morning, in obedience to your orders of lastnight, proceeded with a few of my orderlies, accompanied by LieutenantStalker, to Shewalla Ghaut, the present residence of Rajah Cheyt Sing, and acquainted him it was your pleasure he should consider himself inarrest; that he should order his people to behave in a quiet and orderlymanner, for that any attempt _to rescue him would be attended with hisown destruction. The Rajah submitted quietly to the arrest_, and assuredme, that, whatever were your orders, he was ready implicitly to obey; hehoped that you would allow him a _subsistence_, but as for _hiszemindary, his forts, and his treasure, he was ready to lay them at yourfeet, and his life, if required_. He expressed himself much hurt at theignominy which he affirmed must be the consequence of his confinement, and entreated me to return to you with the foregoing submission, hopingthat you would make allowances for his youth and inexperience, and inconsideration of his father's name release him from his confinement, assoon as he should prove the sincerity of his offers, and himselfdeserving of your compassion and forgiveness. "

X. That a further order was given, that every servant of the Rajah'sshould be disarmed, and a certain number only left to attend him under astrict watch. In a quarter of an hour after this conversation, twocompanies of grenadier sepoys were sent to the Rajah's palace by thesaid Hastings; and the Rajah, being dismayed by this unexpected andunprovoked treatment, wrote two short letters or petitions to the saidHastings, under the greatest apparent dejection at the outrage anddishonor he had suffered in the eyes of his subjects, (all imprisonmentof persons of rank being held in that country as a mark of indelibleinfamy, and he also, in all probability, considering his imprisonment asa prelude to the taking away his life, ) and in the first of the saidpetitions he did express himself in this manner: "Whatever may be yourpleasure, do it with your own hands; I am your slave. What occasion canthere be for a guard?" And in the other: "My honor was bestowed upon meby your Highness. It depends on you alone to take away or not to takeaway the country out of my hands. In case my honor is not left to me, how shall I be equal to the business of the government? Whoever, withhis hands in a supplicating posture, is ready with his life andproperty, what necessity can there be for him to be dealt with in thisway?"

XI. That, according to the said Hastings's narrative of thistransaction, he, the said Hastings, on account of the apparentdespondency in which these letters were written, "thought it _necessary_to give him _some_ encouragement, " and therefore wrote him a note of afew lines, carelessly and haughtily expressed, and little calculated torelieve him from his uneasiness, promising to send to him a person toexplain particulars, and desiring him "to set his mind at rest, and notto conceive any terror or apprehension. " To which an answer of greathumility and dejection was received. 

XII. That the report of the Rajah's arrest did cause a great alarm inthe city, in the suburbs of which the Rajah's palace is situated, and inthe adjacent country. The people were filled with dismay and anger atthe outrage and indignity offered to a prince under whose governmentthey enjoyed much ease and happiness. Under these circumstances theRajah desired leave to perform his ablutions; which was refused, unlesshe sent for water, and performed that ceremony on the spot. This hedid. And soon after some of the people, who now began to surround thepalace in considerable numbers, attempting to force their way into thepalace, a British officer, commanding the guard upon the Rajah, struckone of them with his sword. The people grew more and more irritated; buta message being sent from the Rajah to appease them, they continued, onthis interposition, for a while quiet. Then the Rajah retired to a sortof stone pavilion, or bastion, to perform his devotions, the guard ofsepoys attending him in this act of religion. In the mean time a personof the meanest station, called a _chubdar_, at best answering to ourcommon beadle or tipstaff, was sent with a message (of what nature doesnot appear) from Mr. Hastings, or the Resident, to the prince underarrest: and this base person, without regard to the rank of theprisoner, or to his then occupation, addressed him in a rude, boisterousmanner, "passionately and insultingly, " (as the said Rajah has withoutcontradiction asserted, ) "and, reviling him with a loud voice, gave bothhim and his people the vilest abuse"; and the manner and matter beingobservable and audible to the multitude, divided only by an open stonelattice from the scene within, a firing commenced from without thepalace; on which the Rajah again interposed, and did what in him lay tosuppress the tumult, until, an English officer striking him with asword, and wounding him on the hand, the people no longer kept anymeasures, but broke through the inclosure of the palace. The insolenttipstaff was first cut down, and the multitude falling upon the sepoysand the English officers, the whole, or nearly the whole, were cut topieces: the soldiers having been ordered to that service without anycharges for their pieces. And in this tumult, the Rajah, being justlyfearful of falling into the hands of the said Hastings, did make hisescape over the walls of his palace, by means of a rope formed of histurban tied together, into a boat upon the river, and from thence into aplace of security; abandoning many of his family to the discretion ofthe said Hastings, who did cause the said palace to be occupied by acompany of soldiers after the flight of the Rajah. 

XIII. That the Rajah, as soon as he had arrived at a place of refuge, did, on the very day of his flight, send a suppliant letter to the saidHastings, filled with expressions of concern (affirmed by the saidHastings to be slight expressions) for what had happened, andprofessions (said by the said Hastings to be indefinite and unapplied)of fidelity: but the said Warren Hastings, though bound by his duty tohear the said Rajah, and to prevent extremities, if possible, beingfilled with insolence and malice, did not think it "_becoming_ of him tomake any reply to it; and that he _thought_ he ordered the bearer of theletter to be told that _it required none_. "

XIV. That this letter of submission having been received, the saidRajah, not discouraged or provoked from using every attempt towardspeace and reconciliation, did again apply, on the very morningfollowing, to Richard Johnson, Esquire, for his interposition, but to nopurpose; and did likewise, with as little effect, send a message toCantoo Baboo, native steward and confidential agent of the saidHastings, which was afterwards reduced into writing, "to exculpatehimself from any concern in what had passed, and to profess hisobedience to his _will_ [Hastings's] _in whatever_ way he shoulddictate. " But the said Hastings, for several false and contradictoryreasons by him assigned, did not take any advantage of the said opening, attributing the same to artifice in order to gain time; but instead ofaccepting the said submissions, he did resolve upon flight from the cityof Benares, and did suddenly fly therefrom in great confusion. 

XV. That the said Hastings did persevere in his resolutions not tolisten to any submission or offer of accommodation whatsoever, thoughseveral were afterwards made through almost every person who might besupposed to have influence with him, but did cause the Rajah's troops tobe attacked and fallen upon, though they only acted on the defensive, (as the Rajah has without contradiction asserted, ) and thereby, and byhis preceding refusal of propositions of the same nature, and by otherhis perfidious, unjust, and tyrannical acts by him perpetrated and done, and by his total improvidence in not taking any one rational securitywhatsoever against the inevitable consequences of those acts, did makehimself guilty of all the mutual slaughter and devastation which ensued, as well as, in his opinion, of the imminent danger of the totalsubversion of the British power in India by the risk of his own person, which he asserts that it did run, --as also "that it ought not to bethought that he attributed too much consequence to his personal safety, when he supposed _the fate of the British empire in India connected withit_, and that, mean as its substance may be, its accidental qualitieswere equivalent to those which, like the characters of a talisman inthe Arabian mythology, formed the _essence_ of the state itself, representation, title, and the _estimate_ of the public opinion; that, had he fallen, such a stroke would be universally considered as decisiveof the national fate; every state round it would have started into armsagainst it, and _every subject of its own dominion would, according totheir several abilities, have become its enemy_": and that he knew andhas declared, that, though the said stroke was not struck, that greatconvulsions did actually ensue from his proceedings, "that half theprovince of Oude was in a state of as complete rebellion as that ofBenares, " and that invasions, tumults, and insurrections were occasionedthereby in various other parts. 

XVI. That the said Warren Hastings, after he had collected his forcesfrom all parts, did, with little difficulty or bloodshed, subsequent tothat time, on the part of his troops, and in a few days, entirely reducethe said province of Benares; and did, after the said short and littleresisted hostility, in cold blood, issue an order for burning a certaintown, in which he accused the people at large of having killed, "uponwhat provocation he knows not, " certain wounded sepoys, who wereprisoners: which order, being _generally_ given, when it was his duty tohave made some inquiry concerning the particular offenders, but which hedid never make, or cause to be made, was cruel, inhuman, and tended tothe destruction of the revenues of the Company; and that this, and otheracts of devastation, did cause the loss of two months of thecollections. 

XVII. That the said Warren Hastings did not only refuse the submissionsof the said Rajah, which were frequently repeated through variouspersons after he had left Benares, and even after the defeat of certainof the Company's forces, but did proscribe and except him from thepardons which he issued after he had satisfied his vengeance on theprovince of Benares. 

XVIII. That the said Warren Hastings did send to a certain castle, called Bidzigur, the residence of a person of high rank, called Panna, the mother of the Rajah of Benares, with whom his wife, a womandescribed by the said Hastings "to be of an amiable character, " and allthe other women of the Rajah's family, and the survivors of the familyof his father, Bulwant Sing, did then reside, a body of troops todispossess them of her said residence, and to seize upon her money andeffects, although she did not stand, even by himself, accused of anyoffence whatsoever, --pretending, but not proving, and not attempting toprove, then nor since, that the treasures therein contained were theproperty of the Rajah, and not her own; and did, in order to stimulatethe British soldiery to rapine and outrage, issue to them severalbarbarous orders, contrary to the practice of civilized nations, relative to their property, movable and immovable, attended withunworthy and unbecoming menaces, highly offensive to the manners of theEast and the particular respect there paid to the female sex, --whichletters and orders, as well as the letters which he had received fromthe officers concerned, the said Hastings did unlawfully suppress, untilforced by the disputes between him and the said officers to discoverthe same: and the said orders are as follow. 

"I am this instant favored with yours of yesterday. Mine of the samedate [22d October, 1781] has before this time acquainted you with myresolutions and sentiments respecting the Rannee [the mother of theRajah Cheyt Sing]. I think every demand she has made to you, except thatof safety and respect for her person, is unreasonable. If the reportsbrought to me are true, _your rejecting her offers, or any negotiationswith her_, would soon obtain you possession of the fort upon your ownterms. I apprehend that she will contrive _to defraud the captors of aconsiderable part of the booty by being suffered to retire withoutexamination. But this is your consideration, and not mine. I should bevery sorry that your officers and soldiers lost ANY PART of the rewardto which they are so well entitled_; but I cannot make any objection, asyou must be the best judge of the expediency of the _promised_indulgence to the Rannee. What you have engaged for I will certainlyratify; but as to permitting the Rannee to hold the purgunnah of Hurluk, or any other in the zemindary, without being subject to the authority ofthe zemindar, or any lands whatever, _or indeed making any conditionswith her for a provision, I will never consent to it_. " And in anotherletter to the same person, dated Benares, 3d of November, 1781, in whichhe, the said Hastings, consents that the said woman of distinctionshould be allowed to evacuate the place and to receive protection, hedid express himself as follows. "I am willing to grant her now the sameconditions to which I at first consented, provided that she deliversinto your possession, within twenty-four hours from the time ofreceiving your message, the fort of Bidzigur, with the treasure andeffects lodged therein by Cheyt Sing or any of his adherents, with thereserve only, as above mentioned, of such articles _as you shall thinknecessary to her sex and condition_, or as you shall be disposed _ofyourself to indulge her with_. If she complies, as I expect she will, itwill be your part to secure the fort and the property it contains _forthe benefit of yourself and detachment_. I have only further to requestthat you will grant an escort, if Panna should require it, to conducther here, or wherever she may choose to retire to. But should she refuseto execute the promise she has made, _or delay it beyond the term oftwenty-four hours_, it is my _positive_ injunction that you immediatelyput a stop to any further intercourse or negotiation with her, and on nopretext renew it. If she disappoints _or trifles_ with me, after I havesubjected my duan to the disgrace of returning ineffectually, and ofcourse myself to discredit, I shall consider it as a _wanton affront andindignity which I can never forgive_, nor will I grant her anyconditions whatever, but leave her exposed to _those dangers_ which shehas chosen to risk rather than trust to the clemency and generosity ofour government. I think _she cannot be ignorant of these consequences, and will not venture to incur them_; and it is for this reason I place adependence on her offers, and have consented to send my duan to her. "

XIX. That the castle aforesaid being surrendered upon terms of safety, and on express condition of not attempting to search their persons, thewoman of rank aforesaid, her female relations and female dependants, tothe number of three hundred, besides children, evacuated the saidcastle; but the spirit of rapacity being excited by the letters andother proceedings of the said Hastings, the capitulation was shamefullyand outrageously broken, and, in despite of the endeavors of thecommanding officer, the said woman of high condition, and her femaledependants, friends, and servants, were plundered of the effects theycarried with them, and which were reserved to them in the capitulationof their fortress, and in their persons were otherwise rudely andinhumanly dealt with by the licentious followers of the camp: for whichoutrages, represented to the said Hastings with great concern by thecommanding officer, Major Popham, he, the said Hastings, did afterwardsrecommend a late and fruitless redress. 

XX. That the Governor-General, Warren Hastings, in exciting the hopes ofthe military by declaring them _well entitled to the plunder_ of thefortress aforesaid, the residence of the mother and other women of theRajah of Benares, and by wishing the troops to secure the same for theirown benefit, did advise and act in direct contradiction to the orders ofthe Court of Directors, and to his own opinion of his public duty, aswell as to the truth and reality thereof, --he having some years beforeentered in writing the declaration which follows. 

"The very idea of _prize-money_ suggests to my remembrance _the formerdisorders which arose in our army from this source, and had almostproved fatal to it_. Of this circumstance you must be sufficientlyapprised, and of the necessity for discouraging every expectation ofthis kind amongst the troops. _It is to be avoided like poison. _ The badeffects of a similar measure were but too plainly felt in a formerperiod, and our honorable masters did not fail on that occasion toreprobate with their censure, in the most severe terms, a practice whichthey regarded as the source of infinite evils, and which, ifestablished, would in their judgment necessarily bring corruption andruin on their army. "

XXI. That the said Hastings, after he had given the license aforesaid, and that in consequence thereof the booty found in the castle, to theamount of 23, 27, 813 current rupees, was distributed among the soldiersemployed in its reduction, the said Hastings did retract his declarationof right, and his permission to the soldiers to appropriate tothemselves the plunder, and endeavored, by various devices andartifices, to explain the same away, and to recover the spoil aforesaidfor the use of the Company; and wholly failing in his attempts to resumeby a breach of faith with the soldiers what he had unlawfully disposedof by a breach of duty to his constituents, he attempted to obtain thesame as a loan, in which attempt he also failed; and the aforesaid moneybeing the only part of the treasures belonging to the Rajah, or any ofhis family, that had been found, he was altogether frustrated in theacquisition of every part of that dishonorable object which alone hepretended to, and pursued through a long series of acts of injustice, inhumanity, oppression, violence, and bloodshed, at the hazard of hisperson and reputation, and, in his own opinion, at the risk of the totalsubversion of the British empire. 

XXI. That the said Warren Hastings, after the commission of theoffences aforesaid, being well aware that he should be called to anaccount for the same, did, by the evil counsel and agency of Sir ElijahImpey, Knight, his Majesty's chief-justice, who was then out of thelimits of his jurisdiction, cause to be taken at Benares, before or bythe said Sir Elijah Impey, and through the intervention, not of theCompany's interpreter, but of a certain private interpreter of his, thesaid Hastings's, own appointment, and a dependant on him, called MajorDavy, several declarations and depositions by natives of Hindostan, --anddid also cause to be taken before the said Sir Elijah Impey severalattestations in English, made by British subjects, and which wereafterwards transmitted to Calcutta, and laid before theCouncil-General, --some of which depositions were upon oath, some uponhonor, and others neither upon _oath_ nor _honor_, but all or most ofwhich were of an irregular and irrelevant nature, and not fit or decentto be taken by a British magistrate, or to be transmitted to a Britishgovernment. 

XXIII. That one of the said attestations (but not on oath) was made by aprincipal minister of the Nabob of Oude, to whom the said Hastings hadsome time before proposed to sell the sovereignty of that very territoryof Benares; and that one other attestation (not upon oath) was made by anative woman of distinction, whose son he, the said Hastings, didactually promote to the government of Benares, vacated by the unjustexpulsion of the Rajah aforesaid, and who in her deposition did declarethat she considered the expelled Rajah as her enemy, and that he neverdid confer with her, or suffer her to be acquainted with any of hisdesigns. 

XXIV. That, besides the depositions of persons interested in the ruin ofthe Rajah, others were made by persons who then received pensions fromhim, the said Hastings; and several of the affidavits were made bypersons of mean condition, and so wholly illiterate as not to be able towrite their names. 

XXV. That he, the said Hastings, did also cause to be examined byvarious proofs and essays, the result of which was delivered in uponhonor, the quality of certain military stores taken by the Britishtroops from the said Rajah of Benares; and upon the report that the samewere of a good quality, and executed by persons conversant in the makingof good military stores, although the cannon was stated by the sameauthority to be bad, he, the said Warren Hastings, from the reportaforesaid, did maliciously, and contrary to the principles of naturaland legal reason, infer that the insurrection which had been raised byhis own violence and oppression, and rendered for a time successful byhis own improvidence, was the consequence of a premeditated design tooverturn the British empire in India, and to exterminate therefrom theBritish nation; which design, if it had been true, the said Hastingsmight have known, or rationally conjectured, and ought to have providedagainst. And if the said Hastings had received any credible informationof such design, it was his duty to lay the same before the CouncilBoard, and to state the same to the Rajah, when he was in a condition tohave given an answer thereto or to observe thereon, and not, after hehad proscribed and driven him from his dominions, to have inquired intooffences to justify the previous infliction of punishment. 

XXVI. That it does not appear, that, in taking the said depositions, there was any person present on the part of the Rajah to object to thecompetence or credibility or relevancy of any of the said affidavits orother attestations, or to account, otherwise than as the said deponentsdid account, for any of the facts therein stated; nor were any copiesthereof sent to the said Rajah, although the Company had a minister atthe place of his residence, namely, in the camp of the Mahratta chiefSindia, so as to enable him to transmit to the Company any matters whichmight induce or enable them to do justice to the injured princeaforesaid. And it does not appear that the said Hastings has everproduced any witness, letter, or other document, tending to prove thatthe said Rajah ever did carry on any hostile negotiation whatever withany of those powers with whom he was charged with a conspiracy againstthe Company, previous to the period of the said Hastings's havingarrested him in his palace, although he, the said Hastings, had variousagents at the courts of all those princes, --and that a late principalagent and near relation of a minister of one them, the Rajah of Berar, called Benaram Pundit, was, at the time of the tumult at Benares, actually with the said Hastings, and the said Benaram Pundit was by himhighly applauded for his zeal and fidelity, and was therefore by himrewarded with a large pension on those very revenues which he had takenfrom the Rajah Cheyt Sing, and if such a conspiracy had previouslyexisted, the Mahratta minister aforesaid must have known, and would haveattested it. 

XXVII. That it appears that the said Warren Hastings, at the time thathe formed his design of seizing upon the treasures of the Rajah ofBenares, and of deposing him, did not believe him guilty of thatpremeditated project for driving the English out of India with which heafterwards thought fit to charge him, or that he was really guilty ofany other great offence: because he has caused it to be deposed, that, if the said Rajah should pay the sum of money by him exacted, "he wouldsettle his zemindary upon him on the most eligible footing"; whereas, ifhe had conceived him to have entertained traitorous designs against theCompany, from whom he held his tributary estate, or had been otherwiseguilty of such enormous offences as to make it necessary to takeextraordinary methods for coercing him, it would not have been properfor him to settle upon such a traitor and criminal the zemindary ofBenares, or any other territory, upon the most eligible, or upon anyother footing whatever: whereby the said Hastings has by his own statingdemonstrated that the money intended to have been exacted was not as apunishment for crimes, but that the crimes were pretended for thepurpose of exacting money. 

