Presents from
persons who hold up poverty as a shield against
extortion can scarcely in any case be considered as
gratuitous, whether the plea of poverty be true or
false.
persons who hold up poverty as a shield against
extortion can scarcely in any case be considered as
gratuitous, whether the plea of poverty be true or
false.
Edmund Burke
?
?
ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA.
221
cution of a particular operation in the Mahratta war,
in order to remove objections to that measure, which
were made on account of the expense of the contingencies, he offered to exonerate the Company from
that "' charge. " Continuing his Minute of Council,
he says, " That sum" (a sum of about 23,0001. ) " I
have already deposited, within a small amount, in
the hands of the sub-treasurer; and I beg that the
board will permit it to be accepted for that service. "
Here he offers in his own person; he deposits, or
pretends that he deposits, in his own person; and,
with the zeal of a man eager to pledge his private
fortune in support of his measures, he prays that his
offer may be accepted. Not the least hint that he
was delivering back to the Company money of their
own, which he had secreted from them. Indeed, no
man ever made it a request, much less earnestly entreated, " begged to be permitted," to pay to any persons, public or private, money that was their own. It appeared to your Committee that the money offered for that service, which was to forward the operations of a detachment under Colonel Camac in an expedition against one of the Mahratta chiefs, was
not accepted. And your Committee, having directed
search to be made for any sums of money paid into
the Treasury by Mr. Hastings for this service, found,
that, notwithstanding his assertion of having deposited "two lacs of rupees, or within a trifle of that
sum, in the hands of the sub-treasurer," no entry
whatsoever of that or any other payment by the Governor-General was made in the Treasury accounts at
or about that time. * This circumstance appeared
very striking to your Committee, as the non-appearAppendix B. No. 2.
? ? ? ? 222 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
ance in the Company's books of the article in question must be owing to one or other of these four
causes: -- That the assertion of Mr. Hastings, of his
having paid in near two lacs of rupees at that time,
was not true; or that the sub-treasurer may receive
great sums in deposit without entering them in the
Company's Treasury accounts; or that the Treasury
books themselves are records not to be depended on;
or, lastly, that faithful copies of these books of accounts are not transmitted to Europe. The defect
of an entry corresponding with Mr. Hastings's declaration in Council can be attributed only to one of
these four causes, - of which the want of foundation
in his recorded assertion, though very blamable, is
the least alarming.
On the 29th of November following, Mr. Hastings
communicated to the Court of Directors some sort of
notice of this transaction. * In his letter of that date
he varies in no small degree the aspect under which
the business appeared in his Minute of Consultation
of the 26th of June. In his letter he says to the Directors, "The subject is now become obsolete; the
fair hopes which I had built upon the prosecution of
the Mahratta war have been blasted by the dreadful
calamities which have befallen your Presidency of
Fort St. George, and changed the object of our pursuit from the aggrandizement of your power to its preservation. " After thus confessing, or rather boasting, of his motives to the Mahratta war, he proceeds: "My present reason for reverting to my own conduct
on the occasion which I have mentioned" (namely,
his offering a sum of money for the Company's service) " is to obviate the false conclusions or purposed
* Vide Appendix B. No. 1.
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 223
misrepresentations which may be made of it, either as
an artifice of ostentation or the effect of corrupt influence, by assuring you that the money, by whatever
means it came into my possession, was not my own,
that I had myself no right to it, nor would or could
have received it but for the occasion which prompted me to avail myself of the accidental means which
were at that instant afforded me of accepting and
converting it to the property and use of the Company: and with this brief apology I shall dismiss the
subject. "
The apology is brief indeed, considering the nature
of the transaction; and what is more material than
its length or its shortness, it is in all points unsatisfactory. The matter becomes, if possible, more obscure by his explanation. Here was money received by Mr. Hastings, which, according to his own judgment, he had no right to receive; it was money
which, " but for the occasion that prompted him, he
could not have accepted "; it was money which came
into his, and from his into the Company's hands, by
ways and means undescribed, and from persons unnamed: yet, though apprehensive of false conclusions and purposed misrepresentations, he gives his employers no insight whatsoever into a matter which
of all others stood in the greatest need of a full and
clear elucidation.
Although he chooses to omit this essential point,
he expresses the most anxious solicitude to clear
himself of the charges that might be made against
him, of the artifices of ostentation, and of corrupt
influence. To discover, if possible, the ground for
apprehending such imputations, your Committee adverted to the circumstances in which he stood at the
? ? ? ? 224 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
time: they found that this letter was dispatched
about the time that Mr. Francis took his passage for
England; his fear of misrepresentation may therefore allude to something which passed in conversation between him and that gentleman at the time the offer was made.
It was not easy, on the mere face of his offer, to
give an ill turn to it. The act, as it stands on the
Minute, is not only disinterested, but generous and
public-spirited. If Mr. Hastings apprehended misrepresentation from Mr. Francis, or from any other person, your Committee conceive that he did not employ proper means for defeating the ill designs of his adversaries. On the contrary, the course he has taken
in his letter to the Court of Directors is calculated to
excite doubts and suspicions in minds the most favorably disposed to him. Some degree of ostentation is
not extremely blamable at a time when a man advances largely from his private fortune towards the public service. It is h-uman infirmity at the worst, and only detracts something from the lustre of an action
in itself meritorious. The kind of ostentation which
is criminal, and criminal only because it is fraudulent,
is where a person makes a show of giving when in
reality he does not give. This imposition is criminal
more or less according to the circumstances. But if
the money received to furnish such a pretended gift
is taken from any third person without right to take
it, a new guilt, and guilt of a much worse quality
and description, is incurred. The Governor-General,
in order to keep clear of ostentation, on the 29th of
November, 1780, declares, that the sum of money
which he offered on the 26th of the preceding June
as his own was not his own, and that he had no right
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 225
to it. Clearing himself of vanity, he convicts himself of deceit, and of injustice.
The other object of this brief apology was to clear
himself of corrupt influence. Of all ostentation he
stands completely acquitted in the month of November, however he might have been faulty in that respect in the month of June; but with regard to the other part of the apprehended charge, namely, corrupt
influence, he gives no satisfactory solution. A great
sum of money " not his own," - money to which " he
had no right," - money which came into his possession " by whatever means ":- if this be not money
obtained by corrupt influence, or by something worse,
that is, by violence or terror, it will be difficult to fix
upon circumstances which can furnish a presumption
of unjustifiable use of power and influence in the acquisition of profit. The last part of the apology,
that he had converted this money (" which he had no
right to receive") to the Company's use, so far as
your Committee can discover, does nowhere appear.
He speaks, in the Minute of the 26th of June, as
having then actually deposited it for the Company's
service; in the letter of November he says that he
converted it to the Company's property: but there is
no trace in the Company's books of its being ever
brought to their credit in the expenditure for anyspecific service, even if any such entry and expenditure could justify him in taking money which he had,, by his own confession, "no right to receive. "
The Directors appear to have been deceived by this
representation, and in their letter of January, 1782,*
consider the money as actually paid into their Treasury. Even under their error concerning the appli* Appendix B. No. 7.
