Fowke as from one another, and
as these circumstances tend to discover other dangerous principles of abuse, and the general prostrate condition of the authority of Parliament in Bengal,
your Committee proceed first to make some observations upon them.
as these circumstances tend to discover other dangerous principles of abuse, and the general prostrate condition of the authority of Parliament in Bengal,
your Committee proceed first to make some observations upon them.
Edmund Burke
Hastings had resigned was legally filled.
This
proceeding was officially notified in Bengal, and General Clavering, as senior in Council, was in course
to succeed to the office of Governor-General.
Mr. Hastings, to extricate himself from the difficulties into which this resignation had brought him,
had recourse to one of those unlooked-for and hardy
measures which characterize the whole of his administration. He came to a resolution of disowiiing his agent, denying his letter, and disavowing his friends. He insisted on cdntinuing in the executioni
of his office, and supported himself by such reasons
as could be furnished in such a cause. An open
VOL. VIII. 12
? ? ? ? 178 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
schism instantly divided the Council. General Clavering claimed the office to which he ought to succeed, and Mr. Francis adhered to him: Mr. Barwell
stuck to Mr. Hastings. Tile two parties assembled
separately, and everything was running fast into a
confusion which suspended government, and might
very probably have ended in a civil war, had not the
judges of the Supreme Court, on a reference to them,
settled the controversy by deciding that the resignation was an invalid act, and that Mr. Hastings was
still in the legal possession of his place, which had
been actually filled up in England. It was extraordinary that the nullity of this resignation should not
have been discovered in England, where the act authorizing the resignation then was, where the agent
was personally present, where the witnesses were examined, 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 no light matter
upon them in superseding, and thereby condemning
the legality of his Majesty's appointment: for such it
became by the royal approbation.
On this determination, such as it was, the division
in the meeting, but not in the minds of the Council,
ceased. General Clavering uniformly opposed the
conduct of Mr. Hastings to the end of his life. But
Mr. Hastings showed more temper under much greater provocations. In disclaiming his agent, and in effect accusing him of an imposture the most deeply injurious to his character and fortune, and of the grossest forgery to support it, he was so very mild
and indulgent as not to show any active resentment
against his unfaithful agent, nor to complain to the
Court of Directors. It was expected in Bengal that
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 179
some strong measures would have immediately been
taken to preserve the just rights of the king and of
the Court of Directors; as this proceeding, unaccompanied with the severest animadversion, manifestly struck a decisive blow at the existence of the most essential powers of both. But your Committee do
not find that any measures whatever, such as the case
seenled to demand, were taken. The observations
made by the Court of Directors on what they call
" these extraordinary transactions" are just and well
applied. They conclude with a declaration, " that the
measures which it might be necessary for them to take,
in order to retrieve the honor of the Company, and to
prevent the like abuse from being practised in future,
should have their most serious and earliest consideration "; and with this declaration they appear to have
closed the account, and to have dismissed the subject
forever.
A sanction was hereby given to all future defiance
of every authority in this kingdom. Several other
matters of complaint against Mr. Hastings, particularly the charge of peculation, fell to the ground at the
same time. Opinions of counsel had been taken relative to a prosecution at law upon this charge, from
the then Attorney and the then Solicitor-General and
Mr. Dunning, (now the Lords Thurlow, Loughborough, and Ashburton,) together with Mr. Adair (now
Recorder of London). None of them gave a positive
opinion against the grounds of the prosecution. The
Attorney-General doubted on the prudence of the proceedings, and censured (as it well deserved) the ill
statement of the case. Three of them, Mr. Wedderburn, Mr. Dunning, and Mr. Adair, were clear in favor of the prosecution. No prosecution, however, was
? ? ? ? 180 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
had, and the Directors contented themselves with censuring and admonishing Mr. Hastings.
With regard to the Supreme Council, the members
who chose (for it was choice only) to attend to the
orders which were issued from the languishing authority of the Directors continued to receive unprofitable applauses and no support. Their correspondence was always filled with complaints, the justice of which was always admitted by the Court of Directors;
but this admission of the existence of the evil showed
only the impotence of those who were to administer
the remedy. The authority of the Court of Directors,
resisted with success in so capital an instance as that
of the resignation, was not likely to be respected in
any other. What influence it really had on the conduct of the Company's servants may be collected from
the facts that followed it.
The disobedience of Mr. Hastings has of late not
only become uniform and systematical in practice,
but has been in principle, also, supported by him, 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 as his solemn and deliberate opinion,
that, "while Mr. Hastings is in the government, the
respect and dignity of his station should be supported.
In these sentiments, I must decline an acquiescence
in any order which has a tendency to bring the government into disrepute. As the Company have the
means and power of forming their own administration
in India, they may at pleasure place whom they please
at the head; but in my opinion they are not authorized to treat a person in that post with indignity. "
By treating them with indignity (in the particular
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 181
cases wherein they have declined obedience to orders)
they must mean those orders which imply a censure
on any part of their conduct, a reversal of any of their
proceedings, or, as Mr. Barwell expresses himself in
words very significant, 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, an independence including a despotic
authority over the subordinates and the country. The
very means taken by the Directors for enforcing their
authority becomes, on this principle, a cause of further disobedience. It is observable, that their principles of disobedience do not refer to any local consideration, overlooked by the Directors, which might supersede their orders, or to any change of circumstances, which might render another course advisable,
or even perhaps necessary, -- but it relates solely to
their own interior feelings in matters relative to themselves, and their opinion of their own dignity and reputation. It is plain that they have wholly forgotten
who they are, and what the nature of their office is.
Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell are servants of the
Company, and as such, by the duty inherent in that
relation, as well as by their special covenants, were
obliged to yield obedience to the orders of their masters. They have, as far as they were able, cancelled
all the bonds of this relation, and all the sanctions of
these covenants.
But in thus throwing off the authority of the Court
of Directors, Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell have
thrown off the authority of the whole legislative power of Great Britain; for, by the Regulating Act of the
? ? ? ? 182 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
thirteenth of his Majesty, they are expressly " directed and required to pay due obedience to all such orders as they shall receive from the Court of Directors of the said United Company. " Such is the declaration of the law. But Mr. Barwell declares that he
declines obedience to any orders which he shall inter.
pret to be indignities on a Governor-General. To the
clear injunctions of the legislature Mr. Hastings and
Mr. Barwell have thought proper to oppose their pretended reputation and dignity; as if the chief honor
of public ministers in every situation was not to yield
a cheerful obedience to the laws of their country.
Your Committee, to render evident to this House the
general nature and tendency of this pretended dignity, and to illustrate the real principles upon which
they appear to have acted, think it necessary to make
observations on three or four of the cases, already reported, of marked disobedience to particular and special orders, on one of which the above extraordinary doctrine was maintained.
These are the cases of Mr. Fowke, Mr. Bristow, and
Mahomed Reza Khan. In a few weeks after the death
of Colonel Monson, Mr. Hastings having obtained a
majority in Council by his casting vote, Mr. Fowke
and Mr. Bristow were called from their respective offices of Residents at Benares and Oude, places which
have become the scenes of other extraordinary operations under the conduct of Mr. Hastings in person.