XXVIII. That the said Warren Hastings, in order to justify the acts ofviolence aforesaid to the Court of Directors, did assert certain falsefacts, known by him to be such, and did draw from them certain false anddangerous inferences, utterly subversive of the rights of the princesand subjects dependent on the British nation in India, contrary to theprinciples of all just government, and highly dishonorable to that ofGreat Britain: namely, that the "Rajah of Benares was not a vassal ortributary prince, and that the deeds which passed between him and theboard, upon the transfer of the zemindary in 1775, were not to beunderstood to bear the quality and force of a treaty upon optionalconditions between equal states; that the payments to be made by himwere not a tribute, but a rent; and that the instruments by which histerritories were conveyed to him did not differ from common grants tozemindars who were merely subjects; but that, being nothing more than acommon zemindar and mere subject, and the Company holding theacknowledged rights of his former sovereign, held an absolute authorityover him; that, in the known relations of zemindar to the sovereignauthority, or power delegated by it, he owed a personal allegiance andan implicit and unreserved obedience to that authority, at theforfeiture of his zemindary, and even of his life and property. " Whereasthe said Hastings did well know, that, whether the payments from theRajah were called _rent_ or _tribute_, having been frequently by himselfcalled the one and the other, and that of whatever nature theinstruments by which he held might have been, he did not consider him asa common zemindar or landholder, but as far independent as a tributaryprince could be: for he did assign as a reason for receiving his rentrather within the Company's province than in his own capital, that itwould not "frustrate the intention of rendering the Rajah _independent_;that, if a Resident was appointed to receive the money as it became dueat Benares, such a Resident would unavoidably acquire an influence overthe Rajah, and over his country, which would in effect render him themaster of both; that this consequence might not, perhaps, be broughtcompletely to pass without a struggle, and many appeals to the Council, which, in a government constituted like this, cannot fail to terminateagainst the Rajah, and, by the construction to which his opposition tothe agent would be liable, might eventually draw on him severerestrictions, and end _in reducing him to the mean and depraved state ofa zemindar_. "

XXIX. And the said Hastings, in the said Minute of Consultation, havingenumerated the frauds, embezzlements, and oppressions which would ensuefrom the Rajah's being in the dependent state aforesaid, and havingobviated all apprehensions from giving to him the implied symbols ofdominion, did assert, "that, without such appearance, he would expectfrom every change of government additional demands to be made upon him, and would of course descend to all the arts of intrigue and concealmentpractised by other dependent Rajahs, which would keep him indigent andweak, and eventually prove hurtful to the Company; but that, by properencouragement and protection, he might prove a profitable dependant, anuseful barrier, and even a powerful ally to the Company; but that hewould be neither, if the conditions of his connection with the Companywere left open to future variations. "

XXX. That, if the fact had been true that the Rajah of Benares wasmerely an eminent landholder or any other subject, the wicked anddangerous doctrine aforesaid, namely, that he owed a personal allegianceand an implicit and unreserved obedience to the sovereign authority, atthe forfeiture of his zemindary, and even of his life and property, atthe discretion of those who held or fully represented the sovereignauthority, doth leave security neither for life nor property to anypersons residing under the Company's protection; and that no suchpowers, nor any powers of that nature, had been delegated to the saidWarren Hastings by any provisions of the act of Parliament appointing aGovernor-General and Council at Fort William in Bengal. 

XXXI. That the said Warren Hastings did also advance another dangerousand pernicious principle in justification of his violent, arbitrary, andiniquitous actings aforesaid: namely, "that, if he had acted with anunwarrantable rigor, and even injustice, towards Cheyt Sing, yet, first, if he did _believe_ that extraordinary means were necessary, and thoseexerted with a strong hand, to preserve the Company's interests fromsinking under the accumulated weight that oppressed them, or, secondly, if he saw a _political necessity_ for curbing the _overgrown_ power of agreat member of their dominion, and to make it contribute to the reliefof their pressing exigencies, that his error would be excusable, asprompted by an excess of zeal for their [the Company's] interest, operating with too strong a bias on his judgment; but that much strongeris the presumption, that such acts are founded on just principles thanthat they are the result of a misguided judgment. " That the saiddoctrines are, in both the members thereof, subversive of all theprinciples of just government, by empowering a governor with delegatedauthority, in the first case, on his own private _belief_ concerning thenecessities of the state, not to levy an impartial and equal rate oftaxation suitable to the circumstances of the several members of thecommunity, but to select any individual from the same as an object ofarbitrary and unmeasured imposition, --and, in the second case, enablingthe same governor, on the same arbitrary principles, to determine whoseproperty should be considered as overgrown, and to reduce the same athis pleasure. 

PART IV. 

SECOND REVOLUTION IN BENARES. 

That the said Warren Hastings, after he had, in the manner aforesaid, unjustly and violently expelled the Rajah Cheyt Sing, the lord orzemindar of Benares, from his said lordship or zemindary, did, of hisown mere usurped authority, and without any communication with the othermembers of the Council of Calcutta, appoint another person, of the nameof Mehip Narrain, a descendant by the mother from the late Rajah, Bulwant Sing, to the government of Benares; and on account or pretenceof his youth and inexperience (the said Mehip Narrain not being abovetwenty years old) did appoint his father, Durbege Sing, to act as hisrepresentative or administrator of his affairs; but did give acontrolling authority to the British Resident over both, notwithstandinghis declarations before mentioned of the mischiefs likely to happen tothe said country from the establishment of a Resident, and his opinionsince declared in a letter to the Court of Directors, dated from thisvery place (Benares) the 1st of October, 1784, to the same or strongereffect, in case "agents are sent into the country, and armed withauthority for the purposes of vengeance and corruption, --_for to noother will they be applied_. "

That the said Warren Hastings did, by the same usurped authority, entirely set aside all the agreements made between the late Rajah andthe Company (which were real agreements with the state of Benares, inthe person of the lord or prince thereof, and his heirs); and withoutany form of trial, inquisition, or other legal process, for forfeitureof the privileges of the people to be governed by magistrates of theirown, and according to their natural laws, customs, and usages, did, contrary to the said agreement, separate the mint and the criminaljustice from the said government, and did vest the mint in the BritishResident, and the criminal justice in a Mahomedan native of his ownappointment; and did enhance the tribute to be paid from the province, from two hundred and fifty thousand pounds annually, limited by treaty, or thereabouts, to three hundred and thirty thousand pounds for thefirst year, and to four hundred thousand for every year after; and didcompel the administrator aforesaid (father to the Rajah) to agree to thesame; and did, by the same usurped authority, illegally impose, andcause to be levied, sundry injudicious and oppressive duties on goodsand merchandise, which did greatly impair the trade of the province, andthreaten the utter ruin thereof; and did charge several pensions on thesaid revenues, of his own mere authority; and did send and keep upvarious bodies of the Company's troops in the said country; and didperform sundry other acts with regard to the said territory, in totalsubversion of the rights of the sovereign and the people, and inviolation of the treaties and agreements aforesaid. 

That the said Warren Hastings, being absent, on account of ill health, from the Presidency of Calcutta, at a place called Nia Serai, aboutforty miles distant therefrom, did carry on a secret correspondence withthe Resident at Benares, and, under color that the instalments for thenew rent or tribute were in arrear, did of his own authority make, inabout one year, a second revolution in the government of the territoryaforesaid, and did order and direct that Durbege Sing aforesaid, fatherof the Rajah, and administrator of his authority, should be deprived ofhis office and of his lands, and thrown into prison, and did threatenhim with death: although he, the said Warren Hastings, had, at the timeof the making his new arrangement, declared himself sensible that therent aforesaid might require abatement; although he was well apprisedthat the administrator had been for two months of his administration ina weak and languid state of body, and wholly incapable of attending tothe business of the collections; though a considerable drought hadprevailed in the said province, and did consequently affect theregularity and produce of the collections; and though he had othersufficient reason to believe that the said administrator had not himselfreceived from the collectors of government and the cultivators of thesoil the rent in arrear: yet he, the said Warren Hastings, without anyknown process, or recording any answer, defence, plea, exculpation, orapology from the party, or recording any other grounds of rigor againsthim, except the following paragraph of a letter from the Resident, notonly gave the order as aforesaid, but did afterwards, without laying anyother or better ground before the Council-General, persuade them to, anddid procure from them, a confirmation of the aforesaid cruel andillegal proceedings, the correspondence concerning which had not beenbefore communicated: he pleading his illness for not communicating thesame, though that illness did not prevent him from carrying oncorrespondence concerning the deposition of the said administrator, andother important affairs in various places. 

That in the letter to the Council requiring the confirmation of his actsaforesaid the said Warren Hastings did not only propose the confinementof the said administrator at Benares, although by his imprisonment hemust have been in a great measure disabled from recovering the balancesdue to him, and for the non-payment of which he was thus imprisoned, butdid propose, as an alternative, his imprisonment at a remote fortress, out of the said territory, and in the Company's provinces, calledChunar: desiring them to direct the Resident at Benares "to exact fromBaboo Durbege Sing every rupee of the collections which it shall appearthat he has made and not brought to account, and either to confine himat Benares, or to send him a prisoner to Chunar, and to keep him inconfinement until he shall have discharged the whole of the amount duefrom him. " And the said Warren Hastings did assign motives of passionand personal resentment for the said unjust and rigorous proceedings, asfollows: "I feel myself, and may be allowed on such an occasion toacknowledge it, personally hurt at the ingratitude of this man, and atthe discredit which his ill conduct has thrown on my appointment of him. He has deceived me; he has offended against the government which I thenrepresented. " And as a further reason for depriving him of his jaghire, (or salary out of land, ) he did insinuate in the said letter, butwithout giving or offering any proof, "that the said Rajah had beenguilty of _little and mean peculations_, although the appointmentsassigned to him had been sufficient to free him from the temptationsthereto. "

That it appears, as it might naturally have been expected, that the wifeof the said administrator, the daughter of Bulwant Sing, the late Rajahof Benares, and her son, the reigning Rajah, did oppose to the best oftheir power, but by what remonstrances or upon what plea the said WarrenHastings did never inform the Court of Directors, the deposition, imprisonment, and confiscation of the estates of the husband of the oneand the father of the other; but that the said Hastings, persisting inhis malice, did declare to the said Council as follows: "The oppositionmade by the Rajah and the old Rannee, both equally incapable of judgingfor _themselves_, does certainly originate from some secret influence, which ought to be checked by a decided and peremptory declaration of theauthority of the board, and a denunciation of their displeasure at_their presumption_. "

That the said Warren Hastings, not satisfied with the injuries done andthe insults and disgraces offered to the family aforesaid, did, in amanner unparalleled, except by an act of his own on another occasion, fraudulently and inhumanly endeavor to make the wife and son of the saidadministrator, contrary to the sentiments and the law of Nature, theinstruments of his oppressions: directing, "that, if they" (the motherand son aforesaid) "could be _induced_ to yield _the appearance of acheerful acquiescence_ in the new arrangement, and to adopt it as _ameasure formed with their participation_, it would be better than thatit should be done by a declared act of compulsion; but that at allevents it ought to be done. "

That, in consequence of the pressing declarations aforesaid, the saidWarren Hastings did on his special recommendation appoint, in oppositionto the wishes and desires of the Rajah and his mother, another person tothe administration of his affairs, called Jagher Deo Seo. 

That, the Company having sent express orders for the sending theResident by them before appointed to Benares, the said Warren Hastingsdid strongly oppose himself to the same, and did throw upon the personappointed by the Company (Francis Fowke, Esquire) several strong, butunspecified, reflections and aspersions, contrary to the duty he owed tothe Company, and to the justice he owed to all its servants. 

That the said Resident, being appointed by the votes of the rest of theCouncil, in obedience to the reiterated orders of the Company, and indespite of the opposition of the said Hastings, did proceed to Benares, and, on the representation of the parties, and the submission of theaccounts of the aforesaid Durbege Sing to an arbitrator, did find him, the said Durbege Sing, in debt to the Company for a sum not considerableenough to justify the severe treatment of the said Durbege Sing: hiswife and son complaining, at or about the same time, that the balancesdue to him from the _aumils_, or sub-collectors, had been received bythe new administrator, and carried to his own credit, in prejudice andwrong to the said Durbege Sing; which representation, the only one thathas been transmitted on the part of the said sufferers, has not beencontradicted. 

That it appears that the said Durbege Sing did afterwards go to Calcuttafor the redress of his grievances, and that it does not appear that thesame were redressed, or even his complaints heard, but he received twoperemptory orders from the Supreme Council to leave the said city and toreturn to Benares; that, on his return to Benares, and being there metby Warren Hastings aforesaid, he, the said Warren Hastings, although hehad reason to be well assured that the said Durbege Sing was inpossession of small or no substance, did again cruelly and inhumanly, and without any legal authority, order the said Durbege Sing to bestrictly imprisoned; and the said Durbege Sing, in consequence of thevexations, hardships, and oppressions aforesaid, died in a short timeafter, insolvent, but whether in prison or not does not appear. 

PART V. 

THIRD REVOLUTION IN BENARES. 

That the said Warren Hastings, having, in the manner before recited, divested Durbege Sing of the administration of the province of Benares, did, of his own arbitrary will and pleasure, and against theremonstrances of the Rajah and his mother, (in whose name and in whoseright the said Durbege Sing, father of the one, and husband of theother, had administered the affairs of the government, ) appoint a personcalled Jagher Deo Seo to administer the same. 

That the new administrator, warned by the severe example made of hispredecessor, is represented by the said Warren Hastings as having madeit his "avowed principle" (as it might be expected it should be) "thatthe sum fixed for the revenue _must_ be collected. " And he did, upon theprinciple aforesaid, and by the means suggested by a principle of thatsort, accordingly levy from the country, and did regularly discharge tothe British Resident at Benares, by monthly payments, the sums imposedby the said Warren Hastings, as it is asserted by the Resident, Fowke;but the said Warren Hastings did assert that his annual collections didnot amount to more than Lac 37, 37, 600, or thereabouts, which he says ismuch short of the revenues of the province, and is by about twenty-fourthousand pounds short of his agreement. 

That it further appears, that, notwithstanding the new administratoraforesaid was appointed two months, or thereabouts, after the beginningof the Fusseli year, that is to say, about the middle of November, 1782, and the former administrator had collected a certain portion of therevenues of that year, amounting to 17, 000_l. _ and upwards, yet he, thesaid new administrator, upon the unjust and destructive principleaforesaid, suggested by the cruel and violent proceedings of the saidWarren Hastings towards his predecessor, did levy on the province, within the said year, the whole amount of the revenues to be collected, in addition to the sum collected by his predecessor aforesaid. 

That, on account of a great drought which prevailed in the provinceaforesaid, a remission of certain duties in grain was proposed by thechief criminal judge at Benares; but the administrator aforesaid, beingfearful that the revenue should fall short in his hands, did strenuouslyoppose himself to the necessary relief to the inhabitants of the saidcity. 

That, notwithstanding the cantonment of several bodies of the Company'stroops within the province, since the abolition of the nativegovernment, it became subject in a particular manner to the depredationsof the Rajahs upon the borders; insomuch that in one quarter no fewerthan thirty villages had been sacked and burned, and the inhabitantsreduced to the most extreme distress. 

That the Resident, in his letter to the board at Calcutta, did representthat the collection of the revenue was become very difficult, and, besides the extreme drought, did assign for a cause of that difficultythe following. "That there is also one fund which in former years wasoften applied in this country to remedy temporary inconveniences in therevenue, and which in the present year does not exist. This was theprivate fortunes of merchants and _shroffs_ [bankers] resident inBenares, from whom _aumils_ [collectors] of credit could obtaintemporary loans to satisfy the immediate calls of the Rajah. These sums, which used to circulate between the aumil and the merchant, have beenturned into a different channel, by bills of exchange to defray theexpenses of government, both on the west coast of India, and also atMadras. " To which representation it does not appear that any answer wasgiven, or that any mode of redress was adopted in consequence thereof. 

That the said Warren Hastings, having passed through the province ofBenares (Gazipore) in his progress towards Oude, did, in a letter datedfrom the city of Lucknow, the 2d of April, 1784, give to the CouncilBoard at Calcutta an account, highly dishonorable to the Britishgovernment, of the effect of the arrangements made by himself in theyears 1781 and 1782, in the words following. "Having contrived, bymaking forced stages, while the troops of my escort marched at theordinary rate, to make a stay of five days at Benares, I was therebyfurnished with the means of acquiring some knowledge of the state of theprovince, which I am anxious to communicate to you. Indeed, the inquiry, which was _in a great degree obtruded upon me_, affected me with verymortifying reflections on my inability to apply it to any usefulpurpose. From the confines of Buxar to Benares I was followed and_fatigued_ by the clamors of the discontented inhabitants. It was what Iexpected in a degree, because it is rare that the exercise of authorityshould prove satisfactory to all who are the objects of it. Thedistresses which were produced by the long-continued drought unavoidablytended to heighten the general discontent; _yet I have reason to fearthat the cause existed principally in a defective, if not a corrupt andoppressive administration_. Of a multitude of petitions which werepresented to me, and of which I took minutes, every one that did notrelate to a personal grievance contained the representation of one andthe same species of oppression, which is in its nature of an influencemost fatal to the future cultivation. The practice to which I allude isthis. It is affirmed that the aumils and renters exact from theproprietors of the actual harvest a large increase in kind on theirstipulated rent: that is, from those who hold their _pottah_ by thetenure of paying _one half_ of the produce of their crops, either _thewhole_ without subterfuge, or a _large_ proportion of it by a _falsemeasurement_ or other pretexts; and from those whose engagements are fora fixed rent _in money_, the half, or a greater proportion, is taken _inkind_. This is in effect a tax upon the industry of the inhabitants:since there is scarce a field of grain in the province, _I might say notone_, which has not been preserved by the incessant labor of thecultivator, by digging wells for their supply, or watering them from thewells of masonry with which their country abounds, or from theneighboring tanks, rivers, and nullahs. The people who imposed onthemselves this voluntary and extraordinary labor, and not unattendedwith expense, did it on the expectation of reaping the profits of it;and it is certain they would not have done it, if they had known thattheir rulers, _from whom they were entitled to an indemnification_, would take from them what they had so hardly earned. If the sameadministration continues, and the country shall again labor under a wantof rain, _every field will be abandoned, the revenue fail, and thousandsperish through want of subsistence_: for who will labor for the _sole_benefit of others, and to make himself the subject of exaction? Thesepractices are to be imputed to the Naib himself" (the administratorforced by the said Warren Hastings on the present Rajah of Benares). "The avowed principle on which he acts, and which he acknowledged tomyself, is, that the _whole_ sum fixed for the revenue of the province_must_ be collected, --and that, for this purpose, the deficiency arisingin places where the crops have failed, or which have been leftuncultivated, must be supplied from the resources of others, where thesoil has been better suited to the season, or the industry of thecultivators hath been more successfully exerted: a principle which, however specious and plausible it may at first appear, _certainly tendsto the most pernicious and destructive consequences_. If thisdeclaration of the Naib had been made only to myself, I might havedoubted my construction of it; but it was repeated by him to Mr. Anderson, who understood it exactly in the same sense. In the managementof the customs, the conduct of the Naib, or of the officer under him, was forced also upon my attention. _The exorbitant rates exacted by anarbitrary valuation of the goods_, the practice of exacting duties_twice_ on the same goods, (first from the seller, and afterwards fromthe buyer, ) and the vexations, disputes, and delays drawn on themerchants by these oppressions, were loudly complained of; and someinstances of this kind were said to exist at the very time I was atBenares. Under such circumstances, we are not to wonder, if themerchants of foreign countries are discouraged from resorting toBenares, and if the commerce of that province should annually decay. _Other_ evils, or imputed evils, have accidentally come to my knowledge, which I will not now particularize, as I hope, that, with theassistance of the Resident, they may be _in part_ corrected. One evil Imust mention, because it has been verified by my own observation, and isof that kind which reflects an unmerited reproach on our general andnational character. When I was at Buxar, the Resident, at my desire, enjoined the Naib to appoint creditable people to every town throughwhich our route lay, to persuade and encourage the inhabitants to remainin their houses, promising to give them guards as I approached, and theyrequired it for their protection; and that he might perceive how earnestI was for his observation of this precaution, I repeated it to him inperson, and dismissed him that he might precede me for that purpose. But, to my great disappointment, _I found every place through which Ipassed abandoned; nor had there been a man left in any of them for theirprotection_. I am sorry to add, _that, from Buxar to the oppositeboundary, I have seen nothing but traces of complete devastation inevery village: whether caused by the followers of the troops which havelately passed, for their natural relief, (and I know not whether my ownmay not have had their share, )_ or from the apprehensions of theinhabitants left to themselves, and of themselves deserting theirhouses. I wish to acquit my own countrymen of the blame of theseunfavorable appearances, and in my own heart I do acquit them; for atone encampment a crowd of people came to me complaining that _their newaumil (collector), on the approach of any military detachment, himselffirst fled from the place; and the inhabitants, having no one to whomthey could apply for redress, or for the representation of theirgrievances, and being thus remediless, fled also; so that their housesand effects became a prey to any person who chose to plunder them_. Thegeneral conclusion appeared to me an inevitable consequence from such astate of facts; and my own senses bore testimony to it in this specificinstance: nor do I know how it is possible for any officer commanding amilitary party, how attentive soever he may be to the discipline andforbearance of his people, to prevent disorders, _when there is neitheropposition to hinder nor evidence to detect them_. These and many otherirregularities I impute _solely_ to the Naib, and recommend his instantremoval. I cannot help remarking, that, except the city of Benares, _theprovince is in effect without a government. The administration of theprovince is misconducted, and the people oppressed, trade discouraged, and the revenue in danger of a rapid decline, from the violentappropriation of its means. _"

That the said Warren Hastings did recommend to the Council, for a remedyof the disorders and calamities which had arisen from his own acts, dispositions, and appointments, that the administrator aforesaid shouldbe instantly removed from his office, --attributing the aforesaid"irregularities, _and many others, solely_ to him, " although, on his ownrepresentation, it does appear that he was the sole cause of theirregularities therein described. Neither does it appear that theadministrator, so by the said Hastings nominated and removed, wasproperly charged and called to answer for the said recitedirregularities, or for the _many others_ not recited, but _attributedsolely_ to him; nor has any plea or excuse from him been transmitted tothe board, or to the Court of Directors; but he was, at the instance ofthe said Hastings, deprived of his said office, contrary to theprinciples of natural justice, in a violent and arbitrary manner; whichproceeding, combined with the example made of his predecessor, mustnecessarily leave to the person who should succeed to the said office nodistinct principle upon which he might act with safety. But in comparingthe consequences of the two delinquencies charged, the failure of thepayment of the revenues (from whatever cause it may arise) is morelikely to be avoided than any severe course towards the inhabitants: asthe former fault was, besides the deprivation of office, attended withtwo imprisonments, with a menace of death, and an actual death, indisgrace, poverty, and insolvency; whereas the latter, namely, theoppression, and thereby the total ruin, of the country, charged on thesecond administrator, was only followed by loss of office, --although, he, the said Warren Hastings, did farther assert (but with what truthdoes not appear) that the collection of the last administrator hadfallen much short of the revenue of the province. 