VOL. VIII. 15
? ? ? ? 226 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
cation of the money, they appear rather alarmed
than satisfied with the brief apology of the GovernorGeneral. They consider the whole proceeding as extraordinary and mysterious. They, however, do not condemn it with any remarkable asperity; after admitting that he might be induced to a temporary
secrecy respecting the members of the board, from a
fear of their resisting the proposed application, or
any application of this money to the Company's use,
yet they write to the Governlor-General and Council as
follows: --" It does not appear to us that there could
be any real necessity for delaying to communicate to
us immediate information of the channel by which the
money came into Mr. Hastings's possession, with a
complete illustration of the cause or causes of so extraordinary an event. " And again: " The means
proposed of defraying the extra expenses are very
extraordinary; and the money, we conceive, must
have come into his hands by an unusual channel;
and when more complete information comes before
[rs, we shall give our sentiments fully on the transaction. " And speaking of this and other moneys under
a similar description, they say, " We shall suspend
our judgment, without approving it in the least degree, or proceeding to c. ensure our Governor-General
for this transaction. " The expectations entertained
by the Directors of a more complete explanation
were natural, and their expression tender and temperate. But the more complete information which
they naturally expected they never have to this day
received.
Mr. Hastings wrote two more letters to the Secret
Committee of the Court of Directors, ill which he mentions this transaction: the first dated (as he asserts,
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 227
and a Mr. Larkins swears) on the 22d of May,
1782; * the last, which accompanied it, so late as the
16th of December in the same year. t Though so
long an interval lay between the transaction of the
26th of June, 1780, and the middle of December,
1782, (upwards of two years,) no further satisfaction
is given. He has written, since the receipt of the
above letter of the Court of Directors, (which demanded, what they had a right to demand, a clear explanation of the particulars of this sum of money
which he had no right to receive,) without giving
them any further satisfaction. Instead of explanation or apology, he assumes a tone of complaint and reproach to the Directors: he lays before them a
kind of an account of presents received, to the
amount of upwards of 200,0001. ,- some at a considerable distance of time, and which had not been hitherto communicated to the Company.
In the letter which accompanied that very extraordinary account, which then for the first time appeared, he discovers no small solicitude to clear himself from
the imputation of having these discoveries drawn
from him by the terrors of the Parliamentary inquiries then on foot. To remove all suspicion of such
a motive for making these discoveries, Mr. Larkins
swears, in an affidavit made before Mr. Justice Hyde,
bearing even date with the letter which accompanies
the account, that is, of the 16th of December, 1782,
that this letter had been written by him on the 22d
of May, several months before it was dispatched. t
It appears that Mr. Larkins, who makes this voluntary affidavit, is neither secretary to the board, nor
* Appendix B. No. 3 and No. 5. t Appendix B. No 6. : Vide Larkins's Affidavit, Appendix B. No. 5.
? ? ? ? 228 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
Mr. Hastings's private secretary, but an officer of the
Treasury of Bengal.
Mr. Hastings was conscious that a question would
inevitably arise, how he came to delay the sending
intelligence of so very interesting a nature from May
to December. He therefore thinks it necessary to account for so suspicious a circumstance. He tells the Directors, " that the dispatch of the' Lively' having
been protracted from time to time, the accompanying
address, which was originally designed and prepared
for that dispatch, and no other since occurring, has of
course been thus long delayed. "
The Governor-General's letter is dated the 22d
May, and the " Resolution " was the last ship of the
season dispatched for Europe. The public letters to
the Directors are dated the 9th May; but it appears
by the letter of the commander of the ship that he
did not receive his dispatches from Mr. Lloyd, then
at Kedgeree, until the 26th May, and also that the
pilot was not discharged from the ship until the
11th June. Some of these presents (now for the first
time acknowledged) had been received eighteen
months preceding the date of this letter,- none less
than four months; so that, in fact, he might have
sent this account by all the ships of that season; but
the Governor-General chose to write this letter thirteen days after the determination in Council for the. dispatch of the last ship.
It does not appear that he has given any communication whatsoever to his colleagues in office of those extraordinary transactions. Nothing appears on the
records of the Council of the receipt of the presents;
nor is the transmission of this account mentioned in
the general letter to. the Court of Directors, but in a
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 229
letter from himself to their Secret Committee, consisting generally of two persons, but at most of three.
It is to be observed that the Governor-General states,
" that the dispatch of the' Lively' had been protracted from time to time; that this delay was of no public consequence; but that it produced a situation
which with respect to himself he regarded as unfortunate, because it exposed him to the meanest imputations, from the occasion which the late Parliamentary inquiries have since furnished, but which were unknown when his letter was written. " If the
Governor-General thought his silence exposed him to
the meanest imputations, he had the means in his own
power of avoiding those imputations: he might have
sent this letter, dated the 22d May, by the Resolution. For we find, that, in a letter from Captain
Poynting, of the 26th May, he states it not possible
for him to proceed to sea with the smallest degree of
safety without a supply of anchors and cables, and
most earnestly requests they may be supplied from
Calcutta; and on the 28th May we find a minute
from the Secretary of the Council, Mr. Auriol, requesting an order of Council to the master-attendant
to furnish a sloop to carry down those cables; which
order was accordingly issued on the 30th May.
There requires no other proof to show that the Governor-General had the means of sending this letter
seven days after he wrote it, instead of delaying it for
near seven months, and because no conveyance had
offered. Your Committee must also remark, that
the conveyance by land to Madras was certain; and
whilst such important operations were carrying on,
both by sea and land, upon the coast, that dispatches
would be sent to the Admiralty or to the Company
was highly probable.
? ? ? ? 230 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
If the letter of the 22d May had been found in
the list of packets sent by the Resolution, the Governor General would have established in a satisfactory manner, and far beyond the effect of any affidavit, that the letter had been written at the time of the date. It appears that the Resolution, being on
her voyage to England, met with so severe a gale
of wind as to be obliged to put back to Bengal, and
to unload her cargo. This event makes no difference
in the state of the transaction. Whatever the cause
of these new discoveries might have been, at the time
of sending them the fact of the Parliamentary inquiry
was publicly known.
In the letter of the above date Mr. Hastings laments the mortification of being reduced to take precautions "to guard his reputation from dishonor. "
-- " If I had," says he, 1" at any time possessed that
degree of confidence from my immediate employers
which they have never withheld from the meanest
of my predecessors, I should have disdained to use
these attentions. "
Who the meanest of Mr. Hastings's predecessors
were does not appear to your Committee; nor are
they able to discern the ground of propriety or decency for his assuming to himself a right to call any of
them- mean persons. But if such mean persons have
possessed that degree of confidence from his immediate employers which for so many years he had not
possessed " at any time," inferences must be drawn
from thence very unfavorable to one or the other of
the parties, or perhaps to both. The attentions which
he practises and disdains can in this case be of no
service to himself, his employers, or the public; the
only attention at all effectual towards extenuating,
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 281
or in some degree atoning for, the guilt of having
taken money from individuals illegally was to be full
and fair in his confession of all the particulars of his
offence. This might not obtain that confidence which
at no time he has enjoyed, but still the Company and
the nation might derive essential benefit from it; the
Directors might be able to afford redress to the sufferers; and by his laying open the concealed channels of abuse, means might be furnished for the better discovery, and possibly for the prevention, or at least
for the restraint, of a practice of the most dangerous
nature, -- a practice of which the mere prohibition,
without the means of detection, must ever prove, as
hitherto it had proved, altogether frivolous.
