"
He then calculates what the expenses were; he calculates that the building would cost about 6,0001.
He then calculates what the expenses were; he calculates that the building would cost about 6,0001.
Edmund Burke
SPEECH IN REPLY.
-EIGHTH DAY.
325
pany, Mr. Bristow, the two Residents of Mr. Hastings, Mr. Middleton and Mr. Johnson, and the two
Residents sent by him to watch over all the rest,
Ma3or Palmer and Major Davy, -- upon quarrels, I
say, between them, we discovered that Mr. Middleton had received the offer of a present of 100,0001.
in February, 1782. This circumstance is mentioned
in a letter of Mr Middleton's, ill which lie informs
Mr. Hastings that the Nabob had destined such a
sum for him.
Now the first thing that will occur to your Lordships upon such an affair will be a desire to know
what it was that induced the Nabob to make this
offer. It was but in the September preceding that
Mr. Hastings had received, for his private use, as the
Nabob conceived, so bountiful a present as 100,0001. ;
what motive, tlien, could he have had in February
to offer him another 100,0001. ? This man, at the
time, was piercing heaven itself with the cries of
despondency, despair, beggary, and ruin. You have
seen that lie was forced to rob his own family, in
order to satisfy the Company's demands upon him;
and yet thlis is precisely the time when he thinks
proper to offer 100,0001. to Mr. Hastings. Does not
the mind of every man revolt, whilst lie exclaims,
and say, " What! another 100,0001. to Mr. Hastillgs? "
What reason had the Nabob to think Mr. Hastilgs
so monstrously insatiable, that, having but the Soptember before received 100,0001. , he must give him
another in February? My Lords, he must, in the
interval, have threatened the Nabob with some horrible catastrophe, from which lie was to redeem himself by this second present. You can assign no other motive for his giving it. We know not what
? ? ? ? 326 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
answer Mr. Hastings made to Mr. Middleton upon
that occasion, but we find that in the year 1783 Mr.
Hastings asserts that he sent up Major Palmer and
Major Davy to persuade the Nabob to transfer this
present, which the Nabob intended for him, to the
Company's service. Remark, my Lords, the progress of this affair. In a formal accusation preferred against Mr. Middleton, he charges him with obstructing this design of his. In this accusation, my Lords, you find him at once in tile curious character of
prosecutor, witness, and judge.
Let us see how lie comports himself. I shall only
state to you one of the articles of his impeachment;
it is the third charge; it is in page 1267 of your
Lordsllips' Minutes.
"For sending repeatedly to the Vizier, and to his
minister, Hyder Beg Khan, to advise them against
transferring the ten lacs of rupees intended as a
present to the Governor-General to the Company's
account; as it would be a precedent for further
demands, which if the Vizier did not refuse in the
first instance, the government would never cease to
harass him for money. "
The first thing that will occur to your Lordships
is an assertion of the accuser's:'" I am morally
certain, that jaidads or assets for ten lacs, either
in assignment of land or in bills, had been prepared,
and were in the charge or possession of Mr. Middleton, before Major Palmer's arrival, and left with Mr. Johnson on Mr. Middleton's departure. "
My Lords, here is an accusation that Mr. Middleton had actually received money, either in bills or assets of some kind or other, - and that, upon quit
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -- EIGHTH DAY. 327
ting his Residency, he had handed it over to his
successor, Mr. Johnson. Here are, then, facts asserted, and we must suppose substantiated. Here
is a sum of money to be accounted for, in which
there is a gross malversation directly charged as to
these particulars, in Mr. Hastings's opinion. Mr.
Macpherson, another member of the Council, has declared, that he understood at the time that the ten
lacs were actually deposited in bills, and that it was
not a mere offer made by the Nabob to pay such a
sum from the future revenue of the country. Mr.
Hastings has these facts disclosed to him. He declares
that he was " morally certain" of it, - that is, as certain as a man can be of anything; because physical
certitude does not belong to such matters. The first
thing you will naturally ask is, " Why does lie not
ask Mr. Johnson how lie had disposed of that money
which Mr. Middleton had put in Iris hands? " He
does no such thing; he passes over it totally, as if it
were no part of the matter inll question, and the accusation against Mr. Middleton terminates in the mainner you will there find stated. When Mr. Johnson is
asked, " Why was not that monley applied to the Comnpany's service? " he boldly steps forward, and says,
" I prevented it from being so applied. It never was,
it never ought to have been, so applied; such an
appropriation of money to be taken from the Nabob
would have been enormous upon that occasion. "
What, then, does Mr. Hastings do? Does he examince AIr. Middleton upon the subject, who charges himself with having received the money? Mr. Middleton was at that very time in Calcutta, called down thither by Mr. Hastings himself. One would naturally expect that lie would call upon him to explain for
? ? ? ? 328 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
what purpose he left the money with Mr. Johnson.
He did no such thing. Did he examine Mr. Johnson himself, who was charged with having received
the money from Mr. Middleton? Did he ask him
what he had done with that money? Not one word.
Did he send for Major Palmer and Major Davy to
account for it? No. Did lie call any shroff, ally
banker, any one person concerned in the payment of
the money, or any one person in the management of
the revenue? No, not one. Directly in the face of
his own assertions, directly contrary to his moral conviction of the fact that the money had been actually deposited, he tries Mr. Johnson collusively and obliquely, not upon the account of what was done with the money, but why it was prevented from being applied to the Company's service; and he acquits him in a manner that (taking the whole of it together)
will give your Lordships the finest idea possible of a
Bengal judicature, as exercised by Mr. Hastings.
"I am not sorry," says lie, "that Mr. Johnson
chose to defeat my intentions; since it would have
added to the Nabob's distresses, but with no immediate relief to the Company. If, in his own breast, he can view the secret motives of this transaction, and
on their testimony approve it, I also acquit him. "
Merciful God! Here is a man accused by regular articles of impeachment. The accuser declares he
is morally certain that the money had been received,
but was prevented from being applied to its destination by the person accused; and he acquits him. Does lie acquit him from his own knowledge, or from
any evidence? No: but he applies to the man's colnscience, and says, "If you in your conscience can acquit yourself, I acquit you. "
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -EIGHTH DAY. 329
Here, then, is a proceeding the most astonishing
and shameless that perhaps was ever witnessed: a
court trying a man for a delinquency and misapplication of money, destilled, in the first instance, for the use of the judge, but which he declares ought, in his
own opinion, to be set apart for the public use, and
which he was desirous of' applying to the Company's
service, without regard to his own interest, and then
the judge declaring lie is not sorry that his purpose
had been defeated by the party accused. Instead,
however, of censuring the accused, he applies to the
man's own conscience. " Does your conscience,"
says he, " acquit you of having acted wrong? " The
accused makes no reply; and then Mr. Hastings, by
an hypothetical conclusion, acquits him.
Mr. Hastings is accused by the Commons for that,
having a moral certainty of the money's being intended for his use, he would not have ceased to inquire into the actual application of it but from some corrupt motive and intention. With this he is charged.