That the said Warren Hastings himself was sensible that the frequentchanges by him made would much disorder the management of the revenues, and seemed desirous of concealing his intentions concerning the lastchange until the time of its execution. Yet it appears, by a letter fromthe British Resident, dated the 23d of June, 1784, "that a very strongreport prevailed at Benares of his [the said Hastings's] intentions ofappointing a new Naib for the approaching year, and that the effect isevident which the prevalence of such an idea amongst the aumils wouldprobably have on the cultivation at this particular time. The heavymofussil kists [harvest instalments] have now been collected by theaumils; the season of tillage is arrived; the ryots [country farmers]must be indulged, and even assisted by advances; and the aumil must lookfor his returns in the abundance of the crop, _the consequence of thisearly attention to the cultivation_. The effect is evident _which thereport of a change in the first officer of the revenue must have on theminds of the aumils, by leaving them at an uncertainty of what they havein future to expect_; and in proportion to the degree of thisuncertainty, their efforts and expenses in promoting the cultivationwill be languid and sparing. In compliance with the Naib's request, Ihave written to all the aumils, encouraging and ordering them to attendto the cultivation of their respective districts; but I conceive Ishould be able to promote this very desirable intention much moreeffectually, if you will honor me with the communication of yourintentions on this subject. At the same time I cannot help justremarking, that, if a change is intended, the sooner it takes place, themore _the bad effects_ I have described will be obviated. "

That the Council, having received the proposition for the removal of theadministrator aforesaid, did also, in a letter to him, the saidHastings, condemn the frequent changes by him made in the administrationof the collections of Benares, --but did consent to such alterations asmight be made without encroaching on the rights established by his, thesaid Hastings's, agreement in the year 1781, and did desire him totransmit to them his plan for a new administration. 

That the said Hastings did transmit a plan, which, notwithstanding theevils which had happened from the former frequent changes, he didpropose _as a temporary expedient_ for the administration of therevenues of the said province, --in which no provision was made for thereduction or remission of revenue as exigences might require, or for theextraction of the circulating specie from the said province, or for thesupply of the necessary advances for cultivation, nor for the removal orprevention of any of the grievances by him before complained of, otherthan an inspection by the Resident and the chief criminal magistrate ofBenares, and other regulations equally void of effect andauthority, --and which plan Mr. Stables, one of the Supreme Council, didaltogether reject; but the same was approved of _as a temporaryexpedient_, with some exceptions, by two other members of the board, Mr. Wheler and Mr. Macpherson, declaring _the said Warren Hastingsresponsible for the temporary expediency of the same_. 

That the said Warren Hastings, in the plan aforesaid, having stronglyobjected to the appointment of any European collectors, that is to say, of any European servants of the Company being concerned in the same, declaring that there had been sufficient experience of the ill effectsof their being so employed in the province of Bengal, --by which the saidHastings did either in loose and general terms convey a false imputationupon the conduct of the Company's servants employed in the collection ofthe revenues of Bengal, or he was guilty of a criminal neglect of dutyin not bringing to punishment the particular persons whose evilpractices had given rise to such a general imputation on Britishsubjects and servants of the Company as to render them unfit for servicein other places. 

That the said Warren Hastings, having in the course of three years madethree complete revolutions in the state of Benares, by expelling, in thefirst instance, the lawful and rightful governor of the same, underwhose care and superintendence a large and certain revenue, suitable tothe abilities of the country, and consistent with its prosperity, waspaid with the greatest punctuality, and by afterwards displacing twoeffective governors or administrators of the province, appointed insuccession by himself, and, in consequence of the said appointments andviolent and arbitrary removals, the said province "being left in effectwithout a government, " except in one city only, and having, after all, settled no more than a temporary arrangement, is guilty of an high crimeand misdemeanor in the destruction of the country aforesaid. 

IV. --PRINCESSES OF OUDE. 

I. That the reigning Nabob of Oude, commonly called Asoph ul Dowlah, (son and successor to Sujah ul Dowlah, ) by taking into or continuing inhis pay certain bodies of regular British troops, and by havingafterwards admitted the British Resident at his court into themanagement of all his affairs, foreign and domestic, and particularlyinto the administration of his finances, did gradually become insubstance and effect, as well as in general repute and estimation, adependant on, or vassal of, the East India Company, and was, and is, somuch under the control of the Governor-General and Council of Bengal, that, in the opinion of all the native powers, the English name andcharacter is concerned in every act of his government. 

II. That Warren Hastings, Esquire, contrary to law and to his duty, andin disobedience to the orders of the East India Company, arrogating tohimself the nomination of the Resident at the court of Oude, as hisparticular agent and representative, and rejecting the Residentappointed by the Company, and obtruding upon them a person of his ownchoice, did from that time render himself in a particular mannerresponsible for the good government of the provinces composing thedominions of the Nabob of Oude. 

III. That the provinces aforesaid, having been at the time of theirfirst connection with the Company in an improved and flourishingcondition, and yielding a revenue of more than three millions of poundssterling, or thereabouts, did soon after that period begin sensibly todecline, and the subsidy of the British troops stationed in thatprovince, as well as other sums of money due to the Company by treaty, ran considerably in arrear; although the prince of the country, duringthe time these arrears accrued, was otherwise in distress, and had beenobliged to reduce all his establishments. 

IV. That the prince aforesaid, or Nabob of Oude, did, in humble andsubmissive terms, supplicate the said Warren Hastings to be relievedfrom a body of troops whose licentious behavior he complained of, andwho were stationed in his country without any obligation by treaty tomaintain them, --pleading the failure of harvest and the prevalence offamine in his country: a compliance with which request by the saidWarren Hastings was refused in unbecoming, offensive, and insultinglanguage. 

V. That the said Nabob, laboring under the aforesaid and other burdens, and being continually urged for payment, was advised to extort, and didextort, from his mother and grandmother, under the pretext of loans, (and sometimes without that appearance, ) various great sums of money, amounting in the whole to six hundred and thirty thousand poundssterling, or thereabouts: alleging in excuse the rigorous demands of theEast India Company, for whose use the said extorted money had beendemanded, and to which a considerable part of it had been applied. 

VI. That the two female parents of the Nabob aforesaid were among thewomen of the greatest rank, family, and distinction in Asia, and wereleft by the deceased Nabob, the son of the one and the husband of theother, in charge of certain considerable part of his treasures, in moneyand other valuable movables, as well as certain landed estates, calledjaghires, in order to the support of their own dignity, and thehonorable maintenance of his women, and a numerous offspring, and theirdependants: the said family amounting in the whole to two thousandpersons, who were by the said Nabob, at his death, recommended in aparticular manner to the care and protection of the said WarrenHastings. 

VII. That, on the demand of the Nabob of Oude on his parents for thelast of the sums which completed the six hundred and thirty thousandpounds aforesaid, they, the said parents, did positively refuse to payany part of the same to their son for the use of the Company, until heshould agree to certain terms to be stipulated in a regular treaty, andamong other particulars to secure them in the remainder of theirpossessions, and also on no account or pretence to make any furtherdemands or claims on them; and well knowing from whence all his claimsand exactions had arisen, they demanded that the said treaty, or familycompact, should be guarantied by the Governor-General and Council ofBengal: and a treaty was accordingly agreed to, executed by the Nabob, and guarantied by John Bristow, Esquire, the Resident at Oude, under theauthority and with the express consent of the said Warren Hastings andthe Council-General, and in consequence thereof the sum last requiredwas paid, and discharges given to the Nabob for all the money which hehad borrowed from his own mother and the mother of his father. 

That, the distresses and disorders in the Nabob's government and hisdebt to the Company continuing to increase, notwithstanding the violentmethods before mentioned taken to augment his resources, the said WarrenHastings, on the 21st of May, and on the 31st July, 1781, (he and Mr. Wheler being the only remaining members of the Council-General, and hehaving the conclusive and casting voice, and thereby being in effect thewhole Council, ) did, in the name and under the authority of the board, resolve on a journey to the upper provinces, in order to a personalinterview with the Nabob of Oude, towards the settlement of hisdistressed affairs, and did give to himself a delegation of the powersof the said Council, in direct violation of the Company's ordersforbidding such delegation. 

VIII. That the said Warren Hastings having by his appointment met theNabob of Oude near a place called Chunar, and possessing an entire andabsolute command over the said prince, he did, contrary to justice andequity and the security of property, as well as to public faith and thesanction of the Company's guaranty, under the color of a treaty, whichtreaty was conducted secretly, without a written document of any part ofthe proceeding except the pretended treaty itself, authorize the saidNabob to seize upon, and confiscate to his own profit, the landedestates, called jaghires, of his parents, kindred, and principalnobility: only stipulating a pension to the net amount of the rent ofthe said lands as an equivalent, and that equivalent to such only whoselands had been guarantied to them by the Company; but provided neitherin the said pretended treaty nor in any subsequent act the leastsecurity for the payment of the said pension to those for whom suchpension was ostensibly reserved, and for the others not so much as ashow of indemnity;--to the extreme scandal of the British government, which, valuing itself upon a strict regard to property, did expresslyauthorize, if it did not command, an attack upon that right, unprecedented in the despotic governments of India. 

IX. That the said Warren Hastings, in order to cover the violent andunjust proceedings aforesaid, did assert a claim of right in the sameNabob to all the possessions of his said mother and grandmother, asbelonging to him by the Mahomedan law; and this pretended claim was setup by the said Warren Hastings, after the Nabob had, by a regular treatyratified and guarantied by the said Hastings as Governor-General, renounced and released all demands on them. And this false pretence of alegal demand was taken up and acted upon by the said Warren Hastings, without laying the said question on record before the Council-General, or giving notice to the persons to be affected thereby to support theirrights before any of the principal magistrates and expounders of theMahomedan law, or taking publicly the opinions of any person conversanttherein. 

X. That, in order to give further color to the acts of ill faith andviolence aforesaid, the said Warren Hastings did cause to be taken atLucknow and other places, before divers persons, and particularly beforeSir Elijah Impey, Knight, his Majesty's chief-justice, actingextra-judicially, and not within the limits of his jurisdiction, severalpassionate, careless, irrelevant, and irregular affidavits, consistingof matter not fit to be deposed on oath, --of reports, conjectures, andhearsays; some of the persons swearing to the said hearsays havingdeclined to declare from whom they heard the accounts at second handsworn to; the said affidavits in general tending to support thecalumnious charge of the said Warren Hastings, namely, that the agedwomen before mentioned had formed or engaged in a plan for thedeposition of their son and sovereign, and the _utter extirpation_ ofthe English nation: and neither the said charge against persons whosedependence was principally, if not wholly, on the good faith of thisnation, and highly affecting the honor, property, and even lives, ofwomen of the highest condition, nor the affidavits intended to supportthe same, extra-judicially taken, _ex parte_, and without notice, by thesaid Sir Elijah Impey and others, were at any time communicated to theparties charged, or to any agent for them; nor were they called upon toanswer, nor any explanation demanded of them. 

XI. That the article affecting private property secured by public acts, in the said pretended treaty, contains nothing more than a generalpermission, given by the said Warren Hastings, for confiscating suchjaghires, or landed estates, with the modifications therein contained, "as _he_ [the Nabob] may find necessary, " but does not directly pointat, or express by name, any of the landed possessions of the Nabob'smother. But soon after the signing of the said pretended treaty, (thatis, on the 29th November, 1781, ) it did appear that a principal objectthereof was to enable the Nabob to seize upon the estates of his femaleparents aforesaid, which had been guarantied to them by the East IndiaCompany. And although in the treaty, or pretended treaty, aforesaid, nothing more is purported than to give a simple permission to the Nabobto seize upon and confiscate the estates, leaving the execution ornon-execution of the same wholly to his discretion, yet it appears, byseveral letters from Nathaniel Middleton, Esquire, the Resident at theCourt of Oude, of the 6th, 7th, and 9th of December, 1781, that no suchdiscretion as expressed in the treaty was left, or intended to be left, with him, the said Nabob, but that the said article ought practically tohave a construction of a directly contrary tendency: that, instead ofconsidering the article as originating from the Nabob, and containing apower provided in his favor which he did not possess before, theconfiscation of the jaghires aforesaid was to be considered as a measureoriginating from the English, and to be intended for their benefit, and, as such, that the execution was to be forced upon him; and the executionthereof was accordingly forced upon him. And the Resident, Middleton, onthe Nabob's refusal to act in contradiction to his sworn engagementguarantied by the East India Company, and in the undutiful and unnaturalmanner required, did totally supersede his authority in his owndominions, considering himself as empowered so to act by theinstructions of the said Hastings, although he had reason to apprehend ageneral insurrection in consequence thereof, and that he found itnecessary to remove his family, "which he did not wish to retain there, in case of a rupture with the Nabob, or the necessity of employing theBritish forces in the reduction of _his_ aumils and troops"; and he didaccordingly, as sovereign, issue his own edicts and warrants, indefiance of the resistance of the Nabob, in the manner by him describedin the letters aforesaid, --in a letter of 6th December, 1781, that is tosay: "_Finding the Nabob wavering in his determination about theresumption of the jaghires_, I this day, in presence of and with theminister's concurrence, ordered the necessary purwannahs to be writtento the several aumils for that purpose; and it was my firm resolution tohave dispatched them this evening, with proper people to see thempunctually and implicitly carried into execution; but before they wereall transcribed, I received a message from the Nabob, who had beeninformed by the minister of the resolution I had taken, entreating thatI would withhold the purwannahs until to-morrow morning, when he wouldattend me, and afford me satisfaction on this point. As the loss of afew hours in the dispatch of the purwannahs appeared of little moment, and as it is possible the Nabob, _seeing that the business will at allevents be done, may make it an act of his own, I have consented toindulge him in his request; but, be the remit of our interview whateverit may, nothing shall prevent the orders being issued to-morrow, eitherby him or myself, with the concurrence of the ministers_. Your pleasurerespecting the Begums I have learnt from Sir Elijah, and the measureheretofore proposed will soon follow the resumption of the jaghires. From both, or indeed from the former alone, I have no doubt of thecomplete liquidation of the Company's balance. " And also in anotherletter, of the 7th December, 1781: "I had the honor to address youyesterday, informing you of the steps I had taken in regard to theresumption of _the jaghires. This morning the Vizier came to meaccording to his agreement, but seemingly without any intention ordesire to yield me satisfaction on the subject under discussion; for, after a great deal of conversation, consisting on his part of triflingevasion and puerile excuses for withholding his assent to the measure, though at the same time professing the most implicit submission to yourwishes, I found myself without any other resource than the one ofemploying that exclusive authority with which I consider yourinstructions to vest me: I therefore declared to the Nabob, in presenceof the minister and Mr. Johnson, who I desired might bear witness of theconversation, that I construed his rejection of the measure proposed asa breach of his solemn promise to you, and an unwillingness to yieldthat assistance which was evidently in his power towards liquidating hisheavy accumulating debt to the Company_, and that I must in consequencedetermine, in my own justification, _to issue immediately thepurwannahs_, which had only been withheld in the sanguine hope that hewould be prevailed upon _to make that his own act_ which nothing but themost urgent necessity could force _me to make mine_. He left me withoutany reply, but afterwards sent for his minister and authorized him togive me hopes that my requisition would be complied with; on which Iexpressed my satisfaction, but declared that I could admit of no furtherdelays, and, unless I received his Excellency's formal acquiescencebefore the evening, I should then most assuredly issue _my_ purwannahs;which _I have accordingly done_, not having had any assurances from hisExcellency that could justify a further suspension. I shall, as soon aspossible, inform you of the effect of the purwannahs, which, in manyparts, I am apprehensive it will be found necessary _to enforce withmilitary aid_. I am not, however, entirely without hopes that the Nabob, _when he sees the inefficacy of further opposition_, may alter hisconduct, and prevent _the confusion and disagreeable consequences whichwould be too likely to result from the prosecution of a measure of suchimportance without his concurrence_. His Excellency talks of going toFyzabad, for the purpose heretofore mentioned, in three or four days: _Iwish he may be serious in his intention_, and you may rest assured _Ishall spare no pains to keep him to it_. " And further, in a letter ofthe 9th December, 1781: "I had the honor to address you on the 7thinstant, informing you of the conversation which had passed between theNabob and me on the subject of resuming the jaghires, and the step I hadtaken in consequence. _His Excellency appeared to be very much hurt andincensed at the measure, and loudly complains of the treachery of hisministers, --first, in giving you any hopes that such a measure would beadopted, and, secondly, in their promising me their whole support incarrying it through; but, as I apprehended, rather than suffer it toappear that the point had been carried in opposition to his will_, he atlength yielded a _nominal_ acquiescence, and has this day issued his ownpurwannahs to that effect, --_declaring, however, at the same time, bothto me and his ministers, that it is an act of compulsion_. I hope to beable in a few days, in consequence of this measure, to transmit you anaccount of the actual value and produce of the jaghires, opposed to thenominal amount at which they stand rated on the books of the circar. "

XII. That the said Warren Hastings, instead of expressing anydisapprobation of the proceedings aforesaid, in violation of the rightssecured by treaty with the mother and grandmother of the reigning princeof Oude, and not less in violation of the sovereign rights of the Nabobhimself, did by frequent messages stimulate the said Middleton to aperseverance in and to a rigorous execution of the same, --and in hisletter from Benares of the 25th December, 1781, did "express doubts ofhis firmness and activity, and, above all, of his recollection of hisinstructions and their importance; and that, if he could not rely on hisown [power] and the means he possessed for performing those services, he_would free him_ [the said Middleton] _from the charges_, and wouldproceed _himself_ to Lucknow, and would _himself_ undertake them. "

XIII. That very doubtful credit is to be given to any letters written bythe said Middleton to the said Warren Hastings, when they answer thepurposes which the said Warren Hastings had evidently in view: the saidMiddleton having written to him in the following manner from Lucknow, 30th December, 1781. 

XIV. "MY DEAR SIR, --I have this day answered your _public_letter in the form _you seem to expect_. I hope there is nothing in itthat may appear to you too pointed. _If you wish the matter to beotherwise understood than I have taken up and stated it, I need not sayI shall be ready to conform to whatever you may prescribe, and to takeupon myself any share of the blame of the (hitherto) non-performance ofthe stipulations made on behalf of the Nabob_: though I do assure you Imyself represented to his Excellency and the ministers, (conceiving itto be your desire, ) that _the apparent assumption of the reins of hisgovernment_, (for in that light he undoubtedly considered it at thefirst view, ) as specified in the agreement executed by him, was notmeant to be _fully_ and _literally_ enforced, but that it was necessary_you should have something to show on your side, as the Company weredeprived of a benefit without a requital; and upon the faith of thisassurance alone_, I believe I may safely affirm, his Excellency'sobjections to signing the treaty were given up. If I have understood thematter wrong, or misconceived your design, I am truly sorry for it:_however, it is not too late to correct the error; and I am ready toundertake, and, God willing, to carry through, whatever you may, onreceipt of my public letter, tell me is your final resolve_. "

XV. That it appears, but on his, the said Middleton's, sole authority, in a letter from the said Middleton, dated Lucknow, 2d December, 1781, that the Nabob of Oude, wishing to evade the measure of resuming thejaghires aforesaid, did send a message to him, purporting, "that, if themeasure proposed was intended to procure the payment of the balance dueto the Company, he could better and more expeditiously effect thatobject by taking from his mother the treasures of his father, which hedid assert to be in her hands, and to which he did claim a right; andthat it would be sufficient that he, the said Hastings, _would hint hisopinion upon it, without giving a formal sanction to the measureproposed_; and that, whatever his resolution upon the subject should be, it would be expedient to keep it secret": adding, "_The resumption ofthe jaghires it is necessary to suspend till I have your answer to thisletter_. "

XVI. That it does not appear that the said Hastings did write anyletter in answer to the proposal of the said Middleton, but he, the saidHastings, did communicate his pleasure thereon, to Sir Elijah Impey, being then at Lucknow, for his, the said Middleton's, information; andit does appear that the seizing of the treasures of the mother of theNabob, said to have been proposed as _an alternative_ by the said Nabobto prevent the resumption of the jaghires, was determined upon andordered by the said Hastings, --and that the resumption of the saidjaghires, for the ransom of which the seizing of the treasures wasproposed, was also directed: not one only, but both sides of thealternative, being enforced upon the female parents of the Nabobaforesaid, although both the one and the other had been secured to themby a treaty with the East India Company. 

