No More Learning

Mir Aboo Buksh Zemindar and Mir Rustum Ali
accompanied me.
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -SIXTH DAY. - 97
" 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 property, and
speedily grant me the pleasure of an interview;
until which time continue to favor me with friendly
letters, and oblige me by any commands in my power
to execute. May your wishes be ever crowned with
success! My compliments," &c. , &c. , &c.
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 the customary manner, my address is presented. '" Your gracious letter, in answer to the petition of your servant friom Goondah, exalted me. From
the contents, I became unspeakably impressed with
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 and benevolence; a
few days have elapsed since I arrived at Goondah,
with the Colonel Saib.
"This is presented for your Highness's information. I cl:erish hopes from your generosity, that,
considering me in the light of one of your servants,
you will always continue to exalt and honor me with
your gracious letters. May the sun of prosperity continually shine! "
These acknowledgments of the Begum's friendly
disposition and services were concealed, when the
charge was made against this woman at Lucknow
VOL. XII. 7
? ? ? ? 98 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
before Sir Elijah Impey: I wish to impress this upon
your Lordships' mind; and that before Mr. Hastings
left Bengal, in the trunk of Major Scott, his private
Persian interpreter, was this letter. Did he make
that inquiry of Captain Gordon? No. Did he make
that inquiry of Colonel Hannay? Did he make any
inquiry into the matter, after his perusal of these
letters? Or did he give this poor woman any opportunity of obtaining justice against this Captain Gordon, who, after acknowledging that he owed his life to her favor, calumniates and traduces her to her utter destruction? No, he never did; and therefore
he is chargeable, and I charge him, with everything
that is wrongful in Captain Gordon's evidence.
These papers, which carry with them a clear refutation of all the charges against the Begum, are
never once produced, though Captain Gordon was
referred to expressly for inquiry and explanation of
the whole transaction by the woman herself. You
hear nothing of them; there is no appearance of
them in the affidavits; no such papers were laid
before the Supreme Council; none were transmitted
to the Court of Directors: but at last the House of
Commons having come at the truth of this matter,
Mr. Hastings, not daring to deny the existence of
these papers, brings Captain Gordon to be examined
here, in order to prove that papers which he had
himself written were false. Is this to be tolerated?
What will your Lordships think of a man that comes
to attest his own infamy, -to declare that he has
written papers containing falsehoods, and to invalidate the false testimony which he had before given?
Is he to be suffered, I say, to come here, and endeavor to prove the absolute falsity of his own deeds by
his own evidence?
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -SIXTH DAY. 99
The next point for your Lordships' consideration
is the evidence which he produces to prove the falsity of a paper written by himself. Why, he himself is the sole evidence. And how does he prove it?
Why, says he, " The reason of my writing that letter
was this: she had sent a person with me as an escort,
and this person was desirous of receiving some proof
that he had done his duty; and therefore I wrote a
complaisant letter. I meant nothing by it. It was
written merely to satisfy the mind of the man. "
Now is that the way in which formal and solemn
letters, written upon great occasions to great people,
are to be explained away? If he had said nothing
but "Your servant, such a one, has done his duty,"
this explanation might pass. But you see it has
another complexion. It speaks of his owing his life
to her. But if you admit that it is possible (for
possibilities have an unknown extent) that he wrote
such a letter at such a time and for such a purpose,
and that the letter he wrote was false, and that the
falsity of the letter is proved by his own testimony
given in an affidavit which we have also reason to
believe is false, your Lordships must at the same
time admit that it is one of the most complex pieces
of fraud and falsehood that, I believe, ever existed
in the world. But it is worse than all this. There
is another letter, written some days after, which I
will read to you, and which he has not pretended to
say was written only to testify that a messenger had
executed his commission properly.