He comes before you to make his defence. Mr. Middleton is in England. Does he call Mr. Middleton
to explain it here? Does he call upon Mr. Johnson,
who was the other day in this court, to account for
it? Why did lie not, when he sent for these curious
papers and testimonials to Major Palmer, (the person
authorized, as lie pretends, by him, to resign all his
pretensions to the money procured,) send for Major
Palmer, who is the person that accused him in this
business, - why not send for him to bear some testimony respecting it? No: he had time enough, but
at no one time and inll no place did lie do this; therefore the imputation of the foulest corruption attaches upon him, joined with the infamy of a collusive pros
? ? ? ? 330 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
ecution, instituted for the sake of a collusive acquittal.
Having explained to your Lordships the nature,
and detailed the circumstances, as far as we are acquainted with them, of this fraudulent transaction,
we have only further to remind you, that, though
Mr. Middleton was declared guilty of five of the
six charges brought against him by Mr. Hastings, yet
the next thing you hear is, that Mr. Hastings, after
declaring that this conduct of Mr. Middleton had
been very bad, and that the conduct of the other servants of the Company concerned with him had been
ten times worse, he directly appoints him to one of
the most honorable and confidential offices the Company had to dispose of: he sends him ambassador to
the Nizam, -- to give to all the courts of India a specimen of the justice, honor, and decency of the British government.
My Lords, with regard to the bribe for the entertainment, I only beg leave to make one observation
to you upon that article. I could say, if the time
would admit it, a great deal upon that subject; but
I wish to compress it, and I shall therefore only recommend it in general to your Lordships' deliberate
consideration. The covenant subsisting between the
Company and its servants was made for the express
purpose of putting an end to all such entertainments.
By this convention it is ordered that no presents exceeding 2001. [4001. ? ] shall be accepted upon any
pretence for an entertainment. The covenant was intended to put an end to the custom of receiving money for entertainments, even wlhen visiting an independent Oriental prince. But your Lordsbips know that the Nabob was no prince, but a poor, imiserable, un
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - E! iCTHTH DAY. 331
done dependant upon the Company. The present was
also taken by Mr. Hastings at a time when he went upon the cruel commission of cutting down tile Nabob's allowance from 400,0001. to 260,0001. [160,0001. ? ],
and when he was reducing to beggary thousands
of persons who were dependent for bread upon the
Nabob, and ruining, perhaps, forty thousand others.
I shall say no more upon that subject, though, in
truth, it is a thing upon which much observation
migiht be made.
I shall now pass on to another article connected
with, though not making a direct part of, that of
corrupt bribery: I mean the swindling subterfuges
by which he has attempted to justify his corrupt
practices. At one time lie defends them by pleading the necessities of his own affairs, --as when lihe
takes presents and entertainments avowedly for his
own profits. At another time he defends them by
pleading the goodness of his intentions: he intended, he says, to give the money to the Company. His
last plea has something in it (which shall I say? )
of a more awful or of a more abandoned character,
or of both. In the settlement of his public account,
before he left India, he takes credit for a bond which
lie had received from Nobkissin upon some account
or other. He then returns to England, and what
does he do? Pay off? No. Give up the bond to
the Company? No. He says, "I will account to
the Company for this money. " And when he comes
to give this account of the expenditure of this money, your Lordships will not be a little astonished at
the items of it. One is for founding a Mahometan
college. It is a very strange thing that Rajah Nob
? ? ? ? 332 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
kissin, who is a Gentoo, should be employed by Mr.
Hastings to found a Mahometan college. We will
allow MIr. Hastings, who is a Christian, or would be
thought a Christian, to grow pious at last, and, as
many others have done, who have spent their lives
in fraud, rapacity, and peculation, to seek amends
and to expiate his crimes by charitable foundations.
Nay, we will suppose Mr. Hastings to have taken it
into his head to turn Mahometan, (Gentoo he could
not,) and to have designed by a Mahometan foundation to expiate his offences. Be it so; but why should Nobkissin pay for it? We will pass over
this also. But when your Lordships shall hear of
what nature that foundation was, I believe you will
allow that a more extraordinary history never did
appear in the world.
In the first place, he stated to the Council, on the
18th of April, 1781, that in the month of November,
1780, a petition was presented to him by a considerable number of Mussulmen, in compliance with which this Mahometan college appears to have been
founded. It next appears from his statement, that
in the April following, (that is, within about six
months after the foundation,) many students had
finished their education. You see what a hot-bed
bribery and corruption is. Our universities cannot
furnish an education in six years: in India they
have completed it within six months, and have taken their degrees.
Mr. Hastings says, "I have supported this establishment to this time at my own expense; I desire
the Company will now defray the charge of it.
"
He then calculates what the expenses were; he calculates that the building would cost about 6,0001. ,
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. EIGHTH DAY. 333
and he gets from the Company a bond to raise money
for paying this 6,0001. You apparently have the
building now at the public expense, and Mr. Htastings still stands charged witll the expense of the
college for six months. He then proposes that a
tract of land should be given for the college, to the
value of about three thousand odd pounds a year, -
and that in the mean time there should be a certain
sum allotted for its expenses. After this Mr. Hastings writes a letter from the Ganges to the Company,
in which he says not a word about the expense of
the building, but says that the college was founded
and maintained at his own expense, though it was
thought to be maintained by the Company; and he
fixes the commencement of the expense in September, 1779. But, after all, we find that the very professor who was to be settled there never so much as arrived in Calcutta, or showed ltis face there, till
some time afterwards. And look at Mr. Larkins's
private accounts, and you will find that he charges
the expense to have commenced not until October,
1781. It is no error, because it runs through and
is so accounted in the whole: and it thus appears
that he has charged, falsely and fraudulently, a year
more for that establishment than it cost him.
At last, then, when he was coming away, (for I
hasten to the conclusion of an affair ludicrous indeed in some respects, but not unworthy of your
Lordships' consideration,) " after remarking that he
had experienced for three years the utility of this
institution, he recommends that they will establish
a fund for 3,0001. a year for it, and give it to the
master. " He had left Gunga Govind Sing as a
Gentoo legacy, and he now leaves the Mussulmanl
as a Mahometan legacy to the Company.
? ? ? ? 334 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
Your Lordships shall now hear what was the upshot of the whole. The Company soon afterwards hearing that this college was become the greatest
nuisance in Calcutta, and that it had raised the cries
of all the inhabitants against it, one of their servants,
a Mr. Chapman, was deputed by the Governor, Sir
John Shore, to examine into it, and your Lordships
will find the account he gives of it in your minutes.
In short, my Lords, we find that this was a seminary
of robbers, housebreakers, and every nuisance to society; so that the Company was obliged to turn out the master, and to remodel the whole. Your Lordships will now judge of the merits and value of this, one of the sets-off brought forward by the prisoner
against the charges which we have brought forward
against him: it began in injustice and peculation,
and ended in a seminary for robbers and housebreakers.
Nothing now remains to be pressed by me upon
your Lordships' consideration, but the account given
by the late Governor-General, Earl Cornwallis, of the
state in which he found the country left by his predecessor, Mr. Hastings, the prisoner at your bar. But, patient as I know your Lordships to be, I also know
that your strength is not inexhaustible; and though
what I have farther to add will not consume much
of your Lordships' time, yet I conceive that there is
a necessity for deferring it to another day.
? ? ? ? S P E C HIN
GENERAL REPLY.