XVIII. [60] That Sir Elijah Impey, Knight, his Majesty's chief-justice atPort William, did undertake a journey of nine hundred miles, fromCalcutta to Lucknow, on pretence of health and pleasure, but was inreality in the secret of these and other irregular transactions, andemployed as a channel of confidential communication therein. And thesaid Warren Hastings, by presuming to employ the said chief-justice, aperson particularly unfit for an agent, in the transaction of affairs_primâ facie_ at least unjust, violent, and oppressive, contrary topublic faith, and to the sentiments and law of Nature, and which he, thesaid Hastings, was sensible "could not fail to draw obloquy on himselfby his participation, " did disgrace the king's commission, and renderodious to the natives of Hindostan the justice of the crown of GreatBritain. 

XIX. That, although the said Warren Hastings was from the beginning dulyinformed of the violence offered to the personal inclinations of theNabob, and the "apparent assumption of the reins of his government, " forthe purposes aforesaid, yet more than two years after he did write tohis private agent, Major Palmer, that is to say, in his letter of the6th of May, 1783, "that it has been a matter of _equal surprise andconcern_ to him to learn from the letters of the Resident that the NabobVizier was with difficulty and almost unconquerable reluctance inducedto give his consent to the attachment of the treasure deposited by hisfather under the charge of the Begum, his mother, and to the resumptionof her jaghire, and the other jaghires of the individuals of hisfamily": which pretence of ignorance of the Nabob's inclinations isfictitious and groundless. But whatever deception he might pretend to bein concerning the original intention of the Nabob, he was not, nor didhe pretend to be, ignorant of his, the Nabob's, reluctance to _proceed_in the said measures; but did admit his knowledge of the Nabob'sreluctance to their full execution, and yet did justify the same asfollows. 

XX. "I desire that you will inform him [the Nabob], that, in these andthe other measures which were either proposed by him or received hisconcurrence in the agreement passed between us at Chunar, I neither hadnor could have any object _but his relief, and the strengthening of hisconnection with the Company_; and that I should not on any other groundhave exposed myself to _the personal obloquy which they could not failto draw upon me by my participation in them_, but left him to regulateby his own discretion and by his own means the economy of his ownfinances, and, _with much more cause, the assertion of his domesticright. In these he had no regular claim to my interference_; nor had I, in my public character, any claim upon him, but for the payment of thedebt then due from him to the Company, although I was under thestrongest obligations to require it for the relief of the pressingexigencies of their affairs. He will well remember the manner in which, at a visit to him in his own tent, I declared my acquiescence freely, and without hesitation, to each proposition, which afterwards formed thesubstance of a written agreement, as he severally made them; and he canwant no other evidence of my motives for _so cheerful a consent_, norfor the requests which I added as the means of fulfilling his purposesin them. Had he not made these measures his own option, I should nothave proposed them; _but having once adopted them, and made them theconditions of a formal and sacred agreement, I had no longer an optionto dispense with them, but was bound to the complete performance andexecution of them, as points of public duty and of national faith, forwhich I was responsible to my king, and the Company my immediatesuperiors: and this was the reason for my insisting on their performanceand execution, when I was told that the Nabob himself had relaxed fromhis original purpose, and expressed a reluctance to proceed in it_. "

XXI. That the said Warren Hastings does admit that the Nabob _had_originally no regular claim upon him for his interference, or he anyclaim on the Nabob, which, might entitle him to interfere in the Nabob'sdomestic concerns; yet, in order to justify his so invidious aninterference, he did, in the letter aforesaid, give a false account ofthe said treaty, which (as before mentioned) did nothing more than givea _permission_ to the Nabob to resume the jaghires, _if HE should judgethe same to be necessary_, and did therefore leave the right ofdispensing with the whole, or any part thereof, as much in his optionafter the treaty as it was before: the declared intent of the articlebeing only to remove the restraint of the Company's guaranty forbiddingsuch resumption, but furnishing nothing which could authorize puttingthat resumption into the hands and power of the Company, to be enforcedat their discretion. And with regard to the other part of the spoil madeby order of the said Hastings, and by him in the letter aforesaid statedto be made equally against the will of the Nabob, namely, that which wascommitted on the personal and movable property of the female parents ofthe Nabob, nothing whatsoever in relation to the same is stipulated inthe said pretended treaty. 

XXII. That the said Hastings, in asserting that he was bound to the actsaforesaid by public duty, and even by national faith, in the veryinstance in which that national faith was by him grossly violated, andin justifying himself by alleging that he was bound to the _complete_execution by a responsibility to the Company which he immediatelyserved, and by asserting that these violent and rapacious proceedings, subjecting all persons concerned in them to obloquy, would be the meansof strengthening the connection of the Nabob with the British UnitedCompany of Merchants trading to the East Indies, did disgrace theauthority under which he immediately acted. And that the said Hastings, in justifying his obligations to the said acts by a responsibility tothe _king_, namely, to the King of Great Britain, did endeavor to throwupon his Majesty, his lawful sovereign, (whose name and character he wasbound to respect, and to preserve in estimation with all persons, andparticularly with the sovereign princes, the allies of his government, )the disgrace and odium of the aforesaid acts, in which a sovereignprince was by him, the said Hastings, made an instrument of perfidy, wrong, and outrage to two mothers and wives of sovereign princes, and inwhich he did exhibit to all Asia (a country remarkable for the utmostdevotion to parental authority) the spectacle of a Christian governor, representing a Christian sovereign, compelling a son to become theinstrument of such violence and extortion against his own mother. 

That the said Warren Hastings, by repeated messages and injunctions, andunder menaces of "a dreadful responsibility, " did urge the Resident to acompletion of this barbarous act; and well knowing that such an actwould probably be resisted, did order him, the said Resident, to use theBritish troops under his direction for that purpose; and did offer theassistance of further forces, urging the execution in the followingperemptory terms: "You _yourself_ must be _personally present_; you mustnot allow _any_ negotiation or forbearance, but must prosecute bothservices, until the Begums [princesses] are at the entire mercy of theNabob. "[61]

XXIII. That, in conformity to the said peremptory orders, a party ofBritish and other troops, with the Nabob in the ostensible, and theBritish Resident in the real command, were drawn towards the city ofFyzabad, in the castle of which city the mother and grandmother of theNabob had their residence; and after expending two days in negotiation, (the particulars of which do not appear, ) the Resident not receiving thesatisfaction he looked for, the town was first stormed, and afterwardsthe castle; and little or no resistance being made, and no blood beingshed on either side, the British troops occupied all the outer inclosureof the palace of one of the princesses, and blocked up the other. [62]

XXIV. That this violent assault, and forcible occupation of theirhouses, and the further extremities they had to apprehend, did notprevail on the female parents of the Nabob to consent to any submission, until the Resident sent in unto them a letter from the said WarrenHastings, [63] (no copy of which appears, ) declaring himself no longerbound by the guaranty, and containing such other matter as tended toremove all their hopes, which seemed to be centred in British faith. 

XXV. That the chief officers of their household, who were theirtreasurers and confidential agents, the eunuchs Jewar Ali Khân and BeharAli Khân, persons of great eminence, rank, and distinction, who had beenin high trust and favor with the late Nabob, were ignominiously put intoconfinement under an inferior officer, in order to extort the discoveryof the treasures and effects committed to their care and fidelity. Andthe said Middleton did soon after, that is to say, on the 12th ofJanuary, 1782, deliver them over for the same purpose into the custodyof Captain Neal Stuart, commanding the eighth regiment, by his ordergiven in the following words: "To be kept in close and secureconfinement, admitting of no intercourse with them, excepting by theirfour menial servants, who are authorized to attend them until furtherorders. You will allow them to have any necessary and convenience whichmay be consistent with a strict guard over them. "

XXVI. That, in consequence of these severities upon herself, and onthose whom she most regarded and trusted, the mother of the said Nabobdid at length consent to the delivering up of her treasures, and thesame were paid to the Resident, to the amount of the bond given by theNabob to the Company for his balance of the year 1779-80; and the saidtreasure "was taken from the most secret recesses in the houses of thetwo eunuchs. "

XXVII. That the Nabob continuing still under the pressure of a furtherpretended debt to the Company for his balance of the year 1780-81, theResident, not satisfied with the seizure of the estates and treasures ofhis parents aforesaid, although he, the said Resident, did confess thatthe princess mother "had declared, _with apparent truth_, that she haddelivered up _the whole of the property in her hands_, excepting goodswhich from the experience which he, the Resident, had of the _smallproduce_ of the sales of a former payment made by her in that mode hedid refuse, and that in his opinion it certainly would have amounted tolittle or nothing, " did proceed to extort another great sum of money, that is to say, the sum of one hundred and twenty thousand poundssterling, on account of the last pretended balance aforesaid: in order, therefore, to compel the said ministers and treasurers either todistress their principals by extorting whatever valuable substance mightby any possibility remain concealed, or to furnish the said sum fromtheir own estates or from their credit with their friends, did ordertheir imprisonment to be aggravated with circumstances of great cruelty, giving an order to Lieutenant Francis Rutledge, dated 20th January, 1782, in the following words. 

XXVIII. "SIR, --When this note is delivered to you by HoolasRoy, I have to desire that you order the two prisoners to be put _inirons, keeping them from all food, &c. , agreeable to my instructions ofyesterday_. 

 (Signed) "NATH^L MIDDLETON. "

XXIX. That by the said unjust and rigorous proceeding the said eunuchswere compelled to give their engagement for the payment of one hundredand twenty thousand pounds sterling aforesaid, to be completed withinthe period of one month; but after they had entered into the saidcompulsory engagement, they were still kept in close imprisonment, andthe mother and grandmother of the Nabob were themselves held under astrict guard, --although, at the same time, the confiscated estates wereactually in the Company's possession, and found to exceed the amount ofwhat they were rated at in the general list of confiscated estates, [64]and although the Assistant Resident, Johnson, did confess, "that theobject of distressing the Bhow Begum was merely to obtain a_ready-money_ instead of a _dilatory payment_, and that this ready-moneypayment, if not paid, was recoverable in the course of a few months uponthe jaghires in his possession, and that therefore it was not worthproceeding to any extremities, beyond the one described, " (namely, theconfinement of the princesses, and the imprisonment and fettering oftheir ministers, ) "upon so respectable a family. "[65]

XXX. That, after the surrender of the treasure, and the passing thebonds and obligations given as aforesaid, the Resident having beenstrictly ordered by the said Warren Hastings not to make any settlementwhatsoever with the said women of high rank, the Nabob was induced toleave the city of Fyzabad without taking leave of his mother, or showingher any mark of duty or civility. And on the same day the Resident leftthe city aforesaid; and after his return to Lucknow, in order to pacifythe said Hastings, who appeared to resent that the Nabob was not urgedto greater degrees of rigor than those hitherto used towards his mother, he, the said Resident, did, in his letter of the 6th February, give himan assurance in the following words:--"I shall, as you direct, use myinfluence to dissuade his Excellency from concluding _any settlement_until I have your further commands. "

XXXI. That the payment of the bond last extorted from the eunuchs wassoon after commenced, and the grandmother, as well as the mother, werenow compelled to deliver what they declared was _the extent of thewhole_ of both their possessions, including down to their _tableutensils_; which, as the Resident admitted, "they had been and werestill delivering, and that no proof had yet been obtained of theirhaving more. "

XXXII. That bullion, jewels, and goods, to the amount of five hundredthousand pounds and upwards, were actually received by the Resident forthe use of the Company before the 23d of February, 1782; and thereremained on the said extorted bond no more than about twenty-fivethousand pounds, according to the statement of the eunuchs, and notabove fifty thousand according to that made by the Resident. 

XXXIII. That, in this advanced state of the delivery of the extortedtreasure, the ministers of the women aforesaid of the reigning familydid apply to Captain Leonard Jaques, under whose custody they wereconfined, to be informed of the deficiency with which they stoodcharged, that they might endeavor, with the assistance of their friends, to provide for the same, and praying that they might through hismediation be freed from the hardships they suffered under theirconfinement: to which application they received an insolent answer fromthe said Richard Johnson, dated February 27th, 1782, declaring that partof what he had received in payment was in jewels and bullion, and thatmore than a month, the time fixed for the final payment, would elapsebefore he could dispose of the same, --insisting upon a ready-moneypayment, and assuring them "that the day on which their agreementexpired he should be indispensably obliged to recommence severities uponthem, until the last farthing was fully paid. " And in order to add totheir terrors and hardships, as well as to find some pretext for thefurther cruel and inhuman acts intended, an apparently groundless andinjurious charge was suggested to the imprisoned ministers aforesaid inthe following words. "You may also mention to them, that I have reasonto _suspect_ that the commotions raised by Bulbudder have not beenwithout their _suggestion and abetment_, which, if proved upon them, inaddition to the _probable_ breach of their agreement, will make theirsituation _very desperate_. "

XXXIV. That on the receipt of the said letter, that is, on the 2d March, the ministers aforesaid did aver, that they were not able to obtaincash, in lieu of the jewels and other effects, but that, if the goodswere sold, and they released from their confinement, and permitted (asthey have before requested) to go abroad among their friends, they couldsoon make good the deficiency; and they did absolutely deny "that theyhad any hand in the commotions raised by Bulbudder, or any kind ofcorrespondence with him or his adherents. "

XXXV. That the prisoners aforesaid did shortly after, that is to say, onthe 13th March, a third time renew their application to NathanielMiddleton, Esquire, the Resident, and did request that the jewelsremaining in his, the said Resident's, hands, towards the payment of thebalance remaining, "might be valued by four or five eminent merchants, Mussulmen and Hindoos, upon oath, " and that, if any balance shouldafterwards appear, they would upon their release get their friends toadvance the same; and they did again represent the hardship of theirimprisonment, and pray for relief; and did again assert that theimputations thrown upon them by the said Richard Johnson were false andgroundless, --"that they had no kind of intercourse, either directly orindirectly, with the authors of the commotions alluded to, and that theydid stake their lives upon the smallest proof thereof being brought. "

XXXVI. That, instead of their receiving any answer to any of theaforesaid reasonable propositions, concerning either the account stated, or the crimes imputed to them, or any relief from the hardships theysuffered, he, the Resident, Middleton, did, on the 18th of the saidmonth, give to the officer who had supplicated in favor of the saidprisoners an order in which he declared himself "under the disagreeablenecessity of recurring to severities to enforce the said payment, andthat this is therefore to desire that you immediately cause them _to beput in irons_, and keep them so until I shall arrive at Fyzabad to takefurther measures as may be necessary": which order being received atFyzabad the day after it was given, the said eunuchs were a second timethrown into irons. And it appears that (probably in resentment for thehumane representations of the said Captain Jaques) the Resident didrefuse to pay for the fetters, and other contingent charges of theimprisonment of the said ministers of the Nabob's mother, when at thesame time very liberal contingent allowances were made to otherofficers; and the said Jaques did strongly remonstrate against the sameas follows. "You have also ordered me to put the prisoners in irons:this I have done; yet, as I have no business to purchase fetters, orsupply them any other way, it is but reasonable that you should order meto be reimbursed. And why should I add anything more? A late commanderat this place, I am told, draws near as many thousands monthlycontingencies as my trifling letter for hundreds. However, if you cannotget my bill paid, be so obliging as to return it, and give me anopportunity of declaring to the world that I believe I am the firstofficer in the Company's service who has suffered in his property by anindependent command. "

XXXVI. That, in about two months after the said prisoners had continuedin irons in the manner aforesaid, the officer on guard, in a letter ofthe 18th May, did represent to the Resident as follows. "The prisoners, Behar and Jewar Ali Khân, who seem to be very sickly, have requestedtheir irons might be taken off for a few days, that they might takemedicine, and walk about the garden of the place where they areconfined. Now, as I am sure _they will be equally secure without theirirons as with them_, I think it my duty to inform you of this request: Idesire to know your pleasure concerning it. " To which letter the saidofficer did receive a direct refusal, dated 22d May, 1782, in thefollowing words. "I am sorry it is not in my power to comply with yourproposal of easing the prisoners for a few days of their fetters. Muchas my humanity may be touched by their sufferings, I should think itinexpedient to afford them any alleviation while they persist in abreach of their contract with me: and, indeed, no indulgence can beshown them without the authority of the Nabob, who, instead ofconsenting to moderate the rigors of their situation, would be mostwilling to multiply them":--endeavoring to join the Nabob, whom he wellknew to be reluctant in the whole proceeding, as a party in thecruelties by which, through the medium of her servants, it was intendedto coerce his mother. 

XXXVIII. That the said Resident, in a few days after, that is to say, onthe 1st June, 1782, in a letter to Major Gilpin, in command at Fyzabad, did order the account, as by himself stated, to be read to theprisoners, and, without taking any notice of their proposal concerningthe valuation of the effects, or their denial of the offences imputed tothem, to demand a positive answer relative to the payment, and, "uponreceiving from them a negative or unsatisfactory reply, to inform them, that, all further negotiation being at an end, they must prepare fortheir removal to Lucknow, where they would be called upon to answer notonly their recent breach of faith and solemn engagement, but also toatone for other heavy offences, the punishment of which, as hadfrequently been signified to them, it was in their power to havemitigated by a proper acquittal of themselves in this transaction. " Bywhich insinuations concerning the pretended offences of the said unhappypersons, and the manner by which they were to atone for the same, and bytheir never having been specifically and directly made, it doth appearthat the said crimes and offences were charged for the purpose ofextorting money, and not upon principles or for the ends of justice. 

XXXIX. That, after some ineffectual negotiations to make the prisonerspay the money, which it does not appear to have been in their power topay, they were again threatened by the Resident, in a letter to MajorGilpin, dated 9th June, 1782, in the following terms. "I wish you toexplain once more to the prisoners the imprudence and folly of theirconduct in forcing me to a measure which must be attended withconsequences so very serious to them, and that, when once they areremoved to Lucknow, it will not be in my power to show them mercy, or tostand between them and the vengeance of the Nabob. Advise them toreflect seriously upon the unhappy situation in which they will beinvolved in one case, and the relief it will be in my power to procurethem in the other; and let them make their option. "

XL. That he, the said Resident, did also, at the same time, receive aletter from the princess mother, which letter does not appear, but towhich only the following insolent return was made, --that is to say: "Theletter from the Bhow Begum is no ways satisfactory, and I cannot thinkof returning an answer to it. Indeed, all correspondence between theBegum and me has long been stopped; and I request you will be pleased toinform her that I by no means wish to resume it, or to maintain anyfriendly intercourse with her, until she has made good my claim upon herfor the balance due. "

XLI. That, in consequence of these threats, and to prevent a separationof the ministers from their mistresses, several plans for the payment ofthe balance were offered, both by the mother of the Nabob and theprisoners, to which no other objection appears to have been made thanthe length of time required by the parties to discharge thecomparatively small remainder of the extorted bond: the officer oncommand declaring, that, conformable to his instructions, he could notreceive the same. [66]

XLII. That the prisoners were actually removed from the city of theirresidence to the city of Lucknow, where they arrived on the 24th ofJune, 1782, and were on the next day threatened with severities, "tomake them discover where the balance might be procurable. " And on the28th, it should seem, that the severities for the purpose aforesaid wereinflicted, at least upon one of them; for the Assistant Resident, Johnson, did on that day write to Captain Waugh, the officer commandingthe guard, the letter following, full of disgrace to the honor, justice, and humanity of the British nation. 