For the recall of Mr. Bristow no reason was assigned.
The reason assigned for the proceeding with regard
to Mr. Fowke was, that " the purposes for which he
was appointed were then fully accomplished. "
An accotunt of the removal of Mr. Fowke was communicated to the Court of Directors in a letter of the
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 183
22d of December, 1776. On this notification the
Court had nothing to conclude, but that Mr. Hastings, from a rigid pursufit of economy in the management of the Company's affairs, had recalled a useless
officer. But, without alleging any variation whatsoever in the circumstances, in less than twenty days
after the order for the recall of Mr. Fowke, and
the very day after the dispatch containing all accoullnt
of the transaction, Mr. Hastings recommended Mr.
Grahamn to this very office, the end of which, he
declared to the Directors but the day before, had
been fully accomplished; and not thinking this sufficient, he appointed Mr. D. Barwell as his assistant,
at a salary of about four hundred pounds a year.
Against this extraordinary act General Clavering and
Mr. Francis entered a protest.
So early as the 6th of the following January the
appointment of these gentlemen was communicated
in a letter to the Court of Directors, without ainy
sort of color, apology, or explanation. That court
found a servant removed from his station without
complaint, contrary to the tenor of one of their standing injunctions. They allow, however, and with reason, that, " if it were possible to suppose that a saving, &c. , had been his motive, they would have approved his proceeding. But that when immediately afterwards two persons, with two salaries, had been
appointed to execute the office which had been filled
with reputation by Mr. Fowke alone, and that Mr.
Graham enjoys all the emoluments annexed to the
office of Mr. Fowke," - they properly conclude that
Mr. Fowke was removed without just cause, to make
way for Mr. Graham, and strictly enjoin that the former be reinstated in his office of Resident as Post
? ? ? ? 184 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
master of Benares. In the same letter they assert
their rights in a tone of becoming firmness, and declare, that " on no account we can permit our orders
to be disobeyed or our authority disregarded. "
It was now to be seen which of the parties was to
give way. The orders were clear and precise, and
enforced by a strong declaration of the resolution of
the Court to make itself obeyed. Mr. Hastings fairly joined issue upon this point with his masters,
and, having disobeyed the general instructions of the
Company, determined to pay no obedience to their
special order.
On the 21st July, 1778, he moved, and succeeded
in his proposition, that the execution of these orders should be suspended. The reason he assigned
for this suspension lets in great light upon the true
character of all these proceedings: " That his consent to the recall of Mr. Graham would be adequate
to his own resignation of the service, as it would inflict such a wound on his authority and influence that
he could not maintain it. "
If that had been his opinion, he ought to have resigned, and not disobeyed: because it was not necessary that he should hold his office; but it was necessary, that, whilst he held it, he should obey his superiors, and submit to the law. Much more truly
was his conduct a virtual resignation of his lawful
office, and at the same time an usurpation of a sitlation which did not belong to him, to hold a subordinate office, and to refuse to act according to its dltties. Had his authority been self-originated, it would have been wounded by his submission; but in this
case the true nature of his authority was affirmed,
not injured, by his obedience, because it was a power
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 185
derived from others, and, by its essence, to be executed according to their directions.
In this determined disobedience he was supported
by Mr. Barwell, who on that occasion delivered the
dangerous doctrine to which your Committee have
lately adverted. Mr. Fowke, who had a most material interest in this determination, applied by letter
to be informed concerning it. An answer was sent,
acquainting him coldly, and without any reason assigned, of what had been resolved relative to his office. This communication was soon followed by another letter fromn Mr. Fowke, with great submission and remarkable decency asserting his right to his
office under the authority of the Court of Directors,
and for solid reasons, grounded on the Company's
express orders, praying to be inlformed of the charge
against him. This letter appears to have been received by Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell very loftily. Mr. Hastings said, "that such applications
were irregular; that they are not accountable to Mr.
Fowke for their resolution respecting him. The reasons for suspending the execution of the orders of
the Court of Directors contain no charge, nor the
slightest imputation of a charge, against Mr. Fowke;
but I see no reason why the board should condescend
to tell him so. " Accordingly, the proposition of Mr.
Francis and Mr. Wheler, to inform Mr. Fowke "' that
they had no reason to be dissatisfied with his conduct," on the previous question was rejected.
By this resolution Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell
discovered another principle, and no less dangerous
than the first: namely, that persons deriving a valuable interest under the Company's orders, so far
from being heard in favor of their right, are not so
? ? ? ? 186 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
much as to be informed of the grounds on which they
are deprived of it.
The arrival soon after of Sir Eyre Coote giving
another opportunity of trial, the question for obedience to the Company's orders was again * brought on
by Mr. Francis, and again received a negative. Sir
Eyre Coote, though present, and declaring, that, had
he been at the original consultation, he should have
voted for the immediate execution of the Company's
orders, yet he was resolved to avoid what he called
any kind of retrospect. His neutrality gained the
question in favor of this, the third resolution for
disobedience to orders.
The resolution in Bengal being thus decisively taken, it came to the turn of the Court of Directors to
act their part. They did act their part exactly in
their old manner: they had recourse to their old
remedy of repeating orders which had been disobeyed. The Directors declare to Mr. Hastings and
Mr. Barwell, though without any apparent reason,
that " they have read with astonishment their formal
resolution to suspend the execution of their orders;
that they shall take such measures as appear necessary for preserving the authority of the Court of Directors, and for preventing such instances of direct and wilful disobedience in their servants in time to come. "
They then renew their directions concerning Mr.
Fowke. The event of this sole measure taken to
preserve their authority, and to prevent instances
of direct and wilful disobedience, your Committee
will state in its proper place, --taking into consideration, for the present, the proceedings relative to Mr.
Bristow, and to Mahomed Reza Khhn, which were
* 1st and 5th April, 1779.
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 187
altogether in the same spirit; but as they were diversified in the circumstances of disobedience, as well from the case of Mr.
Fowke as from one another, and
as these circumstances tend to discover other dangerous principles of abuse, and the general prostrate condition of the authority of Parliament in Bengal,
your Committee proceed first to make some observations upon them.
The province of Oude, enlarged by the accession of
several extensive and once flourishing territories, that
is, by the country of the Rohillas, the district of Corah and Allahabad, and other provinces betwixt the Ganges and Jumna, is under the nominal dominion
of one of the princes of the country, called Asoph ul
Dowlah. But a body of English troops is kept up
in his country; and the greatest part of his revenues
are, by one description or another, substantially under the administration of English subjects. He is to
all purposes a dependent prince. The person to be
employed in his dominions to act for the Committee
[Company? ] was therefore of little consequence in
his capacity of negotiator; but he was vested with
a trust, great and critical, in all pecuniary affairs.
These provinces of dependence lie out of the system
of the Company's ordinary administration, and transactions there cannot be so readily brought under the cognizance of the Court of Directors. This renders
it the more necessary that the Residents in such
places should be persons not disapproved of by the
Court of Directors. They are to manage a permanent interest, which is not, like a matter of political negotiation, variable, and which, from circumstances,
might possibly excuse some degree of discretionary
latitude in construing their orders. During the life
? ? ? ? 188 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
time of General Clavering and Colonel Monson, Mr.