NINTH DAY: MONDAY, JUNE 16, 1794.
M Y LORDS, -I should think it necessary to make
an apology to your Lordships for appearing before you one day more, if I were inclined to measure this business either by the standard of my own ability, or by my own impatience, or by any supposed
impatience of yours. I know no measure, in such
a case, but the nature of the subject, and the duty
which we owe to it. You will therefore, my Lords,
permit me, in a few words, to lead you back to what
we did yesterday, that you may the better comprehend the manner in which I mean to conclude the
business to-dav.
My Lords, we took the liberty of stating to you,
the condition of Bengal before our taking possession
of it, and of the several classes of its inhabitants.
We first brought before you the Mahometan inhabitants, who had the judicial authority of the country
in their hands; and we proved to you the utter ruin
of that body of people, and with them of the justice
of the country, by their being, both one and the other, sold to an infaimous woman called Muniny Begum.
We next showed you, that the whole landed interest,
the zemindars, or Ilindoo gentry of the country, was
likewise ruined by its being given over, by letting it
? ? ? ? 336 IMIPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
on a five years' lease, to infamous farmers, and giving it up to their merciless exactions, - and afterwards by subjecting the rank of those zemindars,
their title-deeds, and all their pecuniary affairs, to the
minutest scrutiny, under pain of criminal punishment, by a commission granted to a nefarious villain
called Gunga Govind Sing. We lastly showed you
that the remaining third class, that of the En-glish,
was partly corrupted, or had its authority dissolved,
and that the whole superintending English control
was subverted or subdued, - that the products of
tlhe country were diminished, and that the revenues
of the Company were dilapidated, by an overcharge
of expenses, in four years, to the amount of 500,0001. ,
in consequence of these corrupt, dangerous, and mischievous projects.
We have farther stated, that the Company's servants were corrupted by contracts and jobs; we
proved that those that were not so corrupted were
removed from their stations or reduced to a state of
abject dependence; we showed you the destruction
of the Provincial Councils, the destruction of the
Council-General, and the formation of a committee
for no other ends whatever but for the purposes of
bribery, concealment, an]d corruption. We Inext stated some of the most monstrous instances of that bribery; and though we were of opinion that in unone of them any satisfactory defence worth mentioning
had been made, yet we have thought that this should
not hinder us from recalling to your Lordships' recollection the peculiar nature and circumstances of one
of those proceedings.
The proceedings to which we wish to call your
attention are those belonging to the second bribe
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - NINTH DAY. 337
given by the Nabob of Oude to Mr. Hastings. Mr.
HIastings's own knowledge and opinion that that
money was set apart for his use, either in bills or
assets, I have before stated; and I now wish to call
your Lordships' minute recollection to the manner in
which the fraudulent impeachment of Mr. Middleton,
for the purpose of stifling an inquiry into that business, was carried on. Your Lordships will remember
that I proved to you, upon the face of that proceeding, tile collusive nature of the accusation, and that the real state of the case was not charged, --and that
Mr. Hastings acquitted the party accused of one article of the charge, not upon the evidence of the case, contrary to his own avowed, declared, moral certainty of his guilt, but upon a pretended appeal to the conscience of the man accused. He did not, however, give him a complete, formal, official acquittal,
but referred the matter to the Court of Directors,
who could not possibly know anything of the matter,
without one article of evidence whatever produced at
the time or transmitted. We lastly proved. to you,
t;hat, after finding him guilty of five charges, and
leaving the other to the Court of Directors, Mr. Hastings, without any reason assigned, appointed him to a great office in the Company's service.
These proceedings were brought before you for two
purposes: first, to show the corrupt principle of the
whole proceeding; next, to show the manner in which
the Company's servants are treated. They are accused
and persecuted, until they are brought to submit to
whatever terms it may be thought proper to impose
upon them; they are then formally, indeed, acquitted of the most atrocious crimes charged against
them, but virtually condemned upon some articles,
VOL. XII. 22
? ? ? ? 338 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
with the scourge hung over them, -and in some
instances rewarded by the greatest, most honorable,
and most lucrative situations in the Company's service. My Lords, it is on the same ground of the
wicked, pernicious, and ruinous principles of Mr.
Hastings's government, that I have charged this with
everything that is chargeable against him, namely,
that, if your Lordships should ratify those principles
by your acquittal of him, they become principles of
government, - rejected, indeed, by the Commons, but
adopted by the Peerage of Great Britain.
There is another article which I have just touched,
but which I must do more than barely notice, upon
account of the evil example of it: I mean the taking great sums of money, under pretence of an entertainment. Your Lordships will recollect, that, when this business was charged against him in India, Mr.
Hastings neither affirmed nor denied the fact. Confession could not be there extorted from him. He
next appeared before the House of Commons, and he
still evaded a denial or a confession of it. He lastly
appeared before your Lordships, and in his answer
to our charge he in the same manner evaded either
a confession or a denial. He forced us to employ a
great part of a session in endeavoring to establish
what we have at last established, the receipt of the
sums first charged, and of seven lacs more, by him.
At length the proof could not be evaded; and after
we had fought through all the difficulties which the
law could interpose in his defence, and of which lie
availed himself with a degree of effrontery that has,
I believe, no example in the world, he confesses,
avows, and justifies his conduct. If the custom alleged be well founded, and be an honorable and a
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - NINTH DAY. 339
proper and just practice, why did he not avow it in
every part and progress of our proceedings here?
Why should he have put us to the necessity of wasting so many months in the proof of the fact? And
wlhy, after we have proved it, and not before, did he
confess it, avow it, and even glory in it?
1 must remind your Lordships that the sum charged
to be so taken by way of entertainment made only a,
part, a single article, of the bribes charged by Nundcomar to have been received by Mr. Hastings; and
when we find him confessing, what he could not deny, that single article, and evading all explanation
respecting the others, and not giving any reason
whatever why one was received and the others rejected, your Lordships will judge of the strong presumption of his having taken them all, even if we had given no other proofs of it. We think, however,
that we have proved the whole very satisfactorily.
But whether we have or not, the proof of a single
present received is sufficient; because the principle
to be established respecting these bribes is this,whether or not a Governor-General, paying a visit
to any of the poor, miserable, dependent creatures
called sovereign princes in that country, (men whom
Mr. Hastings has himself declared to be nothing but
phantoms, and that they had no one attribute of sovereignty about them,) whether, I say, he can consider them to be such sovereign princes as to justify his taking from them great sums of money by way of a
present. The Nabob, in fact, was not a sovereign
prince, nor a country power, in any sense but that
which the Company meant to exempt from the custom of making presents. It was their design to prevent their servants from availing themselves of the
? ? ? ? 340 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
real dependence of the nominal native powers to extort money from them under the pretence of their sovereignty. Such presents, so far from being voluntary, were in reality obtained from their weakness, their hopeless and unprotected condition; and you are to
lecide whether or not this custom, whicli is insisted
upon by the prisoner's counsel, with great triumph, to
be a thing which he could not evade, without breaking
through all the usages of the country, and violating
principles established by the most clear law of India,
is to be admitted as his justification.
It was on this very account, namely, the extortion
suffered by these people, under the name or pretence
of presents, that the Company first bound their servants by a covenant, which your Lordships shall now'
hear read.