" Your gracious letter," (he thus writes,) "in
answer to the petition of your servant from Goondah,
exalted me. From the contents, I became unspeakably impressed with the honor it conferred. "
? ? ? ? 100 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
My Lords, this letter was not sent back by a messenger, in acknowledgment of his having done his duty, but was written in consequence of a correspondence in the nature of a petition for something
or other which he made to the Begum. That petition they have suppressed and sunk. It is plain, however, that the petition had been sent, and was
granted; and therefore the apology that is made for
the former letter does not apply to this letter, which
was written afterwards.
How, then, do they attempt to get rid of this difficulty? Why, says Captain Gordon, "The Colonel
Saib (by whom was meant Colonel Hannay) was
not at Goondah, as stated in the letter, but at Succara, about eighteen miles from it, and therefore you ought not to pay much regard to this paper. " But
he does not deny the letter, nor was it possible for
him to deny it. He says Colonel Hannay was not
there. But how do we know whether Colonel Hannay was there or not? We have only his own word
for it. But supposing he was not there, and that it
was clearly proved that he was eighteen miles distant
from it, Major Naylor was certainly with Captain
Gordon at the time. Might not his Persian scribe
(for he does not pretend to say he wrote the letter
himself) take Major Naylor for a colonel, (for he
was the superior officer to Captain Gordon,) and
think him the Colonel Saib? For errors of that kind
may be committed in our own country. Every day
we may take a major for a lieutenant-colonel. This
was an error that might easily have happened in such
a case. He was in as high rank as Colonel Hannay;
for Colonel Hannay at that time was only a major.
I do not believe either of them was properly entitled
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SIXTH DAY. 101
to the name of Colonel Saib. I am ashamed, my
Lords, to be obliged to remark upon this prevarication. Their own endeavors to get rid of their own
written acts by contradictory evidence and false constructions sufficiently clear these women of the crimes of which they were accused; and I may now ask the
prisoner at your bar how he dares to produce Captain
Gordon here, how he dares thus to insult the Peers,
how he dares thus to insult the public justice of his
country, after not having dared to inquire, upon the
spot, of this man, to whom he was referred by the
Begums for an account of this very transaction?
I hope your Lordships have got enough of this
kind of evidence. All the rest is of the same batch,
and of the same description, - made up of nothing
but hearsays, except in one particular only. This I
shall now mention to your Lordships. Colonel Popham and another gentleman have told you, that, in a battle with Cheyt Sing's forces, they took prisoners
two wounded nudjeeves or swordsmen, and that these
men told them that they were sent there by the Begums, - that they had got two rupees and two wounds, but that they thought two rupees a bad compensation for two wounds. These two men, with their
two wounds and two rupees, had, however, been dismissed. It does not appear that this accident was considered by these officers to be of consequence
enough to make them ever tell one word of it to Mr.
Hastings, though they knew he was collecting evidence of the disaffection of the Begums, of all kinds, good, bad, and indifferent, from all sorts of persons.
My Lords, I must beg leave to say a few words
upon this matter; because I consider it as one of the
most outrageous violations of your Lordships' dignity,
? ? ? ? 102 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
and the greatest insult that was ever offered to a
court of justice. A nudjeeve is a soldier armed with
a sword. It appears in evidence that the Nabob had
several corps of nudjeeves in his service; that the
Begums had some nudjeeves; and that Colonel Hannay had a corps of nudjeeves. It is well known that every prince in Hindostan has soldiers of that description, -in like manner, probably, as the princes
of Europe have their guards. The whole, then,
amounts to this: that a story told by two men who
were wounded in an action far from the place from
which they were supposed to come, who were not
regularly examined, not cross-examined, not even
kept for examination, and whose evidence was never
reported, is to be a reason why you are to believe
that these Begums were concerned in a rebellion
against their son, and deserved to forfeit all their
lands and goods, and to suffer the indignities that
we have stated.