Bristow was appointed to this Presidency, and that
appointment, being approved and confirmed by the
Court of Directors, became in effect their own. Mr.
Bristow appears to have shown himself a man of talents and activity. He had been principally concerned
in the negotiations by which the Company's interest
in the higher provinces had been established; and
those services were considered by the Presidency of
Calcutta as so meritorious, that they voted him ten
thousand pounds as a reward, with many expressions
of esteem and honor.
Mr. Bristow, however, was recalled by Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell, who had then acquired the majority, without any complaint having been assigned as the cause of his removal, and Mr. Middleton was
sent in his stead to reside at the capital of Oude.
The Court of Directors, as soon as they could be apprised of this extraordinary step, in their letter of
the 4th of July, 1777, express their strongest disapprobation of it: they order Mr. Middleton to be recalled, and Mr. Bristow to be reinstated in his office. In December, 1778, they repeat their order. Of these
repeated orders no notice was taken. Mr. Bristow,
fatigued with unsuccessful 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 the hardships which he suffered
by the delay in admitting him to the exercise of it.
This letter your Committee have inserted at large in
the Fifth Report, having found nothing whatsoever
exceptionable in it, although it seems to have excited the warmest resentment in Mr. Hastings.
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 189
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's arrival
until the 1st of May, and with as little from the 1st
of May to the 2nd of October following. On that
day, Mr. Francis, after having caused 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 fault could be found,
but that it was not made more early, was received by
Mr. Hastings with the greatest marks of resentment
and indignation. He declares in his minute, that,
" were the most determined adversary of the British
nation to possess, by whatever means, a share in the
administration, he could not devise a measure in itself so pernicious, or time it so effectually for the
ruin of the British interests in India. " 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 such a time, hold him forth as an
instrument for the degradation of the first executive
member of this government? What are the professed
objects of his appointment? What are the merits
and services, or what the qualifications, which entitle him to such uncommon distinction? Is it for his
superior integrity, or from his eminent abilities, that he
is to be dignified at such hazard of every consideration that ought to influence the members of this administration? Of the former (his integrity) 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 letter which he has dared to write to
? ? ? ? 190 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
this board, and which I am ashamed to say we have
suffered. I desire that a copy of it may be inserted
in this day's proceedings, that it may stand before the
eyes of every member of the board, when he shall
give his vote upon a question for giving their confidence to a man, their servant, who has publicly
insulted them, his masters, and the members of the
government to whom he owes his obedience, - who,
assuming an association with the Court of Directors,
and erecting himself into a tribunal, has arraigned
them for disobedience of orders, passed judgment upon
them, and condemned or acquitted them, as their magistrate or superior. Let the board consider, whether
a man possessed of so independent a spirit, who has
already shown a contempt of their authority, who has
shown himself so wretched an advocate for his own
cause and negotiator for his own interest, is fit to be
trusted with the guardianship of their honor, the execution of their measures, and as their confidential
manager and negotiator with the princes of India.
As the motion has been unaccompanied by any reasons which should induce the board to pass their
acquiescence in it, I presume the motion which preceded it, for reading the orders of the Court of Directors, was intended to serve as an argument for it, as well as an introduction to it. The last of those was
dictated the 23rd December, 1778, almost two years
past. They were dictated at a time when, I am sorry
to say, the Court of Directors were in the habit of
casting reproach upon my conduct and heaping indignities upon my station. "
Had the language and opinions which prevail
throughout this part of the minute, as well as in
all the others to which your Committee refer, been
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 191
uttered suddenly and in a passion, however unprovoked, some sort of apology might be made for the Governor-General. But when it was produced five
months after the supposed offence, and then delivered in writing, which always implies the power of
a greater degree of recollection and self-command,
it shows how deeply the principles of disobedience
had taken root in his mind, and of an assumption
to himself of exorbitant powers, which he choose,
to distinguish by the title of " his prerogative. " In
this also will be found an obscure hint of the cause
of his disobedience, which your Committee conceive
to allude to the main cause of the disorders in the
government of Illdia, - namely, an underhand communication 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 as to donsider a motion to obey the Court of Directors
as a degradation of the executive government in
his person. He looks upon a claim under that authority, and a complaint that it has produced no effect, as a piece of daring insolence which he is
ashamed that the board has suffered. The behavior
which your Committee consider as so intemperate
and despotic he regards as a culpable degree of
patience and forbearance. Major Scott, his agent,
eiaters so much into the principles of Mr. Hastings's
conduct as to tell your Committee that in his opinion
Lord Clive would have sent home Mr. Bristow a prisoner upon such an occasion. It is worthy of remark, that, in the very same breath that Mr. Hastings so
heavily condemns a junior officer in the Company's
service (not a servant of the Council, as lie hazards
? ? ? ? 192 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
to call him, but their fellow-servant) for merely complaining of a supposed injury and requiring redress, he so far forgets his own subordination as to reject
the orders of the Court of Directors even as an argument in favor of appointing a person to an office, to presume to censure his undoubted masters, and to
accuse them of having been " in a habit of casting
reproaches upon him, and heaping indignities on his
station. " And it is to be observed, that this censure
was not for the purpose of seeking or obtaining redress for any injury, but appeared rather as a reason for refusing to obey their lawful commands. It is
plainly implied in that minute, that no servant of the
Company, in Mr. Bristow's rank, would dare to act
in such a manner, if he had not by indirect means
obtained a premature fortune. This alone is sufficient to show the situation of the Company's servants in the subordinate situations, when the mere claim
of a right, derived from the sovereign legal power,
becomes fatal not only to the objects which they
pursue, but deeply wounds that reputation both for
ability and integrity by which alone they are to be
qualified for any other.
If anything could add to the disagreeable situation
of those who are submitted to an authority conducted
on such principles, it is this: The Company has ordered that no complaint shall be made in Europe against any of the Council without being previously
communicated to them: a regulation formed upon
grave reasons; and it was certainly made in favor,f that board. But if a person, having ground of complaint against the Council, by making uise of the
mode prescribed ill favor of that very Council, and by
complaining to themselves, commits an offence for
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 193
which lihe may be justly punished, the Directors have
not regulated the mode of complaint, they have actually forbidden it; they have, on that supposition,
renounced their authority; and the whole system of
their officers is delivered over to the arbitrary will
of a few of their chief servants.
During the whole day of that deliberation things
wore a decided face. Mr. Hastings stood to his
principles inl their full extent, and seemed resolved
upon unqualified disobedience. But as the debate
was adjourned to the day following, time was given
for expedients; and such an expedient was hit upon
by Mr. Hastings as will, no doubt, be unexpected by
the House;' but it serves to throw new lights upon
the motives of all his struggles with the authority
of the legislature.