Your Committee, considering that so long a time
had elapsed without any of that information which
the Directors expected, and perceiving that this receipt of sums of money under color of gift seemed a
growing evil, ordered the attendance of Mr. Hastings's
agent, Major Scott. They had found, on former occasions, that this gentleman was furnished with much
more early and more complete intelligence of the
Company's affairs in India than was thought proper
for the Court of Directors; they therefore examined
him concerning every particular sum of money the
receipt of which Mr. Hastings had confessed in his
account. It was to their surprise that Mr. Scott professed himself perfectly uninstructed upon almost
every part of the subject, though the express object
of his mission to England was to clear up such matters as might be objected to Mr. Hastings; and for
that purpose he had early qualified himself by the
production to your Committee of his powers of agency. The ignorance in which Mr. Hastings had left
? ? ? ? 232 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
his agent was the more striking, because he must
have been morally certain, that, if his conduct in
these points should have escaped animadversion from
the Court of Directors, it must become an object of
Parliamentary inquiry; for, in his letter of the 15th
[16th? ] of December, 1782, to the Court of Directors,
he expressly mentions his fears that those Parliamentary inquiries might be thought to have extorted from
him the confessions which he had made.
Your Committee, however, entering on a more
strict examination concerning the two lacs of rupees,
which Mr. Hastings declares he had no right to take,
but had taken from some person then unknown,
Major Scott recollected that Mr. Hastings had, in a
letter of the 7th of December, 1782, (in which lie refers to some former letter,) acquainted him with the
name of the person from whom he had received these
two lacs of rupees, mentioned in the minute of June,
1780. It turned out to be the Rajah of Benares, the
unfortunate Cheyt Sing.
In the single instance in which Mr. Scott seemed
to possess intelligence in this matter, he is preferred to the Court of Directors. Under their censure as Mr. Hastings was, and as he felt himself to be, for not informing them of the channel in
which he received that money, he perseveres obstinately and contemptuously to conceal it from them;
though he thought fit to intrust his agent with the
secret.
Your Committee were extremely struck with this
intelligence. They were totally unacquainted with
it, when they presented to the House the Supplement to their Second Report, on the affairs of Cheyt
Sing. A gift received by Mr. Hastings from the
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 233
Rajah of Benares gave rise in their minds to serious reflections on the condition of the princes of
India subjected to the British authority. Mr. Hastings was, at the very time of his receiving this
gift, in the course of making on the Rajah of Benares a series of demands, unfounded and unjustifiable, and constantly growing in proportion as they were submitted to. To these demands the Rajah
of Benares, besides his objections in point of right,
constantly set up a plea of poverty.
Presents from
persons who hold up poverty as a shield against
extortion can scarcely in any case be considered as
gratuitous, whether the plea of poverty be true or
false. In this case the presents might have been
bestowed, if not with an assurance, at least with a
rational hope, of some mitigation in the oppressive
requisitions that were made by Mr. Hastings; for to
give much voluntarily, when it is known that much
will be taken away forcibly, is a thing absurd and
impossible. On the other [one? ] hand, the acceptance of that gift by Mr. Hiastings must have pledged
a tacit faith for some degree of indulgence towards
the donor: if it was a free gift, gratitude, if it was
a bargain, justice obliged him to do it. If, on the
other hand, Mr. Hastings originally destined (as
he says he did) this money, given to himself secretly and for his private emolument, to the use
of the Company, the Company's favor, to whom he
acted as trustee, ought to have been purchased by
it. In honor and justice he bound and pledged
himself for that power which was to profit by the
gift, and to profit, too, in the success of an expedition which Mr. Hastings thought so necessary to;heir aggrandizement. The unhappy man found his
? ? ? ? 234 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
money accepted, but no favor acquired on the part
either of the Company or of Mr. Hastings.
Your Committee have, in another Report, stated to
the House that Mr. Hastings attributed the extremity
of distress which the detachments under Colonel Camac had suffered, and the great desertions which ensued on that expedition, to the want of punctuality of the Rajah in making payment of one of the sums
which had been extorted from him; and this want
of punctual payment was afterwards assigned as a
principal reason for the ruin of this prince. Your
Committee have shown to the House, by a comparison
of facts and dates, that this charge is wholly without
foundation. But if the cause of Colonel Camac's failure had been true as to the sum which was the object
of the public demand, the failure could not be attributed to the Rajah, when he had on the instant privately furnished at least 23,0001. to Mr. Hastings, -that is, furnished the identical money which he tells us
(but carefully concealing the name of the giver) he
had from the beginning destined, as he afterwards publicly offered, for this very expedition of Colonel Camac's. The complication of fraud and cruelty in the transaction admits of few parallels. Mr. Hastings at
the Council Board of Bengal displays himself as a zealous servant of the Company, bountifully giving from
his own fortune, and in his letter to the Directors (as
he says himself) as going out of the ordinary roads
for their advantage;* and all this on the credit of
supplies derived from the gift of a man whom he treats
with the utmost severity, and whom he accuses, in
this particular, of disaffection to the Company's cause
and interests.
* Vide Appendix B. No. 1.
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 235
With 23,0001. of the Rajah's money in his pocket,
he persecutes him to his destruction, - assigning for
a reason, that his reliance on the Rajah's faith, and
his breach of it, were the principal causes that no other provision was made for the detachment on the specific expedition to which the Rajah's specific money was to be applied. The Rajah had given it to be disposed of by Mr. Hastings; and if it was not disposed
of in the best manner for the accomplishing his objects, the accuser himself is the criminal.
To take money for the forbearance of a just demand would have been corrupt only; but to urge
unjust public demands, - to accept private pecuniary
favors in the course of those demands, - and, on the
pretence of delay or refusal, without mercy to persecute a benefactor, - to refuse to hear his remonstrances, -to arrest him in his capital, in his palace, in the face of all the people, - thus to give occasion to an
insurrection, and, on pretext of that insurrection, to
refuse all treaty or explanation, - to drive him from
his government and his country, -- to proscribe him
in a general amnesty, -and to send him all over
India a fugitive, to publish the shame of British government in all the nations to whom he successively
fled for refuge, - these are proceedings to which, for
the honor of human nature, it is hoped few parallels
are to be found in history, and in which the illegality
and corruption of the acts form the smallest part of
the mischief.
Such is the account of the first sum confessed to be
taken as a present by Mr. Hastings, since the year
1775; and such are its consequences. Mr. Hastings
apologizes for this action by declaring " that he would
not have received the money but for the occasion,
? ? ? ? 236 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
which prompted him to avail himself of the accidental means which were at that instant afforded him of
accepting and converting it to the use of the Company. " * By this account, he considers the act as excusable only by the particular occasion, by the temptation of accidental means, and by the suggestion of the instant. How far this is the case appears by the
very next paragraph of this letter in which the account is given and in which the apology is made. If
these were his sentiments in June, 1780, they lasted
but a very short time: his accidental means appear
to be growing habitual.
To point out in a clear manner the spirit of the
second money transaction to which your Committee
adverted, which is represented by Mr. Hastings as
having some "affinity with the former anecdote,"l
(for in this light kind of phrase he chooses to express himself to his masters,) your Committee think
it necessary to state to the House, that the business,
namely, this business, which was the second object of
their inquiry, appears in three different papers and
in three different lights: on comparing of these authorities, in every one of which Mr. Hastings is himself the voucher, if one of the three be true, the other
two must necessarily be false.
These three authorities, which your Committee has
accurately compared, are, first, his minutes on the
Consultations; t secondly, his letter to the Court of
Directors on the 29th of November, 1780; ~ thirdly,
his account, transmitted on the 16th of December,
1782. 11
About eight months after the first transaction rela* Vide Appendix B. No. 1.
~ Ibid. , No. 1. 11 Ibid. , No. 4.
? t Ibid. t Ibid. , No. 8.
? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 237
tive to Cheyt Sing, and which is just reported, that is,
on the 5th of January, 1781, Mr. Hastings produced a
demand to the Council for money of his own expended
for the Company's service. * Here was no occasion
for secrecy. Mr. Francis was on his passage to Europe; Mr. Wheler was alone left, who no longer dissented from anything; Mr. Hastings was in effect himself the whole Council. He declared that he
had disbursed three lacs of rupees, that is, thirtyfour thousand five hundred pounds, in secret services, -which having, he says, " been advanced from my own private cash, I request that the same may be
repaid. to me in the following manner. " He accordingly desires three bonds, for a lac of Sicca rupees
each, to be given to him in two of the Company's
subscriptions, - one to bear interest on the eight per
cent loan, the other two in the four per cent: the
bonds were antedated to the beginning of the preceding October. On the 9th of the same month, that
is, on the 9th of January, 1781, the three bonds were
accordingly ordered. t So far the whole transaction
appears clear, and of a piece. Private money is subscribed, and a public security is taken for it. When
the Company's Treasury accounts t are compared with
the proceedings of their Council-General, a perfect correspondence also appears. The three bonds are then
[there? ] entered to Mr. Hastings, and he is credited
for principal and interest on them, in the exact terms
of the order. So far the official accounts, - which,
because of their perfect harmony, are considered as
clear and consistent evidence to one body of fact.
The second sort of document relative to these bonds
(though the first in order of time) is Mr. Hastings's
* Appendix B. No. 8. t Ibid. t Ibid. , No. 9.
? ? ? ? 238 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEb
letter of the 29th of November, 1780. * It is written
between the time of the expenditure of the money
for the Company's use and the taking of the bonds.
Here, for the first time, a very material difference appears; and the difference is the more striking, because Mr. Hastings claimed the whole money as his own, and took bonds for it as such, after this representation. The letter to the Company discovers that
part of the money (the whole of which he had declared on record to be his own, and for which he had taken bonds) was not his, but the property of his masters, from whom he had taken the security. It is no less remarkable that the letter which represents the
money as belonging to the Company was written
about six weeks before the Minute of Council in
which he claims that money as his own. It is this
letter on which your Committee is to remark.
Mr. Hastings, after giving his reasons for the application of the three lacs of rupees, and for his having for some time. concealed the fact, says, " Two thirds of that sum I have raised by my own credit, and
shall charge it in my official account; the other third
I have supplied from the cash in my hands belonging
to the Honorable Compamiy. " t
The House will observe, that in November he tells
the Directors that he shall charge only two thirds in
his official accounts; in the following January he
charges the whole. f For the other third, although he
admitted that to belong to the Company, we have
seen that he takes a bond to himself.
It is material that he tells the Company in his letter that these two lacs of rupees were raised on his credit. His letter to the Council says that they were
* Appendix B. No. 1. t Ibid. t Ibid. , No. 8.
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 239
advanced from his private cash. What he raises on
his credit may, on a fair construction, be considered
as his own: but in this, too, he fails; for it is certain
he has never transferred these bonds to any creditor;
nor has he stated any sum he has paid, or for which
he stands indebted, on that account, to any specific
person. Indeed, it was out of his power; for the first
two thirds of the money, which he formerly stated as
raised upon his credit, he now confesses to have been
from the beginning the Company's property, and
therefore could not have been raised on his private
credit, or borrowed from any person whatsoever.
To these two accounts, thus essentially varying, he
has added a third,* varying at least as essentially
from both. In his last or third account, which is a
statement of all the sums he has received in an extraordinary manner, and confessed to be the Company's property, he reverses the items of his first account, and, instead of allowing the Company but one third and claiming two thirds for himself, he enters
two of the bonds, each for a lac of rupees, as belonging to the Company: of the third bond, which appears
so distinctly in the Consultations and in the Treasury
accounts, not one word is said; ten thousand pounds
is absorbed, sinks, and disappears at once, and no
explanation whatsoever concerning it is given; Mr.
Hastings seems not yet to have decided to whose account it ought to be placed. In this manner his debt
to the Company, or the Company's to him, is just
what he thinks fit. In a single article he has varied
three times. In one account lie states the whole to
* Appendix B. -No. 4: The Governor-General's Account of Moneys received, dated 22d May, 1782. Also, Appendix B. No. 9:
The Auditor's Account of Bonds granted to the Governor-General.
? ? ? ? 240 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
be his own; in another he claims two thirds; in the
last he gives up the claim of the two thirds, and says
nothing to the remaining portion.
To make amends, however, for the suppression of
this third bond, given with the two others in January,
1781, and antedated to the beginning of October,
Mr. Hastillgs, in the above-mentioned general account subjoined to his letter of the 22d May, 1782,
has brought to the Company's credit a new bond. *
This bond is for 17,0001. It was taken from the
Company (and so it appears on their Treasury accounts) on the 23d of November, 1780. He took no notice of this, when, in January following, lie called
upon his own Council for the three others. What is
more extraordinary, he was equally silent with regard
to it, when, only six days after its date, he wrote concerning the subject of the three other bonds to the Court of Directors; yet now it comes out, that that
bond also was taken by Mr. Hastings from the Company for money which he declares he had received on the Company's account, and that he entered himself
as creditor when he ought to have made himself
debtor.
Your Committee examined Major Scott concerning
this money, which Mr. Hastings must have obtained
in some clandestine and irregular mode; but they
could obtain no information of the persons from
whom it was taken, nor of the occasion or pretence
of taking this lhrge sum; nor does any Minute of
Council appear for its application to any service. The
whole of the transaction, whatever it was, relative
to this bond, is covered with the thickest obscurity.
Mr. Hastings, to palliate the blame df his conduct,
* Vide Appendix B. No. 4.
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 241
declares that lie has not received any interest on these
bonds, - and that he has indorsed them as not belonging to himself, but to the Company. * As to the
first part of this allegation, whether he received the
interest or let it remain in arrear is a matter of indifference, as he entitled himself to it; and so far as
the legal security he has taken goes, he may, whelever he pleases, dispose both of principal and interest.
What he has indorsed on the bonds, or when he made
the indorsemlent, or whether in fact he has made it at
all, are matters known only to himself; for the bonds
must be in his possession, and are nowhere by him
stated to be given up or cancelled, - which is a thing:
very remarkable, when he confesses that he had no,
right to receive them.
These bonds make but a part of the account of private receipts of money by Mr. Hastings, formerly paid
into the Treasury as his own property, and now allowed not to be so. This account brings into view
other very remarkable matters of a similar nature
and description. t
In the public records, a sum of not less than
23,8711. is set to his credit as a deposit for his private account, paid in by him into the Treasury in
gold, and coined at the Company's mint. $ This appears in the account furnished to the Directors, unlder the date of May, 1782, not to be lawfully his money, and he therefore transfers it to the Company's credit: it still remains as a deposit. ~
That the House may be apprised of the nature of
* Vide Mr. Hastings's Account, in Appendix B. No. 4.
t Vide Hastings's Account, dated 22d May, 1782, in Appendix.
B. No. 4.
t Vide above Appendix, and B. No. 2. ~ Vide above Ajl11:c'',x.
V )L. VIII. 16
? ? ? ? 242 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
this article of deposit, it may not be improper to state
that the Company receive into their treasury the cash
of private personls, placed there as in a bank. On
this no interest is paid, and the party depositing has
a right to receive it upon demand. Under this head
of accoult no public money is ever entered. Mr.
Hastings, neither at making the deposit as his own,
nor at the time of his disclosure of the real proprietor, (which he makes to be the Company,) has given any information of the persons from whom this money had been received. Mr. Scott was applied to by your Committee, but could not give any more satisfaction in this particular than in those relative to the bonds.