My Lords, I am really ashamed to mention so
scandalous a thing; but let us put a case: let us
suppose that we had accused Mr. Hastings of instigating the Rajah of Berar to fall upon some of the country powers, and that the evidence we produced
at your bar to prove it was, that an officer had taken
two nudjeeves, who declared they were instigated by
Mr. Hastings to go into the service of that Rajah:
could you bear such a thing? would you suffer
such evidence to be produced? or do you think that
we should have so little regard for our own reputation as to venture to produce such evidence before you? Agail, we have charged Mr. Hastings with
committiing several acts of violence against the Begums. Let us suppose our proof to be, that two
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SIXTH DAY. 103
persons who never appeared before nor since, that
two grenadiers ill English uniforms, (which would be
a great deal stronger than the case of the nudjeeves,
because they have no particular uniform belonging to
them,) that two English grenadiers, I say, had been
taken prisoners in some action and let go again, who
said that Mr. Hastings had instigated them to make
war upon the Begums: would your Lordships suffer
such evidence to be produced before you? No.
And yet two of the first women in India are to be
stripped of all they have in the world upon no better
evidence than that which you would utterly reject.
You would not disgrace the British peerage, you
would not disgrace this court of justice, you would
not disgrace human reason itself, by confiscating, on
such evidence, the meanest property of the meanlest
wretch. You would not subject to the smallest fine
for the smallest delinquency, upon such evidence. I
will venture to say, that, in an action of assault and
battery, or in an action for the smallest su1m, such evidence would be scouted as odious and contemptible, even supposing that a perfect reliance might be placed
uponi its truth. And yet this is the sort of evidence
upon which the property, the dignity, and the rank
of some of the first persois in Asia are to be destroyed, --by which a British guaranty, and the honor
and dignity of the crown of Great Britain, and of the
Parliament itself, which sent out this man, are to be
forfeited.
Observe, besides, my Lords, that the two swordsmen said they were sent by the Begums. Now they
could not be sent by the Begums in their own person. This was a thing in India impossible. They
might, indeed, have been sent by Jewar and Behar
? ? ? ? 104 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
Ali Kh'an: and then we ask again, How came these
ministers not to be called to an account at the time?
2lWhy were they not called upon for their muster-rolls
of these nud jeeves? No, these men and women suffer the penalty, but they never hear the accusation
nor the evidence.
But to proceed with the evidence of this pretended
rebellion. Captain Williams has told your Lordships
that he once had a great number of letters and papers to prove this rebellion of the Begums. But he
declares that he has lost all these letters. A search
was ordered to be made in Mr. Hastings's recordoffice, called a trunk; and accordingly in the trunk
is found a paper worthy of such a place and such a
cause. This letter, which has been made use of to
criminate the Begums, has not their names mentioned, nor is there any possibility of their being included in it. By this paper which is preserved you may judge of the whole of the papers that are lost.
Such a letter, I believe, was never before brought as
evidence in a court of justice. It is a letter said to
have been intercepted, and is as follows.
" To the most noble * * ** *, whose prosperity be
everlasting!
"It is represented, that the august purwannah
[command], having completed his honorable arrival on the 16th of the month in the evening, highly
exalted me. It is ordered that I should charge
Medeporee, and the other enrolled sepoys belonging
to my district, and take bonds from them that none
of them go for service to the Rajah; and that, when
four or five hundred men, nud jeeves and others, are
collected, I should send them to the presence. Ac
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SIXTH DAY. 105
cording to the order, I have written to Brejunekar
Shah Rehemet Ullall, who is in Bhooaparah, charging
him to take bonds from them, and that whatever
sepoys fit for service are collected he should send to
the presence. As at this time the wind is contrary,
the sepoys will not * * * * without travelling charges;
for I have learnt from a letter previously received
from Brejunekar Shah Rehemet Ullah, that the people there also are badly inclined. By the grace of God, the unalterable glory shall be * * * * *. Zehan Beg and the nudjeeves who were in the fort of Aneelah have gone off to Goruckpore. "
This is a letter of somebody or other employed
by somebody or other for the recruiting service, - it
should seem by the word " presence," somebody employed in enlisting forces for the Nabob. The charge against the Begum was, that she had joined with the
rebellious Rajahs to exterminate her son's government and the English influence in that country. In
this very paper you see that the soldiers entering into that service, and officers who are to contract for soldiers, are expressly bound not to join the Rajahs;
and this they produce as proof that the Begums had
joined the Rajahs, and had joined them in a rebellion, for the purpose of exterminating their son, in
the first instance, and the English afterwards.