The next day the Council met upon the adjournment. Then Mr. Hastings proposed, as a compromise, a division of the object in question. One half
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 his own share in this partition is very worthy of notice. He had taken his sole
ground of objection against Mr. Bristow on the supposed ill effect that such an appointment would have
on the minds of the Indian powers. He said, " that
these powers could have no dependence oni his fulfilling his engagements, or maintaining the faith of treaties which he might offer for their acceptance, if they saw him treated with such contempt. " Mr. Bristow's
appearing in a political character was the whole of his
complaint; yet, when he comes to a voluntary distribution of the duties of the office, he gives Mr. Bristow those very political negotiations of which but the: VOL. VIII. 13
? ? ? ? 194 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
day before he had in such strong terms declared him
personally incapable, whose appointment he considered to be fatal to those negotiations, and which he
then spoke of as a measure in itself such as the bitterest adversary to Great Britain would have proposed. But having thus yielded his whole ground
of ostensible objection, he reserved to his own appointment the entire management of the pecuniary
trust. Accordingly he named Mr. Bristow for the
former, and Mr. Middleton for the latter. On his
own principles he ought to have done the very reverse. On every justifiable principle he ought to
have done so; for a servant who for a long time resists the orders of his masters, and when he reluctantly gives way obeys them by halves, ought to 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 his motives. It was
possible that the political reasons, which were solely
assigned against Mr. Bristow's appointment, might
have been the real motives of Mr. Hastings's opposition. But these he totally abandons, and holds
fast to the pecuniary department. Now, as it is notorious that most of the abuses of India grow out
of money-dealing, it was peculiarly unfit for a servant, delicate with regard to his reputation, to require a personal and confidential agent in a situation merely official, in which secrecy and personal connections could be of no possible use, and could only
serve to excite distrust. Matters of account cannot
be made too public; and it is not the most confidential agent, but the most responsible, who is the fittest for the management of pecuniary trusts. That man was the fittest at once to do the duty, and to
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 195
remove all suspicions from the Governor-General's
character, whom, by not being of his appointment,
he could not be supposed to favor for private purposes, who must naturally stand in awe of his inspection, and whose misconduct could not possibly be imputable to him. Such an agency in a pecuniary trust was the very last on which Mr. Hastings
ought to have risked his disobedience to the orders
of the Direction, -- or, what is even worse for his
motives, a direct contradiction to all the principles
upon which he had attempted to justify that bold
measure.
The conduct of Mr. Hastings in the affair of Mahomed Reza Kha'n was an act of disobedience of
the same character, but wrought by other instruments. When the Duann6 (or universal perception
and management of the revenues) of Bengal was acquired to the Company, together with the command
of the army, the Nabob, or governor, naturally fell
into the rank rather of a subject than that even of
a dependent prince. Yet the preservation of such a
power in such a degree of subordination, with the
criminal jurisdiction, and the care of the public order annexed to it, was a wise and laudable policy.
It preserved a portion of the government in the hands
of the natives; it kept them in respect; it rendered
them quiet on the change; and it prevented that
vast kingdom fiom wearing the dangerous appearance, and still more from sinking into'the terrible
state, of a country of conquest. Your Committee
has already reported the manner in which the Company (it must be allowed, upon pretences that will
not bear the slightest examination) diverted from its
purposes a great part of the revenues appropriated
? ? ? ? 196 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
to the country government; but they were very
properly anxious that what remained should be well
administered. In the lifetime of General Clavering
and Colonel Monson, Mahomed Reza Khan, a man
of rank among the natives, was judged by them the
fittest person to conduct the affairs of the Nabob,
as his Naib, or deputy: an office well known in the
ancient constitution of these provinces, at a time
when the principal magistrates, by nature and situation, were more efficient. This appointment was
highly approved, and in consequence confirmed, by
the Court of Directors. Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell, however, thought proper to remove him. To
the authority of the Court of Directors they opposed
the request of the Nabob, stating that he was arrived
at the common age of maturity, and stood in no need
of a deputy to manage his affairs. On former occasions Mr. Hastings conceived a very low opinion of
the condition of the person whom he thus set up
against the authority of his masters. " On a former
occasion," as the Directors tell him, " and to serve a
very different purpose, he had not scrupled to declare
it as visible as the sun that the Nabob was a mere
pageant, without even the shadow of authority. " But
on this occasion he became more substantial. Mr.
Hastings and Mr. Barwell yielded to his representation that a deputy was not necessary, and accordingly
Mahomed Reza Khan was removed from his office.
However, lest any one should so far mistrust their
understanding as to conceive them the dupes of this
pretext, they who had disobeyed the Company's orders under color that no deputy was necessary immediately appoint another deputy. This independent prince, who, as Mr. Hastings said, " had an incon
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 197
testable right to his situation, and that it was his by
inheritance," suddenly shrunk into his old state of insignificance, and was even looked upon in so low a light as to receive a severe reprimand from Mr. Hastings for interposing in the duties of his (the deputy's) office.
The Company's orders, censuring this transaction
in the strongest terms, and ordering Mahomed Reza
Khan to be immediately restored to the office of Naib
Subahdar, were received in Calcutta in November,
1779. Mr. Hastings acted on this with the firmness
which he had shown on other occasions; but in his
principles he went further. Thinking himself assured
of some extraordinary support, suitable to the open
and determined defiance with which he was resolved
to oppose the lawful authority of his superiors, and to
exercise a despotic power, he no longer adhered to
Mr. Barwell's distinction of the orders which had a
tendency to bring his government into disrepute.
This distinction afforded sufficient latitude to disobedience; but here he disdained all sorts of colors and distinctions. He directly set up an independent right
to administer the government according to his pleasure; and he went so far as to bottom his claim to act independently of the Court of Directors on the very
statute which commanded his obedience to them.
He declared roundly, " that lie should not yield to
the authority of the Court of Directors in any instance
in which it should require his concession of the rights
which he held under an act of Parliament. " It is too
clear to stand in need of proof, that. he neither did or
could hold any authority that was not subject, in
every particle of it, and in every instance ill wlichl it
could be exercised, to the orders of the Coul't of Directors.
? ? ? ? 198 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
He therefore refused to back the Company's orders
with any requisition from himself to the Nabob, but
merely suffered them to be transmitted to him, leaving it to him to do just as he thought proper. The
Nabob, who called Mr. Hastings " his patron, and declared he would never do anything without his consent and approbation," perfectly understood this kind of signification. For the second time the Nabob recovered from his trance of pageantry and insignificance, and collected courage enough to write to the Council in these terms: "I administer the affairs of
the Nizamut, (the government,) which are the affairs
of my own family, by my own authority, and shall do
so; and I never can on any account agree to the appointment of the Nabob Mahomed Reza Khan to the'
Naib Subahship. " Here was a second independent
power in Bengal. This answer from that power
proved as satisfactory as it was resolute. No further
notice was taken of the orders of the Court of Directors, and Mahomed Reza Khan found their protection
much more of a shadow than the pageant of power of
which he aspired to be the representative.
This act of disobedience differs from the others in
one particular which, in the opinion of your Committee, rather aggravates than extenuates the offence.
In the others, Messrs. Hastings and Barwell took the
responsibility on themselves; here they held up the
pretext of the country government. However, they
obtained thereby one of the objects which they appear
to have systematically pursued. As they had in the
other instances shown to the British servants of the
Company that the Directors were not able to protect
them, here the same lesson was taught to the natives.
