They wished to receive his rents, and to
be made an intermediate party between him and the
?
be made an intermediate party between him and the
?
Edmund Burke
?
?
?
256 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
had beggared and destroyed his own subjects, and
could not pay his debts to the English government,
was the man with whom Mr. Hastings was in treaty
to deliver up Cheyt Sing and his country, under pretence of his not having paid regularly to the Company those customary payments which the tyrant would probably have never paid at all, if he had
been put in possession of the country. This I mention to illustrate Mr. Hastings's plans of economy
and finance, without considering the injustice and
cruelty of delivering up a man to the hereditary enemy of his family.
It is known, my Lords, that Mr. Hastings, besides
having received proposals for delivering up the beautiful country of Benares, that garden of God, as it is
styled in India, to that monster, that rapacious tyrant,
Asoph ul Dowlah, who with his gang of mercenary
troops had desolated his own country like a swarm
of locusts, had purposed likewise to seize Cheyt Sing's
own patrimonial forts, which was nothing less than
to take from him the residence of his women and
his children, the seat of his honor, the place in which
the remaining treasures and last hopes of his family.
were centred. By the Gentoo law, every lord or supreme magistrate is bound to construct and to live in
such a fort. It is the usage of India, and is a matter
of state and dignity, as well as of propriety, reason,
and defence. It was probably an apprehension of being injured in this tender point, as well as a knowledge of the proposal made by the Nabob, which induced Cheyt Sing to offer to buy himself off; although it does not appear from any part of the
evidence that he assigned any other reason than
that of Mr. Hastings intending to exact from him
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -SECOND DAY. 257
six lacs of rupees over and above his other exactions.
Mr. Hastings,. indeed, almost acknowledges the existence of this plot against the Rajah, and his being
the author of it. He says, without any denial of
the fact, that the Rajah suspected some strong acts
to be intended against him, and therefore asked
Mr. Markham whether he could not buy them off
and obtain Mr. Hastings's favor by the payment of
200,0001. Mr. Markhain gave as his opinion, that
200,0001. was not sufficient; and the next day the
Ra. jah offered 20,0001. more, in all 220,0001. The
negotiation, however, broke off; and why? Not, as
Mr. Markham says he conjectured, because the Rajah
had learned that Mr. Hastings had no longer an intention of imposing these six lacs, or something to
that effect, and therefore retracted his offer, but because that offer had been rejected by Mr. Hastings. . Let us hear what reason the man who was in the true secret gives for not accepting the Rajah's offer.
" I rejected," says Mr. Hastings, " the offer of twenty
lacs, with which the Rajah would have compromised
for his guilt when it was too late. " My Lords, he
best-knows what the motives of his own actions were.
He says, the offer was made " when it was too late. "
Had he previously told the Rajah what sum of money
he would be required to pay in order to buy himself off, or had he required him to name any sum
which he was willing to pay? Did he, after having
refused the offer made by the Rajah, say, " Come
and make me a better offer, or upon such a day I
shall declare that your offers are inadmissible "?
No such thing appears. Your Lordships will further
VOL. XI. 17
? ? ? ? 258 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
remark, that Mr. Hastings refused the 200,0001. at
a time when the exigencies of the Company were
so pressing that he was obliged to rob, pilfer, and
steal upon every side, - at a time when he was borrowing 40,000l. from Mr. Sulivan in one morning,
and raising by other under-jobs 27,0001. more. In the
distress [in? ] which his own extravagance and prodigality had involved him, 200,0001. would have been a weighty benefit, although derived from his villany;
but this relief he positively refused, because, says
he, " the offer came too late. " From these words,
my Lords, we may infer that there was a time when
the offer would not have been " too late," -a period
at which it would have been readily accepted. No
such thing appears. There is not a trace upon your
minutes, not -a trace in the correspondence of the
Company, to prove that the Rajah would at any
time have been permitted to buy himself off from
this complicated tyranny.
I have already stated a curious circumstance in
this proceeding, to which I must again beg leave to
direct your Lordships' attention. Does it anywhere
appear in that correspondence, or in the testimony
of Mr. Benn, of Mr. Markham, or of any human being, that Mr. Hastings had ever told Cheyt Sing with what sum he should be satisfied? There is evidence
before you directly in proof that they did not know
the amount. Not one person knew what his intention was, when he refused this 200,0001. For when
he met Mr. Markham at Boglipore, and for the
first time mentioned the sum of 500,0001. as the
fine he meant to exact, Mr. Markham was astonished
and confounded at its magnitude. He tells you this
himself. It appears, then, that neither Cheyt Sing
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SECOND DAY. 259
nor the Resident at Benares (who ought to have
been in the secret, if upon such an occasion secrecy
is allowable) ever knew what the terms were. The
Rajah was in the dark; he was left to feel, blindfold,
how much money could relieve him from the iniquitous intentions of Mr. Hastings; and at last he is
told that his offer comes too late, without having
ever been told the period at which it would have
been well-timed, or the amount it was proposed to
take from him. Is this, my Lords, the proper way
to adjudge a fine?
Your Lordships will now be pleased to advert to
the manner in which he defends himself and these
proceedings. He says, "I rejected this offer of
twenty lacs, with which the Rajah would have compromised for his guilt when it was too late. " If by
these words he means too late to answer the purpose
for which he has said the fine was designed, namely,
the relief of the Company, the ground of his defence
is absolutely false; for it is notorious that at the
time referred to the Company's affairs were in the
greatest distress.
I will next call your Lordships' attention to the
projected sale of Benares to the Nabob of Oude.
"if," says Mr. Hastings, "I ever talked of selling
the Company's sovereignty over Benares to the Nabob of Oude, it was but in terrorem; and no subsequent act of mine warrants the supposition of my having seriously intended it. " And in another place
he. says, " If I ever threatened " (your Lordships will
remark, that he puts hypothetically a matter the
reality of which he has got to be solemnly declared
on an affidavit, and in a narrative to the truth of
which he has deposed upon oath)- "if I ever.
? ? ? ? 260 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
threatened," says he, "to dispossess the Rajah of
his territories, it is no more than what my predecessors, without rebuke from their superiors, or notice taken of the expression, had wished and intended to have done to his father, even when the Company
had no pretensions to the sovereignty of the country.
It is no more than such a legal act of sovereignty
as his behavior justified, and as I was justified in
by the intentions of my predecessors. If I pretended to seize upon his forts, it was in full conviction
that a dependant on the Company, guarantied, maintained, and protected in his country by the Company's arms, had no occasion for forts, had no right to them, and could hold them for no other than
suspected and rebellious purposes. None of the
Company's other zemindars are permitted to maintain them; and even our ally, the Nabob of the
Carnatic, has the Company's troops in all his garrisons. Policy and public safety absolutely require
it. What state could exist that allowed its inferior
members to hold forts and garrisons independent of
the superior administration? It is a solecism in government to suppose it. "
Here, then, my Lords, he first declares that this
was merely done in terrorem; that he never intended
to execute the abominable act. And will your Lordships patiently endure that such terrific threats as
these shall be hung by your Governor in India over
the unhappy people that are subject to him and
protected by British faith? Will you permit, that,
for the purpose of extorting money, a Governor shall
hold out the terrible threat of delivering a tributary
prince and his people, bound hand and foot, into the
power of their perfidious enemies?