The title of the account of the 22d of May purports not only that those sums were paid into the Company's treasury by Mr. Hastings's order, but that
they were applied to the Company's service. No
service is specified, directly or by any reference, to
which this great sulm of money has been applied.
cution of a particular operation in the Mahratta war,
in order to remove objections to that measure, which
were made on account of the expense of the contingencies, he offered to exonerate the Company from
that "' charge. " Continuing his Minute of Council,
he says, " That sum" (a sum of about 23,0001. ) " I
have already deposited, within a small amount, in
the hands of the sub-treasurer; and I beg that the
board will permit it to be accepted for that service. "
Here he offers in his own person; he deposits, or
pretends that he deposits, in his own person; and,
with the zeal of a man eager to pledge his private
fortune in support of his measures, he prays that his
offer may be accepted. Not the least hint that he
was delivering back to the Company money of their
own, which he had secreted from them. Indeed, no
man ever made it a request, much less earnestly entreated, " begged to be permitted," to pay to any persons, public or private, money that was their own. It appeared to your Committee that the money offered for that service, which was to forward the operations of a detachment under Colonel Camac in an expedition against one of the Mahratta chiefs, was
not accepted. And your Committee, having directed
search to be made for any sums of money paid into
the Treasury by Mr. Hastings for this service, found,
that, notwithstanding his assertion of having deposited "two lacs of rupees, or within a trifle of that
sum, in the hands of the sub-treasurer," no entry
whatsoever of that or any other payment by the Governor-General was made in the Treasury accounts at
or about that time. * This circumstance appeared
very striking to your Committee, as the non-appearAppendix B. No. 2.
? ? ? ? 222 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
ance in the Company's books of the article in question must be owing to one or other of these four
causes: -- That the assertion of Mr. Hastings, of his
having paid in near two lacs of rupees at that time,
was not true; or that the sub-treasurer may receive
great sums in deposit without entering them in the
Company's Treasury accounts; or that the Treasury
books themselves are records not to be depended on;
or, lastly, that faithful copies of these books of accounts are not transmitted to Europe. The defect
of an entry corresponding with Mr. Hastings's declaration in Council can be attributed only to one of
these four causes, - of which the want of foundation
in his recorded assertion, though very blamable, is
the least alarming.
On the 29th of November following, Mr. Hastings
communicated to the Court of Directors some sort of
notice of this transaction. * In his letter of that date
he varies in no small degree the aspect under which
the business appeared in his Minute of Consultation
of the 26th of June. In his letter he says to the Directors, "The subject is now become obsolete; the
fair hopes which I had built upon the prosecution of
the Mahratta war have been blasted by the dreadful
calamities which have befallen your Presidency of
Fort St. George, and changed the object of our pursuit from the aggrandizement of your power to its preservation. " After thus confessing, or rather boasting, of his motives to the Mahratta war, he proceeds: "My present reason for reverting to my own conduct
on the occasion which I have mentioned" (namely,
his offering a sum of money for the Company's service) " is to obviate the false conclusions or purposed
* Vide Appendix B. No. 1.
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 223
misrepresentations which may be made of it, either as
an artifice of ostentation or the effect of corrupt influence, by assuring you that the money, by whatever
means it came into my possession, was not my own,
that I had myself no right to it, nor would or could
have received it but for the occasion which prompted me to avail myself of the accidental means which
were at that instant afforded me of accepting and
converting it to the property and use of the Company: and with this brief apology I shall dismiss the
subject. "
The apology is brief indeed, considering the nature
of the transaction; and what is more material than
its length or its shortness, it is in all points unsatisfactory. The matter becomes, if possible, more obscure by his explanation. Here was money received by Mr. Hastings, which, according to his own judgment, he had no right to receive; it was money
which, " but for the occasion that prompted him, he
could not have accepted "; it was money which came
into his, and from his into the Company's hands, by
ways and means undescribed, and from persons unnamed: yet, though apprehensive of false conclusions and purposed misrepresentations, he gives his employers no insight whatsoever into a matter which
of all others stood in the greatest need of a full and
clear elucidation.
Although he chooses to omit this essential point,
he expresses the most anxious solicitude to clear
himself of the charges that might be made against
him, of the artifices of ostentation, and of corrupt
influence. To discover, if possible, the ground for
apprehending such imputations, your Committee adverted to the circumstances in which he stood at the
? ? ? ? 224 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
time: they found that this letter was dispatched
about the time that Mr. Francis took his passage for
England; his fear of misrepresentation may therefore allude to something which passed in conversation between him and that gentleman at the time the offer was made.
It was not easy, on the mere face of his offer, to
give an ill turn to it. The act, as it stands on the
Minute, is not only disinterested, but generous and
public-spirited. If Mr. Hastings apprehended misrepresentation from Mr. Francis, or from any other person, your Committee conceive that he did not employ proper means for defeating the ill designs of his adversaries. On the contrary, the course he has taken
in his letter to the Court of Directors is calculated to
excite doubts and suspicions in minds the most favorably disposed to him. Some degree of ostentation is
not extremely blamable at a time when a man advances largely from his private fortune towards the public service. It is h-uman infirmity at the worst, and only detracts something from the lustre of an action
in itself meritorious. The kind of ostentation which
is criminal, and criminal only because it is fraudulent,
is where a person makes a show of giving when in
reality he does not give. This imposition is criminal
more or less according to the circumstances. But if
the money received to furnish such a pretended gift
is taken from any third person without right to take
it, a new guilt, and guilt of a much worse quality
and description, is incurred. The Governor-General,
in order to keep clear of ostentation, on the 29th of
November, 1780, declares, that the sum of money
which he offered on the 26th of the preceding June
as his own was not his own, and that he had no right
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 225
to it. Clearing himself of vanity, he convicts himself of deceit, and of injustice.
The other object of this brief apology was to clear
himself of corrupt influence. Of all ostentation he
stands completely acquitted in the month of November, however he might have been faulty in that respect in the month of June; but with regard to the other part of the apprehended charge, namely, corrupt
influence, he gives no satisfactory solution. A great
sum of money " not his own," - money to which " he
had no right," - money which came into his possession " by whatever means ":- if this be not money
obtained by corrupt influence, or by something worse,
that is, by violence or terror, it will be difficult to fix
upon circumstances which can furnish a presumption
of unjustifiable use of power and influence in the acquisition of profit. The last part of the apology,
that he had converted this money (" which he had no
right to receive") to the Company's use, so far as
your Committee can discover, does nowhere appear.
He speaks, in the Minute of the 26th of June, as
having then actually deposited it for the Company's
service; in the letter of November he says that he
converted it to the Company's property: but there is
no trace in the Company's books of its being ever
brought to their credit in the expenditure for anyspecific service, even if any such entry and expenditure could justify him in taking money which he had,, by his own confession, "no right to receive. "
The Directors appear to have been deceived by this
representation, and in their letter of January, 1782,*
consider the money as actually paid into their Treasury. Even under their error concerning the appli* Appendix B. No. 7.
VOL. VIII. 15
? ? ? ? 226 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
cation of the money, they appear rather alarmed
than satisfied with the brief apology of the GovernorGeneral. They consider the whole proceeding as extraordinary and mysterious. They, however, do not condemn it with any remarkable asperity; after admitting that he might be induced to a temporary
secrecy respecting the members of the board, from a
fear of their resisting the proposed application, or
any application of this money to the Company's use,
yet they write to the Governlor-General and Council as
follows: --" It does not appear to us that there could
be any real necessity for delaying to communicate to
us immediate information of the channel by which the
money came into Mr. Hastings's possession, with a
complete illustration of the cause or causes of so extraordinary an event. " And again: " The means
proposed of defraying the extra expenses are very
extraordinary; and the money, we conceive, must
have come into his hands by an unusual channel;
and when more complete information comes before
[rs, we shall give our sentiments fully on the transaction. " And speaking of this and other moneys under
a similar description, they say, " We shall suspend
our judgment, without approving it in the least degree, or proceeding to c. ensure our Governor-General
for this transaction. " The expectations entertained
by the Directors of a more complete explanation
were natural, and their expression tender and temperate. But the more complete information which
they naturally expected they never have to this day
received.