Whilst the matter lay between the native power and
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 199
the servants, the former was considered by Mr. Hastings in the most contemptible light. When the question was between the servants and the Court of Directors, the native power was asserted to be a selfderived, hereditary, uncontrollable authority, and encouraged to act as such.
proceeding was officially notified in Bengal, and General Clavering, as senior in Council, was in course
to succeed to the office of Governor-General.
Mr. Hastings, to extricate himself from the difficulties into which this resignation had brought him,
had recourse to one of those unlooked-for and hardy
measures which characterize the whole of his administration. He came to a resolution of disowiiing his agent, denying his letter, and disavowing his friends. He insisted on cdntinuing in the executioni
of his office, and supported himself by such reasons
as could be furnished in such a cause. An open
VOL. VIII. 12
? ? ? ? 178 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
schism instantly divided the Council. General Clavering claimed the office to which he ought to succeed, and Mr. Francis adhered to him: Mr. Barwell
stuck to Mr. Hastings. Tile two parties assembled
separately, and everything was running fast into a
confusion which suspended government, and might
very probably have ended in a civil war, had not the
judges of the Supreme Court, on a reference to them,
settled the controversy by deciding that the resignation was an invalid act, and that Mr. Hastings was
still in the legal possession of his place, which had
been actually filled up in England. It was extraordinary that the nullity of this resignation should not
have been discovered in England, where the act authorizing the resignation then was, where the agent
was personally present, where the witnesses were examined, 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 no light matter
upon them in superseding, and thereby condemning
the legality of his Majesty's appointment: for such it
became by the royal approbation.
On this determination, such as it was, the division
in the meeting, but not in the minds of the Council,
ceased. General Clavering uniformly opposed the
conduct of Mr. Hastings to the end of his life. But
Mr. Hastings showed more temper under much greater provocations. In disclaiming his agent, and in effect accusing him of an imposture the most deeply injurious to his character and fortune, and of the grossest forgery to support it, he was so very mild
and indulgent as not to show any active resentment
against his unfaithful agent, nor to complain to the
Court of Directors. It was expected in Bengal that
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 179
some strong measures would have immediately been
taken to preserve the just rights of the king and of
the Court of Directors; as this proceeding, unaccompanied with the severest animadversion, manifestly struck a decisive blow at the existence of the most essential powers of both. But your Committee do
not find that any measures whatever, such as the case
seenled to demand, were taken. The observations
made by the Court of Directors on what they call
" these extraordinary transactions" are just and well
applied. They conclude with a declaration, " that the
measures which it might be necessary for them to take,
in order to retrieve the honor of the Company, and to
prevent the like abuse from being practised in future,
should have their most serious and earliest consideration "; and with this declaration they appear to have
closed the account, and to have dismissed the subject
forever.
A sanction was hereby given to all future defiance
of every authority in this kingdom. Several other
matters of complaint against Mr. Hastings, particularly the charge of peculation, fell to the ground at the
same time. Opinions of counsel had been taken relative to a prosecution at law upon this charge, from
the then Attorney and the then Solicitor-General and
Mr. Dunning, (now the Lords Thurlow, Loughborough, and Ashburton,) together with Mr. Adair (now
Recorder of London). None of them gave a positive
opinion against the grounds of the prosecution. The
Attorney-General doubted on the prudence of the proceedings, and censured (as it well deserved) the ill
statement of the case. Three of them, Mr. Wedderburn, Mr. Dunning, and Mr. Adair, were clear in favor of the prosecution. No prosecution, however, was
? ? ? ? 180 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
had, and the Directors contented themselves with censuring and admonishing Mr. Hastings.
With regard to the Supreme Council, the members
who chose (for it was choice only) to attend to the
orders which were issued from the languishing authority of the Directors continued to receive unprofitable applauses and no support. Their correspondence was always filled with complaints, the justice of which was always admitted by the Court of Directors;
but this admission of the existence of the evil showed
only the impotence of those who were to administer
the remedy. The authority of the Court of Directors,
resisted with success in so capital an instance as that
of the resignation, was not likely to be respected in
any other. What influence it really had on the conduct of the Company's servants may be collected from
the facts that followed it.
The disobedience of Mr. Hastings has of late not
only become uniform and systematical in practice,
but has been in principle, also, supported by him, 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 as his solemn and deliberate opinion,
that, "while Mr. Hastings is in the government, the
respect and dignity of his station should be supported.
In these sentiments, I must decline an acquiescence
in any order which has a tendency to bring the government into disrepute. As the Company have the
means and power of forming their own administration
in India, they may at pleasure place whom they please
at the head; but in my opinion they are not authorized to treat a person in that post with indignity. "
By treating them with indignity (in the particular
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 181
cases wherein they have declined obedience to orders)
they must mean those orders which imply a censure
on any part of their conduct, a reversal of any of their
proceedings, or, as Mr. Barwell expresses himself in
words very significant, 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, an independence including a despotic
authority over the subordinates and the country. The
very means taken by the Directors for enforcing their
authority becomes, on this principle, a cause of further disobedience. It is observable, that their principles of disobedience do not refer to any local consideration, overlooked by the Directors, which might supersede their orders, or to any change of circumstances, which might render another course advisable,
or even perhaps necessary, -- but it relates solely to
their own interior feelings in matters relative to themselves, and their opinion of their own dignity and reputation. It is plain that they have wholly forgotten
who they are, and what the nature of their office is.
Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell are servants of the
Company, and as such, by the duty inherent in that
relation, as well as by their special covenants, were
obliged to yield obedience to the orders of their masters. They have, as far as they were able, cancelled
all the bonds of this relation, and all the sanctions of
these covenants.
But in thus throwing off the authority of the Court
of Directors, Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell have
thrown off the authority of the whole legislative power of Great Britain; for, by the Regulating Act of the
? ? ? ? 182 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
thirteenth of his Majesty, they are expressly " directed and required to pay due obedience to all such orders as they shall receive from the Court of Directors of the said United Company. " Such is the declaration of the law. But Mr. Barwell declares that he
declines obedience to any orders which he shall inter.
pret to be indignities on a Governor-General. To the
clear injunctions of the legislature Mr. Hastings and
Mr. Barwell have thought proper to oppose their pretended reputation and dignity; as if the chief honor
of public ministers in every situation was not to yield
a cheerful obedience to the laws of their country.
Your Committee, to render evident to this House the
general nature and tendency of this pretended dignity, and to illustrate the real principles upon which
they appear to have acted, think it necessary to make
observations on three or four of the cases, already reported, of marked disobedience to particular and special orders, on one of which the above extraordinary doctrine was maintained.
These are the cases of Mr. Fowke, Mr. Bristow, and
Mahomed Reza Khan. In a few weeks after the death
of Colonel Monson, Mr. Hastings having obtained a
majority in Council by his casting vote, Mr. Fowke
and Mr. Bristow were called from their respective offices of Residents at Benares and Oude, places which
have become the scenes of other extraordinary operations under the conduct of Mr. Hastings in person.
For the recall of Mr. Bristow no reason was assigned.