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -SECOND DAY. 261
The terror occasioned by threatening to take from
him his forts can only be estimated by considering,
that, agreeably to the religion and prejudices of Hindoos, the forts are the places in which their women are lodged, in which, according to their notions, their honor is deposited, and in which is lodged all
the wealth that they can save against an evil day to
purchase off the vengeance of an enemy. These forts
Mr. Hastings says he intended to take, because the
Rajah could hold them for no other than rebellious
and suspected purposes. Now I will show your
Lordships that the man who has the horrible audacity to make this declaration did himself. assign to the
Rajah these very forts. He put him in possession
of them, and, when there was a dispute about the
Nabob's rights to them on the one side and the
Company's on the other, did confirm them to this
man. The paper shall be produced, that you may
have before your eyes the gross contradictions into
which his rapacity and acts of arbitrary power have
betrayed him. Thank God, my Lords, men that are
greatly guilty are never wise. I repeat it, men that
are greatly guilty are never wise. In their defence
of one crime they are sure to meet the ghost of some
former defence, which, like the spectre in Virgil,
drives them back. The prisoner at your bar, like
the hero of the poet, when he attempts to make his
escape by one evasion, is stopped by the appearance of some former contradictory averment. If he
attempts to escape by one door, there his criminal
allegations of one kind stop him; if he attempts to
escape at another, the facts and allegations intended for some other wicked purpose stare him full in
the face.
? ? ? ? 262 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
Quacunque viam sibi fraude petivit,
Successum Dea dira negat.
The paper I hold in my hand contains Nundcomar's accusation of Mr. Hastings. It consists of a variety of charges; and I will first read to you what
is said by Nundcomar of these forts, which it is pretended could be held for none but suspicious and rebellious purposes. "At the time Mr. Hastings was going to Benares,
he desired me to give him an account in writing of
any lands which, though properly belonging to the
Subah of Bahar, might have come iunder the dominion of Bulwant Sing, that they might be recovered from his son, Rajah Cheyt Sing. The purgunnahs
of Kera, Mungrora, and Bidjegur were exactly in
this situation, having been usurped by Bulwant Sing
from the Subah of Bahar. I accordingly delivered to
Mr. Hastings the accounts of them, from the entrance
of the Company upon the dewanny to the year 1179
of the Fusseli era, stated at twenty-four lacs. Mr.
Hastings said,' Give a copy of this to Roy Rada
Churn, that, if Cheyt Sing is backward in acknowledging this claim, Rada Churn may answer and confute him. ''Why Mr. Hastings, when he arrived
at Benares, and had called Rajah Cheyt Sing before
him, left these countries still in the Rajah's usurpations it remains with Mr. Hastings to explain. " This is Nundcomar's charge. Here follows Mr.
Hastings's reply.
"I recollect an information given me by Nundco.
mar concerning the pretended usurpations made by
the Rajah of Benares, of the purgunnahs of Kera,
Mungrora, and Bidjegur. " (Your Lordships will
recollect that Bidjegur is one of those very forts
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -SECOND DAY. 263
which he declares could not be held but for suspicious and rebellious purposes. ) "I do not recollect
his mentioning it again, when- I set out for Benares;
neither did I ever intimate the subject, either to
Cheyt Sing or his ministers, because I knew I could
not support the claim; and to have made it and
dropped it would have been in every sense dishonorable. Not that I passed by it with indifference or
inattention. I took pains to investigate the foundation of this title, and recommended it to the particular inquiry of Mr. Vansittart, who was the Chief of Patna, at the time in which I received the first intimation. The following letter and voucher, which
I received from him, contain a complete statement
of this pretended usurpation. "
These vouchers will answer our purpose, fully to
establish that in his opinion the claim of the English
government upon those forts was at that time totally
unfounded, and so absurd that he did not even dare
to mention it. This fort of Bidjegur, the most considerable in the country, and of which we shall have
much to say hereafter, is the place in which Cheyt
Sing had deposited his women and family. That
fortress did Mr. Hastings himself give to this very
man, deciding in his favor as a judge, upon an examination and after an inquiry: and yet he now declares that he had no right to it, and that he could not hold it but for wicked and rebellious purposes.
But, my Lords, when he changed this language, he
had resolved to take away these forts,- to destroy
them,- to root the Rajah out of every place of refuge, out of every secure place in which he could
hide his head, or screen himself from the rancor, re.
venge, avarice, and malice. of his ruthless foe. He
? ? ? ? 264 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
was resolved to have them, although he had, upon
the fullest conviction of the Rajah's right, given them
to this very man, and put him into the absolute possession of them.
Again, my Lords, did he, when Cheyt Sing, in
1775, was put in possession by the pottah of the
Governor-General and Council, which contains an
enumeration of the names of all the places which
were given up to him, and consequently of this
among the rest,-did he, either before he put the
question in Council upon that pottah, or afterwards,
tell the Council they were going to put forts into
the main's hands to which he had no right, and which
could be held only for rebellious and suspected purposes? We refer your Lordships to the places in which all these transactions are mentioned, and you
will there find Mr. Hastings took no one exception
whatever against them; nor,, till he was resolved
upon the destruction of this unhappy man, did he
ever so much as mention them. It was not till then
that he discovers the possession of these forts by the
Rajah to be a solecism in government.
After quoting the noble examples of Sujah Dowlah,
and the other persons whom I have mentioned to
you, he proceeds to say, that some of his predecessors, without any pretensions to sovereign authority, endeavored to get these forts into their possession;
and " I was justified," says he, " by the intention of
my predecessors. " Merciful God! if anything can
surpass what he has said before, it is this: " My
predecessors, without any title of sovereignty, without any right whatever, wished to get these forts into their power; I therefore have a right to do
what they wished to do; and I am justified, not by
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SECOND DAY. 265
the. acts, but by the intentions of my predecessors. "
At'the: same time he knows that these predecessors
had been reprobated by the Company for this part
of'their proceedings; he knew that he was sent
there- to introduce a better system, and to put an
end to this state of rapacity. Still, whatever his
predecessors wished, however unjust and violent it
might be, when the sovereignty came. into his hands,
he maintains that he had a right to do all which
they were desirous of accomplishing. Thus the enormities formerly practised, which the Company sent him to correct, became a sacred standard for his imitation.
Your Lordships will observe that he slips in the
word sovereignty and forgets compact; because it is
plain, and your Lordships must perceive it, that,
wherever he uses the word sovereignty, he uses it
to destroy the authority of all compacts; and accordingly in the passage now before us he declares that there is an invalidity in all compacts entered into in
India, from the nature, state, and constitution of that
empire. "From the disorderly form of its government," says he, " there is an invalidity in all compacts and treaties whatever. " "Persons who had no treaty
with the Ra~jah wished," says:he, " to rob him: therefore I, who have a treaty with:him, and call myself his sovereign, have a right to' realize all their wishes. "
But the fact is, my Lords, that his predecessors
never did propose to deprive Bulwant Sing, the father of Cheyt Sing, of his;zemindary. They, indeed, wished to have had tlie dewanny transferred to them,
in the manner it has sinee:been transferred to the
Company.