XLIII. "SIR, --The Nabob having determined _to inflict corporalpunishment upon the prisoners_ under your guard, this is to desire thathis officers, when they shall come, may have free access to theprisoners, and _be permitted to do with them as they shall see proper_, only taking care that they leave them always under your charge. "

XLIV. That the said Richard Johnson did, further to terrify theprisoners, and to extort by all ways the remainder of the said unjust, oppressive, and rapacious demand, threaten to remove them out of theNabob's dominions into the castle of Churnagur, in order forever toseparate them from their principals, and deprive both of theirreciprocal protection and services, [67]--and did order a further guardto be put on the palace of the grandmother of the Nabob, an ally of theCompany, and to prevent the entrance of the provisions to her, (whichorder relative to the guard only was executed, ) and did use sundryunworthy and insulting menaces both with regard to herself and to herprincipal ministers. [68]

XLV. That a proposal was soon after made by the said princess and herdaughter-in-law, praying that their ministers aforesaid should bereturned to Fyzabad, and offering to raise a sum of money on thatcondition;[69] as also that they would remove from one of their palaces, whilst the English were to be permitted to search the other. [70] But theAssistant Resident, Johnson, did, instead of a compliance with theformer of these propositions, send the following orders, dated 23d July, 1782, to the officer commanding the guard on the ministers aforesaid:"Some violent demands having been made for the release of the prisoners, it is necessary that every possible precaution be taken for theirsecurity; you will therefore be pleased to be very strict in guardingthem; and I herewith send _another pair of fetters to be added to thosenow upon the prisoners_. " And in answer to the second proposition, thesaid Resident did reply in the following terms: "The proposal ofevacuating one palace, that it may be searched, and then evacuating thenext, upon the same principle, is apparently fair; but it is well known, in the first place, that such bricked-up or otherwise hidden treasureis not to be hit upon in a day without a guide. I have thereforeinformed the Nabob of this proposal, and, if the matter is to be reducedto a search, he will go himself, with such people as he may possess forinformation, together with the prisoners; and when in possession of theground, by _punishing the prisoners_, or by such _other means as he mayfind most effectual_ to forward a successful search upon the spot, hewill avail himself of the proposal made by the Bhow Begum. "

XLVI. That, probably from the Nabob's known and avowed reluctance tolend himself to the perpetration of the oppressive and iniquitousproceedings of the representative of the British government, thescandalous plan aforesaid was not carried into execution; and all therigors practised upon the chief ministers of the ladies aforesaid atLucknow being found ineffectual, and the princess mother having declaredherself ready to deliver up everything valuable in her possession, whichBehar Ali Khân, one of her confidential ministers aforesaid, only couldcome at, the said change of prison was agreed to, --but not until theNabob's mother aforesaid had engaged to pay for the said change ofprison a sum of ten thousand pounds, (one half of which was paid on thereturn of the eunuchs, ) and that "she would ransack the _zenanah_[women's apartments] for kincobs, muslins, clothes, &c. , &c. , &c. , andthat she would even allow a deduction from the annual allowance made toher for her subsistence in lieu of her jaghire. "[71]

XLVII. That, soon after the return of the aforesaid ministers to theplace of their imprisonment at Fyzabad, bonds for the five thousandpounds aforesaid, and goods, estimated, according to the valuation of amerchant appointed to value the same, at the sum of forty thousandpounds, even allowing them to sell greatly under their value, weredelivered to the commanding officer at Fyzabad; and the said commandingofficer did promise to the Begum to visit Lucknow with such proposals ashe hoped would secure the _small balance_ of fifteen thousand poundsremaining of the unjust exaction aforesaid. [72] But the said Resident, Middleton, did, in his letter of the 17th of the said month, positivelyrefuse to listen to any terms before the final discharge of the whole ofthe demand, and did positively forbid the commanding officer to come toLucknow to make the proposal aforesaid in the terms following. "As it isnot possible to listen to _any_ terms from the Begums before the finaldischarge of their conditional agreement for fifty-five lacs, yourcoming here upon such an agency can only be _loss of time_ in completingthe recovery of the balance of 6, 55, 000, for which your regiment wassent to Fyzabad. I must therefore desire you will leave _no efforts, gentle or harsh_, unattempted to complete this, before you move fromFyzabad; and I am very anxious that this should be as soon as possible, _as I want to employ your regiment upon other emergent service, nowsuffering by every delay_. "

XLVIII. That the goods aforesaid were sent to Lucknow, and disposed ofin a manner unknown; and the harsh and oppressive measures aforesaidbeing still continued, the Begum did, about the middle of October, 1782, cause to be represented to the said Middleton as follows. "Thather situation was truly pitiable, --her estate sequestered, her treasuryransacked, her cojahs prisoners, and her servants deserting daily fromwant of subsistence. That she had solicited the loan of money, tosatisfy the demands of the Company, from every person that she imaginedwould or could assist her with any; but that the opulent would notlisten to her adversity. She had hoped that the wardrobe sent to Lucknowmight have sold for at least one half of the Company's demands on her;but even jewelry and goods, she finds from woful experience, lose theirvalue the moment it is known they come from her. That she had nowsolicited the loan of cash from Almas Ali Khân, and if she failed inthat application, she had no hopes of ever borrowing a sum equal to thedemand":[73]--an hope not likely to be realized, as the said Almas Aliwas then engaged for a sum of money to be raised for the Company's useon the security of their confiscated lands, the restoration of whichcould form the only apparent security for a loan. 

XLIX. That this remonstrance produced no effect on the mind of theaforesaid Resident, --who, being about this time removed from hisResidency, did, in a letter to his successor, Mr. Bristow, dated 23dOctober, 1782, in effect recommend a perseverance in the cruel andoppressive restraints aforesaid as a certain means of recovering theremainder of the extorted bond, and that the lands with which theprincesses aforesaid had been endowed should not be restored to them. 

L. That the said Warren Hastings was duly apprised of all the materialcircumstances in the unjust proceedings aforesaid, but did nothing tostop the course they were in, or to prevent, relieve, or mitigate thesufferings of the parties affected by them: on the contrary, he did, inhis letter of the 25th of January, 1782, to the Resident, Middleton, declare, that the Nabob having consented to the "resumption of thejaghires held by the Begums, and to the confiscation of their treasures, and thereby involved my own name and the credit of the Company in aparticipation of both measures, I have a right to _require and insist onthe complete execution of them_; and I look to you for their execution, declaring that I shall hold you accountable for it. " And it appears thathe did write to the Nabob a letter in the same peremptory manner; butthe said letter has been suppressed. 

LI. That he, the said Hastings, farther did manifest the concern he tookin, and the encouragement which he gave to the proceedings aforesaid, byconferring honors and distinctions upon the ministers of the Nabob, whomhe, the Nabob, did consider as having in the said proceedings disobeyedhim and betrayed him, and as instruments in the dishonor of his familyand the usurpation of his authority. That the said ministers did makeaddresses to the said Hastings for that purpose (which addresses thesaid Hastings hath suppressed); and the Resident, Middleton, did, withhis letter of the 11th of February, 1782, transmit the same, and did inthe said letter acquaint the said Hastings "that the ministers of theNabob had incurred much odium on account of their participation in hismeasures, and that they were not only considered by the party of thedispossessed jaghiredars, and the mother and uncle of the Nabob, but _bythe Nabob himself_, as the _dependants of the English government, whichthey certainly are, and it is by its declared and most obvious supportalone_ that they can maintain the authority and influence which isindispensably necessary. " And the said Middleton did therefore recommend"that they should be honored with some testimony of his [the saidHastings's] approbation and favor. " And he, the said Warren Hastings, did send _kellauts_, or robes of honor, (the most public anddistinguished mode of acknowledging merit known in India, ) to the saidministers, in testimony of his approbation of their late services. 

LII. That the said Hastings did not only give the aforesaid publicencouragement to the ministers of the Nabob to betray and insult theirmaster and his family in the manner aforesaid, but, when the said Nabobdid write several letters to him, the said Hastings, expressive of hisdislike of being used as an instrument in the dishonorable actsaforesaid, and refusing to be further concerned therein, he, the saidWarren Hastings, did not only suppress and hide the said letters fromthe view of the Court of Directors, but in his instructions to theResident, Bristow, did attribute them to Hyder Beg Khân, minister to theNabob, (whom in other respects he did before and ever since supportagainst his master, ) and did express himself with great scorn andcontempt of the said Nabob, and with much asperity against the saidminister: affirming, in proud and insolent terms, that he had, "by anabuse of his influence over the Nabob, --he, the Nabob himself, being(_as he ever must be in the hands of some person_) _a mere cipher inhis [the said minister's], --dared_ to make him [the Nabob] _assume_ avery _unbecoming_ tone of refusal, reproach, and resentment, inopposition to _measures recommended by ME_, and even to _acts done by MYauthority_": the said Hastings, in the instruction aforesaid, particularizing the resumption of the jaghires, and the confiscation ofthe treasures that had been so long suffered to remain in the hands ofhis, the Nabob's, mother. But the letters of the Nabob, which in thesaid instructions he refers to as containing an opposition to themeasures recommended by him, and which he asserts was conveyed in a veryunbecoming tone of refusal, reproach, and resentment, he, the saidHastings, hath criminally withheld from the Company, contrary to theirorders, and to his duty, --and the more, as the said letters must tend toshow in what manner the said Nabob did feel the indignities offered tohis mother, and the manner in which the said ministers, notwithstandingtheir known dependence on the English government, did express theirsense of the part which their sovereign was compelled to act in the saiddisgraceful measures. And in farther instructions to him, the said newResident, he did declare his approbation of the evil acts aforesaid, aswell as his resolution of compelling the Nabob to those rigorousproceedings against his parent from which he had long shown himself sovery averse, in the following words. "The severities which have beenincreased towards the Begums were most justly merited by the advantagewhich they took of the troubles in which I was personally involved lastyear, to create a rebellion in the Nabob's government, and to completethe ruin which they thought was impending on ours. If it is the Nabob'sdesire to forget and to forgive their past offence, I have no objectionto his allowing them, in pension, the nominal amount of their jaghires;but if he shall _ever offer_ to restore their jaghires to them, or togive them any property in land, after the warning which they have givenhim by the dangerous abuse which they formerly made of his indulgence, you must remonstrate in the strongest terms against it; _you must notpermit such an event to take place_, until this government shall havereceived information of it, and shall have had time to interpose itsinfluence for the prevention of it. " And the said Warren Hastings, whodid in the manner aforesaid positively refuse to admit the Nabob torestore to his mother and grandmother any part of their landed estatesfor their maintenance, did well know that the revenues of the said Nabobwere at that time so far applied to the demands of the Company, (by him, the said Warren Hastings, aggravated beyond the whole of what they didproduce, ) or were otherwise so far applied to the purposes of several ofthe servants of the Company, and others, the dependants of him, the saidHastings, that none of the pensions or allowances, assigned by the saidNabob in lieu of the estates confiscated, were paid, or were likely tobe discharged, with that punctuality which was necessary even to thescanty subsistence of the persons to which they were in name andappearance applied. For, LIII. That, so early as the 6th March, 1782, Captain Leonard Jaques, whocommanded the forces on duty for the purpose of distressing the severalwomen in the palaces at Fyzabad, did complain to the Resident, RichardJohnson, in the following words. "The women belonging to the KhordMohul (or lesser palace) complain of their being in want of everynecessary of life, and are at last driven to that desperation that theyat night get on the top of the zenanah, make a great disturbance, andlast night not only alarmed the sentinels posted in the garden, butthrew dirt at them; they threaten to throw themselves from the walls ofthe zenanah, and also to break out of it. Humanity obliges me toacquaint you of this matter, and to request to know if you have anydirections to give me concerning it. I also beg leave to acquaint you Isent for Letafit Ali Khân, the cojah who has the charge of them, and whoinforms me it is well grounded, --that they _have sold everything theyhad, even to the clothes from their backs, and now have no means ofsubsisting_. "

LIV. That the distresses of the said women grew so urgent on the nightof the said 6th of March, the day when the letter above recited waswritten, that Captain Leonard Jaques aforesaid did think it necessary towrite again, on the day following, to the British Resident in thefollowing words. "I beg leave to address you again concerning the womenin the Khord Mohul [the lesser palace]. Their behavior last night was sofurious, that there seemed the greatest probability of their proceedingto the uttermost extremities, and that they would either _throwthemselves from the walls or force open the doors of the zenanah_. Ihave made every inquiry concerning the cause of their complaints, andfind from Letafit Ali Khân that they are in _a starving condition, having sold all their clothes and necessaries, and now have notwherewithal to support nature_; and as my instructions are quite silenton this head, I should be glad to know how to proceed, in case they wereto force the doors of the zenanah, as I suspect it will happen, shouldno subsistence be very quickly sent to them. "

LV. That, in consequence of these representations, it appears that thesaid Resident, Richard Johnson, did promise that an application shouldbe made to certain of the servants of the Nabob Vizier to provide fortheir subsistence. 

LVI. That Captain Jaques being relieved from the duty of imprisoning thewomen of Sujah ul Dowlah, the late sovereign of Oude, an ally of theCompany, who dwelt in the said lesser palace, and Major Gilpin beingappointed to succeed, the same malicious design of destroying the saidwomen, or the same scandalous neglect of their preservation andsubsistence, did still continue; and Major Gilpin found it necessary toapply to the new Resident, Bristow, in a letter of the 30th of October, 1782, as follows. 

LVII. "SIR, --Last night, about eight o'clock, the women in theKhord Mohul [lesser palace] or zenanah [women's apartment] under thecharge of Letafit Ali Khân, assembled on the tops of the buildings, _crying in a most lamentable manner for food, --that for the last fourdays they had got but a very scanty allowance, and that yesterday theyhad got none_. 

LVIII. "_The melancholy cries of famine are more easily imagined thandescribed_; and from their representation I fear the Nabob's agents forthat business are very inattentive. I therefore think it requisite tomake you acquainted with the circumstance, that his Excellency, theNabob, may cause his agents to be more circumspect in their conducttowards these poor unhappy women. "

LIX. That, although the Resident, Bristol, did not then think himselfauthorized to remove the guard, he did apply to the minister of theNabob, who did promise some relief to the women of the late Nabob, confined in the lesser palace; but apprehending, with reason, that theminister aforesaid might not be more ready or active in making thenecessary provision for them than on former occasions, he did renderhimself personally responsible to Major Gilpin for the repayment of anysum, equal to one thousand pounds sterling, which he might procure forthe subsistence of the sufferers. But whatever relief was given, (theamount thereof not appearing, ) the same was soon exhausted; and thenumber of persons to be maintained in the said lesser palace being eighthundred women, the women of the late sovereign, Sujah ul Dowlah, andseveral of the younger children of the said sovereign prince, besidestheir attendants, Major Gilpin was obliged, on the 15th of Novemberfollowing, again to address the Resident by a representation of thistenor. 

"SIR, --The repeated cries of the women in the Khord MohulZenanah for subsistence have been truly melancholy. 

LX. "_They beg most piteously for liberty, that they may earn theirdaily bread by laborious servitude, or to be relieved from their miseryby immediate death. _

LXI. "In consequence of their unhappy situation, I have this day takenthe liberty of drawing on you in favor of Ramnarain, at ten days' sight, for twenty Son Kerah rupees, ten thousand of which I have paid to CojahLetafit Ali Khân, under whose charge that zenanah is. "

LXII. That, notwithstanding all the promises and reiterated engagementsof the minister, Hyder Beg Khân, the ladies of the palace aforesaid fellagain into extreme distress; and the Resident did again complain to thesaid minister, who was considered to be, and really and substantiallywas, the minister of the Governor-General, Warren Hastings, aforesaid, and not of the Nabob, (the said Nabob being, according to the saidHastings's own account, "a cipher in his [the said minister's] hands, ")that the funds allowed for their subsistence were not applied to theirsupport. But notwithstanding all these repeated complaints andremonstrances, and the constant promise of amendment on the part of his, the said Hastings's, minister, the supply was not more plentiful or moreregular than before. 

LXIII. That the said Resident, Bristow, finding by experience theinefficacy of the courses which had been pursued with regard to themother and grandmother of the reigning prince of Oude, and havingreceived a report from Major Gilpin, informing him that all which couldbe done by force had been done, and that the only hope which remainedfor realizing the remainder of the money, unjustly exacted as aforesaid, lay in more lenient methods, [74] he, the said Resident, did, of his ownauthority, order the removal of the guard from the palaces, the troopsbeing long and much wanted for the defence of the frontier, and othermaterial services, --and did release the said ministers of the said womenof rank, who had been confined and put in irons, and variouslydistressed and persecuted, as aforerecited, for near twelve months. [75]

LXIV. That the manner in which the said inhuman acts of rapacity andviolence were felt, both by the women of high rank concerned, and by allthe people, strongly appears in the joy expressed on their release, which took place on the 5th of December, 1782, and is stated in twoletters of that date from Major Gilpin to the Resident, in the wordsfollowing. 

LXV. "I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 2dinstant, and in consequence immediately enlarged the prisoners Behar AliKhân and Jewar Ali Khân from their confinement: a circumstance that gavethe Begums, and the city of Fyzabad in general, the greatestsatisfaction. 

LXVI. "In tears of joy Behar and Jewar Ali Khân expressed their sincereacknowledgments to the Governor-General, his Excellency the NabobVizier, and to you, Sir, for restoring them to that invaluable blessing, liberty, for which they would ever retain the most grateful remembrance;and at their request I transmit you the inclosed letters. 

LXVII. "I wish you had been present at the enlargement of theprisoners. The quivering lips, with the tears of joy stealing down thepoor men's cheeks, was a scene truly affecting. 

LXVIII. "If the prayers of these poor men will avail, you will, at theLAST TRUMP, be translated to the happiest regions in heaven. "

LXIX. And the Resident, Bristow, knowing how acceptable the saidproceeding would be to all the people of Oude, and the neighboringindependent countries, did generously and politically, (though nottruly, ) in his letter to the princess mother attribute the said reliefgiven to herself, and the release of her ministers, to the humanity ofthe said Warren Hastings, agreeably to whose orders he pretended to act:asserting, that he, the said Hastings, "was the spring from whence shewas restored to her dignity and consequence. "[76] And the account of theproceedings aforesaid was regularly transmitted to the said WarrenHastings on the 30th of December, 1782, with the reasons and motivesthereto, and a copy of the report of the officer concerning theinutility of further force, attended with sundry documents concerningthe famishing, and other treatment, of the women and children of thelate sovereign: but the same appear to have made no proper impression onthe mind of the said Warren Hastings; for no answer whatsoever was givento the said letter until the 3d of March, 1783, when the said Hastings, writing in his own character and that of the Council, did entirely passby all the circumstances before recited, but did give directions for therenewal of measures of the like nature and tendency with those which(for several of the last months at least of the said proceeding) hadbeen employed with so little advantage to the interest and with so muchinjury to the reputation of the Company, his masters, in whose name heacted, --expressing himself in the said letter of the 3d of March, 1783, as follows: "We desire you will inform us what means have been taken forrecovering the balance [the pretended balance of the extorted money] duefrom the Begums [princesses] at Fyzabad; and if necessary, you mustrecommend it to the Vizier _to enforce the most effectual means_ forthat purpose. " And the Resident did, in his answer to the board, dated31st March, 1783, on this peremptory order, again detail the particularsaforesaid to the said Warren Hastings, referring him to his formercorrespondence, stating the utter impossibility of proceeding further byforce, and mentioning certain other disgraceful and oppressivecircumstances, and in particular, that the Company did not, inplundering the mother of the reigning prince of her wearing apparel andbeasts of carriage, receive a value in the least equal to the loss shesuffered: the elephants having no buyer but the Nabob, and the clothes, which had last been delivered to Middleton at a valuation of thirtythousand pounds, were so damaged by ill keeping in warehouses, that theycould not be sold, even for six months' credit, at much more than abouteight thousand pounds; by which a loss in a single article was incurredof twenty-two thousand pounds out of the fifty, for the recovery ofwhich (supposing it had been a just debt) such rigorous means had beenemployed, after having actually received upwards of five hundredthousand pounds in value to the Company, and extorted much more in lossto the suffering individuals. And the said Bristow, being wellacquainted with the unmerciful temper of the said Hastings, in order toleave no means untried to appease him, not contented with the letter tothe Governor-General and Council, did on the same day write anotherletter _to him particularly_, in which he did urge several arguments, the necessity of using of which to the said Hastings did reflect greatdishonor on this nation, and on the Christian religion thereinprofessed, namely: "That he had experienced great embarrassment intreating with her [the mother of the reigning prince]; for, as themother of the Vizier, the people look up to her with respect, and anyhard measures practised against women of her high rank creatediscontent, and affect our national character. " And the said Resident, after condemning very unjustly her conduct, added, "Still she is themother of the prince of the country, and the religious prejudices ofMussulmen prevail too strongly in their minds to forget her situation. "

LXX. That the said Warren Hastings did not make any answer to the saidletter. But the mother of the prince aforesaid, as well as the mother ofhis father, being, in consequence of his, the said Hastings's, directions, incessantly and rudely pressed by their descendant, in thename of the Company, to pay to the last farthing of the demand, they didboth positively refuse to pay any part of the pretended balancesaforesaid, until their landed estates were restored to them; on thesecurity of which alone they alleged themselves to be in a condition toborrow any money, or even to provide for the subsistence of themselvesand their numerous dependants. And in order to put some end to thesedifferences, the Vizier did himself, about the beginning of August, 1783, go to Fyzabad, and did hold divers conferences with his parents, and did consent and engage to restore to them their landed estatesaforesaid, and did issue an order that they should be restoredaccordingly; but his minister aforesaid, having before his eyes theperemptory orders of him, the said Warren Hastings, did persuade hismaster to dishonor himself in breaking his faith and engagement with hismother and the mother of his father, by first evading the execution, andafterwards totally revoking his said public and solemn act, on pretencethat he had agreed to the grant "from shame, being in their presence[the presence of his mother and grandmother], and that it wasunavoidable at the time";[77]--the said minister declaring to him, thatit would be sufficient, if he allowed them "money for their _necessary_expenses, and that would be _doing enough_. "

LXXI. That the faith given for the restoration of their landed estatesbeing thus violated, and the money for necessary expenses being as illsupplied as before, the women and children of the late sovereign, fatherof the reigning prince, continued exposed to frequent want of the commonnecessaries of life;[78] and being sorely pressed by famine, they werecompelled to break through all the principles of local decorum andreserve which constitute the dignity of the female sex in that part ofthe world, and, after great clamor and violent attempts for one wholeday to break the inclosure of the palace, and to force their way intothe public market, in order to move the compassion of the people, and tobeg their bread, they did, on the next day, actually proceed to theextremity of exposing themselves to public view, --an extremity implyingthe lowest state of disgrace and degradation, to avoid which many womenin India have laid violent hands upon themselves, --and they did proceedto the public market-place with the starving children of the latesovereign, and the brothers and sisters of the reigning prince! A minuteaccount of the transaction aforesaid was written to the British Residentat Lucknow by the person appointed to convey intelligence to him fromFyzabad, in the following particulars, highly disgraceful to the honor, justice, and humanity of this nation. 