The reason assigned for the proceeding with regard
to Mr. Fowke was, that " the purposes for which he
was appointed were then fully accomplished. "
An accotunt of the removal of Mr. Fowke was communicated to the Court of Directors in a letter of the
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 183
22d of December, 1776. On this notification the
Court had nothing to conclude, but that Mr. Hastings, from a rigid pursufit of economy in the management of the Company's affairs, had recalled a useless
officer. But, without alleging any variation whatsoever in the circumstances, in less than twenty days
after the order for the recall of Mr. Fowke, and
the very day after the dispatch containing all accoullnt
of the transaction, Mr. Hastings recommended Mr.
Grahamn to this very office, the end of which, he
declared to the Directors but the day before, had
been fully accomplished; and not thinking this sufficient, he appointed Mr. D. Barwell as his assistant,
at a salary of about four hundred pounds a year.
Against this extraordinary act General Clavering and
Mr. Francis entered a protest.
So early as the 6th of the following January the
appointment of these gentlemen was communicated
in a letter to the Court of Directors, without ainy
sort of color, apology, or explanation. That court
found a servant removed from his station without
complaint, contrary to the tenor of one of their standing injunctions. They allow, however, and with reason, that, " if it were possible to suppose that a saving, &c. , had been his motive, they would have approved his proceeding. But that when immediately afterwards two persons, with two salaries, had been
appointed to execute the office which had been filled
with reputation by Mr. Fowke alone, and that Mr.
Graham enjoys all the emoluments annexed to the
office of Mr. Fowke," - they properly conclude that
Mr. Fowke was removed without just cause, to make
way for Mr. Graham, and strictly enjoin that the former be reinstated in his office of Resident as Post
? ? ? ? 184 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
master of Benares. In the same letter they assert
their rights in a tone of becoming firmness, and declare, that " on no account we can permit our orders
to be disobeyed or our authority disregarded. "
It was now to be seen which of the parties was to
give way. The orders were clear and precise, and
enforced by a strong declaration of the resolution of
the Court to make itself obeyed. Mr. Hastings fairly joined issue upon this point with his masters,
and, having disobeyed the general instructions of the
Company, determined to pay no obedience to their
special order.
On the 21st July, 1778, he moved, and succeeded
in his proposition, that the execution of these orders should be suspended. The reason he assigned
for this suspension lets in great light upon the true
character of all these proceedings: " That his consent to the recall of Mr. Graham would be adequate
to his own resignation of the service, as it would inflict such a wound on his authority and influence that
he could not maintain it. "
If that had been his opinion, he ought to have resigned, and not disobeyed: because it was not necessary that he should hold his office; but it was necessary, that, whilst he held it, he should obey his superiors, and submit to the law. Much more truly
was his conduct a virtual resignation of his lawful
office, and at the same time an usurpation of a sitlation which did not belong to him, to hold a subordinate office, and to refuse to act according to its dltties. Had his authority been self-originated, it would have been wounded by his submission; but in this
case the true nature of his authority was affirmed,
not injured, by his obedience, because it was a power
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 185
derived from others, and, by its essence, to be executed according to their directions.
In this determined disobedience he was supported
by Mr. Barwell, who on that occasion delivered the
dangerous doctrine to which your Committee have
lately adverted. Mr. Fowke, who had a most material interest in this determination, applied by letter
to be informed concerning it. An answer was sent,
acquainting him coldly, and without any reason assigned, of what had been resolved relative to his office. This communication was soon followed by another letter fromn Mr. Fowke, with great submission and remarkable decency asserting his right to his
office under the authority of the Court of Directors,
and for solid reasons, grounded on the Company's
express orders, praying to be inlformed of the charge
against him. This letter appears to have been received by Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell very loftily. Mr. Hastings said, "that such applications
were irregular; that they are not accountable to Mr.
Fowke for their resolution respecting him. The reasons for suspending the execution of the orders of
the Court of Directors contain no charge, nor the
slightest imputation of a charge, against Mr. Fowke;
but I see no reason why the board should condescend
to tell him so. " Accordingly, the proposition of Mr.
Francis and Mr. Wheler, to inform Mr. Fowke "' that
they had no reason to be dissatisfied with his conduct," on the previous question was rejected.
By this resolution Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell
discovered another principle, and no less dangerous
than the first: namely, that persons deriving a valuable interest under the Company's orders, so far
from being heard in favor of their right, are not so
? ? ? ? 186 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
much as to be informed of the grounds on which they
are deprived of it.
The arrival soon after of Sir Eyre Coote giving
another opportunity of trial, the question for obedience to the Company's orders was again * brought on
by Mr. Francis, and again received a negative. Sir
Eyre Coote, though present, and declaring, that, had
he been at the original consultation, he should have
voted for the immediate execution of the Company's
orders, yet he was resolved to avoid what he called
any kind of retrospect. His neutrality gained the
question in favor of this, the third resolution for
disobedience to orders.
The resolution in Bengal being thus decisively taken, it came to the turn of the Court of Directors to
act their part. They did act their part exactly in
their old manner: they had recourse to their old
remedy of repeating orders which had been disobeyed. The Directors declare to Mr. Hastings and
Mr. Barwell, though without any apparent reason,
that " they have read with astonishment their formal
resolution to suspend the execution of their orders;
that they shall take such measures as appear necessary for preserving the authority of the Court of Directors, and for preventing such instances of direct and wilful disobedience in their servants in time to come. "
They then renew their directions concerning Mr.
Fowke. The event of this sole measure taken to
preserve their authority, and to prevent instances
of direct and wilful disobedience, your Committee
will state in its proper place, --taking into consideration, for the present, the proceedings relative to Mr.
Bristow, and to Mahomed Reza Khhn, which were
* 1st and 5th April, 1779.
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 187
altogether in the same spirit; but as they were diversified in the circumstances of disobedience, as well from the case of Mr.
Fowke as from one another, and
as these circumstances tend to discover other dangerous principles of abuse, and the general prostrate condition of the authority of Parliament in Bengal,
your Committee proceed first to make some observations upon them.
The province of Oude, enlarged by the accession of
several extensive and once flourishing territories, that
is, by the country of the Rohillas, the district of Corah and Allahabad, and other provinces betwixt the Ganges and Jumna, is under the nominal dominion
of one of the princes of the country, called Asoph ul
Dowlah. But a body of English troops is kept up
in his country; and the greatest part of his revenues
are, by one description or another, substantially under the administration of English subjects. He is to
all purposes a dependent prince. The person to be
employed in his dominions to act for the Committee
[Company? ] was therefore of little consequence in
his capacity of negotiator; but he was vested with
a trust, great and critical, in all pecuniary affairs.
These provinces of dependence lie out of the system
of the Company's ordinary administration, and transactions there cannot be so readily brought under the cognizance of the Court of Directors. This renders
it the more necessary that the Residents in such
places should be persons not disapproved of by the
Court of Directors. They are to manage a permanent interest, which is not, like a matter of political negotiation, variable, and which, from circumstances,
might possibly excuse some degree of discretionary
latitude in construing their orders. During the life
? ? ? ? 188 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
time of General Clavering and Colonel Monson, Mr.
Bristow was appointed to this Presidency, and that
appointment, being approved and confirmed by the
Court of Directors, became in effect their own. Mr.