They wished to receive his rents, and to
be made an intermediate party between him and the
? ? ? ? 266 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
Mogul emperor, his sovereign. These predecessors
had entered into no compact with the man: they
were negotiating with his sovereign for the transfer
of the dewanny or stewardship of the country, which
transfer was afterwards actually executed; but they
were obliged to give the country itself back again
to Bulwant Sing, with a guaranty against all the
pretensions of Sujah Dowlah, who had tyrannically
assumed an arbitrary power over it. This power
the predecessors of Mr. Hastings might -also have
wished to assume; and he may therefore say, according to the mode of reasoning which he has adopted, -"' Whatever they wished to do, but never
succeeded in doing, I may and ought to do of my
own will. Whatever fine Sujah Dowlah would have
exacted I will exact. I will penetrate into that
tiger's bosom, and discover the latent seeds of rapacity and injustice which lurk there, and I will
make him the subject of my imitation. "
These are the principles upon which, without accuser, without judge, without inquiry, he resolved
to lay a fine of 500,0001. on Cheyt Sing!
In order to bind himself to a strict fulfilment of
this resolution, he has laid down another very extraordinary doctrine. He has laid it down as a sort
of canon, (in injustice and corruption,) that,. whatever demand, whether just or unjust, a man declares his intention of making upon another, he should exact the precise sum which he has determined upon, and that, if he takes anything less, it is a proof of
corruption. " I have," says he, " shown by this
testimony that I never intended to make any communication to. Cheyt Sing of taking less than the fifty lacs which in my own mind I had resolved to.
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SECOND DAY. 267. exact-. " And he adds, -- " I shall make my last and
solemn appeal to the breast of every man who shall
read this, whether it is likely, or morally possible,
that I should have tied down my own future conduct. to so decided a process and series of acts, if
I had secretly intended to threaten, or to use a degree of violence, for no other purpose than to draw from the object of it a mercenary atonement for my
own private emolument, and suffer all this tumult
to terminate in an ostensible and unsubstantial submission to the authority which I represented. "
He had just before said, "If I ever talked of
selling the Company's sovereignty to the Nabob of
Oude, it was only in terrorem. " In the face of this
assertion, he here gives you to understand he never
held out anything'in terrorem, but what he intended to execute. But we will show you that in fact he
had reserved to himself a power of acting pro re
nata, and that he intended to compound or not, just
as answered his purposes Upon this occasion. "I
admit," he says, "that I did not enter it [the intention of fining Cheyt Sing] on the Consultations,
because it was not necessary; even this plan itself
of the fine was not a fixed plan, but to be regulated
by circumstances, both as to the substantial execution of it and the mode. " Now here is a man
who has given it in a sworn narrative, that he did
not intend to have a farthing less. Why? "Because I should have menaced and done as in former
times has been done,-made great and violent demands which I reduce afterwards for my own corrupt purposes. " Yet he tells you in the course of the same defence, but in another paper, that he had
no fixed plan, that he did not know whether he
? ? ? ? . 268 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
should exact a fine at all, or what should be his
mode of executing it.
My Lords, what shall we say to this man, who declares that it would be a proof of corruption not
to exact the full sum which he had threatened to exact, but who, finding that this doctrine would
press hard upon him, and be considered as a proof
of cruelty and injustice, turns round and declares he had no intention of exacting anything? What shall
we say to a man who thus reserves his determination, who threatens to sell a tributary prince to a tyrant, and cannot decide whether he should take from him his forts and pillage him of all he had, whether he should raise 500,0001. upon him, whether he should accept the 220,0001. offered, (which, by the way, we never knew of till long after the whole transaction,) whether he should do any or all of those things,
and then, by his own account, going up to Benares
without having resolved anything upon this important subject?
My Lords, I will now assume the hypothesis that
he at last discovered sufficient proof of rebellious
practices; still even this gave him no right to adduce
such rebellion in justification of resolutions which
he had taken, of acts which he had done, before he
knew anything of its existence. To such a plea we
answer, and your Lordships will every one of you answer,-" You shall not by a subsequent discovery of rebellious practices, which you did not know at
the time, and which you did not even believe, as you
have expressly told us here, justify your conduct prior to that discovery. " If the conspiracy which he falsely imputes to Cheyt Sing, if that wild scheme of
driving the English out of India, had existed, think
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SECOND DAY. . 269
in what miserable circumstances we stand as proseoutors, and your Lordships as judges, if we admit a discovery to be pleaded in justification of antecedent
acts founded upon the assumed existence of that
which he had no sort of proof, knowledge, or belief of!
My Lords, we shall now proceed to another circumnstance, not less culpable in itself, though less shocking to your feelings, than those to which I have
already called your attention: a circumstance which
throws a strong presumption of guilt upon every part
of the prisoner's conduct. Having formed all these
infernal plots in his mind, but uncertain which of
them he should execute, uncertain what sums of
money he should extort, whether he should deliver
up the Rajah to his enemy or pillage his forts, he
goes up to Benares; but he first delegates to himself all the powers of government, both civil and military, in the countries which he was going to
visit.
My Lords, we have asserted in our charge that
thlis delegation and division of power was illegal. He
invested himself with this authority; for he was the
majority in the Council: Mr. Wheler's consent or
dissent signifying nothing. He gave-himself powers
which the act of Parliament did not give him. He
went up to Benares with an illegal commission, civil
and military; and to prove this I shall beg leave to
read the provisions of the act of Parliament. I shall
show what the creature ought to be, by showing the
law of the creator: what the legislature of Great
Britain meant that Governor Hastings should be, not
what he made himself.
? ? ? ? 270'IMPEACHMENT OF- WARREN HASTINGS.
[Mr. Burke then read the seventh section of the act. ]
Now we do deny that there is by this act given, or
that under this act there can be given, to the government of India, a power of dividing its unity into
two parts, each of which shall separately be a unity
and possess the power given to the whole. Yet, my
Lords, an agreement was made between him and
Mr. Wheler, that he (Mr. Hastings) should have
every power, civil and military, in the upper provinces, and that Mr. Wheler should enjoy equal authority in the lower ones.
Now, to show you that it is impossible for such
an agreement to be legal, we must refer you to the
constitution of the Company's government. The
whole. power is vested in the Council, where all
questions are to be decided- by a majority of voices,
and the members are directed to record in the minutes of their proceedings not only the questions'decided, but the grounds upon which each individual member founds his vote. Now, although the Council
is competent to delegate its authority for any specific
purpose to any servant of the Company, yet to admit
that it can delegate its authority generally, without
reserving the means of deliberation and control,
would be to change the whole constitution. By such
a proceeding the government may be divided into a
number of independent governments, without a common deliberative Council and control. This deliberative capacity, which is so strictly guarded by the obligation of recording its consultations, would be totally annihilated, if the Council divided itself into
independent parts, each acting according to its own
discretion. There is no similar instance in law,
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SECOND DAY. 271
there is no similar instance in policy. The conduct
of these men implies a direct contradiction; and you
will see, by the agreement they made to support each
other, that they were themselves conscious of the illegality of this proceeding.
After Mr. Hastings had conferred absolute power
upon himself during his stay in the upper provinces
by an order of Council, (of which Council he was
hlimself a majority,) he entered the following minute
in the Consultations. " The Governor-General delivers in the following minute. In my minute which I
laid before the court on the 21st May, I expressed
the satisfaction with which I could at this juncture
leave the Presidency, from the mutual confidence
which was happily established between Mr. Wheler
and me. I now readily repeat that sentiment, and
observe with pleasure that Mr. Wheler confirms it.