LXXII. "The ladies, their attendants and servants, were still asclamorous as last night. Letafit, the _darogah_, went to them andremonstrated with them on the impropriety of their conduct, at the sametime assuring them that in a few days all their allowances would bepaid, and should not that be the case, he would advance them ten days'subsistence, upon condition that they returned to their habitation. Noneof them, however, consented to his proposals, but were still intent uponmaking their escape through the _bazar_ [market-place], and inconsequence formed themselves into a line, arranging themselves in thefollowing order: the children in the front; behind them the ladies ofthe seraglio; and behind them again their attendants: but theirintentions were frustrated by the opposition which they met fromLetafit's sepoys. 

LXXIII. "The next day Letafit went twice to the women, and used hisendeavors to make them return into the zenanah, promising to advancethem ten thousand rupees; which, upon the money being paid down, theyagreed to comply with: but night coming on, nothing transpired. 

LXXIV. "On the day following their clamors were more violent than usual. Letafit went to confer with them, upon the business of yesterday;offering the same terms. Depending upon the fidelity of his promises, they consented to return to their apartments, which they accordinglydid, except two or three of the ladies, and most of their attendants. Letafit then went to Hossmund Ali Khân, to consult with him upon whatmeans they should take. They came to a resolution of driving them in byforce, and gave orders to their sepoys to beat any one of the women whoshould attempt to move forward. The sepoys consequently assembled; andeach one being provided with a bludgeon, they drove them by dint ofbeating into the zenanah. The women, seeing the treachery of Letafit, proceeded to throw stones and bricks at the sepoys, and again attemptedto get out; but finding that impossible, from the gates being shut, theykept up a continual discharge of stones and bricks till about ten, when, finding their situation desperate, they retired into the Kung Mohul, andforced their way from thence into the palace, and dispersed themselvesabout the house and garden; after this they were desirous of gettinginto the Begum's apartment, but she, being apprised of their intention, ordered her doors to be shut. In the mean time Letafit and Hossmund AliKhân posted sentries to secure the gates of the lesser Mohul. Duringthe whole of this conflict, all the ladies and women remained exposed tothe view of the sepoys. The Begum then sent for Letafit and Hossmund AliKhân, whom she severely reprimanded, and insisted upon knowing thecauses of this infamous behavior. They pleaded in their defence theimpossibility of helping it, as the treatment the women had met with hadbeen conformable to his Excellency the Vizier's orders. The Begumalleged, that, even admitting that the Nabob had given those orders, they were by no means authorized in this manner to disgrace the familyof Sujah Dowlah; and should they not receive their allowance for a dayor two, it could be of no great moment: what was passed was now at anend; but that the Vizier should certainly be acquainted with the wholeof the affair, and that whatever he desired she should implicitly complywith. The Begum then sent for five of the children, who were wounded inthe affray of last night, and, after endeavoring to soothe them, shesent again for Letafit and Hossmund Ali Khân, and in the presence of thechildren expressed her disapprobation of their conduct, and theimprobability of Asoph ul Dowlah's suffering the ladies and children ofSujah Dowlah to be disgraced by being exposed to the view of the rabble. Upon which Letafit produced the letter from the Nabob, at the same timerepresenting that he was amenable only to the orders of his Excellency, and that whatever he ordered it was his duty to obey, and that, had theladies thought proper to have retired into their apartments quietly, hewould not have used the means he had taken to compel them. The Begumagain observed, that what had happened was now over. She then gave thechildren four hundred rupees, and dismissed them, and sent word byJumrud and the other eunuchs, that, if the ladies would peaceably retireto their apartments, Letafit would supply them with three or fourthousand rupees for their personal expenses, and recommended to them notto incur any further disgrace, and that, if they did not think proper toact agreeable to her directions, they would do wrong. The ladiesfollowed her advice, and about ten at night went back into the zenanah. The nest morning the Begum waited upon the mother of Sujah Dowlah, andrelated to her all the circumstances of the disturbances. The mother ofSujah Dowlah returned for answer, that, after there being no accountskept of crores of revenues, she was not surprised that the family ofSujah Dowlah, in their endeavors to procure a subsistence, should beobliged to expose themselves to the meanest of the people. Afterbewailing their misfortunes, and shedding many tears, the Begum took herleave, and returned home. "

That the said affecting narrative being sent, with others of the samenature, on the 29th of January, 1784, to the said Warren Hastings, hedid not order any relief in consequence thereof, or take any sort ofnotice whatsoever of the said intelligence. 

LXXV. That the Court of Directors did express strong doubts of thepropriety of seizing the estates aforesaid, and did declare to him, thesaid Hastings, "that the only consolation they felt on the occasion is, that the amount of those jaghires _for which the Company wereguaranties_ is to be paid _through our Resident at the court of theVizier_; and it very materially concerns the credit of your Governor onno account to _suffer such payments to be evaded_. " But the said WarrenHastings did never make the arrangement supposed in the said letter tobe actually made, nor did he cause the Resident to pay them the amountof their jaghires, or to make any payment to them. 

And the said Hastings being expressly ordered by the Court of Directorsto restore to them their estates, in case the charges made upon themshould not be found true, he, the said Hastings, did contumaciously andcruelly decline any compliance with the said orders until his journey toLucknow, in ----, when he did, as he says, "conformably to the orders ofthe Court of Directors, and more to the inclination of the Nabob Vizier, restore to them their jaghires, but with the defalcation, according tohis own account, of _a large portion_ of their respective shares":pretending, without the least probability, that the said defalcation wasa "voluntary concession on their part. " But what he has left to them fortheir support, or in what proportion to that which he has taken away, hehas nowhere stated to the Court of Directors, whose faith he has broken, and whose orders he has thus eluded, whilst he pretended to yield _some_obedience to them. 

LXXVI. That the said Warren Hastings having made a malicious, loose, andill-supported charge, backed by certain unsatisfactory affidavits, as aground for his seizing on the jaghires and the treasures of the Vizier'smother, solemnly guarantied to them, the Court of Directors did, intheir letter of the 14th of February, 1783, express themselves asfollows concerning that measure, --"which the Governor-General, [he, thesaid Warren Hastings, ] in his letter to your board, the 23d of January, 1782, has declared _he strenuously encouraged and supported_: we hopeand trust, for the honor of the British nation, that the measureappeared fully justified in the eyes of all Hindostan. TheGovernor-General has informed us that it can be well attested that theBegums [the mother and grandmother of the Nabob aforesaid] _principally_excited and supported the late commotions, and that they carried theirinveteracy to the English nation so far _as to aim at our utterextirpation_. " And the Court of Directors did farther declare asfollows: "That it nowhere appears from the papers at present in ourpossession, that they [the mother and grandmother of the Nabob of Oude]excited any commotions previous to the imprisonment of Rajah Cheyt Sing, and only armed themselves in consequence of that transaction; and, as itis probable, that such a conduct proceeded from motives ofself-defence, under an apprehension that they themselves might likewisebe laid under unwarrantable contributions. " And the said Court ofDirectors, in giving their orders for the restoration of the jaghires, or for the payment of an equivalent through the Resident, did give thisorder for the restoration of their estates as aforesaid on conditionthat it should appear from inquiry that they were not guilty of thepractices charged upon them by the said Hastings. Mr. Stables, one ofthe Council-General, did, in execution of the said conditional order, propose an inquiry leading to the ascertainment of the condition, anddid enter a minute as follows: "That the Court of Directors, by theirletters of the 14th of February, 1783, seem not to be satisfied that thedisaffection of the Begums to this government is sufficiently proved bythe evidence before them; I therefore think that the late and presentResident, and commanding officer in the Vizier's country at the time, should be called on to collect what further information they can on thissubject, in which the honor and dignity of this government is so_materially concerned_, and that such information may be transmitted tothe Court of Directors. " And he did further propose heads and modes ofinquiry suitable to the doubts expressed by the Court of Directors. Butthe said Warren Hastings, who ought long before, on principles ofnatural justice, to have instituted a diligent inquiry in support of hisso improbable a charge, and was bound, even for his own honor, as wellas for the satisfaction of the Court of Directors, to take a strong partin the said inquiry, did set himself in opposition to the same, and didcarry with him a majority of Council against the said inquiry into thejustice of the cause, or any proposition for the relief of thesufferers: asserting, "that the reasons of the Court of Directors, iftransmitted with the orders for the inquiry, will prove in effect anorder for collecting evidence _to the justification and acquittal of theBegums, and not for the investigation of the truth of the charges whichhave been preferred against them_. " That Mr. Stables did not propose (asin the said Hastings's minute is groundlessly supposed) that the reasonsof the Court of Directors should be transmitted with the orders for aninquiry. But the apprehension of the said Warren Hastings of theprobable result of the inquiry proposed did strongly indicate his senseof his own guilt and the innocence of the parties accused by him; andif, by his construction, Mr. Stables's minute did indicate an inquirymerely for the justification of the parties by him accused, (whichconstruction the motion did not bear, ) it was no more than what theobvious rules of justice would well support, his own proceedings havingbeen _ex parte_, --he having employed Sir Elijah Impey to take affidavitsagainst the women of high rank aforesaid, not only without any inquirymade on their part, but without any communication to them of hispractice and proceeding against them; and equity did at least requirethat they, with his own knowledge and by the subordinates of his owngovernment, should be allowed a public inquiry to acquit themselves ofthe heavy offences with which they had been by him clandestinelycharged. 

LXXVII. That he, the said Hastings, in order to effectually stifle thesaid inquiry, did enter on record a further minute, asserting that thesaid inquiry would be productive "of evils greater than any which existin the consequences which have already taken place, _and which time hasalmost obliterated_"; as also the following: "If I am rightly informed, the Nabob Vizier and the Begums are on terms of mutual goodwill. Itwould ill become this government to interpose its influence by any actwhich might tend to revive their animosities, --and a very slightoccasion would be sufficient to effect it. They will instantly take fireon such a declaration, proclaim the judgment of the Company in theirfavor, demand a reparation of the acts which they will construe wrongswith such a sentence warranting that construction, and either accept theinvitation to the proclaimed scandal of the Nabob Vizier, which _willnot add to the credit of our government_, or remain in his dominions, but not under his authority, to add to his vexations and the disordersof the country by continual intrigues and seditions. Enough alreadyexists to affect his peace and the quiet of his people. If we cannotheal, let us not inflame the wounds _which have been inflicted_. "--"Ifthe Begums think themselves aggrieved to such a degree as to justifythem in _an appeal to a foreign jurisdiction_, to appeal to it against aman standing in the relation of son and grandson to them, _to appeal tothe justice of those who have been the abettors and instruments of theirimputed wrongs_, let us at least permit them to be the judges of theirown feelings, and prefer their complaints before we offer to redressthem. They will not need to be prompted. I hope I shall not depart fromthe simplicity of official language in saying, the majesty of justiceought to be approached with solicitation, not descend to provoke orinvite it, much less to debase itself by the suggestion of wrongs andthe promise of redress, with the denunciation of punishments beforetrial, and even before accusation. "

LXXVIII. That the said Warren Hastings, in attempting to pass an act ofindemnity for his own crimes, and of oblivion for the sufferings ofothers, supposing the latter _almost obliterated_ by time, did not onlymock and insult over the sufferings of the allies of the Company, butdid show an indecent contempt of the understandings of the Court ofDirectors: because his violent attempts on the property and liberty ofthe mother and grandmother of the ally aforesaid had not their firstcommencement much above two years before that time, and had beencontinued, without abatement or relaxation on his part, to the very timeof his minute; the Nabob having, by the instigation of his, the saidHastings's, instrument, Hyder Beg Khân, not two months before the dateof the Consultation, been obliged a second time to break his faith withrelation to the estates of his mother, in the manner hereinbeforerecited. And the said Hastings did not and could not conceive that theclearing the mother could revive any animosity between her and her son, by whom she never had been accused. The said Hastings was also sensiblethat the restoration of her landed estates, recommended by the Court ofDirectors, could not produce any ill effect on the mind of the said son, as it was "with almost unconquerable reluctance he had been persuaded todeprive her of them, " and at the time of his submitting to become aninstrument in this injustice, did "declare, " both, to the Resident andhis ministers, "that it was an act of compulsion. "

LXXIX. That the said Hastings further, by insinuating that the women inquestion would act amiss in appealing to _a foreign jurisdiction_against a son and grandson, could not forget that he himself, being thatforeign jurisdiction, (if any jurisdiction there was, ) did himselfdirect and order the injuries, did himself urge the calumnies, and didhimself cause to be taken and produced the unsatisfactory evidence bywhich the women in question had suffered, --and that it was against him, the said Hastings, and not against their son, that they had reason toappeal. But the truth is, that the inquiry was moved for by Mr. Stables, not on the prayer or appeal of the sufferers, but upon the illimpression which the said Hastings's own conduct, merely and solely onhis own state of it, and on his own evidence in support of it, had madeon the Court of Directors, who were his lawful masters, and not suitorsin his court. And his arrogating to himself and his colleagues to be atribunal, and a tribunal not for the purpose of doing justice, but ofrefusing inquiry, was an high offence and misdemeanor (particularly asthe due obedience to the Company's orders was eluded on the insolentpretence "that the majesty of justice ought to be approached withsolicitation, and that it would debase itself by the suggestion ofwrongs and the promise of redress") in a Governor, whose business it is, even of himself, and unsolicited, not only to promise, but to afford, redress to all those who should suffer under the power of the Company, even if their ignorance, or want of protection, or the imbecility oftheir sex, or the fear of irritating persons in rank and station, shouldprevent them from seeking it by formal solicitation. 

LXXX. That the said Warren Hastings, at the time when he pretendedignorance of all solicitation for justice on the part of the womenaforesaid, and on that pretence did refuse the inquiry moved by hiscolleague, Mr. Stables, had in all probability received from theResident, Middleton, or, if he had made the slightest inquiry from thesaid Middleton, then at Calcutta, might immediately receive, an accountthat _they did actually solicit_ the said Resident, through MajorGilpin, for redress against his, the said Hastings's, calumniousaccusation, and the false testimony by which it was supported, and didsend the said complaint to the Resident, Middleton, by the said Gilpin, to be transmitted to him, the said Hastings, and the Council, so earlyas the 19th of October, 1782; and that she, the mother of the Nabob, did afterwards send the same to the Resident, Bristow, asserting theirinnocence, and accompanying the same with the copies of letters (theoriginals of which they asserted were in their hands) from the chiefwitnesses against them, Hannay and Gordon, which letters did directlyoverturn the charges or insinuations in the affidavits made by them, andthat, instead of any accusation of an attempt upon them and theirparties by the instigation of the mother of the Nabob, or by herministers, they, the said Hannay and Gordon, did attribute theirpreservation to them and to their services, and did, with strongexpressions of gratitude both to the mother of the Nabob and to herministers, fully acknowledge the same: which remonstrance of the motherof the Nabob, and the letters of the said Hannay and Gordon, are annexedto this charge; and the said Hastings is highly criminal for not havingexamined into the facts alleged in the said remonstrance. 

LXXXI. That the violent proceedings of the said Warren Hastings did tendto impress all the neighboring princes, some of whom were allied inblood to the oppressed women of rank aforesaid, with an ill opinion ofthe faith, honor, and decency of the British nation; and accordingly, onthe journey aforesaid made by the Nabob from Lucknow to Fyzabad, inwhich the said Nabob did restore, in the manner before mentioned, theconfiscated estates of his mother and grandmother, and did afterwardsrevoke his said grant, it appears that the said journey did cause ageneral alarm (the worst motives obtaining the most easy credit withregard to any future proceeding, on account of the foregone acts) andexcited great indignation among the ruling persons of the adjacentcountry, insomuch that Major Brown, agent to the said Warren Hastings atthe court of the King Shah Allum at Delhi, did write a remonstrancetherein to Mr. Bristow, Resident at Oude, as follows. 

"The evening of the 7th, at a conference I had with Mirza Shaffee Khân, he introduced a subject, respecting the Nabob Vizier, which, however itmay be disagreeable for you to know, and consequently for me tocommunicate, I am under a necessity of laying before you. He told me hehad received information from Lucknow, that, by the advice of Hyder BegKhân, the Vizier had determined to bring his grandmother, the widow ofSufdar Jung, from Fyzabad to Lucknow, with a view of getting a furthersum of money from her, by seizing on her eunuchs, digging up theapartments of her house at Fyzabad, and putting her own person underrestraint. This, he said, he knew was not an act of our government, butthe mere advice of Hyder Beg Khân, to which the Vizier had been inducedto attend. He added, that the old Begum had resolved rather to putherself to death than submit to the disgrace intended to be put uponher; that, if such a circumstance should happen, there is _not a man inHindostan who will attribute the act to the Vizier [Nabob of Oude], butevery one will fix the odium on the English, who might easily, by theinfluence they so largely exercise in their own concerns there_, haveprevented such unnatural conduct in the Vizier. He therefore called uponme, as the English representative in this quarter, to inform you ofthis, that you may prevent a step which will destroy all confidence inthe English nation throughout Hindostan, and excite the bitterestresentment in all those who by blood are connected with the house ofSufdar Jung. He concluded by saying, that, 'if the Vizier so littleregarded his family and personal honor, or his natural duty, as to wishto disgrace his father's mother for a sum of money, let him plunder herof all she has, but let him send her safe up to Delhi or Agra, and, pooras I am, I will furnish subsistence for her, which she shall possesswith safety and honor, though it cannot be adequate to her rank. '

"This, Sir, is a most exact detail of the conversation (as far asrelated to that affair) on the part of Mirza Shaffee Khân. On my part Icould only say, that I imagined the affair was misrepresented, and thatI should write as he requested. Let me therefore request that you willenable me to answer in a more effectual manner any further questions onthis subject. 

LXXXII. "As Mirza Shaffee's grandfather was brother to Sufdar Jung, there can be no doubt of what his declaration means; and if this measureof dismissing the old Begum should be persisted in, I should not, fromthe state of affairs, and the character of the Amir ul Omrah, besurprised at some immediate and violent resolution being adopted byhim. "

LXXXIII. That Mirza Shaffee, mentioned in this correspondence, (who hassince been murdered, ) was of near kindred to the lady in question, (grandmother to the Nabob, ) was resident in a province immediatelyadjoining to the province of Oude, and, from proximity of situation andnearness of connection, was likely to have any intelligence concerninghis female relations from the best authority. 

LXXXIV. That the Resident, Bristow, on receiving this letter, did applyto the said Hyder Beg Khân for an explanation of the Nabob's intentions, who denied that the Nabob intended more than a visit of duty andceremony: which, whatever his dispositions might have been, and probablywere, towards his own mother, was not altogether probable, as it waswell known that he was on very bad terms with the mother of his father, and it appears that intentions of a similar nature had been beforemanifested even with regard to his own mother, and therefore obtainedthe more easy credit concerning the other woman of high rank aforesaid, especially as the evil designs of the said Hyder Beg were abundantlyknown, and that the said Hastings, upon whom he did wholly depend, continued to recommend "the most effectual, that is, the most violent, means for the recovery of the small remains of his extorted demand. " Butalthough it does not appear that the Resident did give credit to thesaid report, yet the effect of the same on the minds of the neighboringprinces did make it proper and necessary to direct a strict inquiry intothe same, which was not done; and it does not appear that any furtherinquiry was made into the true motives for this projected journey toFyzabad, nor into the proceedings of Hyder Beg Khân, although the saidWarren Hastings well knew that all the acts of the Nabob and hisprincipal ministers were constantly attributed to him, and that it wasknown that secret agents, as well as the Company's regular agent, wereemployed by him at Lucknow and other places. 