" That they shall not take any grant of lands, or
rents or revenues issuing out of lands, or any territorial possession, jurisdiction, dominion, power, or
authority whatsoever, from any of the Indian princes,
sovereigns, subahs, or nabobs, or any of their ministers, servants, or agents, for any service or services,
or upon any account or pretence whatsoever, without
the license or consent of the Court of Directors. "
This clause in the covenant had doubtless a regard
to Lord Clive, and to Sir Hector Munro, and to some
others, who had received gifts, and grants of jaghires,
and other territorial revenues, that were confirmed by
the Company. But though this confirmation might
be justifiable at a time when we had no real sovereignty in the country, yet the Company very wisely
provided afterwards, that under no pretence whatever should their servants have the means of extort
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -NINTH DAY. 341
ing from the sovereigns or pretended sovereigns of
the country any of their lands or possessions. Afterwards it appeared that there existed abuses of a similar nature, and particularly (as was proved before us in the year 1773, and reported to our House, upon
the evidence of Mahomed Reza Khan) the practice
of frequently visiting the princes, and of extorting,
under pretence of such visits, great sums of money.
All their servants, and the Governor-General particularly, were therefore obliged to enter into the following covenant: -
" That they shall not, directly or indirectly, accept,
take, or receive, or agree to accept, take, or receive,
any gift, reward, gratuity, allowance, donation, or
compensation, in money, effects, jewels, or otherwise
howsoever, from any of the Indian princes, sovereigns,
subals, or nabobs, or any of their ministers, servants,
or agents, exceeding the value of four thousand rupees, for any service or services performed or to be
performed by them in India, or upon any other account or pretence whatsoever. "
By this covenant, my Lords, Mr. Hastings is forbidden to accept, upon any pretence and under any
name whatsoever, any sum above four thousand rupees, -that is to say, any sum above four hundred
pounds. Now the sum that was here received is
eighteen thousand pounds sterling, by way of a present, under the name of an allowance for an entertainment, which is the precise thing which his covenant was made to prevent. The covenant suffered him to
receive four hundred pounds: if he received more
than that money, he became a criminal, he had broken his covenant, and forfeited the obligation he had
? ? ? ? 342 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
made with his masters. Think with yourselves, my
Lords, what you will do, if you acquit the prisoner
of this charge. You will avow the validity, you will
sanction the principle of his defence: for, as the fact
is avowed, there is an end of that.
Good God! my Lords, where are we? If they
conceal their gifts and presents, they are safe by their
concealment; if they avow them, they are still safer.
They plead the customs of the country, or rather,
the customs which we have introduced into the country, - customs which have been declared to have their
foundation in a system of the most abominable corruption, the most flagitious extortion, the most dreadful oppression, -those very customs which their covenant is made to abolish. Think where your Lordships are. You have before you a covenant declaring that
he should take under no name whatever (I do not
know how words could be selected in the English
language more expressive) any sum more thanl four
hundred pounds. He says, " I have taken eighteen
thousand pounds. " He makes his counsel declare,
and he desires your Lordships to confirm their declaration, that he is not only justifiable iln so doing, but
that he ought to do so, --that he ought to break his
covenant, and act in direct contradiction to it. He
does not even pretend to say that this money was
intended, either inwardly or outwardly, avowedly or
covertly, for the Company's service. He put absolutely into his own pocket eighteen thousand pounds,
besides his salary.
Consider, my Lords, the consequences of this species of iniquity. If any servant of the Company,
high in station, chooses to make a visit from Calcutta
to Moorshedabad, which Moorshedabad was then the
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -NINTH DAY. 343
residence of our principal revenue government, --if
he should choose to take anll airing for his health, if
he has a fancy to make a little voyage for pleasure
as far as Moorshedabad, in one of those handsome
barges or budgeros of which you have heard so much
in his charge against Nundcomar, he can put twenty
thousand pounds into his pocket any day he pleases,
in defiance of all our acts of Parliament, covenants,
and regulations.
Do you make your laws, do you make your covenants, for the very purpose of their being evaded?
Is this the purpose for which a British tribunal sits
here, to furnish a subject for an epigram, or a tale
for the laughter of the world? Believe me, my
Lords, the world is not to be thus trifled with. But,
my Lords, you will never trifle with your duty. You
have a gross, horrid piece of corruption before you,
-impudently confessed, and more impudelltly defended. But you will not suffer Mr. Hastings to
say, " I have only to go to Moorshedabad, or to order the Nabob to meet me half way, and I can set aside and laugh at all your covenants and acts of
Parliament. " Is this all the force and power of
the covenant by which you would prevent the servants of the Company from committing acts of fraud and oppression, that they have nothing to do but to
amuse themselves with a tour of pleasure to Moorshedabad in order to put any sum of money in their pocket that they please?
But they justify themselves by saying, such things
have been practised before. No doubt they have;
and these covenants were made that they should not
be practised any more. But your Lordships are desired to say, that the very custom which the cove
? ? ? ? 344 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
nant is made to destroy, the very grievance itself,
may be pleaded; the abuse shall be admitted to destroy the law made to prevent it. It is impossible,
I venture to say, that your Lordshlips should act thus.
The conduct of the criminal is not half so abhorrent
as the justification is affronting to justice, whilst it
tends to vilify and degrade the dignity of the Peerage
and the character of the Commons of Great Britain,
before the former and against the latter of which such
a justification is produced in the face of the world.
At the same time- that we call for your justice
upon this man, we beseech you to remember the
severest justice upon him is the tenderest pity towards the innocent victims of his crimes. Consider
what was at that time the state of the people from
whom, in direct defiance of his covenant, he took this
sum of money. Were they at this time richer, were
they more opulent, was the state of the country more
flourishing than when Mr. Sumner, when Mr. Vansittart, in short, than when the long line of Mr. Hastings's predecessors visited that country? No, they were not. Mr. Hastings at this very time had reduced the Nabob's income from 450,0001. [400,0001. ? ]
sterling a year, exclusive of other considerable domains and revenues, to 160,0001. He was, indeed, an
object of compassion. His revenues had not only been
reduced during his state of minority, but they were
reduced when lie afterwards continued in a state in
which he could do no one valid act; and yet, in this
state, he was made competent to give away, under the
name of compensation for entertainments, the sum of
18,0001. , - perhaps at that time nearly all he had in
the world.
Look at your minutes, and you will find Mr. Hast
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -NINTH DAY. 345
ings had just before this time said that the bread of
ten thousand persons, many of them of high rank,
depended upon the means possessed by the Nabob
for their support, -- that his heart was cut and afflicted to see himself obliged to ruin and starve so many of the Mahometan nobility, the greatest part
of whose yet remaining miserable allowances were
now taken away. You know, and you will forgive
me again remarking, that it is the nature of the
eagles and more generous birds of prey to fall upon
living, healthy victims, but that vultures and carrion
crows, and birds of that base and degenerate kind,
always prey upon dead or dying carcases. It is upon
ruined houses, it is upon decayed families, it is upon extinguished nobility, that Mr. Hastings chooses to prey, and to justify his making them his prey.