There is another circumstance which makes their
own acts the refutation of their false pretences. This
letter says that the country is disaffected, and it
mentions the ill-disposed parts of the country. Now
we all know that the country was ill-disposed; and
we may therefore conclude this paper was written
by, and addressed to, some person who was employed
? ? ? ? 106 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
against the persons so ill-disposed, - namely, the very Rajahs so mentioned before. The prisoner's counsel, after producing this paper, had the candor to declare that they did not see what use could be made of it. No, to be sure, they do not see what
use can be made of it for their cause; but I see the use that can be made of it against their cause. I say that the lost papers, upon which they do so much insist, deserve no consideration, when the only paper that they have preserved operates directly against them; and that therefore we may safely infer, that,
if we had the rest of the contents of this trunk, we should probably find them make as strongly against them as this paper does. You have no reason to judge of them otherwise than by the specimen: for how can you judge of what is lost but from what remains?
The man who hid these papers in his trunk never
understood one word of the Persian language, and
consequently was liable to every kind of mistake,
even though he meant well. But who is this man?
Why, it is Captain Williams, -- the man who in his
affidavits never mentioned the Begums without mentioning Saadut Ali. It is Captain Williams, - whom we charge. to have murdered a principal man of the
country' by his own hand, without law or legal process. It is Captain Williams, - one of those British officers whom Mr. Hastings states to be the pests of
the country. This is the man who comes here as
evidence against these women, and produces this
monstrous paper.
All the evidence they had produced to you amounts to no more than that such a man believes such a man heard of something: and to close the whole of this
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SIXTH DAY. 107
hearsay account, Sir Elijah Impey, who always comes
in as a supplement, declares that no man doubted of
the existence of this rebellion, and of the guilt of the
Begums, any more than of the rebellion of 1745: a
comparison which, I must say, is, by way of evidence,
a little indecorous in a chief-justice of India. Your
Lordships are sufficiently acquainted with the history
of that rebellion to know, that, when Lord Lovat was
tried at this bar, the proceedings against him were
not founded on second-hand hearsay. The existence
of the rebellion of 1745 was proved, notwithstandilg
its notoriety; but neither notoriety nor proof would
have signified anything, if Lord Lovat's participation
in it had not been brought home to him directly, personally, and particularly. Yet a chief-justice, sent to
India to represent the sacred majesty of the crown of
England, has gone so far as to say at your bar that
no more doubt could be entertained of the existence
either of the rebellion or the guilt of the Begums
than of the rebellion in 1745.
Besides, he forgets
that he himself carried the order to confiscate these
people's property without any trial whatever. But
this is the way of proceeding by an English chief-justice in India, - a chief-justice who had rendered himself the instrument, the letter-carrier, the messenger, I had almost said the executioner of Mr. Hastings.
From this view of the whole matter your Lordships will form an estimate of the spirit of Indian
government and Indian justice. But to blow away
and to put an end to all their false pretences, their
hearsays, and talk of nudjeeves, and wounds, and
the like, I ask, Who is the first witness that we have
produced upon this occasion? It is the Nabob himself, negativing all these pretences. Did he believe
? ? ? ? 108 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
them? Not a word from him of any rebellion, actual
or suspected. Sir Elijah Impey, indeed, said that
he was obliged to wheel round, and to avoid that
dangerous place, Fyzabad. His friends urged him
to this. " For God's sake," say they, " have a reverend care of your sacred person! What will become of the justice of India, what will become of the natives, if you, their legitimate protector, should fall
into the hainds of these wicked, rebellious women at
Fyzabad? " But although the Chief-Justice does this,
the Nabob, whose deposition is said to be the first object of this rebellion, takes leave of Mr. Hastings at
the very moment when it is raging in the highest
possible degree, and gallops into its very focus.