Before my departure, it is probable that we shall in
concert have provided at the board for almost every
important circumstance that can eventually happen
during my absence; but if any should occur for
which no previous provision shall have been made
in the resolutions of the board, Mr. Wheler may act
with immediate decision, and with the fullest confidence of my support, in all such emergencies, as well
as in conducting the ordinary business of the Presidency, and in general in all matters of this government, excepting those which may specially or generally be intrustedto me. Mr. Wheler during my absence may consider himself as possessed of the
full powers of the Governor-General and Council. of
this government, as in effect he is by the constitution; and he may be assured, that, so far as my
sanction and concurrence shall be, or be deemed,
? ? ? ? 272 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
necessary to the confirmation of his measures, he
shall receive them. "
Now here is a compact of iniquity between these
two duumvirs. They each give to the other the full,
complete, and perfect powers of the government;
and in order to secure themselves against any obstacles that might arise, they mutually engage to ratify each other's acts: and they say this is not
illegal, because Lord Cornwallis has had such a deputation. I must first beg leave to observe that no man can justify himself in doing any illegal act by
its having been done by another; much less can he
justify his own illegal act by pleading an act of the
same kind done subsequently to his act, because the
latter may have been done in conisequence of his
bad example. Men justify their acts in two ways,by law and by precedent; the former asserts the
right, the latter presumes it, from the example of
others. But can any man justify an act, because ten
or a dozen years after another man has done the
same thing? Good heavens! was there ever such
a doctrine before heard? Suppose Lord Cornwallis
to have -done wrong; suppose him to have acted illegally; does that clear the prisoner at your bar?
No: on the contrary, it aggravates his offence; because he has afforded others an example of corrupt
and illegal conduct. But if even Lord Cornwallis
had preceded, instead of following him, the example
would not have furnished a justification. There is
no resemblance in the cases. Lord Cornwallis does
not hold his government by the act of 1773, but by
a special act made afterwards; and therefore to attempt to justify acts done under one form of appointment by acts done under another form is to the last
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SECOND DAY. 273
degree wild and absurd. Lord Cornwallis was going
to conduct a war of great magnitude, and was consequently trusted with extraordinary powers. HIe went
in the two characters of governor and commander-inchief; and yet the legislature was sensible of the
doubtful validity of a Governor-General's carrying
with him the whole powers of the Council. But
Mr. Hastings was not commander-in-chief, when he
assumed the whole military as well as civil power.
Lord Cornwallis, as I have just said, was not only
commander-in-chief, but was going to a great war,
where he might have occasion to treat with the country powers in a' civil capacity; and yet so doubtful
was the legislature upon this point, that they passed
a special act to confirm that delegation, and to give
him a power of acting under it.
My Lords, we do further contend that Mr. Hastings
had no right to assume the character of commanderin-chief; for he was no military man, nor was he
appointed by the Company to that trust. His assumption of the military authority was a gross usurpation. It was an authority to which he would have had no right, if the whole powers of government were
vested in him, and he had carried his Council with
him on his horse. If, I say, Mr. Hastings had his
('Council on his crupper, he could neither have given
those powers to himself nor made a partition of them
with Mr. Wheler. Could Lord Cornwallis, for instance, who carried with him the power of commander-in-chief, and authority to conclude treaties with all the native powers, could he, I ask, have left
a Council behind him in Calcutta with equal powers,
who might have concluded treaties in direct contradiction to those in which he was engaged? Clearly
VOL. XI. 18
? ? ? ? 274 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
he could not; therefore I contend that this partition
of power, which supposes an integral authority in
each counsellor, is a monster that cannot exist.
This the parties themselves felt so strongly that they
were obliged'to have recourse to a stratagem scarcely
less absurd than their divided assumption of power.
They entered into a compact to confirm each other's
acts, and to support each other in whatever they
did: thus attempting' to give their separate acts a
legal form.
I have'further to remark to your Lordships, what
has just been suggested to me, that it was for the express purpose of legalizing Lord Cornwallis's delegation that he was made commander-in-chief as well as Governor-General by the act.
The next plea urged by Mr. Hastings is conveniency. "It was convenient," he says, " for me to do
this. " I answer, No person acting with delegated
power can delegate that power to another. Delegatus
non potest delegare is a maxim of law. Much less has
he a right to supersede the law, and the principle of
his own delegation and appointment, upon any idea
of convenience. But what was the conveniency?
There was no one professed object connected with
Mr. Hastings's going up to Benares which might not
as well have been attained in Calcutta. The only
difference would have been, that in the latter case he
must have entered some part of his proceedings upon
the Consultations, whether he wished it or not. If
he had a mind to negotiate with the Vizier, he had a
resident at his court, and the Vizier had a resident
in Calcutta. The most solemn treaties had often
been made without any Governor-General carrying
up a delegation of civil and military power. If it
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -SECOND DAY. 275
had been his object to break treaties, he might have
broken them at Calcutta, as he broke the treaty of
Chunar. Is there an article in that treaty that he
might not as well have made at Calcutta? Is there
an article that he broke (for he broke them all) that
he could not have broken at Calcutta? So that,
whether pledging or breaking the faith of the Company, he might have done both or either without
ever stirring from the Presidency.
I can conceive a necessity so urgent as to supersede all laws; but I have no conception of a necessity
that can require two governors-general, each forming separately a supreme council. Nay, to bring the
point home to him,-if. he had a mind to make
Cheyt Sing to pay a fine, as he called it, he could
have made him do that at Calcutta as well as at
Benares. He had before contrived to make him pay
all the extra demands that were iinposed upon him;
and he well knew that he could send Colonel Camac,
or somebody else, to Benares, with a body of troops
to enforce the payment. Why, then, did he go to
try experiments there in his own person? For this
plain reason: that he might be enabled to put such
sums in his own pocket as he thought fit. It was
not and could not be for any other purpose; and I
defy the wit of man to find out any other.
He says, my Lords, that Cheyt Sing might have
resisted, and that, if he had not been there, the Rajah might have fled with his money, or raised a rebellion for the purpose of avoiding payment. Why, then, we ask, did he not send an army? We ask,
whether Mr. Markham, with an army under the
command of Colonel Popham, or Mr. Fowke, or any
other Resident, was not much more likely to exact
? ? ? ? 276 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
a great sum of money than' Mr. Hastings without
an army? My Lords, the answer must be in the affirmative; it is therefore evident that no necessity
could exist for his presence, and that his presence
and conduct occasioned his being defeated in this
matter.
We find this man, armed with an illegal commission, undeirtaking an enterprise which he has since
said was perilous, which proved to be perilous, and
in which, as he has told us himself, the existence of
the British empire in India was involved. The talisman, (your Lordships will remember his use of the
word,) that charm which kept all India in order,
which kept mighty; and warlike nations under the
government of a few Englishmen, would, I verily believe, have been broken forever, if he, or any other
Governor-General, good or bad, had been killed. Infinite mischiefs would have followed such an event.
The situation in which he placed himself, by his own
misconduct, was pregnant with danger; and he put
himself in the way of that danger without having
any armed force worth mentioning, although -he
has acknowledged that Cheyt Sing had then an immense force. In fact, the demand of two thousand
cavalry proves that he considered the Rajah's army
to be formidable; yet, notwithstanding this, with four
companies of sepoys, poorly armed and ill provisioned, he went to invade that fine country, and to
force from its sovereign a sum of money, the payment of which he had reason to think would be resisted. He thus rashly hazarded his own being and the being of all his people.