Bristow appears to have shown himself a man of talents and activity. He had been principally concerned
in the negotiations by which the Company's interest
in the higher provinces had been established; and
those services were considered by the Presidency of
Calcutta as so meritorious, that they voted him ten
thousand pounds as a reward, with many expressions
of esteem and honor.
Mr. Bristow, however, was recalled by Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell, who had then acquired the majority, without any complaint having been assigned as the cause of his removal, and Mr. Middleton was
sent in his stead to reside at the capital of Oude.
The Court of Directors, as soon as they could be apprised of this extraordinary step, in their letter of
the 4th of July, 1777, express their strongest disapprobation of it: they order Mr. Middleton to be recalled, and Mr. Bristow to be reinstated in his office. In December, 1778, they repeat their order. Of these
repeated orders no notice was taken. Mr. Bristow,
fatigued with unsuccessful 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 the hardships which he suffered
by the delay in admitting him to the exercise of it.
This letter your Committee have inserted at large in
the Fifth Report, having found nothing whatsoever
exceptionable in it, although it seems to have excited the warmest resentment in Mr. Hastings.
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 189
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's arrival
until the 1st of May, and with as little from the 1st
of May to the 2nd of October following. On that
day, Mr. Francis, after having caused 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 fault could be found,
but that it was not made more early, was received by
Mr. Hastings with the greatest marks of resentment
and indignation. He declares in his minute, that,
" were the most determined adversary of the British
nation to possess, by whatever means, a share in the
administration, he could not devise a measure in itself so pernicious, or time it so effectually for the
ruin of the British interests in India. " 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 such a time, hold him forth as an
instrument for the degradation of the first executive
member of this government? What are the professed
objects of his appointment? What are the merits
and services, or what the qualifications, which entitle him to such uncommon distinction? Is it for his
superior integrity, or from his eminent abilities, that he
is to be dignified at such hazard of every consideration that ought to influence the members of this administration? Of the former (his integrity) 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 letter which he has dared to write to
? ? ? ? 190 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
this board, and which I am ashamed to say we have
suffered. I desire that a copy of it may be inserted
in this day's proceedings, that it may stand before the
eyes of every member of the board, when he shall
give his vote upon a question for giving their confidence to a man, their servant, who has publicly
insulted them, his masters, and the members of the
government to whom he owes his obedience, - who,
assuming an association with the Court of Directors,
and erecting himself into a tribunal, has arraigned
them for disobedience of orders, passed judgment upon
them, and condemned or acquitted them, as their magistrate or superior. Let the board consider, whether
a man possessed of so independent a spirit, who has
already shown a contempt of their authority, who has
shown himself so wretched an advocate for his own
cause and negotiator for his own interest, is fit to be
trusted with the guardianship of their honor, the execution of their measures, and as their confidential
manager and negotiator with the princes of India.
As the motion has been unaccompanied by any reasons which should induce the board to pass their
acquiescence in it, I presume the motion which preceded it, for reading the orders of the Court of Directors, was intended to serve as an argument for it, as well as an introduction to it. The last of those was
dictated the 23rd December, 1778, almost two years
past. They were dictated at a time when, I am sorry
to say, the Court of Directors were in the habit of
casting reproach upon my conduct and heaping indignities upon my station. "
Had the language and opinions which prevail
throughout this part of the minute, as well as in
all the others to which your Committee refer, been
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 191
uttered suddenly and in a passion, however unprovoked, some sort of apology might be made for the Governor-General. But when it was produced five
months after the supposed offence, and then delivered in writing, which always implies the power of
a greater degree of recollection and self-command,
it shows how deeply the principles of disobedience
had taken root in his mind, and of an assumption
to himself of exorbitant powers, which he choose,
to distinguish by the title of " his prerogative. " In
this also will be found an obscure hint of the cause
of his disobedience, which your Committee conceive
to allude to the main cause of the disorders in the
government of Illdia, - namely, an underhand communication 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 as to donsider a motion to obey the Court of Directors
as a degradation of the executive government in
his person. He looks upon a claim under that authority, and a complaint that it has produced no effect, as a piece of daring insolence which he is
ashamed that the board has suffered. The behavior
which your Committee consider as so intemperate
and despotic he regards as a culpable degree of
patience and forbearance. Major Scott, his agent,
eiaters so much into the principles of Mr. Hastings's
conduct as to tell your Committee that in his opinion
Lord Clive would have sent home Mr. Bristow a prisoner upon such an occasion. It is worthy of remark, that, in the very same breath that Mr. Hastings so
heavily condemns a junior officer in the Company's
service (not a servant of the Council, as lie hazards
? ? ? ? 192 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
to call him, but their fellow-servant) for merely complaining of a supposed injury and requiring redress, he so far forgets his own subordination as to reject
the orders of the Court of Directors even as an argument in favor of appointing a person to an office, to presume to censure his undoubted masters, and to
accuse them of having been " in a habit of casting
reproaches upon him, and heaping indignities on his
station. " And it is to be observed, that this censure
was not for the purpose of seeking or obtaining redress for any injury, but appeared rather as a reason for refusing to obey their lawful commands. It is
plainly implied in that minute, that no servant of the
Company, in Mr. Bristow's rank, would dare to act
in such a manner, if he had not by indirect means
obtained a premature fortune. This alone is sufficient to show the situation of the Company's servants in the subordinate situations, when the mere claim
of a right, derived from the sovereign legal power,
becomes fatal not only to the objects which they
pursue, but deeply wounds that reputation both for
ability and integrity by which alone they are to be
qualified for any other.
If anything could add to the disagreeable situation
of those who are submitted to an authority conducted
on such principles, it is this: The Company has ordered that no complaint shall be made in Europe against any of the Council without being previously
communicated to them: a regulation formed upon
grave reasons; and it was certainly made in favor,f that board. But if a person, having ground of complaint against the Council, by making uise of the
mode prescribed ill favor of that very Council, and by
complaining to themselves, commits an offence for
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 193
which lihe may be justly punished, the Directors have
not regulated the mode of complaint, they have actually forbidden it; they have, on that supposition,
renounced their authority; and the whole system of
their officers is delivered over to the arbitrary will
of a few of their chief servants.
During the whole day of that deliberation things
wore a decided face. Mr. Hastings stood to his
principles inl their full extent, and seemed resolved
upon unqualified disobedience. But as the debate
was adjourned to the day following, time was given
for expedients; and such an expedient was hit upon
by Mr. Hastings as will, no doubt, be unexpected by
the House;' but it serves to throw new lights upon
the motives of all his struggles with the authority
of the legislature.