But again we hear, my Lords, that it is a custom, upon ceremonial and complimentary visits, to
receive these presents. Do not let us deceive ourselves. Mr. Hastings was there upon no visit either
of ceremony or politics.
pany, Mr. Bristow, the two Residents of Mr. Hastings, Mr. Middleton and Mr. Johnson, and the two
Residents sent by him to watch over all the rest,
Ma3or Palmer and Major Davy, -- upon quarrels, I
say, between them, we discovered that Mr. Middleton had received the offer of a present of 100,0001.
in February, 1782. This circumstance is mentioned
in a letter of Mr Middleton's, ill which lie informs
Mr. Hastings that the Nabob had destined such a
sum for him.
Now the first thing that will occur to your Lordships upon such an affair will be a desire to know
what it was that induced the Nabob to make this
offer. It was but in the September preceding that
Mr. Hastings had received, for his private use, as the
Nabob conceived, so bountiful a present as 100,0001. ;
what motive, tlien, could he have had in February
to offer him another 100,0001. ? This man, at the
time, was piercing heaven itself with the cries of
despondency, despair, beggary, and ruin. You have
seen that lie was forced to rob his own family, in
order to satisfy the Company's demands upon him;
and yet thlis is precisely the time when he thinks
proper to offer 100,0001. to Mr. Hastings. Does not
the mind of every man revolt, whilst lie exclaims,
and say, " What! another 100,0001. to Mr. Hastillgs? "
What reason had the Nabob to think Mr. Hastilgs
so monstrously insatiable, that, having but the Soptember before received 100,0001. , he must give him
another in February? My Lords, he must, in the
interval, have threatened the Nabob with some horrible catastrophe, from which lie was to redeem himself by this second present. You can assign no other motive for his giving it. We know not what
? ? ? ? 326 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
answer Mr. Hastings made to Mr. Middleton upon
that occasion, but we find that in the year 1783 Mr.
Hastings asserts that he sent up Major Palmer and
Major Davy to persuade the Nabob to transfer this
present, which the Nabob intended for him, to the
Company's service. Remark, my Lords, the progress of this affair. In a formal accusation preferred against Mr. Middleton, he charges him with obstructing this design of his. In this accusation, my Lords, you find him at once in tile curious character of
prosecutor, witness, and judge.
Let us see how lie comports himself. I shall only
state to you one of the articles of his impeachment;
it is the third charge; it is in page 1267 of your
Lordsllips' Minutes.
"For sending repeatedly to the Vizier, and to his
minister, Hyder Beg Khan, to advise them against
transferring the ten lacs of rupees intended as a
present to the Governor-General to the Company's
account; as it would be a precedent for further
demands, which if the Vizier did not refuse in the
first instance, the government would never cease to
harass him for money. "
The first thing that will occur to your Lordships
is an assertion of the accuser's:'" I am morally
certain, that jaidads or assets for ten lacs, either
in assignment of land or in bills, had been prepared,
and were in the charge or possession of Mr. Middleton, before Major Palmer's arrival, and left with Mr. Johnson on Mr. Middleton's departure. "
My Lords, here is an accusation that Mr. Middleton had actually received money, either in bills or assets of some kind or other, - and that, upon quit
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -- EIGHTH DAY. 327
ting his Residency, he had handed it over to his
successor, Mr. Johnson. Here are, then, facts asserted, and we must suppose substantiated. Here
is a sum of money to be accounted for, in which
there is a gross malversation directly charged as to
these particulars, in Mr. Hastings's opinion. Mr.
Macpherson, another member of the Council, has declared, that he understood at the time that the ten
lacs were actually deposited in bills, and that it was
not a mere offer made by the Nabob to pay such a
sum from the future revenue of the country. Mr.
Hastings has these facts disclosed to him. He declares
that he was " morally certain" of it, - that is, as certain as a man can be of anything; because physical
certitude does not belong to such matters. The first
thing you will naturally ask is, " Why does lie not
ask Mr. Johnson how lie had disposed of that money
which Mr. Middleton had put in Iris hands? " He
does no such thing; he passes over it totally, as if it
were no part of the matter inll question, and the accusation against Mr. Middleton terminates in the mainner you will there find stated. When Mr. Johnson is
asked, " Why was not that monley applied to the Comnpany's service? " he boldly steps forward, and says,
" I prevented it from being so applied. It never was,
it never ought to have been, so applied; such an
appropriation of money to be taken from the Nabob
would have been enormous upon that occasion. "
What, then, does Mr. Hastings do? Does he examince AIr. Middleton upon the subject, who charges himself with having received the money? Mr. Middleton was at that very time in Calcutta, called down thither by Mr. Hastings himself. One would naturally expect that lie would call upon him to explain for
? ? ? ? 328 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
what purpose he left the money with Mr. Johnson.
He did no such thing. Did he examine Mr. Johnson himself, who was charged with having received
the money from Mr. Middleton? Did he ask him
what he had done with that money? Not one word.
Did he send for Major Palmer and Major Davy to
account for it? No. Did lie call any shroff, ally
banker, any one person concerned in the payment of
the money, or any one person in the management of
the revenue? No, not one. Directly in the face of
his own assertions, directly contrary to his moral conviction of the fact that the money had been actually deposited, he tries Mr. Johnson collusively and obliquely, not upon the account of what was done with the money, but why it was prevented from being applied to the Company's service; and he acquits him in a manner that (taking the whole of it together)
will give your Lordships the finest idea possible of a
Bengal judicature, as exercised by Mr. Hastings.
"I am not sorry," says lie, "that Mr. Johnson
chose to defeat my intentions; since it would have
added to the Nabob's distresses, but with no immediate relief to the Company. If, in his own breast, he can view the secret motives of this transaction, and
on their testimony approve it, I also acquit him. "
Merciful God! Here is a man accused by regular articles of impeachment. The accuser declares he
is morally certain that the money had been received,
but was prevented from being applied to its destination by the person accused; and he acquits him. Does lie acquit him from his own knowledge, or from
any evidence? No: but he applies to the man's colnscience, and says, "If you in your conscience can acquit yourself, I acquit you. "
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -EIGHTH DAY. 329
Here, then, is a proceeding the most astonishing
and shameless that perhaps was ever witnessed: a
court trying a man for a delinquency and misapplication of money, destilled, in the first instance, for the use of the judge, but which he declares ought, in his
own opinion, to be set apart for the public use, and
which he was desirous of' applying to the Company's
service, without regard to his own interest, and then
the judge declaring lie is not sorry that his purpose
had been defeated by the party accused. Instead,
however, of censuring the accused, he applies to the
man's own conscience. " Does your conscience,"
says he, " acquit you of having acted wrong? " The
accused makes no reply; and then Mr. Hastings, by
an hypothetical conclusion, acquits him.
Mr. Hastings is accused by the Commons for that,
having a moral certainty of the money's being intended for his use, he would not have ceased to inquire into the actual application of it but from some corrupt motive and intention. With this he is charged.