And under what circumstances does he do this?
He had brought some considerable forces with him.
No mall of his rank in that country ever goes without
them. He left a part of these forces with Mr. Hastings, notwithstanding he was going into the centre
of the rebellion. He then went on with a corps of
about a thousand horse. He even left a part of
these with Mr. Middleton, and galloped, attended by
a few horse, into the very capital, where the Begums,
we are told, had ten thousand armed men. He put
himself into their power, and, not satisfied with this,
the very first thing we hear of him after his arrival
is, that he paid his mother a friendly visit, -thus
rushing into the den of a lioness who was going to
destroy her own whelp. Is it to be credited, my
Lords, that a prince would act thus who believed
that a conspiracy was formed against him by his
own mother? Is it to be credited that any man
would trust a mother who, contrary to all the rules
of Nature and policy, had conspired to destroy her
own son?
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SIXTH DAY. 109
Upon this matter your Lordships have the evidence
of Captain Edwards, who was aide-de-camp to the
Nabob, who was about his person, his attendant at
Chunar, and his attendant back again. I am not
producing this to exculpate the Begums,- for I say
you cannot try them here, you have not the parties
before you, they ought to have been tried on the
spot, -- but I am going to demonstrate the iniquity
of this abominable plot beyond all doubt: for it is
necessary your Lordships should know the length,
breadth, and depth of this mystery of iniquity.
Captain Edwards being asked, --" Whether he ever
heard any native of credit and authority in the Nabob's dominions, who appeared to believe the rebellion of the Begums? - A. No, I never did. - Q. Have you any reason to believe that the Nabob gave
credit to it? -- A. I really cannot rightly presume
to say whether the Nabob did or did not; but I am
apt to believe that he did not. - Q. Have you any
reason, and what, to form a belief about it? - A. I
have. I think, if he supposed the rebellion ever
existed at Fyzabad, he would have been the first
person to take and give the alarm to the British
troops. Q. And no such alarm was taken or given
to the British troops? -A. No, I think not: as I
was always about his person, and in the camp, I
think I certainly must have known it or heard of
it; but I never did. "
We assure your Lordships, you will find upon
your printed Minutes, that Captain Edwards says
he was credibly informed that the Nabob left behind him a part of his guard of horse; and that, so
desirous was he to go into the power of this cruel
lioness, his mother, that he advanced, as he is a
? ? ? ? 110'IMPEACHMIENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
vigorous man, and a bold and spirited rider, leaving
all his guards behind him, and rode before them
into the middle of Fyzabad. There is some more
evidence to the same purpose in answer to the
question put next to that which I read before.
" Q. When you did hear of the rebellion, did not
you understand it to have been alleged that one
object of it was to dethrone the Nabob himself, as
well as to extirpate the English? -- A. I understood
that the intention of the princesses, the Begums, was
to extirpate the English troops out of the country
and out of those dominions, and likewise to depose
her son, and set another son, who seems to have
been a greater favorite of that family, upon the
throne, in the room of the present Nabob; and that
son's name is Saadut Ali. I have only heard this
from report. I have no other knowledge but mere
report. I understood from the report, she was to
extirpate the English, and depose her son who is
now upon the throne. -- Q. Was it after or before
the seizing of the treasures, that you heard a circumstantial account of the supposed object of the rebellion? --A. The report was more general after
the seizing of the treasures; but yet there were reports prevailing in the neighborhood that our troops were sent there in consequence of the charge that
was made by Colonel Hannay and some of his officers
of a rebellion existing then at Fyzabad, or having
existed, I cannot rightly say which. - Q. Was that
report after the order for the troops to march to
Fyzabad? --A. It was more general, it was very
general then when the troops did march there, and
more general after the seizing of the treasures. - Q.