"But," says he, " I did not imagine the Rajah intended to go into rebellion, and therefore went un
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY.
had beggared and destroyed his own subjects, and
could not pay his debts to the English government,
was the man with whom Mr. Hastings was in treaty
to deliver up Cheyt Sing and his country, under pretence of his not having paid regularly to the Company those customary payments which the tyrant would probably have never paid at all, if he had
been put in possession of the country. This I mention to illustrate Mr. Hastings's plans of economy
and finance, without considering the injustice and
cruelty of delivering up a man to the hereditary enemy of his family.
It is known, my Lords, that Mr. Hastings, besides
having received proposals for delivering up the beautiful country of Benares, that garden of God, as it is
styled in India, to that monster, that rapacious tyrant,
Asoph ul Dowlah, who with his gang of mercenary
troops had desolated his own country like a swarm
of locusts, had purposed likewise to seize Cheyt Sing's
own patrimonial forts, which was nothing less than
to take from him the residence of his women and
his children, the seat of his honor, the place in which
the remaining treasures and last hopes of his family.
were centred. By the Gentoo law, every lord or supreme magistrate is bound to construct and to live in
such a fort. It is the usage of India, and is a matter
of state and dignity, as well as of propriety, reason,
and defence. It was probably an apprehension of being injured in this tender point, as well as a knowledge of the proposal made by the Nabob, which induced Cheyt Sing to offer to buy himself off; although it does not appear from any part of the
evidence that he assigned any other reason than
that of Mr. Hastings intending to exact from him
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -SECOND DAY. 257
six lacs of rupees over and above his other exactions.
Mr. Hastings,. indeed, almost acknowledges the existence of this plot against the Rajah, and his being
the author of it. He says, without any denial of
the fact, that the Rajah suspected some strong acts
to be intended against him, and therefore asked
Mr. Markham whether he could not buy them off
and obtain Mr. Hastings's favor by the payment of
200,0001. Mr. Markhain gave as his opinion, that
200,0001. was not sufficient; and the next day the
Ra. jah offered 20,0001. more, in all 220,0001. The
negotiation, however, broke off; and why? Not, as
Mr. Markham says he conjectured, because the Rajah
had learned that Mr. Hastings had no longer an intention of imposing these six lacs, or something to
that effect, and therefore retracted his offer, but because that offer had been rejected by Mr. Hastings. . Let us hear what reason the man who was in the true secret gives for not accepting the Rajah's offer.
" I rejected," says Mr. Hastings, " the offer of twenty
lacs, with which the Rajah would have compromised
for his guilt when it was too late. " My Lords, he
best-knows what the motives of his own actions were.
He says, the offer was made " when it was too late. "
Had he previously told the Rajah what sum of money
he would be required to pay in order to buy himself off, or had he required him to name any sum
which he was willing to pay? Did he, after having
refused the offer made by the Rajah, say, " Come
and make me a better offer, or upon such a day I
shall declare that your offers are inadmissible "?
No such thing appears. Your Lordships will further
VOL. XI. 17
? ? ? ? 258 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
remark, that Mr. Hastings refused the 200,0001. at
a time when the exigencies of the Company were
so pressing that he was obliged to rob, pilfer, and
steal upon every side, - at a time when he was borrowing 40,000l. from Mr. Sulivan in one morning,
and raising by other under-jobs 27,0001. more. In the
distress [in? ] which his own extravagance and prodigality had involved him, 200,0001. would have been a weighty benefit, although derived from his villany;
but this relief he positively refused, because, says
he, " the offer came too late. " From these words,
my Lords, we may infer that there was a time when
the offer would not have been " too late," -a period
at which it would have been readily accepted. No
such thing appears. There is not a trace upon your
minutes, not -a trace in the correspondence of the
Company, to prove that the Rajah would at any
time have been permitted to buy himself off from
this complicated tyranny.
I have already stated a curious circumstance in
this proceeding, to which I must again beg leave to
direct your Lordships' attention. Does it anywhere
appear in that correspondence, or in the testimony
of Mr. Benn, of Mr. Markham, or of any human being, that Mr. Hastings had ever told Cheyt Sing with what sum he should be satisfied? There is evidence
before you directly in proof that they did not know
the amount. Not one person knew what his intention was, when he refused this 200,0001. For when
he met Mr. Markham at Boglipore, and for the
first time mentioned the sum of 500,0001. as the
fine he meant to exact, Mr. Markham was astonished
and confounded at its magnitude. He tells you this
himself. It appears, then, that neither Cheyt Sing
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SECOND DAY. 259
nor the Resident at Benares (who ought to have
been in the secret, if upon such an occasion secrecy
is allowable) ever knew what the terms were. The
Rajah was in the dark; he was left to feel, blindfold,
how much money could relieve him from the iniquitous intentions of Mr. Hastings; and at last he is
told that his offer comes too late, without having
ever been told the period at which it would have
been well-timed, or the amount it was proposed to
take from him. Is this, my Lords, the proper way
to adjudge a fine?
Your Lordships will now be pleased to advert to
the manner in which he defends himself and these
proceedings. He says, "I rejected this offer of
twenty lacs, with which the Rajah would have compromised for his guilt when it was too late. " If by
these words he means too late to answer the purpose
for which he has said the fine was designed, namely,
the relief of the Company, the ground of his defence
is absolutely false; for it is notorious that at the
time referred to the Company's affairs were in the
greatest distress.
I will next call your Lordships' attention to the
projected sale of Benares to the Nabob of Oude.
"if," says Mr. Hastings, "I ever talked of selling
the Company's sovereignty over Benares to the Nabob of Oude, it was but in terrorem; and no subsequent act of mine warrants the supposition of my having seriously intended it. " And in another place
he. says, " If I ever threatened " (your Lordships will
remark, that he puts hypothetically a matter the
reality of which he has got to be solemnly declared
on an affidavit, and in a narrative to the truth of
which he has deposed upon oath)- "if I ever.
? ? ? ? 260 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
threatened," says he, "to dispossess the Rajah of
his territories, it is no more than what my predecessors, without rebuke from their superiors, or notice taken of the expression, had wished and intended to have done to his father, even when the Company
had no pretensions to the sovereignty of the country.
It is no more than such a legal act of sovereignty
as his behavior justified, and as I was justified in
by the intentions of my predecessors. If I pretended to seize upon his forts, it was in full conviction
that a dependant on the Company, guarantied, maintained, and protected in his country by the Company's arms, had no occasion for forts, had no right to them, and could hold them for no other than
suspected and rebellious purposes. None of the
Company's other zemindars are permitted to maintain them; and even our ally, the Nabob of the
Carnatic, has the Company's troops in all his garrisons. Policy and public safety absolutely require
it. What state could exist that allowed its inferior
members to hold forts and garrisons independent of
the superior administration? It is a solecism in government to suppose it. "
Here, then, my Lords, he first declares that this
was merely done in terrorem; that he never intended
to execute the abominable act. And will your Lordships patiently endure that such terrific threats as
these shall be hung by your Governor in India over
the unhappy people that are subject to him and
protected by British faith? Will you permit, that,
for the purpose of extorting money, a Governor shall
hold out the terrible threat of delivering a tributary
prince and his people, bound hand and foot, into the
power of their perfidious enemies?