He comes before you to make his defence. Mr. Middleton is in England. Does he call Mr. Middleton
to explain it here? Does he call upon Mr. Johnson,
who was the other day in this court, to account for
it? Why did lie not, when he sent for these curious
papers and testimonials to Major Palmer, (the person
authorized, as lie pretends, by him, to resign all his
pretensions to the money procured,) send for Major
Palmer, who is the person that accused him in this
business, - why not send for him to bear some testimony respecting it? No: he had time enough, but
at no one time and inll no place did lie do this; therefore the imputation of the foulest corruption attaches upon him, joined with the infamy of a collusive pros
? ? ? ? 330 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
ecution, instituted for the sake of a collusive acquittal.
Having explained to your Lordships the nature,
and detailed the circumstances, as far as we are acquainted with them, of this fraudulent transaction,
we have only further to remind you, that, though
Mr. Middleton was declared guilty of five of the
six charges brought against him by Mr. Hastings, yet
the next thing you hear is, that Mr. Hastings, after
declaring that this conduct of Mr. Middleton had
been very bad, and that the conduct of the other servants of the Company concerned with him had been
ten times worse, he directly appoints him to one of
the most honorable and confidential offices the Company had to dispose of: he sends him ambassador to
the Nizam, -- to give to all the courts of India a specimen of the justice, honor, and decency of the British government.
My Lords, with regard to the bribe for the entertainment, I only beg leave to make one observation
to you upon that article. I could say, if the time
would admit it, a great deal upon that subject; but
I wish to compress it, and I shall therefore only recommend it in general to your Lordships' deliberate
consideration. The covenant subsisting between the
Company and its servants was made for the express
purpose of putting an end to all such entertainments.
By this convention it is ordered that no presents exceeding 2001. [4001. ? ] shall be accepted upon any
pretence for an entertainment. The covenant was intended to put an end to the custom of receiving money for entertainments, even wlhen visiting an independent Oriental prince. But your Lordsbips know that the Nabob was no prince, but a poor, imiserable, un
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - E! iCTHTH DAY. 331
done dependant upon the Company. The present was
also taken by Mr. Hastings at a time when he went upon the cruel commission of cutting down tile Nabob's allowance from 400,0001. to 260,0001. [160,0001. ? ],
and when he was reducing to beggary thousands
of persons who were dependent for bread upon the
Nabob, and ruining, perhaps, forty thousand others.
I shall say no more upon that subject, though, in
truth, it is a thing upon which much observation
migiht be made.
I shall now pass on to another article connected
with, though not making a direct part of, that of
corrupt bribery: I mean the swindling subterfuges
by which he has attempted to justify his corrupt
practices. At one time lie defends them by pleading the necessities of his own affairs, --as when lihe
takes presents and entertainments avowedly for his
own profits. At another time he defends them by
pleading the goodness of his intentions: he intended, he says, to give the money to the Company. His
last plea has something in it (which shall I say? )
of a more awful or of a more abandoned character,
or of both. In the settlement of his public account,
before he left India, he takes credit for a bond which
lie had received from Nobkissin upon some account
or other. He then returns to England, and what
does he do? Pay off? No. Give up the bond to
the Company? No. He says, "I will account to
the Company for this money. " And when he comes
to give this account of the expenditure of this money, your Lordships will not be a little astonished at
the items of it. One is for founding a Mahometan
college. It is a very strange thing that Rajah Nob
? ? ? ? 332 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
kissin, who is a Gentoo, should be employed by Mr.
Hastings to found a Mahometan college. We will
allow MIr. Hastings, who is a Christian, or would be
thought a Christian, to grow pious at last, and, as
many others have done, who have spent their lives
in fraud, rapacity, and peculation, to seek amends
and to expiate his crimes by charitable foundations.
Nay, we will suppose Mr. Hastings to have taken it
into his head to turn Mahometan, (Gentoo he could
not,) and to have designed by a Mahometan foundation to expiate his offences. Be it so; but why should Nobkissin pay for it? We will pass over
this also. But when your Lordships shall hear of
what nature that foundation was, I believe you will
allow that a more extraordinary history never did
appear in the world.
In the first place, he stated to the Council, on the
18th of April, 1781, that in the month of November,
1780, a petition was presented to him by a considerable number of Mussulmen, in compliance with which this Mahometan college appears to have been
founded. It next appears from his statement, that
in the April following, (that is, within about six
months after the foundation,) many students had
finished their education. You see what a hot-bed
bribery and corruption is. Our universities cannot
furnish an education in six years: in India they
have completed it within six months, and have taken their degrees.
Mr. Hastings says, "I have supported this establishment to this time at my own expense; I desire
the Company will now defray the charge of it.
"
He then calculates what the expenses were; he calculates that the building would cost about 6,0001. ,
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. EIGHTH DAY. 333
and he gets from the Company a bond to raise money
for paying this 6,0001. You apparently have the
building now at the public expense, and Mr. Htastings still stands charged witll the expense of the
college for six months. He then proposes that a
tract of land should be given for the college, to the
value of about three thousand odd pounds a year, -
and that in the mean time there should be a certain
sum allotted for its expenses. After this Mr. Hastings writes a letter from the Ganges to the Company,
in which he says not a word about the expense of
the building, but says that the college was founded
and maintained at his own expense, though it was
thought to be maintained by the Company; and he
fixes the commencement of the expense in September, 1779. But, after all, we find that the very professor who was to be settled there never so much as arrived in Calcutta, or showed ltis face there, till
some time afterwards. And look at Mr. Larkins's
private accounts, and you will find that he charges
the expense to have commenced not until October,
1781. It is no error, because it runs through and
is so accounted in the whole: and it thus appears
that he has charged, falsely and fraudulently, a year
more for that establishment than it cost him.
At last, then, when he was coming away, (for I
hasten to the conclusion of an affair ludicrous indeed in some respects, but not unworthy of your
Lordships' consideration,) " after remarking that he
had experienced for three years the utility of this
institution, he recommends that they will establish
a fund for 3,0001. a year for it, and give it to the
master. " He had left Gunga Govind Sing as a
Gentoo legacy, and he now leaves the Mussulmanl
as a Mahometan legacy to the Company.
? ? ? ? 334 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
Your Lordships shall now hear what was the upshot of the whole. The Company soon afterwards hearing that this college was become the greatest
nuisance in Calcutta, and that it had raised the cries
of all the inhabitants against it, one of their servants,
a Mr. Chapman, was deputed by the Governor, Sir
John Shore, to examine into it, and your Lordships
will find the account he gives of it in your minutes.
In short, my Lords, we find that this was a seminary
of robbers, housebreakers, and every nuisance to society; so that the Company was obliged to turn out the master, and to remodel the whole. Your Lordships will now judge of the merits and value of this, one of the sets-off brought forward by the prisoner
against the charges which we have brought forward
against him: it began in injustice and peculation,
and ended in a seminary for robbers and housebreakers.
Nothing now remains to be pressed by me upon
your Lordships' consideration, but the account given
by the late Governor-General, Earl Cornwallis, of the
state in which he found the country left by his predecessor, Mr. Hastings, the prisoner at your bar. But, patient as I know your Lordships to be, I also know
that your strength is not inexhaustible; and though
what I have farther to add will not consume much
of your Lordships' time, yet I conceive that there is
a necessity for deferring it to another day.
? ? ? ? S P E C HIN
GENERAL REPLY.
NINTH DAY: MONDAY, JUNE 16, 1794.