LXXXV. That the said Hastings, who did, on pretence of the majesty ofjustice, refuse to inquire into the charges made upon the femaleparents of the Nabob of Oude, in justification of the violence offeredto them, did voluntarily and of his own accord make himself an accuserof the Resident, Middleton, for the want of a literal execution of hisorders in the plans of extortion and rapine aforesaid: the criminalnature, spirit, and tendency of the said proceedings, for the defectiveexecution of which he brought the said charge, appearing in the defenceor apology made by Mr. Middleton, the Resident, for his temporary andshort forbearances. 

LXXXVI. "It could not, I flatter myself, be termed a long orunwarrantable delay [two days], when the importance of the business, andthe peculiar embarrassments attending the prosecution of it to itsdesired end, are considered. The Nabob was _son_ to the Begum whom wewere to proceed against: a son against a mother must at least _saveappearances in his mode of proceeding_. The produce of his negotiationwas to be received by the Company. Receiving a benefit, accompanying theNabob, withdrawing their protection, were circumstances sufficient to_mark the English as the principal movers in this business_. At a courtwhere no opportunity is lost to throw odium on us, so favorable anoccasion was not missed to persuade the Nabob that we instigated him todishonor his family for our benefit. The impressions made by thesesuggestions constantly retarded the progress, and more than onceactually broke off the business: which rendered the utmost caution on mypart necessary, especially as I had no assistance to expect from theministers, who could not openly move in the business. In the East, it iswell known that no man either by himself or his troops, can enter thewalls of a zenanah, scarcely in the case of acting against an openenemy, much less of _an ally, --an ally acting against his own mother_. The outer walls, and the Begum's agents, were all that were liable toimmediate attack: they were dealt with, and successfully, as the eventproved. "--He had before observed to Mr. Hastings, in his correspondence, what Mr. Hastings well knew to be true, "that no farther rigor than thathe had exerted could be used against females in that country; whereforce could be employed, it was not spared;--that the place ofconcealment was only known to the chief eunuchs, who could not be drawnout of the women's apartments, where they had taken refuge, and fromwhich, if an attempt had been made to storm them, they might escape; andthe secret of the money being known only to them, it was necessary toget their persons into his hands, which could be obtained by negotiationonly. "--The Resident concluded his defence by declaring his "hope, that, if the main object of his orders was fulfilled, he should be no longerheld criminal for a deviation from the precise letter of them. "

LXXXVII. That the said Warren Hastings did enter a reply to this answer, in support of his criminal charge, continuing to insist "that his ordersought to have been literally obeyed, " although he did not deny that theabove difficulties occurred, and the above consequences must have beenthe result, --and though the reports of the military officers chargedwith the execution of his commission confirmed the moral impossibility, as well as inutility in point of profit, of forcing a son to greaterviolence and rigor against his mother. 

LXXXVIII. That the said Hastings, after all the acts aforesaid, didpresume to declare on record, in his minute of the 23d September, 1788, "that, whatever may happen of the events which he dreads in the train ofaffairs now subsisting, he shall at least receive this consolation underthem, that he used his utmost exertions to prevent them, and that in theannals of the nations of India which have been subjected to the Britishdominions _HE shall not be remembered among their oppressors_. " Andspeaking of certain alleged indignities offered to the Nabob of Oude, and certain alleged suspicions of his authority with regard to themanagement of his household, he, the said Hastings, did, in the saidminute, endeavor to excite the spirit of the British nation, severelyanimadverting on such offences, making use of the following terms: "Ifthere be a spark of generous virtue in the breasts of any of mycountrymen who shall be the readers of this compilation, this letter" (aletter of complaint from the Nabob) "shall stand for an instrument toawaken it to the call of vengeance against so flagitious an abuse ofauthority and reproach to the British name. "

_From her Excellency the Bhow Begum to Mr. Bristow, Resident at theVizier's Court. _

There is no necessity to write to you by way of information a detail ofmy sufferings. From common report, and the intelligence of those who areabout you, the account of them will have reached your ears. I will hererelate a part of them. 

After the death of Sujah Dowlah, most of his ungrateful servants wereconstantly laboring to gratify their enmity; but finding, from the firmand sincere friendship which subsisted between me and the English, thatthe accomplishment of their purposes was frustrated, they formed thedesign of occasioning a breach in that alliance, to insure their ownsuccess. I must acquaint you that my son Asoph ul Dowlah had formerlythreatened to seize my jaghire; but, upon producing the treaty signed byyou, and showing it to Mr. Middleton, he interfered, and prevented theimpending evil. The conspiration now framed an accusation against me ofa conduct which I had never conceived even in idea, of renderingassistance to Rajah Cheyt Sing. The particulars are as follow. My sonAsoph ul Dowlah and his ministers, with troops and a train of artillery, accompanied by Mr. Middleton, on the 16th of the month of Mohurum, arrived at Fyzabad, and made a demand of a crore of rupees. As myinability to pay so vast a sum was manifest, I produced the treaty _you_signed and gave me, but to no effect: their hearts were determined uponviolence. I offered my son Asoph ul Dowlah, whose will is dearer to methan all my riches, or even life itself, whatever money and goods I waspossessed of: but an amicable adjustment seemed not worth accepting: hedemanded the delivering up the fort, and the recall of the troops thatwere stationed for the preserving the peace of the city. To me tumultand discord appeared unnecessary. I gave up these points, upon whichthey seized my head eunuchs, Jewar Ali Khân and Behar Ali Khân, and sentthem to Mr. Middleton, after having obliged them to sign a bond forsixty lacs of rupees; they were thrown into prison, with fetters abouttheir feet, and denied food and water. I, who had never, even in mydreams, experienced such an oppression, gave up all I had to preservemy honor and dignity: but this would not satisfy their demands: theycharged me with a rupee and a half batta upon each mohur, and on thisaccount laid claims upon me to the amount of six lacs some thousandrupees, and sent Major Gilpin to exact the payment. Major Gilpin, according to orders, at first was importunate; but being a man ofexperience, and of a benevolent disposition, when he was convinced of mywant of means, he changed his conduct, and was willing to apply to theshroffs and bankers to lend me the money. But with the loss of myjaghire my credit was sunk; I could not raise the sum. At last, feelingmy helpless situation, I collected my wardrobe and furniture, to theamount of about three lacs of rupees, besides fifty thousand rupeeswhich I borrowed from one place or other, and sent Major Gilpin with itto Lucknow. My sufferings did not terminate here. The disturbances ofColonel Hannay and Mr. Gordon were made a pretence for seizing myjaghire. The state of the matter is this. When Colonel Hannay was by Mr. Hastings ordered to march to Benares, during the troubles of Cheyt Sing, the Colonel, _who had plundered the whole country, was incapable ofproceeding, from the union of thousands of zemindars, who had seizedthis favorable opportunity_: they harassed Mr. Gordon near Junivard[Juanpore?], and the zemindars of that place and Acberpore opposed hismarch from thence, till he arrived near Taunda. As the Taunda nullah, from its overflowing, was difficult to cross without a boat, Mr. Gordonsent to the Phousdar to supply him. He replied, the boats were all inthe river, but would, according to orders, assist him as soon aspossible. Mr. Gordon's situation would not admit of his waiting: heforded the nullah upon his elephant, and was hospitably entertained andprotected by the Phousdar for six days. In the mean time a letter wasreceived by me from Colonel Hannay, desiring me to escort Mr. Gordon toFyzabad. As my friendship for the English was always sincere, I readilycomplied, and sent some companies of nejeebs to escort Mr. Gordon, andall his effects, to Fyzabad, where, having provided for hisentertainment, I effected his junction with Colonel Hannay. The lettersof thanks I received from both these gentlemen upon this occasion arestill in my possession, copies of which I gave in charge to MajorGilpin, to be delivered to Mr. Middleton, that he might forward them tothe Governor-General. To be brief, those who have loaded me withaccusations are now clearly convicted of falsehood. But is it notextraordinary, notwithstanding the justness of my cause, that nobodyrelieves my misfortunes? Why did Major Gilpin return without effect?

My prayers have been constantly offered to Heaven for your arrival;report has announced it; for which reason I have taken up the pen, andrequest you will not place implicit confidence in my accusers, but, weighing in the scale of justice their falsehoods and myrepresentations, you will exert your influence in putting a period tothe misfortunes with which I am overwhelmed. 

_Copy of a Letter from Colonel Hannay to Jewar Ali Khân and Behar AliKhân. _

I had the pleasure to receive your friendly letter, fraught withbenevolence; and whatever favors you, my friends, have been pleased toconfer respecting Mr. Gordon afforded me the greatest pleasure. 

Placing a firm reliance on your friendship, I am in expectation that theaforesaid gentleman, with his baggage, will arrive at Fyzabad in safety, that the same may oblige and afford satisfaction to me. 

A letter from Mr. Gordon is inclosed to you. I am in expectation of itsbeing inclosed in a cover to the Aumil of Taunda, to the end that theAumil may forward it to the above-mentioned gentleman, and procure hisreply. Whenever the answer arrives, let it be delivered to Hoolas Roy, who will forward it to me. 

Always rejoice me by a few lines respecting your health. [Continue tohonor me with your correspondence. ]

_Copy of a Letter from Colonel Hannay to Jewar and Behar Ali Khân. _

Khân Saib, my indulgent friends, remain under the protection of God!

Your friendly letter, fraught with kindness, accompanied by an honoraryletter from the Begum Saib, of exalted dignity, and inclosing a letterfrom Mr. Gordon, sent through your hircarrahs, obliged and rejoiced me. 

With respect to what you communicate regarding your not having receivedan answer to your friendly epistle, I became perfectly astonished, as areply was written from Mohadree. It may be owing to the danger of theroad that it never arrived, --not to the smallest neglect on my side [orof mine]. 

I now send two letters to you, --one by the Dawk people, and the secondby one of my hircarrahs, (who will present them to you, ) which youcertainly will receive. 

I am extremely well contented and pleased with the friendship you haveshown. 

You wrote me to remain perfectly easy concerning Mr. Gordon. Verily, from the kindness of you, my indulgent friends, my heart is quite easy. You also observed and mentioned, that, as Mr. Gordon's coming with thoseattached to him [probably his sepoys and others] might be attended withdifficulty, if I approved, he should be invited alone to Fyzabad. Myfriends, I place my expectation entirely upon your friendships, andleave it to you to adopt the manner in which the said gentleman mayarrive in security, without molestation, at Fyzabad; but at the sametime let the plan be so managed that it may not come to the knowledge ofany zemindars: in this case you are men of discernment. However, he isto come to Fyzabad: extend your assistance and endeavors. 

It is probable that the Begum Saib, of high dignity, has receivedauthentic intelligence from the camp at Benares. Favor me with thecontents or purport. 

From Mr. Gordon's letter I understand that Mirza Imaum Buksh, whom youdispatched thither [Taunda], has and still continues to pay greatattention to that gentleman, which affords me great pleasure. 

An answer to the Begum's letter is to be presented. I also send a letterfor Mr. Gordon, which please to forward. 

_An Address from Colonel Hannay to the Begum. _

Begum Saib, of exalted dignity and generosity, &c. , whom God preserve!

Your exalting letter, fraught with grace and benevolence, that throughyour unbounded generosity and goodness was sent through grace and favor, I had the honor to receive in a fortunate moment, and whatever you werepleased to write respecting Mr. Gordon, --"that, as at this time theshort-sighted and deluded ryots had carried their disturbances andravages beyond all bounds, Mr. Gordon's coming with his whole people [oradherents] might be attended with difficulty, and therefore, if I chose, he should be invited to come alone. " Now, as your Highness is the bestjudge, your faithful servant reposeth his most unbounded hopes andexpectation upon your Highness, that the aforesaid Mr. Gordon may arriveat Fyzabad without any apprehension or danger. I shall be then extremelyhonored and obliged. 

Considering me in the light of a firm and faithful servant, continue tohonor and exalt me by your letters. 

What further can I say?

_A Copy of an Address from Mr. Gordon to the Begum. _

Begum Saib, of exalted dignity and generosity, whom God preserve!

After presenting the usual professions of servitude, &c. , in thecustomary manner, my address is presented. 

Your gracious letter, in answer to the petition of your servant fromGoondah, exalted me. From the contents I became unspeakably impressedwith the honor it conferred. May the Almighty protect that royal purity, and bestow happiness, increase of wealth, and prosperity!

The welfare of your servant is entirely owing to your favor andbenevolence. A few days have elapsed since I arrived at Goondah with theColonel Saib. 

This is presented for your Highness's information. I cherish hopes fromyour generosity, that, considering me in the light of one of yourservants, you will always continue to exalt and honor me with yourgracious letters. 

May the sun of prosperity continually shine!

_Copy of a Letter to Mahomed Jewar Ali Khân and Behar Ali Khân, from Mr. Gordon. _

 Sirs, my indulgent friends, Remain under, &c. , &c. 

After compliments. I have the pleasure to acquaint you that yesterdayhaving taken leave of you, I passed the night at Noorgunge, and nextmorning, about ten or eleven o'clock, through your favor andbenevolence, arrived safe at Goondah. Mir Aboo Buksh, zemindar, and MirRustum Ali, accompanied me. 

To what extent can I prolong the praises of you, my beneficent friends?May the Supreme Being, for this benign, compassionate, humane action, have you in His keeping, and increase your prosperity, and speedilygrant me the pleasure of an interview! Until which time continue tofavor me with friendly letters, and oblige me by any commands in mypower to execute. 

May your wishes be ever crowned with success!

 My compliments, &c. , &c. , &c. 

_Copy of a Letter from Colonel Hannay to Jewar Ali Khân and Behar AliKhân. _

 Khân Saib, my indulgent friends, Remain under the protection of the Supreme Being!

After compliments, and signifying my earnest desire of an interview, Iaddress you. 

Your friendly letter, fraught with kindness, I had the pleasure toreceive in a propitious hour, and your inexpressible kindness in sendingfor Mir Nassar Ali with a force to Taunda, for the purpose of conductingMr. Gordon, with all his baggage, who is now arrived at Fyzabad. 

This event has afforded me the most excessive pleasure and satisfaction. May the Omnipotence preserve you, my steadfast, firm friends! The pen offriendship itself cannot sufficiently express your generosity andbenevolence, and that of the Begum of high dignity, who so graciouslyhas interested herself in this matter. Inclosed is an address for her, which please to forward. I hope from your friendship, until we meet, youwill continue to honor me with an account of your health and welfare. What further can I write?

V. --REVOLUTIONS IN FURRUCKABAD. 

I. That a prince called Ahmed Khân was of a family amongst the mostdistinguished in Hindostan, and of a nation famous through that empirefor its valor in acquiring, and its policy and prudence in wellgoverning the territories it had acquired, called the Patans, orAfghans, of which the Rohillas were a branch. The said Ahmed Khân hadfixed his residence in the city of Furruckabad, and in the first warsof this nation in India the said Ahmed Khân attached himself to theCompany against Sujah Dowlah, then an enemy, now a dependant on thatCompany. Ahmed Khân, towards the close of his life, was dispossessed ofa large part of his dominions by the prevalence of the Mahratta power;but his son, a minor, succeeded to his pretensions, and to the remainderof his dominions. The Mahrattas were expelled by Sujah ul Dowlah, thelate Vizier, who, finding a want of the services of the son andsuccessor of Ahmed Khân, called Muzuffer Jung, did not only guaranty himin the possession of what he then actually held, but engaged to restoreall the other territories which had been occupied by the Mahrattas; andthis was confirmed by repeated treaties and solemn oaths, by the lateVizier and by the present. But neither the late nor the present Vizierfulfilled their engagements, or observed their oaths: the former havingwithheld what he had stipulated to restore; and the latter not onlysubjecting him to a tribute, instead of restoring him to what his fatherhad unjustly withheld, but having made a further invasion by deprivinghim of fifteen of his districts, levying the tribute of the whole on thelittle that remained, and putting the small remains of his territoryunder a sequestrator or collector appointed by Almas Ali Khân, who didgrievously afflict and oppress the prince and territory aforesaid. 

That the hardships of his case being frequently represented to WarrenHastings, Esquire, he did suggest a doubt whether "that little ought tobe still subject to tribute, " indicating that the said tribute might behard and inequitable, --but, whatever its justice might have been, that, "from the _earliest period_ of our connection with the present Nabob ofOude, it had invariably continued a part of the funds assigned by hisExcellency as a provision for the liquidation of the several publicdemands of _this government_ [Calcutta] upon him; and in consequence ofthe powers the board deemed it expedient to vest in the Resident at hiscourt for the collection of the Company's assignments, a _sezauwil_ [asequestrator] has always been stationed to enforce by every means in hispower the payment of the tribute. " And the said tribute was, inconsequence of this arrangement, not paid to the Nabob, but to theBritish Resident at Oude; and the same being therefore under thedirection and for the sole use of the Company, and indeed the princehimself wholly dependent, the representatives of the said Company wereresponsible for the protection of the prince, and for the goodgovernment of the country. 

II. That the said "Warren Hastings did, on the 22d of May, 1780, represent to the board of Calcutta the condition of the said country inthe following manner. 

"To the total want of all order, regularity, or _authority_ in hisgovernment [the Furruckabad government], among _other obvious causes_, it may, no doubt, be owing, that the country of Furruckabad is become_an almost entire waste, without cultivation or inhabitants_; that thecapital, which but a very short time ago was distinguished as one of themost _populous and opulent_ commercial cities in Hindostan, at presentexhibits nothing _but_ scenes of the most wretched poverty, desolation, and misery; and the Nabob himself, though in possession of a tract ofcountry which with only common care is notoriously capable of yieldingan annual revenue of between thirty and forty lacs [three or fourhundred thousand pounds], with _no military establishment to maintain, scarcely commanding the means of bare subsistence_. " And the said WarrenHastings, taking into consideration the said state of the country andits prince, and that the latter had "_preferred frequent complaints_"(which complaints the said Hastings to that time did not lay before theboard, as his duty required) "_of the hardships and indignities_ towhich he is subjected by the conduct of the sezauwil [sequestrator]stationed in the country for the purpose of levying the annual tributewhich he is bound by treaty to pay to the Subah of Oude, " he, the saidWarren Hastings, did declare himself "extremely desirous, as well frommotives of _common justice_ as _due_ regard to _the rank which thatchief holds among the princes of Hindostan_, of affording him relief. "And he, the said Warren Hastings, as the means of the said relief, did, with the consent of the board, order the said native sequestrator to beremoved, and an English Resident, a servant of the Company, to beappointed in his room, declaring "he understood a local interference tobe _indispensably necessary_ for realizing the Vizier's just demands. "

III. That the said native sequestrator being withdrawn, and a Residentappointed, no complaint whatever concerning the collection of therevenue, or of any indignities offered to the prince of the country oroppression of his subjects by the said Resident, was made to theSuperior Council at Calcutta; yet the said Warren Hastings did, nevertheless, in a certain paper, purporting to be a treaty made atChunar with the Nabob of Oude, on the 19th September, 1781, at therequest of the said Nabob, consent to an article therein, "That noEnglish Resident be appointed to Furruckabad, and that the present berecalled. " And the said Warren Hastings, knowing that the Nabob of Oudewas ill-affected towards the said Nabob of Furruckabad, and that he wasalready supposed to have oppressed him, did justify his conduct on theprinciples and in the words following: "That, if the Nabob Muzuffer Jung_must_ endure oppression, (_and I dare not at this time propose histotal relief_, ) it concerns the reputation of our government to remove_our participation in it_. " And the said Warren Hastings making, recording, and acting upon the first of the said false and inhumansuppositions, most scandalous to this nation, namely, that princespaying money wholly for the use of the Company, and directly to itsagent, for the maintenance of British troops, by whose force and powerthe said revenue was in effect collected, must of necessity endureoppression, and that our government at any time _dare_ not propose their_total_ relief, was an high offence and misdemeanor in the said WarrenHastings, and the rather, because in the said treaty, as well as beforeand after, the said Hastings, who pretended not to dare to relieve thoseoppressed by the Nabob of Oude, did assume a complete authority over thesaid Nabob himself, and did dare to oppress him. 