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -SECOND DAY. 261
The terror occasioned by threatening to take from
him his forts can only be estimated by considering,
that, agreeably to the religion and prejudices of Hindoos, the forts are the places in which their women are lodged, in which, according to their notions, their honor is deposited, and in which is lodged all
the wealth that they can save against an evil day to
purchase off the vengeance of an enemy. These forts
Mr. Hastings says he intended to take, because the
Rajah could hold them for no other than rebellious
and suspected purposes. Now I will show your
Lordships that the man who has the horrible audacity to make this declaration did himself. assign to the
Rajah these very forts. He put him in possession
of them, and, when there was a dispute about the
Nabob's rights to them on the one side and the
Company's on the other, did confirm them to this
man. The paper shall be produced, that you may
have before your eyes the gross contradictions into
which his rapacity and acts of arbitrary power have
betrayed him. Thank God, my Lords, men that are
greatly guilty are never wise. I repeat it, men that
are greatly guilty are never wise. In their defence
of one crime they are sure to meet the ghost of some
former defence, which, like the spectre in Virgil,
drives them back. The prisoner at your bar, like
the hero of the poet, when he attempts to make his
escape by one evasion, is stopped by the appearance of some former contradictory averment. If he
attempts to escape by one door, there his criminal
allegations of one kind stop him; if he attempts to
escape at another, the facts and allegations intended for some other wicked purpose stare him full in
the face.
? ? ? ? 262 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
Quacunque viam sibi fraude petivit,
Successum Dea dira negat.
The paper I hold in my hand contains Nundcomar's accusation of Mr. Hastings. It consists of a variety of charges; and I will first read to you what
is said by Nundcomar of these forts, which it is pretended could be held for none but suspicious and rebellious purposes. "At the time Mr. Hastings was going to Benares,
he desired me to give him an account in writing of
any lands which, though properly belonging to the
Subah of Bahar, might have come iunder the dominion of Bulwant Sing, that they might be recovered from his son, Rajah Cheyt Sing. The purgunnahs
of Kera, Mungrora, and Bidjegur were exactly in
this situation, having been usurped by Bulwant Sing
from the Subah of Bahar. I accordingly delivered to
Mr. Hastings the accounts of them, from the entrance
of the Company upon the dewanny to the year 1179
of the Fusseli era, stated at twenty-four lacs. Mr.
Hastings said,' Give a copy of this to Roy Rada
Churn, that, if Cheyt Sing is backward in acknowledging this claim, Rada Churn may answer and confute him. ''Why Mr. Hastings, when he arrived
at Benares, and had called Rajah Cheyt Sing before
him, left these countries still in the Rajah's usurpations it remains with Mr. Hastings to explain. " This is Nundcomar's charge. Here follows Mr.
Hastings's reply.
"I recollect an information given me by Nundco.
mar concerning the pretended usurpations made by
the Rajah of Benares, of the purgunnahs of Kera,
Mungrora, and Bidjegur. " (Your Lordships will
recollect that Bidjegur is one of those very forts
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -SECOND DAY. 263
which he declares could not be held but for suspicious and rebellious purposes. ) "I do not recollect
his mentioning it again, when- I set out for Benares;
neither did I ever intimate the subject, either to
Cheyt Sing or his ministers, because I knew I could
not support the claim; and to have made it and
dropped it would have been in every sense dishonorable. Not that I passed by it with indifference or
inattention. I took pains to investigate the foundation of this title, and recommended it to the particular inquiry of Mr. Vansittart, who was the Chief of Patna, at the time in which I received the first intimation. The following letter and voucher, which
I received from him, contain a complete statement
of this pretended usurpation. "
These vouchers will answer our purpose, fully to
establish that in his opinion the claim of the English
government upon those forts was at that time totally
unfounded, and so absurd that he did not even dare
to mention it. This fort of Bidjegur, the most considerable in the country, and of which we shall have
much to say hereafter, is the place in which Cheyt
Sing had deposited his women and family. That
fortress did Mr. Hastings himself give to this very
man, deciding in his favor as a judge, upon an examination and after an inquiry: and yet he now declares that he had no right to it, and that he could not hold it but for wicked and rebellious purposes.
But, my Lords, when he changed this language, he
had resolved to take away these forts,- to destroy
them,- to root the Rajah out of every place of refuge, out of every secure place in which he could
hide his head, or screen himself from the rancor, re.
venge, avarice, and malice. of his ruthless foe. He
? ? ? ? 264 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
was resolved to have them, although he had, upon
the fullest conviction of the Rajah's right, given them
to this very man, and put him into the absolute possession of them.
Again, my Lords, did he, when Cheyt Sing, in
1775, was put in possession by the pottah of the
Governor-General and Council, which contains an
enumeration of the names of all the places which
were given up to him, and consequently of this
among the rest,-did he, either before he put the
question in Council upon that pottah, or afterwards,
tell the Council they were going to put forts into
the main's hands to which he had no right, and which
could be held only for rebellious and suspected purposes? We refer your Lordships to the places in which all these transactions are mentioned, and you
will there find Mr. Hastings took no one exception
whatever against them; nor,, till he was resolved
upon the destruction of this unhappy man, did he
ever so much as mention them. It was not till then
that he discovers the possession of these forts by the
Rajah to be a solecism in government.
After quoting the noble examples of Sujah Dowlah,
and the other persons whom I have mentioned to
you, he proceeds to say, that some of his predecessors, without any pretensions to sovereign authority, endeavored to get these forts into their possession;
and " I was justified," says he, " by the intention of
my predecessors. " Merciful God! if anything can
surpass what he has said before, it is this: " My
predecessors, without any title of sovereignty, without any right whatever, wished to get these forts into their power; I therefore have a right to do
what they wished to do; and I am justified, not by
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SECOND DAY. 265
the. acts, but by the intentions of my predecessors. "
At'the: same time he knows that these predecessors
had been reprobated by the Company for this part
of'their proceedings; he knew that he was sent
there- to introduce a better system, and to put an
end to this state of rapacity. Still, whatever his
predecessors wished, however unjust and violent it
might be, when the sovereignty came. into his hands,
he maintains that he had a right to do all which
they were desirous of accomplishing. Thus the enormities formerly practised, which the Company sent him to correct, became a sacred standard for his imitation.
Your Lordships will observe that he slips in the
word sovereignty and forgets compact; because it is
plain, and your Lordships must perceive it, that,
wherever he uses the word sovereignty, he uses it
to destroy the authority of all compacts; and accordingly in the passage now before us he declares that there is an invalidity in all compacts entered into in
India, from the nature, state, and constitution of that
empire. "From the disorderly form of its government," says he, " there is an invalidity in all compacts and treaties whatever. " "Persons who had no treaty
with the Ra~jah wished," says:he, " to rob him: therefore I, who have a treaty with:him, and call myself his sovereign, have a right to' realize all their wishes. "
But the fact is, my Lords, that his predecessors
never did propose to deprive Bulwant Sing, the father of Cheyt Sing, of his;zemindary. They, indeed, wished to have had tlie dewanny transferred to them,
in the manner it has sinee:been transferred to the
Company.