M Y LORDS, -I should think it necessary to make
an apology to your Lordships for appearing before you one day more, if I were inclined to measure this business either by the standard of my own ability, or by my own impatience, or by any supposed
impatience of yours. I know no measure, in such
a case, but the nature of the subject, and the duty
which we owe to it. You will therefore, my Lords,
permit me, in a few words, to lead you back to what
we did yesterday, that you may the better comprehend the manner in which I mean to conclude the
business to-dav.
My Lords, we took the liberty of stating to you,
the condition of Bengal before our taking possession
of it, and of the several classes of its inhabitants.
We first brought before you the Mahometan inhabitants, who had the judicial authority of the country
in their hands; and we proved to you the utter ruin
of that body of people, and with them of the justice
of the country, by their being, both one and the other, sold to an infaimous woman called Muniny Begum.
We next showed you, that the whole landed interest,
the zemindars, or Ilindoo gentry of the country, was
likewise ruined by its being given over, by letting it
? ? ? ? 336 IMIPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
on a five years' lease, to infamous farmers, and giving it up to their merciless exactions, - and afterwards by subjecting the rank of those zemindars,
their title-deeds, and all their pecuniary affairs, to the
minutest scrutiny, under pain of criminal punishment, by a commission granted to a nefarious villain
called Gunga Govind Sing. We lastly showed you
that the remaining third class, that of the En-glish,
was partly corrupted, or had its authority dissolved,
and that the whole superintending English control
was subverted or subdued, - that the products of
tlhe country were diminished, and that the revenues
of the Company were dilapidated, by an overcharge
of expenses, in four years, to the amount of 500,0001. ,
in consequence of these corrupt, dangerous, and mischievous projects.
We have farther stated, that the Company's servants were corrupted by contracts and jobs; we
proved that those that were not so corrupted were
removed from their stations or reduced to a state of
abject dependence; we showed you the destruction
of the Provincial Councils, the destruction of the
Council-General, and the formation of a committee
for no other ends whatever but for the purposes of
bribery, concealment, an]d corruption. We Inext stated some of the most monstrous instances of that bribery; and though we were of opinion that in unone of them any satisfactory defence worth mentioning
had been made, yet we have thought that this should
not hinder us from recalling to your Lordships' recollection the peculiar nature and circumstances of one
of those proceedings.
The proceedings to which we wish to call your
attention are those belonging to the second bribe
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - NINTH DAY. 337
given by the Nabob of Oude to Mr. Hastings. Mr.
HIastings's own knowledge and opinion that that
money was set apart for his use, either in bills or
assets, I have before stated; and I now wish to call
your Lordships' minute recollection to the manner in
which the fraudulent impeachment of Mr. Middleton,
for the purpose of stifling an inquiry into that business, was carried on. Your Lordships will remember
that I proved to you, upon the face of that proceeding, tile collusive nature of the accusation, and that the real state of the case was not charged, --and that
Mr. Hastings acquitted the party accused of one article of the charge, not upon the evidence of the case, contrary to his own avowed, declared, moral certainty of his guilt, but upon a pretended appeal to the conscience of the man accused. He did not, however, give him a complete, formal, official acquittal,
but referred the matter to the Court of Directors,
who could not possibly know anything of the matter,
without one article of evidence whatever produced at
the time or transmitted. We lastly proved. to you,
t;hat, after finding him guilty of five charges, and
leaving the other to the Court of Directors, Mr. Hastings, without any reason assigned, appointed him to a great office in the Company's service.
These proceedings were brought before you for two
purposes: first, to show the corrupt principle of the
whole proceeding; next, to show the manner in which
the Company's servants are treated. They are accused
and persecuted, until they are brought to submit to
whatever terms it may be thought proper to impose
upon them; they are then formally, indeed, acquitted of the most atrocious crimes charged against
them, but virtually condemned upon some articles,
VOL. XII. 22
? ? ? ? 338 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
with the scourge hung over them, -and in some
instances rewarded by the greatest, most honorable,
and most lucrative situations in the Company's service. My Lords, it is on the same ground of the
wicked, pernicious, and ruinous principles of Mr.
Hastings's government, that I have charged this with
everything that is chargeable against him, namely,
that, if your Lordships should ratify those principles
by your acquittal of him, they become principles of
government, - rejected, indeed, by the Commons, but
adopted by the Peerage of Great Britain.
There is another article which I have just touched,
but which I must do more than barely notice, upon
account of the evil example of it: I mean the taking great sums of money, under pretence of an entertainment. Your Lordships will recollect, that, when this business was charged against him in India, Mr.
Hastings neither affirmed nor denied the fact. Confession could not be there extorted from him. He
next appeared before the House of Commons, and he
still evaded a denial or a confession of it. He lastly
appeared before your Lordships, and in his answer
to our charge he in the same manner evaded either
a confession or a denial. He forced us to employ a
great part of a session in endeavoring to establish
what we have at last established, the receipt of the
sums first charged, and of seven lacs more, by him.
At length the proof could not be evaded; and after
we had fought through all the difficulties which the
law could interpose in his defence, and of which lie
availed himself with a degree of effrontery that has,
I believe, no example in the world, he confesses,
avows, and justifies his conduct. If the custom alleged be well founded, and be an honorable and a
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - NINTH DAY. 339
proper and just practice, why did he not avow it in
every part and progress of our proceedings here?
Why should he have put us to the necessity of wasting so many months in the proof of the fact? And
wlhy, after we have proved it, and not before, did he
confess it, avow it, and even glory in it?
1 must remind your Lordships that the sum charged
to be so taken by way of entertainment made only a,
part, a single article, of the bribes charged by Nundcomar to have been received by Mr. Hastings; and
when we find him confessing, what he could not deny, that single article, and evading all explanation
respecting the others, and not giving any reason
whatever why one was received and the others rejected, your Lordships will judge of the strong presumption of his having taken them all, even if we had given no other proofs of it. We think, however,
that we have proved the whole very satisfactorily.
But whether we have or not, the proof of a single
present received is sufficient; because the principle
to be established respecting these bribes is this,whether or not a Governor-General, paying a visit
to any of the poor, miserable, dependent creatures
called sovereign princes in that country, (men whom
Mr. Hastings has himself declared to be nothing but
phantoms, and that they had no one attribute of sovereignty about them,) whether, I say, he can consider them to be such sovereign princes as to justify his taking from them great sums of money by way of a
present. The Nabob, in fact, was not a sovereign
prince, nor a country power, in any sense but that
which the Company meant to exempt from the custom of making presents. It was their design to prevent their servants from availing themselves of the
? ? ? ? 340 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
real dependence of the nominal native powers to extort money from them under the pretence of their sovereignty. Such presents, so far from being voluntary, were in reality obtained from their weakness, their hopeless and unprotected condition; and you are to
lecide whether or not this custom, whicli is insisted
upon by the prisoner's counsel, with great triumph, to
be a thing which he could not evade, without breaking
through all the usages of the country, and violating
principles established by the most clear law of India,
is to be admitted as his justification.
It was on this very account, namely, the extortion
suffered by these people, under the name or pretence
of presents, that the Company first bound their servants by a covenant, which your Lordships shall now'
hear read.