When did the troops first march? - A. It was some
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -SIXTH DAY. 111
time in the month of January, I believe, in the year
1782. - Q. While you was with the Nabob in passing from Lucknow to Chunar, and while you was
with him or the army returning from Chunar, did
you then, out of the whole army, regular or irregular, ever hear of any report of the Begums being in rebellion? -A. No, I do not recollect I ever did. Q. (Upon cross-examination. ) Do you recollect at
what time in August, 1781, you left Lucknow to proceed with the Nabob to Chunar? -- A. No, I cannot rightly mention the date: all that I know is this, that
I accompanied the Nabob, Mr. Middleton, and his attendants, all the way from Lucknow to Chunargur. I really cannot recollect; I have no notes, and it is
so distant a time since that I do not recollect the
particulars of the month or the day; but I recollect
perfectly I accompanied the Nabob all the way from
Lucknow to Chunar, and returned again with him
until he struck off on the road for Fyzabad. "
Your Lordships see plainly the whole of this matter. When they had resolved to seize the Begums' treasures, they propagated this report just in proportion to their acts. As they proceeded, the report grew hotter and hotter. This man tells you when it
was that the propagation of this report first began,
when it grew hot, and when it was in its greatest
heat. He tells you that not one native of credit in
the country believed it, - that he did not think the
Nabob himself believed it; and he gives a reason
that speaks for itself, namely, that he, the Nabob,
would have been the first man to give the alarm, if
he believed in a rebellion, as he was to be the object
of it. He says the English were the principal spreaders of the report. It was, in fact, a wicked report,
? ? ? ? 112 IMPEACtIIMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
propagated by Mr. Middleton and the English agents
for the purpose of justifying their iniquitous spoliation of the Begums.
This is the mainner in which the matter stands
upon the ground of rebellion, with the exception of
Major Gilpin's and Hyder Beg Khan's testimony.
Tlhis last man we have proved to have been kept in
his office by Mr. Hastings's influence, and to have
been entirely under his government. When this dependant comes to give his attestation, he gives a long
account of all the proceedings of Cheyt Sing's rebellion, with which the rebellion charged on the Begums
was supposed to be coincident; and he ends it very
remarkably, - that he tells the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth. But it is also remarkable,
that even this Hyder Beg Khan never mentions by
name the rebellion of the Begums, nor says that he
ever heard a word about it: a strong proof that he
did not dare, in the face of his country, to give countenance to such a falsehood.
Major Gilpin's evidence leaves'not even the shadow
of a pretence for this charge. He had the Begums
and their eunuchs under his custody for a full year;
he was strictly ordered to watch them and to guard
them; and during all that time he lived at Fyzabad.
He was the man who commanded the troops, who
had all the witnesses in his power, who had daily
access to all parties at Fyzabad, and who, moreover,
was a person attached to Mr. Hastings in the strongest manner. Your Lordships will now be pleased to
hear read to you this part of Major Gilpin's evidence.
" Q. Had you any opportunity of knowing the character of the Begums, and whether they were disaffected to our government? - A. I had a very good op
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SIXTH' DAY. 113
portunity of knowing, from the circumstance of my
having commanded so long there. The elder Begum,
it was generally understood, (and I have reason to
believe,) was disaffected to our government; and my
sentiments of her conduct stand recorded in my correspondence to the court of Lucknow to that effect;
but with respect to the Bhow Begum, I acquit her
entirely of any disaffection to our government, so far
as comes to my knowledge: appearances were for
some time against her; but, on cool, deliberate inquiry, I found there was no ground for supposing
her guilty of any rebellious principles, at the time of
Cheyt Sing's rebellion. - Q. Whether that, according to your belief, is not your present opinion? A. I think I have answered that very fully, that it was upon those very principles that I did form an
opinion of her innocence; how far they are justifiable or right I will not take upon me to say upon
oath; there was no one circumstance that came to
my knowledge, during my residence at Fyzabad or
my residence in India, that I would wish to withhold
from your Lordships. -- Q. You state here,'upon
cool; deliberate inquiry': what was that cool, deliberate inquiry? - A. That cool, deliberate inquiry was
the conversations I had with the ministers and the
people of Fyzabad, and the letters from herself expressing her innocence; and it appeared to me from
those letters that she really was our friend and ally. "
The same witness goes on afterwards to say:. "Q. I understood you to say, that originally the
report prevailed with respect to both the Begums, but
that you was induced to alter that opinion with respect to the younger Begum, in consequence of Mr.