IV. That the second principle assumed by the said Warren Hastings, asground for voluntarily abandoning the protection of those whom he hadbefore undertaken to relieve, _on the sole strength of his ownauthority_, and in full confidence of the lawful foundation thereof, andfor delivering over the persons so taken into protection, under falsenames and pretended descriptions, to known oppression, asserting thatthe reputation of the Company was saved by removing this apparentparticipation, when the new as well as the old arrangements were trulyand substantially acts of the British government, was disingenuous, deceitful, and used to cover unjustifiable designs: since the saidWarren Hastings well knew that all oppressions exercised by the Nabob ofOude were solely, and in this instance particularly, upheld by Britishforce, and were imputed to this nation; and because he himself, in notmore than three days after the execution of this treaty, and in virtuethereof, did direct the British Resident at Oude, in orders _to which herequired his most implicit obedience_, "that the ministers [the Nabob ofOude's ministers] are to choose _all_ aumils and collectors of revenuewith your concurrence. " And the dishonor to the Company, in thusdeceitfully concurring in oppression, which they were able and werebound to prevent, is much aggravated by the said Warren Hastings'sreceiving from the person to whose oppression he had delivered the saidprince, as a private gift or donation to himself and for his own use, asum of money amounting to one hundred thousand pounds and upwards, whichmight give just ground of suspicion that the said gift from theoppressor to the person surrendering the person injured to his mercymight have had some share in the said criminal transaction. 

V. That the said Warren Hastings did (in the paper justifying the saidsurrender of the prince put by himself under the protection of the EastIndia Company) assert, "that it was a fact, that the Nabob MuzufferJung [the Nabob of Furruckabad] is equally urgent with the Nabob Vizierfor the removal of a Resident, " without producing, as he ought to havedone, any document to prove his improbable assertion, namely, hisassertion that the oppressed prince did apply to his known enemy andoppressor, the Nabob of Oude, (who, if he would, was not able to relievehim against the will of the English government, ) rather than to thatEnglish government, which he must have conceived to be more impartial, to which he had made his former complaint, and which was alone able torelieve him. 

VI. That the said Warren Hastings, in the said writing, did furtherconvey an insinuation of an ambiguous, but, on any construction, of asuspicious and dangerous import, viz. : "It is a fact, that Mr. Shee's[the Resident's] authority over the territory of Furruckabad is initself as much subversive of that [_of the lawful rulers_] as that ofthe Vizier's aumil [collector] ever was, and is the more _oppressive_ asthe power from whence it is derived is greater. " The said assertionproceeds upon a supposition of the illegality both of the Nabob's andthe Company's government; all consideration of the _title_ to authoritybeing, therefore, on that supposition, put out of the question, and thewhole turning only upon the _exercise_ of authority, the said Hastings'ssuggestion, that the oppression of government must be in proportion toits power, is the result of a false and dangerous principle, and such asit is criminal for any person intrusted with the lives and fortunes ofmen to entertain, much more, publicly to profess as a rule of action, asthe same hath a direct tendency to make the new and powerful governmentof this kingdom in India dreadful to the natives and odious to theworld. But if the said Warren Hastings did mean thereby indirectly toinsinuate that oppressions had been actually exercised under the Britishauthority, he was bound to inquire into these oppressions, and toanimadvert on the person guilty of the same, if proof thereof could behad, --and the more, as the authority was given by _himself_, and theperson exercising it was by himself also named. And the said WarrenHastings did on another occasion assert that "whether they were well orill-founded he never had an opportunity to ascertain. " But it is nottrue that the said Hastings did or could want such opportunity: the factbeing, that the said Warren Hastings did never cause any inquiry to bemade into any supposed abuses during the said Residency, but did give apension of fifteen hundred pounds a year to the said late Resident as acompensation to him for an injury received, and did afterwards promotethe Resident, as a faithful servant of the Company, (and nothing appearsto show him otherwise, ) to a judicial office of high trust, --therebytaking away all credit from any grounds asserted or insinuated by thesaid Hastings for delivering the said Nabob of Furruckabad to the handof a known enemy and oppressor, who had already, contrary to repeatedtreaties, deprived him of a large part of his territories. 

VII. That, on the said Warren Hastings's representation of thetransaction aforesaid to the Court of Directors, they did heavily andjustly censure the said Warren Hastings for the same, and did conveytheir censure to him, recommending relief to the suffering prince, butwithout any order for sending a new Resident: being, as it may besupposed, prevented from taking that step by the faith of the treatymade at Chunar. 

VIII. That all the oppressions foreseen by him, the said WarrenHastings, when he made the article aforesaid in the treaty of Chunar, did actually happen: for, immediately on the removal of the BritishResident, the country of Furruckabad was subjected to the discretion ofa certain native manager of revenue, called Almas Ali Khân, who didimpoverish and oppress the country and insult the prince, and diddeprive him of all subsistence from his own estates, --taking from himeven his gardens and the tombs of his ancestors, and the funds formaintaining the same. 

IX. That, on complaint of those proceedings, the said Hastings did ofhis own authority, and without communicating with his Council, directthe native collector aforesaid to be removed, and the territory ofFurruckabad to be left to the sole management of its natural prince. Butin a short time the said Hastings, pretending to receive many complaintspurporting that the tribute to the Nabob remained wholly unpaid, and theagent to the prince of Furruckabad at the Presidency, and afterwardschief manager to the prince aforesaid, having, as the said WarrenHastings saith, "had the insolence to propagate a report that the_interference_ to which his master owed the power he then enjoyed was_purchased_ through him, " he, the said Hastings, did again (but, asbefore, without the Council) "withdraw his protection and interferencealtogether, " on or about the month of August, 1782, and did signify hisresolution, through the Resident, Middleton, to the Nabob Vizier. Butthe said Hastings asserts that "the consequence of this his own seconddereliction of the prince of Furruckabad was _an aggravated renewal ofthe severities_ exercised against his government, and the reappointmentof a sezauwil, with powers delegated or assumed, to the _utterextinction_ of the rights of Muzuffer Jung, and actually depriving himof the means of subsistence. " And the said Hastings did receive, on the16th of February, 1783, from the prince aforesaid, a bitter complaint ofthe same to the following tenor. 

"The miseries which have fallen upon my country, and the poverty anddistress which have been heaped upon me by the reappointment of thesezauwil, are such, that a relation of them would, I am convinced, excite the strongest feelings of compassion in your breast. But it isimpossible to relate them: on one side, my country ruined anduncultivated to a degree of desolation which exceeds all description; onthe other, my domestic concerns and connections involved _in such astate of distress and horror, that even the relations, the children, andthe wives of my father are starving in want of daily bread, and are onthe point of flying voluntary exiles from their country and from eachother_. "

But although the said Hastings did, on the 16th of February, receive andadmit the justice of the said complaint, and did not deny the urgentnecessity of redress, the said letter containing the following sentence, "If there should be _any delay_ in your acceptance of this proposal, _myexistence and the existence of my family will become difficult anddoubtful_, "--and although he did admit the interference to be the moreurgently demanded, "as the services of the English troops have beenadded to enforce the authority of the sezauwil, "--and although he admitsalso, that, even before that time, similar complaints and applicationshad been made, --yet he did withhold the said letter of complaint, aminute of which he asserts he had, at or about that time, prepared forthe relief of the sufferer, from the Board of Council, and did not somuch as propose anything relative to the same for seven months after, viz. , until the 6th of October, 1783: the said letter and minute being, as he asserts, "_withheld_, from causes _not necessary to mention_, frompresentation. " By which means the said country and prince did suffer along continuance of unnecessary hardship, from which the said Hastingsconfessed it was his duty to relieve them, and that a British Residentwas necessary at Furruckabad, "from a sense of submission to the_implied_ orders of the Court of Directors in their letter of 1783, lately received, added to _the conviction I have LONG SINCE_ entertained_of the necessity of such an appointment for the preservation of ournational credit_, and the means of rescuing an ancient and respectablefamily from ruin. "

And the said Warren Hastings did at length perform what he thought had_long since_ been necessary; and in contradiction to his engagementswith the Nabob in the treaty of Chunar, and against his strongremonstrances, urging his humiliation from this measure, and the faithof the agreement, and against his own former declaration that itconcerned the reputation of our government to remove our participationin the oppressions which he, the said Hastings, supposed the prince ofFurruckabad must undergo, did once more recommend to the Council aBritish Resident at Furruckabad, and the withdrawing the nativesezauwil: no course being left to the said Hastings to take which wasnot a violation of some engagement, and a contradiction to someprinciple of justice and policy by him deliberately advanced and enteredon record. 

That Mr. Willes being appointed Resident, and having arrived atFurruckabad on the 25th of February, 1784, with instructions to inquireminutely into the state of the country and the ruling family, he, thesaid Resident, Willes, in obedience thereto, did fully explain to him, the Governor-General, the said Warren Hastings, (he being then out ofthe Company's provinces, at Lucknow, on a delegation which respectedthis very country, as part of the dependencies of Oude, ) the situationof the province of Furruckabad; but the said Warren Hastings did nottake or recommend any measure whatsoever for the relief thereof inconsequence of the said representation, nor even communicate to theCouncil-General the said representation; and it was not until the 28thof June, 1783 [1785?], that is, sixteen months from the arrival of theResident at his station, that anything was laid before the boardrelative to the regulation or relief of the distressed countryaforesaid, and that not from the said Warren Hastings, but from othermembers of the Council: which purposed neglect of duty, joined to thepreceding wilful delay of seven months in proposing the said relieforiginally, caused near two years' delay. And the said Warren Hastingsis further culpable in not communicating to the Council Board the orderwhich he had, of his own authority, and without any powers from them, given to the said Resident, Willes, and did thereby prevent them fromtaking such steps as might counteract the ill effects of the said order;which order purported, that the said Willes was not to interfere withthe Nabob of Furruckabad's government, for the regulation of which hewas in effect appointed to the Residency, --declaring as follows: "I relymuch on your moderation and good judgment, which I hope will enable youto regulate your conduct towards the Nabob and his _servants_ in such amanner, that, _without interfering in the executive part of hisgovernment_, you may render him essential service by _your council andadvice_. " And this restriction the said Hastings did impose, whichtotally frustrated the purpose of the Resident's mission, though he wellknew, and had frequently stated, the extreme imbecility and weakness ofthe said Nabob of Furruckabad, and his subjection to unworthy servants;and in the Minute of Consultation upon which he founded the appointmentdid state the Nabob of Furruckabad "as a weak and unexperienced youngman, who had abandoned himself entirely to the discretion of hisservants, and the restoration of his independence was followed by a_total_ breach of the engagements he had promised to fulfil, attended bypointed instances of contumacy and disrespect"; and in the said minutethe said Hastings adds, (as before mentioned, ) his principal servant andmanager had propagated a report that the "_interference_" (namely, his, the said Hastings's, interference) "to which his master owed the powerhe then enjoyed was purchased by him, " the principal servant aforesaid:yet he, the said Hastings, who had assigned on record the character ofthe said Nabob, and the conduct of his servants, and the aforesaidreport of his principal servant, so highly dishonorable to him, the saidHastings, as reasons for taking away the independency of the Nabob ofFurruckabad, and the subjecting him to the oppression of the Nabob ofOude's officer, Almas Ali, did again himself establish the pretendedindependence of the said prince of Furruckabad, and the realindependence of his corrupt and perfidious servants, not against theNabob of Oude, but against a British Resident appointed by himself ("asa character eminently qualified for such a charge") for the correctionof those evils, and for rendering the prince aforesaid an useful ally tothe Company, and restoring his dominions to order and plenty. 

That the said Hastings did not only disable the Resident at Furruckabadby his said prohibitory letter, but did render his very remaining at allin that station perfectly precarious by a subsequent letter, renderinghim liable to dismission by the Vizier, --thereby changing the tenure ofthe Resident's office, and changing him from a minister of the Company, dependent on the Governor-General and Council, to a dependant upon anunresponsible power, --in this also acting without the Council, and byhis own usurped authority: and accordingly the said Resident diddeclare, in his letter of the 24th of April, 1785, "that the situationof the country was _more_ distressful than when he [the prince ofFurruckabad] addressed himself for relief in 1783, and that he was sorryto say that his appointment at Furruckabad was of no use"; that, thoughthe old tribute could not be paid, owing to famine and other causes, itwas increased by a new imposition, making the whole equal the entire_gross_ produce of the revenue; that therefore there will not be"_anything for the subsistence of the Nabob and family_. " And the unclesof the said Nabob of Furruckabad, the brethren of the late Ahmed Khân, (who had rendered important services to the Company, ) and theirchildren, in a petition to the Resident, represented that soon after thesuccession of Muzuffer Jung "their misery commenced. The jaghires [landsand estates] on which they subsisted were disallowed. Our distress isgreat: we have neither clothes nor food. Though we felt hurt at the ideaof explaining our situation, yet, could we have found a mode ofconveyance, we would have proceeded to Calcutta for redress. Thescarcity of grain this season is an additional misfortune. Withdifficulty we support life. From your presence without the provinces weexpect relief. It is not the custom of the Company to deprive thezemindars and jaghiredars of the means of subsistence. To your justicewe look up. "

This being the situation of the person and family of the Nabob ofFurruckabad and his nearest relations, the state of the country and itscapital, prevented from all relief by the said Warren Hastings, isdescribed in the following words by the Resident, Willes. 

"Almas Ali has taken the purgunnah of Marara at a very inadequate rent, and his aumils have seized many adjacent villages: the purgunnahs ofCocutmow and Souje are constantly plundered by his people. Thecollection of the ghauts near Futtyghur has been seized by the Vizier's_cutwal_, and the zemindars in four purgunnahs are so refractory as tohave fortified themselves in their gurries, and to refuse all paymentsof revenue. This is the state of the purgunnahs. _And Furruckabad, which was once the seat of great opulence and trade, is now dailydeserted by its inhabitants, its walls mouldering away, without police, without protection, exposed to the depredations of a banditti of two orthree hundred robbers, who, night after night, enter it for plunder, murdering all who oppose them. The ruin that has overtaken this countryis not to be wondered at, when it is considered that there has been nostate, no stable government, for many years. _ There has been the NabobVizier's authority, his ministers', the Residents' at Lucknow, thesezauwils', the camp authority, the Nabob Muzuffer Jung's, and that oftwenty duans or advisers: no authority sufficiently predominant toestablish any regulations for the benefit of the country, whilst eachauthority has been exerted, as opportunity offered, for temporarypurposes. 

"Such being the present _deplorable_ state of Furruckabad and itsdistricts, in the ensuing year it will be in vain to look for revenue, if some regulations equal to the exigency be not adopted. The wholecountry will be divided between the neighboring powerful aumils, therefractory zemindars, and banditti of robbers; and the Patans, who mightbe made useful subjects, will fly from the scene of anarchy. The crisisappears now come, that either some plan of government should be resolvedon, so as to form faithful subjects on the frontier, or the country begiven up to its fate: and if it be abandoned, there can be little doubtbut that the Mahrattas will gladly seize on a station so favorable toincursions into the Vizier's dominions, will attach to their intereststhe Hindoo zemindars, and possess themselves of forts, which, withlittle expense being made formidable, would give employment perhaps tothe whole of our force, should it be ever necessary to recover them. "

That the Council at Calcutta, on the representation aforesaid made bythe Resident at Furruckabad, did propose and record a plan for thebetter government of the said country, but did delay the execution ofthe same until the arrangements made by the said Hastings with the NabobVizier should be known; but the said Hastings, as far as in him lay, didentirely set aside any plan that could be formed for that purpose uponthe basis of a British Resident at Furruckabad, by engaging with thesaid Nabob Vizier that no British influence shall be employed within hisdominions, and he has engaged to that prince not to abandon him to anyother mode of relation; and he has informed the Court of Directors thatthe territories of the Nabob of Oude will be ruined, if Residents aresent into them, observing, that "Residents never will be sent for anyother purposes than those of vengeance and corruption. "

That the said Warren Hastings did declare to the Court of Directors, that in his opinion the mode of relief most effectual, and most lenientwith regard to Furruckabad, would be to nominate one of the family ofthe prince to superintend his affairs and to secure the payments; butthis plan, which appears to be most connected with the rights of theruling family, whilst it provides against the imbecility of the naturallord, and is free from his objection to a Resident, is the only onewhich the said Hastings never has executed, or even proposed to execute. 

That the said Hastings, by the agreements aforesaid, has left theCompany in such an alternative, that they can neither relieve the saidprince of Furruckabad from oppression without a breach of theengagements entered into by him, the said Hastings, with the NabobVizier in the name of the Company, nor suffer him to remain under thesaid oppression without violating all faith and all the rules of justicewith regard to him. And the said Hastings hath directly made orauthorized no less than six revolutions in less than five years in theaforesaid harassed province; by which frequent and rapid changes ofgovernment, all of them made in contradiction to all his own declaredmotives and reasons for the several acts successively done and undone inthis transaction, the distresses of the country and the disorders in itsadministration have been highly aggravated; and in the said irregularproceedings, and in the gross and complicated violations of faith withall parties, the said Hastings is guilty of high crimes andmisdemeanors. 

VI. --DESTRUCTION OF THE RAJAH OF SAHLONE. 

I. That the late Nabob of Oude, Sujah ul Dowlah, did (on what reasons ofpolicy or pretences of justice is unknown) dispossess a certain nativeperson of distinction, or eminent Rajah, residing in the country ofSahlone, "the lineal descendant of the most powerful Hindoo family inthat part of Hindostan, " of his patrimonial estate, and conferred thesame, or part of the same, on his, the Nabob's, mother, as a jaghire, orestate, for the term of her life: and the mother of the Nabob, in orderto quiet the country, and to satisfy in some measure the principal andother inhabitants, did allow and pay a certain pension to the saidRajah; which pension, on the general confiscation of jaghires, made atthe instigation of the said Warren Hastings, and by the letting thelands so confiscated to farmers at rack-rents, was discontinued andrefused to be paid; and the discontinuance of the said pension, "onaccount of the personal respect borne to the Rajah, (as connections withhim are sought for, and thought _to confer honor_, )" did cause anuniversal discontent and violent commotions in the district of Sahlone, and other parts of the province of Oude, with great consequent effusionof blood, and interruption, if not total discontinuance, to thecollection of the revenues in those parts, other than as the same wasirregularly, and with great damage to the country, enforced by Britishtroops. 

II. That Mr. Lumsdaine, the officer employed to reduce those disorderedparts of the province to submission, after several advantages gainedover the Rajah and his adherents, and expelling him from the country, did represent the utter impossibility of bringing it to a permanentsettlement "merely by forcible methods; as in any of his [the Rajah's]incursions it would not be necessary to bring even a force with him, asthe zemindars [landed proprietors and freeholders] are much attached tothe Rajah, whom they consider as their hereditary prince, and never failto assist him, and that his rebellion against government is not lookedon as a crime": and Mr. Lumsdaine declared it "as his clear opinion, that the allowing the said Rajah a pension suitable to his rank andinfluence in the country would be the most certain mode of obtaining apermanent peace, "--alleging, among other cogent reasons, "that theexpense of the force necessary to be employed to subdue the countrymight be spared, and employed elsewhere, and that the people wouldreturn to their villages with their cattle and effects, and of coursegovernment have some security for the revenue, whereas at present theyhave none. " And the representation containing that prudent and temperatecounsel, given by a military man of undoubted information and perfectexperience in the local circumstances of the country, was transmitted bythe Resident, Bristow, to the said Warren Hastings, who did wilfully andcriminally omit to order any relief to the said Rajah in conformity tothe general sense and wishes of the inhabitants, a compliance with whoseso reasonable an expectation his duty in restoring the tranquillity ofthe country and in retrieving the honor of the English government didabsolutely require; but instead of making such provision, a price wasset upon his head, and several bodies of British troops being employedto pursue him, after many skirmishes and much bloodshed and mutual wasteof the country, the said Rajah, honored and respected by the natives, was hunted down, and at length killed in a thicket. 

FOOTNOTES:

[59] See Hastings's Letter. 

[60] Sic orig. 

[61] 26th Dec. , 1781. 

[62] 13th Jan. , 1782. 

[63] 18th Jan. , 1782. 

[64] Letter from Mr. Middleton, 2d Feb. , 1782. 

[65] Lucknow, 22d July, 1782. 

[66] Major Gilpin's Letter, 15th June, 1782. 

[67] Mr. Johnson's letter, 9th July, 1782. 

[68] Ibid. , 4th July, 1782. 

[69] Major Gilpin's Letter, 6th July, 1782. 

[70] Mr. Johnson's Letter, 22d July, 1782. 

[71] Major Gilpin's Letters, 16th June and 15th Sept. , 1782. 

[72] Major Gilpin's letter, 15th Sept. , 1782. 

[73] Major Gilpin's letter, 19th Oct. , 1782. 

[74] Major Gilpin's Letter, 18 Nov. , 1782. 

[75] Mr. Bristow's Letter, 2d Dec. , 1782. 

[76] Mr. Bristow's Letter, 12 Dec. , 1782. 

[77] Shoka from the Vizier to Hyder Beg Khân, 2d Ramsur, 1197

[78] Bristow's Letter, 29th Jan. , 1784, with inclosures. 

END OF VOL. VIII.