Mr. Hastings wrote two more letters to the Secret
Committee of the Court of Directors, ill which he mentions this transaction: the first dated (as he asserts,
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 227
and a Mr. Larkins swears) on the 22d of May,
1782; * the last, which accompanied it, so late as the
16th of December in the same year. t Though so
long an interval lay between the transaction of the
26th of June, 1780, and the middle of December,
1782, (upwards of two years,) no further satisfaction
is given. He has written, since the receipt of the
above letter of the Court of Directors, (which demanded, what they had a right to demand, a clear explanation of the particulars of this sum of money
which he had no right to receive,) without giving
them any further satisfaction. Instead of explanation or apology, he assumes a tone of complaint and reproach to the Directors: he lays before them a
kind of an account of presents received, to the
amount of upwards of 200,0001. ,- some at a considerable distance of time, and which had not been hitherto communicated to the Company.
In the letter which accompanied that very extraordinary account, which then for the first time appeared, he discovers no small solicitude to clear himself from
the imputation of having these discoveries drawn
from him by the terrors of the Parliamentary inquiries then on foot. To remove all suspicion of such
a motive for making these discoveries, Mr. Larkins
swears, in an affidavit made before Mr. Justice Hyde,
bearing even date with the letter which accompanies
the account, that is, of the 16th of December, 1782,
that this letter had been written by him on the 22d
of May, several months before it was dispatched. t
It appears that Mr. Larkins, who makes this voluntary affidavit, is neither secretary to the board, nor
* Appendix B. No. 3 and No. 5. t Appendix B. No 6. : Vide Larkins's Affidavit, Appendix B. No. 5.
? ? ? ? 228 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
Mr. Hastings's private secretary, but an officer of the
Treasury of Bengal.
Mr. Hastings was conscious that a question would
inevitably arise, how he came to delay the sending
intelligence of so very interesting a nature from May
to December. He therefore thinks it necessary to account for so suspicious a circumstance. He tells the Directors, " that the dispatch of the' Lively' having
been protracted from time to time, the accompanying
address, which was originally designed and prepared
for that dispatch, and no other since occurring, has of
course been thus long delayed. "
The Governor-General's letter is dated the 22d
May, and the " Resolution " was the last ship of the
season dispatched for Europe. The public letters to
the Directors are dated the 9th May; but it appears
by the letter of the commander of the ship that he
did not receive his dispatches from Mr. Lloyd, then
at Kedgeree, until the 26th May, and also that the
pilot was not discharged from the ship until the
11th June. Some of these presents (now for the first
time acknowledged) had been received eighteen
months preceding the date of this letter,- none less
than four months; so that, in fact, he might have
sent this account by all the ships of that season; but
the Governor-General chose to write this letter thirteen days after the determination in Council for the. dispatch of the last ship.
It does not appear that he has given any communication whatsoever to his colleagues in office of those extraordinary transactions. Nothing appears on the
records of the Council of the receipt of the presents;
nor is the transmission of this account mentioned in
the general letter to. the Court of Directors, but in a
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 229
letter from himself to their Secret Committee, consisting generally of two persons, but at most of three.
It is to be observed that the Governor-General states,
" that the dispatch of the' Lively' had been protracted from time to time; that this delay was of no public consequence; but that it produced a situation
which with respect to himself he regarded as unfortunate, because it exposed him to the meanest imputations, from the occasion which the late Parliamentary inquiries have since furnished, but which were unknown when his letter was written. " If the
Governor-General thought his silence exposed him to
the meanest imputations, he had the means in his own
power of avoiding those imputations: he might have
sent this letter, dated the 22d May, by the Resolution. For we find, that, in a letter from Captain
Poynting, of the 26th May, he states it not possible
for him to proceed to sea with the smallest degree of
safety without a supply of anchors and cables, and
most earnestly requests they may be supplied from
Calcutta; and on the 28th May we find a minute
from the Secretary of the Council, Mr. Auriol, requesting an order of Council to the master-attendant
to furnish a sloop to carry down those cables; which
order was accordingly issued on the 30th May.
There requires no other proof to show that the Governor-General had the means of sending this letter
seven days after he wrote it, instead of delaying it for
near seven months, and because no conveyance had
offered. Your Committee must also remark, that
the conveyance by land to Madras was certain; and
whilst such important operations were carrying on,
both by sea and land, upon the coast, that dispatches
would be sent to the Admiralty or to the Company
was highly probable.
? ? ? ? 230 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
If the letter of the 22d May had been found in
the list of packets sent by the Resolution, the Governor General would have established in a satisfactory manner, and far beyond the effect of any affidavit, that the letter had been written at the time of the date. It appears that the Resolution, being on
her voyage to England, met with so severe a gale
of wind as to be obliged to put back to Bengal, and
to unload her cargo. This event makes no difference
in the state of the transaction. Whatever the cause
of these new discoveries might have been, at the time
of sending them the fact of the Parliamentary inquiry
was publicly known.
In the letter of the above date Mr. Hastings laments the mortification of being reduced to take precautions "to guard his reputation from dishonor. "
-- " If I had," says he, 1" at any time possessed that
degree of confidence from my immediate employers
which they have never withheld from the meanest
of my predecessors, I should have disdained to use
these attentions. "
Who the meanest of Mr. Hastings's predecessors
were does not appear to your Committee; nor are
they able to discern the ground of propriety or decency for his assuming to himself a right to call any of
them- mean persons. But if such mean persons have
possessed that degree of confidence from his immediate employers which for so many years he had not
possessed " at any time," inferences must be drawn
from thence very unfavorable to one or the other of
the parties, or perhaps to both. The attentions which
he practises and disdains can in this case be of no
service to himself, his employers, or the public; the
only attention at all effectual towards extenuating,
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 281
or in some degree atoning for, the guilt of having
taken money from individuals illegally was to be full
and fair in his confession of all the particulars of his
offence. This might not obtain that confidence which
at no time he has enjoyed, but still the Company and
the nation might derive essential benefit from it; the
Directors might be able to afford redress to the sufferers; and by his laying open the concealed channels of abuse, means might be furnished for the better discovery, and possibly for the prevention, or at least
for the restraint, of a practice of the most dangerous
nature, -- a practice of which the mere prohibition,
without the means of detection, must ever prove, as
hitherto it had proved, altogether frivolous.
Your Committee, considering that so long a time
had elapsed without any of that information which
the Directors expected, and perceiving that this receipt of sums of money under color of gift seemed a
growing evil, ordered the attendance of Mr. Hastings's
agent, Major Scott. They had found, on former occasions, that this gentleman was furnished with much
more early and more complete intelligence of the
Company's affairs in India than was thought proper
for the Court of Directors; they therefore examined
him concerning every particular sum of money the
receipt of which Mr. Hastings had confessed in his
account. It was to their surprise that Mr. Scott professed himself perfectly uninstructed upon almost
every part of the subject, though the express object
of his mission to England was to clear up such matters as might be objected to Mr. Hastings; and for
that purpose he had early qualified himself by the
production to your Committee of his powers of agency. The ignorance in which Mr. Hastings had left
? ? ? ? 232 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
his agent was the more striking, because he must
have been morally certain, that, if his conduct in
these points should have escaped animadversion from
the Court of Directors, it must become an object of
Parliamentary inquiry; for, in his letter of the 15th
[16th? ] of December, 1782, to the Court of Directors,
he expressly mentions his fears that those Parliamentary inquiries might be thought to have extorted from
him the confessions which he had made.