Gordon's letters, and the intelligence of some of her
VOL. XII 8
? ? ? ? 114 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
ministers and other persons: were not those other
persons in the interest of the younger Begum? A. In general the town of Fyzabad were in her interest. - Q. In what sense do you mean generally in her interest? Were the persons you conversed
with merely those who were in her service and
household, or the inhabitants of Fyzabad in general?
- A. Both: I held conversations with both her own
body-servants and the inhabitants of the city. "
A little lower down, in the same page: --
" Q. What do you mean by the word rebellion, as
applied to the Begums? In what sense do you use it?
- A. In raising troops, and in other acts of rebellion,
in the common acceptation of the word. - Q. Against
whom? --A. Against the Nabob's government and
the British government jointly: but I beg to know the
particular time and circumstance the question alludes
to. - Q. I understand you to have said you understood the elder Begum was in a constant state of
rebellion. In what sense do you use the word rebellion? Did you say the elder Begum was in a constant
state of rebellion? - A. I always understood her to
be disaffected to the English government: it might not
be a proper expression of mine, the word rebellion.
- Q. Do you know of any act by the elder Begum
against the Vizier? - A. I cannot state any. - Q.
Do you know of any act which you call rebellion,
committed by the elder Begum against the Company'?
- A. I do not know of any particular circumstance,
only it was generally supposed that she was disaffected to the Company. - Q. What acts of disaffection or
hostility towards the English do you allude to, when
you speak of the conversation of the world at the
time? -- A. I have answered that question as fully
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -SIXTH DAY. 115
as I can, --that it was nothing but conversation,
that I knew of no particular act or deed myself. "
This man, then, declares, as your Lordships have
heard, that, upon cool, deliberate inquiry made at
Fyzabad from all the inhabitants, he did not believe
in the existence of any rebellion;- that as to the
Bhow Begum, the grandmother, who was a person
that could only be charged with it in a secondary
degree, and as conspiring with the other, he says he
knows no facts against her, except that at the battle
of Buxar, in the year 1764, she had used some odd
expressions concerning the English, who were then
at war with her son Sujah Dowlah. This was long
before we had any empire or pretence to empire in
that part of India: therefore the expression of a rebellion, which he had used with regard to her, was, he acknowledged, improper, and that he only meant he
had formed some opinion of her disaffection to the
English.
As to the Begum, he positively acquits her of any
rebellion. If he, therefore, did not know it, who was
an active officer in the very centre of the alleged rebellion, and who was in possession of all the persons from whom information was to be got, who had the
eunuchs in prison, and might have charged them
with this rebellion, and might have examined and
cross-examined them at his pleasure, -- if this man
knew nothing about it, your Lordships will judge of
the falsehood of this wicked rumor, spread about
from hand to hand, and which was circulated by persons who at the same time have declared that they never heard of it before Sir Elijah Impey went up
into the country, the messenger of Mr. Hastings's
orders to seize the treasures of the Begums, and
? ? ? ? 116 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
commissioned to procure evidence in justification of
that violence and robbery.
I now go to another part of this evidence. There
is a person they call Hoolas Roy, -- a man in the
employment of the Resident, Mr.