They wished to receive his rents, and to
be made an intermediate party between him and the
? ? ? ? 266 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
Mogul emperor, his sovereign. These predecessors
had entered into no compact with the man: they
were negotiating with his sovereign for the transfer
of the dewanny or stewardship of the country, which
transfer was afterwards actually executed; but they
were obliged to give the country itself back again
to Bulwant Sing, with a guaranty against all the
pretensions of Sujah Dowlah, who had tyrannically
assumed an arbitrary power over it. This power
the predecessors of Mr. Hastings might -also have
wished to assume; and he may therefore say, according to the mode of reasoning which he has adopted, -"' Whatever they wished to do, but never
succeeded in doing, I may and ought to do of my
own will. Whatever fine Sujah Dowlah would have
exacted I will exact. I will penetrate into that
tiger's bosom, and discover the latent seeds of rapacity and injustice which lurk there, and I will
make him the subject of my imitation. "
These are the principles upon which, without accuser, without judge, without inquiry, he resolved
to lay a fine of 500,0001. on Cheyt Sing!
In order to bind himself to a strict fulfilment of
this resolution, he has laid down another very extraordinary doctrine. He has laid it down as a sort
of canon, (in injustice and corruption,) that,. whatever demand, whether just or unjust, a man declares his intention of making upon another, he should exact the precise sum which he has determined upon, and that, if he takes anything less, it is a proof of
corruption. " I have," says he, " shown by this
testimony that I never intended to make any communication to. Cheyt Sing of taking less than the fifty lacs which in my own mind I had resolved to.
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SECOND DAY. 267. exact-. " And he adds, -- " I shall make my last and
solemn appeal to the breast of every man who shall
read this, whether it is likely, or morally possible,
that I should have tied down my own future conduct. to so decided a process and series of acts, if
I had secretly intended to threaten, or to use a degree of violence, for no other purpose than to draw from the object of it a mercenary atonement for my
own private emolument, and suffer all this tumult
to terminate in an ostensible and unsubstantial submission to the authority which I represented. "
He had just before said, "If I ever talked of
selling the Company's sovereignty to the Nabob of
Oude, it was only in terrorem. " In the face of this
assertion, he here gives you to understand he never
held out anything'in terrorem, but what he intended to execute. But we will show you that in fact he
had reserved to himself a power of acting pro re
nata, and that he intended to compound or not, just
as answered his purposes Upon this occasion. "I
admit," he says, "that I did not enter it [the intention of fining Cheyt Sing] on the Consultations,
because it was not necessary; even this plan itself
of the fine was not a fixed plan, but to be regulated
by circumstances, both as to the substantial execution of it and the mode. " Now here is a man
who has given it in a sworn narrative, that he did
not intend to have a farthing less. Why? "Because I should have menaced and done as in former
times has been done,-made great and violent demands which I reduce afterwards for my own corrupt purposes. " Yet he tells you in the course of the same defence, but in another paper, that he had
no fixed plan, that he did not know whether he
? ? ? ? . 268 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
should exact a fine at all, or what should be his
mode of executing it.
My Lords, what shall we say to this man, who declares that it would be a proof of corruption not
to exact the full sum which he had threatened to exact, but who, finding that this doctrine would
press hard upon him, and be considered as a proof
of cruelty and injustice, turns round and declares he had no intention of exacting anything? What shall
we say to a man who thus reserves his determination, who threatens to sell a tributary prince to a tyrant, and cannot decide whether he should take from him his forts and pillage him of all he had, whether he should raise 500,0001. upon him, whether he should accept the 220,0001. offered, (which, by the way, we never knew of till long after the whole transaction,) whether he should do any or all of those things,
and then, by his own account, going up to Benares
without having resolved anything upon this important subject?
My Lords, I will now assume the hypothesis that
he at last discovered sufficient proof of rebellious
practices; still even this gave him no right to adduce
such rebellion in justification of resolutions which
he had taken, of acts which he had done, before he
knew anything of its existence. To such a plea we
answer, and your Lordships will every one of you answer,-" You shall not by a subsequent discovery of rebellious practices, which you did not know at
the time, and which you did not even believe, as you
have expressly told us here, justify your conduct prior to that discovery. " If the conspiracy which he falsely imputes to Cheyt Sing, if that wild scheme of
driving the English out of India, had existed, think
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SECOND DAY. . 269
in what miserable circumstances we stand as proseoutors, and your Lordships as judges, if we admit a discovery to be pleaded in justification of antecedent
acts founded upon the assumed existence of that
which he had no sort of proof, knowledge, or belief of!
My Lords, we shall now proceed to another circumnstance, not less culpable in itself, though less shocking to your feelings, than those to which I have
already called your attention: a circumstance which
throws a strong presumption of guilt upon every part
of the prisoner's conduct. Having formed all these
infernal plots in his mind, but uncertain which of
them he should execute, uncertain what sums of
money he should extort, whether he should deliver
up the Rajah to his enemy or pillage his forts, he
goes up to Benares; but he first delegates to himself all the powers of government, both civil and military, in the countries which he was going to
visit.
My Lords, we have asserted in our charge that
thlis delegation and division of power was illegal. He
invested himself with this authority; for he was the
majority in the Council: Mr. Wheler's consent or
dissent signifying nothing. He gave-himself powers
which the act of Parliament did not give him. He
went up to Benares with an illegal commission, civil
and military; and to prove this I shall beg leave to
read the provisions of the act of Parliament. I shall
show what the creature ought to be, by showing the
law of the creator: what the legislature of Great
Britain meant that Governor Hastings should be, not
what he made himself.
? ? ? ? 270'IMPEACHMENT OF- WARREN HASTINGS.
[Mr. Burke then read the seventh section of the act. ]
Now we do deny that there is by this act given, or
that under this act there can be given, to the government of India, a power of dividing its unity into
two parts, each of which shall separately be a unity
and possess the power given to the whole. Yet, my
Lords, an agreement was made between him and
Mr. Wheler, that he (Mr. Hastings) should have
every power, civil and military, in the upper provinces, and that Mr. Wheler should enjoy equal authority in the lower ones.
Now, to show you that it is impossible for such
an agreement to be legal, we must refer you to the
constitution of the Company's government. The
whole. power is vested in the Council, where all
questions are to be decided- by a majority of voices,
and the members are directed to record in the minutes of their proceedings not only the questions'decided, but the grounds upon which each individual member founds his vote. Now, although the Council
is competent to delegate its authority for any specific
purpose to any servant of the Company, yet to admit
that it can delegate its authority generally, without
reserving the means of deliberation and control,
would be to change the whole constitution. By such
a proceeding the government may be divided into a
number of independent governments, without a common deliberative Council and control. This deliberative capacity, which is so strictly guarded by the obligation of recording its consultations, would be totally annihilated, if the Council divided itself into
independent parts, each acting according to its own
discretion. There is no similar instance in law,
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SECOND DAY. 271
there is no similar instance in policy. The conduct
of these men implies a direct contradiction; and you
will see, by the agreement they made to support each
other, that they were themselves conscious of the illegality of this proceeding.
After Mr. Hastings had conferred absolute power
upon himself during his stay in the upper provinces
by an order of Council, (of which Council he was
hlimself a majority,) he entered the following minute
in the Consultations. " The Governor-General delivers in the following minute. In my minute which I
laid before the court on the 21st May, I expressed
the satisfaction with which I could at this juncture
leave the Presidency, from the mutual confidence
which was happily established between Mr. Wheler
and me. I now readily repeat that sentiment, and
observe with pleasure that Mr. Wheler confirms it.