The next day the Council met upon the adjournment. Then Mr. Hastings proposed, as a compromise, a division of the object in question. One half
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 his own share in this partition is very worthy of notice. He had taken his sole
ground of objection against Mr. Bristow on the supposed ill effect that such an appointment would have
on the minds of the Indian powers. He said, " that
these powers could have no dependence oni his fulfilling his engagements, or maintaining the faith of treaties which he might offer for their acceptance, if they saw him treated with such contempt. " Mr. Bristow's
appearing in a political character was the whole of his
complaint; yet, when he comes to a voluntary distribution of the duties of the office, he gives Mr. Bristow those very political negotiations of which but the: VOL. VIII. 13
? ? ? ? 194 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
day before he had in such strong terms declared him
personally incapable, whose appointment he considered to be fatal to those negotiations, and which he
then spoke of as a measure in itself such as the bitterest adversary to Great Britain would have proposed. But having thus yielded his whole ground
of ostensible objection, he reserved to his own appointment the entire management of the pecuniary
trust. Accordingly he named Mr. Bristow for the
former, and Mr. Middleton for the latter. On his
own principles he ought to have done the very reverse. On every justifiable principle he ought to
have done so; for a servant who for a long time resists the orders of his masters, and when he reluctantly gives way obeys them by halves, ought to 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 his motives. It was
possible that the political reasons, which were solely
assigned against Mr. Bristow's appointment, might
have been the real motives of Mr. Hastings's opposition. But these he totally abandons, and holds
fast to the pecuniary department. Now, as it is notorious that most of the abuses of India grow out
of money-dealing, it was peculiarly unfit for a servant, delicate with regard to his reputation, to require a personal and confidential agent in a situation merely official, in which secrecy and personal connections could be of no possible use, and could only
serve to excite distrust. Matters of account cannot
be made too public; and it is not the most confidential agent, but the most responsible, who is the fittest for the management of pecuniary trusts. That man was the fittest at once to do the duty, and to
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 195
remove all suspicions from the Governor-General's
character, whom, by not being of his appointment,
he could not be supposed to favor for private purposes, who must naturally stand in awe of his inspection, and whose misconduct could not possibly be imputable to him. Such an agency in a pecuniary trust was the very last on which Mr. Hastings
ought to have risked his disobedience to the orders
of the Direction, -- or, what is even worse for his
motives, a direct contradiction to all the principles
upon which he had attempted to justify that bold
measure.
The conduct of Mr. Hastings in the affair of Mahomed Reza Kha'n was an act of disobedience of
the same character, but wrought by other instruments. When the Duann6 (or universal perception
and management of the revenues) of Bengal was acquired to the Company, together with the command
of the army, the Nabob, or governor, naturally fell
into the rank rather of a subject than that even of
a dependent prince. Yet the preservation of such a
power in such a degree of subordination, with the
criminal jurisdiction, and the care of the public order annexed to it, was a wise and laudable policy.
It preserved a portion of the government in the hands
of the natives; it kept them in respect; it rendered
them quiet on the change; and it prevented that
vast kingdom fiom wearing the dangerous appearance, and still more from sinking into'the terrible
state, of a country of conquest. Your Committee
has already reported the manner in which the Company (it must be allowed, upon pretences that will
not bear the slightest examination) diverted from its
purposes a great part of the revenues appropriated
? ? ? ? 196 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
to the country government; but they were very
properly anxious that what remained should be well
administered. In the lifetime of General Clavering
and Colonel Monson, Mahomed Reza Khan, a man
of rank among the natives, was judged by them the
fittest person to conduct the affairs of the Nabob,
as his Naib, or deputy: an office well known in the
ancient constitution of these provinces, at a time
when the principal magistrates, by nature and situation, were more efficient. This appointment was
highly approved, and in consequence confirmed, by
the Court of Directors. Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell, however, thought proper to remove him. To
the authority of the Court of Directors they opposed
the request of the Nabob, stating that he was arrived
at the common age of maturity, and stood in no need
of a deputy to manage his affairs. On former occasions Mr. Hastings conceived a very low opinion of
the condition of the person whom he thus set up
against the authority of his masters. " On a former
occasion," as the Directors tell him, " and to serve a
very different purpose, he had not scrupled to declare
it as visible as the sun that the Nabob was a mere
pageant, without even the shadow of authority. " But
on this occasion he became more substantial. Mr.
Hastings and Mr. Barwell yielded to his representation that a deputy was not necessary, and accordingly
Mahomed Reza Khan was removed from his office.
However, lest any one should so far mistrust their
understanding as to conceive them the dupes of this
pretext, they who had disobeyed the Company's orders under color that no deputy was necessary immediately appoint another deputy. This independent prince, who, as Mr. Hastings said, " had an incon
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 197
testable right to his situation, and that it was his by
inheritance," suddenly shrunk into his old state of insignificance, and was even looked upon in so low a light as to receive a severe reprimand from Mr. Hastings for interposing in the duties of his (the deputy's) office.
The Company's orders, censuring this transaction
in the strongest terms, and ordering Mahomed Reza
Khan to be immediately restored to the office of Naib
Subahdar, were received in Calcutta in November,
1779. Mr. Hastings acted on this with the firmness
which he had shown on other occasions; but in his
principles he went further. Thinking himself assured
of some extraordinary support, suitable to the open
and determined defiance with which he was resolved
to oppose the lawful authority of his superiors, and to
exercise a despotic power, he no longer adhered to
Mr. Barwell's distinction of the orders which had a
tendency to bring his government into disrepute.
This distinction afforded sufficient latitude to disobedience; but here he disdained all sorts of colors and distinctions. He directly set up an independent right
to administer the government according to his pleasure; and he went so far as to bottom his claim to act independently of the Court of Directors on the very
statute which commanded his obedience to them.
He declared roundly, " that lie should not yield to
the authority of the Court of Directors in any instance
in which it should require his concession of the rights
which he held under an act of Parliament. " It is too
clear to stand in need of proof, that. he neither did or
could hold any authority that was not subject, in
every particle of it, and in every instance ill wlichl it
could be exercised, to the orders of the Coul't of Directors.
? ? ? ? 198 NINTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
He therefore refused to back the Company's orders
with any requisition from himself to the Nabob, but
merely suffered them to be transmitted to him, leaving it to him to do just as he thought proper. The
Nabob, who called Mr. Hastings " his patron, and declared he would never do anything without his consent and approbation," perfectly understood this kind of signification. For the second time the Nabob recovered from his trance of pageantry and insignificance, and collected courage enough to write to the Council in these terms: "I administer the affairs of
the Nizamut, (the government,) which are the affairs
of my own family, by my own authority, and shall do
so; and I never can on any account agree to the appointment of the Nabob Mahomed Reza Khan to the'
Naib Subahship. " Here was a second independent
power in Bengal. This answer from that power
proved as satisfactory as it was resolute. No further
notice was taken of the orders of the Court of Directors, and Mahomed Reza Khan found their protection
much more of a shadow than the pageant of power of
which he aspired to be the representative.
This act of disobedience differs from the others in
one particular which, in the opinion of your Committee, rather aggravates than extenuates the offence.
In the others, Messrs. Hastings and Barwell took the
responsibility on themselves; here they held up the
pretext of the country government. However, they
obtained thereby one of the objects which they appear
to have systematically pursued. As they had in the
other instances shown to the British servants of the
Company that the Directors were not able to protect
them, here the same lesson was taught to the natives.
Whilst the matter lay between the native power and
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 199
the servants, the former was considered by Mr. Hastings in the most contemptible light. When the question was between the servants and the Court of Directors, the native power was asserted to be a selfderived, hereditary, uncontrollable authority, and encouraged to act as such.