Your Committee, however, entering on a more
strict examination concerning the two lacs of rupees,
which Mr. Hastings declares he had no right to take,
but had taken from some person then unknown,
Major Scott recollected that Mr. Hastings had, in a
letter of the 7th of December, 1782, (in which lie refers to some former letter,) acquainted him with the
name of the person from whom he had received these
two lacs of rupees, mentioned in the minute of June,
1780. It turned out to be the Rajah of Benares, the
unfortunate Cheyt Sing.
In the single instance in which Mr. Scott seemed
to possess intelligence in this matter, he is preferred to the Court of Directors. Under their censure as Mr. Hastings was, and as he felt himself to be, for not informing them of the channel in
which he received that money, he perseveres obstinately and contemptuously to conceal it from them;
though he thought fit to intrust his agent with the
secret.
Your Committee were extremely struck with this
intelligence. They were totally unacquainted with
it, when they presented to the House the Supplement to their Second Report, on the affairs of Cheyt
Sing. A gift received by Mr. Hastings from the
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 233
Rajah of Benares gave rise in their minds to serious reflections on the condition of the princes of
India subjected to the British authority. Mr. Hastings was, at the very time of his receiving this
gift, in the course of making on the Rajah of Benares a series of demands, unfounded and unjustifiable, and constantly growing in proportion as they were submitted to. To these demands the Rajah
of Benares, besides his objections in point of right,
constantly set up a plea of poverty.
Presents from
persons who hold up poverty as a shield against
extortion can scarcely in any case be considered as
gratuitous, whether the plea of poverty be true or
false. In this case the presents might have been
bestowed, if not with an assurance, at least with a
rational hope, of some mitigation in the oppressive
requisitions that were made by Mr. Hastings; for to
give much voluntarily, when it is known that much
will be taken away forcibly, is a thing absurd and
impossible. On the other [one? ] hand, the acceptance of that gift by Mr. Hiastings must have pledged
a tacit faith for some degree of indulgence towards
the donor: if it was a free gift, gratitude, if it was
a bargain, justice obliged him to do it. If, on the
other hand, Mr. Hastings originally destined (as
he says he did) this money, given to himself secretly and for his private emolument, to the use
of the Company, the Company's favor, to whom he
acted as trustee, ought to have been purchased by
it. In honor and justice he bound and pledged
himself for that power which was to profit by the
gift, and to profit, too, in the success of an expedition which Mr. Hastings thought so necessary to;heir aggrandizement. The unhappy man found his
? ? ? ? 234 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
money accepted, but no favor acquired on the part
either of the Company or of Mr. Hastings.
Your Committee have, in another Report, stated to
the House that Mr. Hastings attributed the extremity
of distress which the detachments under Colonel Camac had suffered, and the great desertions which ensued on that expedition, to the want of punctuality of the Rajah in making payment of one of the sums
which had been extorted from him; and this want
of punctual payment was afterwards assigned as a
principal reason for the ruin of this prince. Your
Committee have shown to the House, by a comparison
of facts and dates, that this charge is wholly without
foundation. But if the cause of Colonel Camac's failure had been true as to the sum which was the object
of the public demand, the failure could not be attributed to the Rajah, when he had on the instant privately furnished at least 23,0001. to Mr. Hastings, -that is, furnished the identical money which he tells us
(but carefully concealing the name of the giver) he
had from the beginning destined, as he afterwards publicly offered, for this very expedition of Colonel Camac's. The complication of fraud and cruelty in the transaction admits of few parallels. Mr. Hastings at
the Council Board of Bengal displays himself as a zealous servant of the Company, bountifully giving from
his own fortune, and in his letter to the Directors (as
he says himself) as going out of the ordinary roads
for their advantage;* and all this on the credit of
supplies derived from the gift of a man whom he treats
with the utmost severity, and whom he accuses, in
this particular, of disaffection to the Company's cause
and interests.
* Vide Appendix B. No. 1.
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 235
With 23,0001. of the Rajah's money in his pocket,
he persecutes him to his destruction, - assigning for
a reason, that his reliance on the Rajah's faith, and
his breach of it, were the principal causes that no other provision was made for the detachment on the specific expedition to which the Rajah's specific money was to be applied. The Rajah had given it to be disposed of by Mr. Hastings; and if it was not disposed
of in the best manner for the accomplishing his objects, the accuser himself is the criminal.
To take money for the forbearance of a just demand would have been corrupt only; but to urge
unjust public demands, - to accept private pecuniary
favors in the course of those demands, - and, on the
pretence of delay or refusal, without mercy to persecute a benefactor, - to refuse to hear his remonstrances, -to arrest him in his capital, in his palace, in the face of all the people, - thus to give occasion to an
insurrection, and, on pretext of that insurrection, to
refuse all treaty or explanation, - to drive him from
his government and his country, -- to proscribe him
in a general amnesty, -and to send him all over
India a fugitive, to publish the shame of British government in all the nations to whom he successively
fled for refuge, - these are proceedings to which, for
the honor of human nature, it is hoped few parallels
are to be found in history, and in which the illegality
and corruption of the acts form the smallest part of
the mischief.
Such is the account of the first sum confessed to be
taken as a present by Mr. Hastings, since the year
1775; and such are its consequences. Mr. Hastings
apologizes for this action by declaring " that he would
not have received the money but for the occasion,
? ? ? ? 236 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
which prompted him to avail himself of the accidental means which were at that instant afforded him of
accepting and converting it to the use of the Company. " * By this account, he considers the act as excusable only by the particular occasion, by the temptation of accidental means, and by the suggestion of the instant. How far this is the case appears by the
very next paragraph of this letter in which the account is given and in which the apology is made. If
these were his sentiments in June, 1780, they lasted
but a very short time: his accidental means appear
to be growing habitual.
To point out in a clear manner the spirit of the
second money transaction to which your Committee
adverted, which is represented by Mr. Hastings as
having some "affinity with the former anecdote,"l
(for in this light kind of phrase he chooses to express himself to his masters,) your Committee think
it necessary to state to the House, that the business,
namely, this business, which was the second object of
their inquiry, appears in three different papers and
in three different lights: on comparing of these authorities, in every one of which Mr. Hastings is himself the voucher, if one of the three be true, the other
two must necessarily be false.
These three authorities, which your Committee has
accurately compared, are, first, his minutes on the
Consultations; t secondly, his letter to the Court of
Directors on the 29th of November, 1780; ~ thirdly,
his account, transmitted on the 16th of December,
1782. 11
About eight months after the first transaction rela* Vide Appendix B. No. 1.
~ Ibid. , No. 1. 11 Ibid. , No. 4.
? t Ibid. t Ibid. , No. 8.
? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 237
tive to Cheyt Sing, and which is just reported, that is,
on the 5th of January, 1781, Mr. Hastings produced a
demand to the Council for money of his own expended
for the Company's service. * Here was no occasion
for secrecy. Mr. Francis was on his passage to Europe; Mr. Wheler was alone left, who no longer dissented from anything; Mr. Hastings was in effect himself the whole Council. He declared that he
had disbursed three lacs of rupees, that is, thirtyfour thousand five hundred pounds, in secret services, -which having, he says, " been advanced from my own private cash, I request that the same may be
repaid. to me in the following manner. " He accordingly desires three bonds, for a lac of Sicca rupees
each, to be given to him in two of the Company's
subscriptions, - one to bear interest on the eight per
cent loan, the other two in the four per cent: the
bonds were antedated to the beginning of the preceding October. On the 9th of the same month, that
is, on the 9th of January, 1781, the three bonds were
accordingly ordered. t So far the whole transaction
appears clear, and of a piece. Private money is subscribed, and a public security is taken for it. When
the Company's Treasury accounts t are compared with
the proceedings of their Council-General, a perfect correspondence also appears. The three bonds are then
[there? ] entered to Mr. Hastings, and he is credited
for principal and interest on them, in the exact terms
of the order. So far the official accounts, - which,
because of their perfect harmony, are considered as
clear and consistent evidence to one body of fact.
The second sort of document relative to these bonds
(though the first in order of time) is Mr. Hastings's
* Appendix B. No. 8. t Ibid. t Ibid. , No. 9.
? ? ? ? 238 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEb
letter of the 29th of November, 1780. * It is written
between the time of the expenditure of the money
for the Company's use and the taking of the bonds.
Here, for the first time, a very material difference appears; and the difference is the more striking, because Mr. Hastings claimed the whole money as his own, and took bonds for it as such, after this representation. The letter to the Company discovers that
part of the money (the whole of which he had declared on record to be his own, and for which he had taken bonds) was not his, but the property of his masters, from whom he had taken the security. It is no less remarkable that the letter which represents the
money as belonging to the Company was written
about six weeks before the Minute of Council in
which he claims that money as his own. It is this
letter on which your Committee is to remark.
Mr. Hastings, after giving his reasons for the application of the three lacs of rupees, and for his having for some time. concealed the fact, says, " Two thirds of that sum I have raised by my own credit, and
shall charge it in my official account; the other third
I have supplied from the cash in my hands belonging
to the Honorable Compamiy. " t
The House will observe, that in November he tells
the Directors that he shall charge only two thirds in
his official accounts; in the following January he
charges the whole. f For the other third, although he
admitted that to belong to the Company, we have
seen that he takes a bond to himself.
It is material that he tells the Company in his letter that these two lacs of rupees were raised on his credit. His letter to the Council says that they were
* Appendix B. No. 1. t Ibid. t Ibid. , No. 8.
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 239
advanced from his private cash. What he raises on
his credit may, on a fair construction, be considered
as his own: but in this, too, he fails; for it is certain
he has never transferred these bonds to any creditor;
nor has he stated any sum he has paid, or for which
he stands indebted, on that account, to any specific
person. Indeed, it was out of his power; for the first
two thirds of the money, which he formerly stated as
raised upon his credit, he now confesses to have been
from the beginning the Company's property, and
therefore could not have been raised on his private
credit, or borrowed from any person whatsoever.
To these two accounts, thus essentially varying, he
has added a third,* varying at least as essentially
from both. In his last or third account, which is a
statement of all the sums he has received in an extraordinary manner, and confessed to be the Company's property, he reverses the items of his first account, and, instead of allowing the Company but one third and claiming two thirds for himself, he enters
two of the bonds, each for a lac of rupees, as belonging to the Company: of the third bond, which appears
so distinctly in the Consultations and in the Treasury
accounts, not one word is said; ten thousand pounds
is absorbed, sinks, and disappears at once, and no
explanation whatsoever concerning it is given; Mr.
Hastings seems not yet to have decided to whose account it ought to be placed. In this manner his debt
to the Company, or the Company's to him, is just
what he thinks fit. In a single article he has varied
three times. In one account lie states the whole to
* Appendix B. -No. 4: The Governor-General's Account of Moneys received, dated 22d May, 1782. Also, Appendix B. No. 9:
The Auditor's Account of Bonds granted to the Governor-General.
? ? ? ? 240 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
be his own; in another he claims two thirds; in the
last he gives up the claim of the two thirds, and says
nothing to the remaining portion.
To make amends, however, for the suppression of
this third bond, given with the two others in January,
1781, and antedated to the beginning of October,
Mr. Hastillgs, in the above-mentioned general account subjoined to his letter of the 22d May, 1782,
has brought to the Company's credit a new bond. *
This bond is for 17,0001. It was taken from the
Company (and so it appears on their Treasury accounts) on the 23d of November, 1780. He took no notice of this, when, in January following, lie called
upon his own Council for the three others. What is
more extraordinary, he was equally silent with regard
to it, when, only six days after its date, he wrote concerning the subject of the three other bonds to the Court of Directors; yet now it comes out, that that
bond also was taken by Mr. Hastings from the Company for money which he declares he had received on the Company's account, and that he entered himself
as creditor when he ought to have made himself
debtor.
Your Committee examined Major Scott concerning
this money, which Mr. Hastings must have obtained
in some clandestine and irregular mode; but they
could obtain no information of the persons from
whom it was taken, nor of the occasion or pretence
of taking this lhrge sum; nor does any Minute of
Council appear for its application to any service. The
whole of the transaction, whatever it was, relative
to this bond, is covered with the thickest obscurity.
Mr. Hastings, to palliate the blame df his conduct,
* Vide Appendix B. No. 4.
? ? ? ? ON THE AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 241
declares that lie has not received any interest on these
bonds, - and that he has indorsed them as not belonging to himself, but to the Company. * As to the
first part of this allegation, whether he received the
interest or let it remain in arrear is a matter of indifference, as he entitled himself to it; and so far as
the legal security he has taken goes, he may, whelever he pleases, dispose both of principal and interest.
What he has indorsed on the bonds, or when he made
the indorsemlent, or whether in fact he has made it at
all, are matters known only to himself; for the bonds
must be in his possession, and are nowhere by him
stated to be given up or cancelled, - which is a thing:
very remarkable, when he confesses that he had no,
right to receive them.
These bonds make but a part of the account of private receipts of money by Mr. Hastings, formerly paid
into the Treasury as his own property, and now allowed not to be so. This account brings into view
other very remarkable matters of a similar nature
and description. t
In the public records, a sum of not less than
23,8711. is set to his credit as a deposit for his private account, paid in by him into the Treasury in
gold, and coined at the Company's mint. $ This appears in the account furnished to the Directors, unlder the date of May, 1782, not to be lawfully his money, and he therefore transfers it to the Company's credit: it still remains as a deposit. ~
That the House may be apprised of the nature of
* Vide Mr. Hastings's Account, in Appendix B. No. 4.
t Vide Hastings's Account, dated 22d May, 1782, in Appendix.
B. No. 4.
t Vide above Appendix, and B. No. 2. ~ Vide above Ajl11:c'',x.
V )L. VIII. 16
? ? ? ? 242 ELEVENTH REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE
this article of deposit, it may not be improper to state
that the Company receive into their treasury the cash
of private personls, placed there as in a bank. On
this no interest is paid, and the party depositing has
a right to receive it upon demand. Under this head
of accoult no public money is ever entered. Mr.
Hastings, neither at making the deposit as his own,
nor at the time of his disclosure of the real proprietor, (which he makes to be the Company,) has given any information of the persons from whom this money had been received. Mr. Scott was applied to by your Committee, but could not give any more satisfaction in this particular than in those relative to the bonds.
The title of the account of the 22d of May purports not only that those sums were paid into the Company's treasury by Mr. Hastings's order, but that
they were applied to the Company's service. No
service is specified, directly or by any reference, to
which this great sulm of money has been applied.