" That they shall not take any grant of lands, or
rents or revenues issuing out of lands, or any territorial possession, jurisdiction, dominion, power, or
authority whatsoever, from any of the Indian princes,
sovereigns, subahs, or nabobs, or any of their ministers, servants, or agents, for any service or services,
or upon any account or pretence whatsoever, without
the license or consent of the Court of Directors. "
This clause in the covenant had doubtless a regard
to Lord Clive, and to Sir Hector Munro, and to some
others, who had received gifts, and grants of jaghires,
and other territorial revenues, that were confirmed by
the Company. But though this confirmation might
be justifiable at a time when we had no real sovereignty in the country, yet the Company very wisely
provided afterwards, that under no pretence whatever should their servants have the means of extort
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -NINTH DAY. 341
ing from the sovereigns or pretended sovereigns of
the country any of their lands or possessions. Afterwards it appeared that there existed abuses of a similar nature, and particularly (as was proved before us in the year 1773, and reported to our House, upon
the evidence of Mahomed Reza Khan) the practice
of frequently visiting the princes, and of extorting,
under pretence of such visits, great sums of money.
All their servants, and the Governor-General particularly, were therefore obliged to enter into the following covenant: -
" That they shall not, directly or indirectly, accept,
take, or receive, or agree to accept, take, or receive,
any gift, reward, gratuity, allowance, donation, or
compensation, in money, effects, jewels, or otherwise
howsoever, from any of the Indian princes, sovereigns,
subals, or nabobs, or any of their ministers, servants,
or agents, exceeding the value of four thousand rupees, for any service or services performed or to be
performed by them in India, or upon any other account or pretence whatsoever. "
By this covenant, my Lords, Mr. Hastings is forbidden to accept, upon any pretence and under any
name whatsoever, any sum above four thousand rupees, -that is to say, any sum above four hundred
pounds. Now the sum that was here received is
eighteen thousand pounds sterling, by way of a present, under the name of an allowance for an entertainment, which is the precise thing which his covenant was made to prevent. The covenant suffered him to
receive four hundred pounds: if he received more
than that money, he became a criminal, he had broken his covenant, and forfeited the obligation he had
? ? ? ? 342 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
made with his masters. Think with yourselves, my
Lords, what you will do, if you acquit the prisoner
of this charge. You will avow the validity, you will
sanction the principle of his defence: for, as the fact
is avowed, there is an end of that.
Good God! my Lords, where are we? If they
conceal their gifts and presents, they are safe by their
concealment; if they avow them, they are still safer.
They plead the customs of the country, or rather,
the customs which we have introduced into the country, - customs which have been declared to have their
foundation in a system of the most abominable corruption, the most flagitious extortion, the most dreadful oppression, -those very customs which their covenant is made to abolish. Think where your Lordships are. You have before you a covenant declaring that
he should take under no name whatever (I do not
know how words could be selected in the English
language more expressive) any sum more thanl four
hundred pounds. He says, " I have taken eighteen
thousand pounds. " He makes his counsel declare,
and he desires your Lordships to confirm their declaration, that he is not only justifiable iln so doing, but
that he ought to do so, --that he ought to break his
covenant, and act in direct contradiction to it. He
does not even pretend to say that this money was
intended, either inwardly or outwardly, avowedly or
covertly, for the Company's service. He put absolutely into his own pocket eighteen thousand pounds,
besides his salary.
Consider, my Lords, the consequences of this species of iniquity. If any servant of the Company,
high in station, chooses to make a visit from Calcutta
to Moorshedabad, which Moorshedabad was then the
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -NINTH DAY. 343
residence of our principal revenue government, --if
he should choose to take anll airing for his health, if
he has a fancy to make a little voyage for pleasure
as far as Moorshedabad, in one of those handsome
barges or budgeros of which you have heard so much
in his charge against Nundcomar, he can put twenty
thousand pounds into his pocket any day he pleases,
in defiance of all our acts of Parliament, covenants,
and regulations.
Do you make your laws, do you make your covenants, for the very purpose of their being evaded?
Is this the purpose for which a British tribunal sits
here, to furnish a subject for an epigram, or a tale
for the laughter of the world? Believe me, my
Lords, the world is not to be thus trifled with. But,
my Lords, you will never trifle with your duty. You
have a gross, horrid piece of corruption before you,
-impudently confessed, and more impudelltly defended. But you will not suffer Mr. Hastings to
say, " I have only to go to Moorshedabad, or to order the Nabob to meet me half way, and I can set aside and laugh at all your covenants and acts of
Parliament. " Is this all the force and power of
the covenant by which you would prevent the servants of the Company from committing acts of fraud and oppression, that they have nothing to do but to
amuse themselves with a tour of pleasure to Moorshedabad in order to put any sum of money in their pocket that they please?
But they justify themselves by saying, such things
have been practised before. No doubt they have;
and these covenants were made that they should not
be practised any more. But your Lordships are desired to say, that the very custom which the cove
? ? ? ? 344 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
nant is made to destroy, the very grievance itself,
may be pleaded; the abuse shall be admitted to destroy the law made to prevent it. It is impossible,
I venture to say, that your Lordshlips should act thus.
The conduct of the criminal is not half so abhorrent
as the justification is affronting to justice, whilst it
tends to vilify and degrade the dignity of the Peerage
and the character of the Commons of Great Britain,
before the former and against the latter of which such
a justification is produced in the face of the world.
At the same time- that we call for your justice
upon this man, we beseech you to remember the
severest justice upon him is the tenderest pity towards the innocent victims of his crimes. Consider
what was at that time the state of the people from
whom, in direct defiance of his covenant, he took this
sum of money. Were they at this time richer, were
they more opulent, was the state of the country more
flourishing than when Mr. Sumner, when Mr. Vansittart, in short, than when the long line of Mr. Hastings's predecessors visited that country? No, they were not. Mr. Hastings at this very time had reduced the Nabob's income from 450,0001. [400,0001. ? ]
sterling a year, exclusive of other considerable domains and revenues, to 160,0001. He was, indeed, an
object of compassion. His revenues had not only been
reduced during his state of minority, but they were
reduced when lie afterwards continued in a state in
which he could do no one valid act; and yet, in this
state, he was made competent to give away, under the
name of compensation for entertainments, the sum of
18,0001. , - perhaps at that time nearly all he had in
the world.
Look at your minutes, and you will find Mr. Hast
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -NINTH DAY. 345
ings had just before this time said that the bread of
ten thousand persons, many of them of high rank,
depended upon the means possessed by the Nabob
for their support, -- that his heart was cut and afflicted to see himself obliged to ruin and starve so many of the Mahometan nobility, the greatest part
of whose yet remaining miserable allowances were
now taken away. You know, and you will forgive
me again remarking, that it is the nature of the
eagles and more generous birds of prey to fall upon
living, healthy victims, but that vultures and carrion
crows, and birds of that base and degenerate kind,
always prey upon dead or dying carcases. It is upon
ruined houses, it is upon decayed families, it is upon extinguished nobility, that Mr. Hastings chooses to prey, and to justify his making them his prey.
But again we hear, my Lords, that it is a custom, upon ceremonial and complimentary visits, to
receive these presents. Do not let us deceive ourselves. Mr. Hastings was there upon no visit either
of ceremony or politics.