Before my departure, it is probable that we shall in
concert have provided at the board for almost every
important circumstance that can eventually happen
during my absence; but if any should occur for
which no previous provision shall have been made
in the resolutions of the board, Mr. Wheler may act
with immediate decision, and with the fullest confidence of my support, in all such emergencies, as well
as in conducting the ordinary business of the Presidency, and in general in all matters of this government, excepting those which may specially or generally be intrustedto me. Mr. Wheler during my absence may consider himself as possessed of the
full powers of the Governor-General and Council. of
this government, as in effect he is by the constitution; and he may be assured, that, so far as my
sanction and concurrence shall be, or be deemed,
? ? ? ? 272 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
necessary to the confirmation of his measures, he
shall receive them. "
Now here is a compact of iniquity between these
two duumvirs. They each give to the other the full,
complete, and perfect powers of the government;
and in order to secure themselves against any obstacles that might arise, they mutually engage to ratify each other's acts: and they say this is not
illegal, because Lord Cornwallis has had such a deputation. I must first beg leave to observe that no man can justify himself in doing any illegal act by
its having been done by another; much less can he
justify his own illegal act by pleading an act of the
same kind done subsequently to his act, because the
latter may have been done in conisequence of his
bad example. Men justify their acts in two ways,by law and by precedent; the former asserts the
right, the latter presumes it, from the example of
others. But can any man justify an act, because ten
or a dozen years after another man has done the
same thing? Good heavens! was there ever such
a doctrine before heard? Suppose Lord Cornwallis
to have -done wrong; suppose him to have acted illegally; does that clear the prisoner at your bar?
No: on the contrary, it aggravates his offence; because he has afforded others an example of corrupt
and illegal conduct. But if even Lord Cornwallis
had preceded, instead of following him, the example
would not have furnished a justification. There is
no resemblance in the cases. Lord Cornwallis does
not hold his government by the act of 1773, but by
a special act made afterwards; and therefore to attempt to justify acts done under one form of appointment by acts done under another form is to the last
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. - SECOND DAY. 273
degree wild and absurd. Lord Cornwallis was going
to conduct a war of great magnitude, and was consequently trusted with extraordinary powers. HIe went
in the two characters of governor and commander-inchief; and yet the legislature was sensible of the
doubtful validity of a Governor-General's carrying
with him the whole powers of the Council. But
Mr. Hastings was not commander-in-chief, when he
assumed the whole military as well as civil power.
Lord Cornwallis, as I have just said, was not only
commander-in-chief, but was going to a great war,
where he might have occasion to treat with the country powers in a' civil capacity; and yet so doubtful
was the legislature upon this point, that they passed
a special act to confirm that delegation, and to give
him a power of acting under it.
My Lords, we do further contend that Mr. Hastings
had no right to assume the character of commanderin-chief; for he was no military man, nor was he
appointed by the Company to that trust. His assumption of the military authority was a gross usurpation. It was an authority to which he would have had no right, if the whole powers of government were
vested in him, and he had carried his Council with
him on his horse. If, I say, Mr. Hastings had his
('Council on his crupper, he could neither have given
those powers to himself nor made a partition of them
with Mr. Wheler. Could Lord Cornwallis, for instance, who carried with him the power of commander-in-chief, and authority to conclude treaties with all the native powers, could he, I ask, have left
a Council behind him in Calcutta with equal powers,
who might have concluded treaties in direct contradiction to those in which he was engaged? Clearly
VOL. XI. 18
? ? ? ? 274 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
he could not; therefore I contend that this partition
of power, which supposes an integral authority in
each counsellor, is a monster that cannot exist.
This the parties themselves felt so strongly that they
were obliged'to have recourse to a stratagem scarcely
less absurd than their divided assumption of power.
They entered into a compact to confirm each other's
acts, and to support each other in whatever they
did: thus attempting' to give their separate acts a
legal form.
I have'further to remark to your Lordships, what
has just been suggested to me, that it was for the express purpose of legalizing Lord Cornwallis's delegation that he was made commander-in-chief as well as Governor-General by the act.
The next plea urged by Mr. Hastings is conveniency. "It was convenient," he says, " for me to do
this. " I answer, No person acting with delegated
power can delegate that power to another. Delegatus
non potest delegare is a maxim of law. Much less has
he a right to supersede the law, and the principle of
his own delegation and appointment, upon any idea
of convenience. But what was the conveniency?
There was no one professed object connected with
Mr. Hastings's going up to Benares which might not
as well have been attained in Calcutta. The only
difference would have been, that in the latter case he
must have entered some part of his proceedings upon
the Consultations, whether he wished it or not. If
he had a mind to negotiate with the Vizier, he had a
resident at his court, and the Vizier had a resident
in Calcutta. The most solemn treaties had often
been made without any Governor-General carrying
up a delegation of civil and military power. If it
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY. -SECOND DAY. 275
had been his object to break treaties, he might have
broken them at Calcutta, as he broke the treaty of
Chunar. Is there an article in that treaty that he
might not as well have made at Calcutta? Is there
an article that he broke (for he broke them all) that
he could not have broken at Calcutta? So that,
whether pledging or breaking the faith of the Company, he might have done both or either without
ever stirring from the Presidency.
I can conceive a necessity so urgent as to supersede all laws; but I have no conception of a necessity
that can require two governors-general, each forming separately a supreme council. Nay, to bring the
point home to him,-if. he had a mind to make
Cheyt Sing to pay a fine, as he called it, he could
have made him do that at Calcutta as well as at
Benares. He had before contrived to make him pay
all the extra demands that were iinposed upon him;
and he well knew that he could send Colonel Camac,
or somebody else, to Benares, with a body of troops
to enforce the payment. Why, then, did he go to
try experiments there in his own person? For this
plain reason: that he might be enabled to put such
sums in his own pocket as he thought fit. It was
not and could not be for any other purpose; and I
defy the wit of man to find out any other.
He says, my Lords, that Cheyt Sing might have
resisted, and that, if he had not been there, the Rajah might have fled with his money, or raised a rebellion for the purpose of avoiding payment. Why, then, we ask, did he not send an army? We ask,
whether Mr. Markham, with an army under the
command of Colonel Popham, or Mr. Fowke, or any
other Resident, was not much more likely to exact
? ? ? ? 276 IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS.
a great sum of money than' Mr. Hastings without
an army? My Lords, the answer must be in the affirmative; it is therefore evident that no necessity
could exist for his presence, and that his presence
and conduct occasioned his being defeated in this
matter.
We find this man, armed with an illegal commission, undeirtaking an enterprise which he has since
said was perilous, which proved to be perilous, and
in which, as he has told us himself, the existence of
the British empire in India was involved. The talisman, (your Lordships will remember his use of the
word,) that charm which kept all India in order,
which kept mighty; and warlike nations under the
government of a few Englishmen, would, I verily believe, have been broken forever, if he, or any other
Governor-General, good or bad, had been killed. Infinite mischiefs would have followed such an event.
The situation in which he placed himself, by his own
misconduct, was pregnant with danger; and he put
himself in the way of that danger without having
any armed force worth mentioning, although -he
has acknowledged that Cheyt Sing had then an immense force. In fact, the demand of two thousand
cavalry proves that he considered the Rajah's army
to be formidable; yet, notwithstanding this, with four
companies of sepoys, poorly armed and ill provisioned, he went to invade that fine country, and to
force from its sovereign a sum of money, the payment of which he had reason to think would be resisted. He thus rashly hazarded his own being and the being of all his people.
"But," says he, " I did not imagine the Rajah intended to go into rebellion, and therefore went un
? ? ? ? SPEECH IN REPLY.
