СНАР. 1786. Feb. 17th. Mr. Burke moves for Another year elapsed before charges were in a formal manner moved; but, from that time, the task proceeded without intermission. Mr. Burke then assumed the position of accuser; and, having caused resolutions formerly passed* to be read as the ground of papers pre- his proceeding, introduced to the House what he justly charges against termed the solemn and important business of the day. Mr Hastings. He traced, in a clear and perspicuous manner, paratory to his the rise of our power in India, the settlement effected by Lord Clive; the enormous abuses which, in consequence of the facility afforded to the sudden acquisition of wealth, were piled on each other, until every spot of British territory in India became a shocking theatre of that variety of crimes to which the lust of avarice and ambition so frequently impels the worthless part of human kind. Such were the circumstances when Mr. Hastings was removed from Madras to Bengal; but still the state of affairs required scrutiny; and he mentioned the operations of the different committees, until the reports were delivered which occasioned the resolutions he had caused to be read. He reflected with great severity on Mr. Dundas, for having become so cold and indifferent on a subject in which he had before shewn so much spirit and eagerness; and complained bitterly of an expression used by Lord Thurlow, when he compared the reports to mere fables, and placed their authority no higher than that of the romance of Robinson Crusoe. In defiance of either the keen severity of raillery, at once unmerited and groundless, or the imposing plausibility of an insidious style of argument, he should rest his own particular accusation against Mr. Hastings as a delinquent of the first magnitude, upon the united authority of the heavy charges arising out of the reports, and of the string of resolutions remaining on the Journals. Three modes of proceeding presented themselves : a criminal information to be filed in the Court of King's Bench by the Attorney-general, a bill of pains * In May, 1782. and penalties, and a parliamentary impeachment. From the first he was averse, because the Attorneygeneral* did not discover any zealous inclination to support the measure; nor did he conceive that a trial by jury was, of all others, the most unexceptionable and best devised for obtaining ample justice against an offender so great and elevated; nor could a prosecution so important, and necessarily of such long duration, be carried on in the Court of King's Bench, without overwhelming all other causes. A bill of pains and penalties would press, with the severity of injustice, on the party prosecuted, and tarnish the character and dignity of the House; as its members would thus present themselves at one moment as accusers, and at another as judges; where the accused must state the grounds of his defence, and witnesses produced, who could not be examined on oath, but who must yet, before another assembly, be subjected to that test. He therefore gave the preference to an impeachment, but would not pursue the accustomed course of first moving the impeachment and then for a committee, who should discover and arrange the articles: he would only move for papers, from the contents of which he would endeavour to collect the facts into their necessary points of view; and when these should, in the contemplation of the House, appear to be charges of an atrocious nature, he would propose an impeachment. In conclusion, he moved for all correspondence since January, 1782, between Mr. Hastings and the Court of Directors, as well before as since his return, relative to presents and other money privately received by him. Mr. Windham seconded the motion. CHAP. LXI. 1786. Mr. Dundas jocularly observed, that, from some Mr. Dundas. passages in the mover's specch, he was led to congratulate himself that he was not the person to be impeached. He denied that he had ever dropped a hint from which it could be inferred that he would be an accuser of Mr. Hastings; nor did the resolutions СНАРА LXI. 1786. Mr. Fox. Mr. Pitt. Other members. Papers granted. 20th. Other papers demanded. which had been adverted to, charge on him any criminality. These observations called up Mr. Fox, who exposed, with great vehemence, what he considered the inconsistency of the Lord Advocate; and alluded particularly to the extermination of the Rohillas, and taking from the Mogul the provinces secured by the treaty of Poorunder. Mr. Pitt treated as extraordinary the language used by Mr. Fox. He excused Mr. Hastings as to several of the points of charge intimated against him; extermination of the Rohillas was a mere word, unattended with any act; and, with respect to the breach of the treaty of Poorunder, by seizing the provinces of Corah and Allahabad, he observed, that after that transaction, Mr. Hastings had been named by act of Parliament, instead of President of the Council of Bengal, Governor-general of all the settlements. Öther members spoke in defence of Mr. Hastings and in justification of Mr. Dundas, particularly Mr. Rous, Mr. Vansittart, and Major Scott; while on the other side appeared Mr. Francis, and Lord North. The papers were granted without opposition; as were, on subsequent motions, several others, relating to presents and payments, and the correspondence with Mr. Hastings on the removal of Mr. John Bristow*; but when Mr. Burke proceeded to require copies of all other correspondence during the residence of Mr. Bristow in the province of Oude, with documents, answers, and proceedings, a disposition to resistance was shewn by Mr. Pitt and Mr. Dundas; a debate was prevented by the Speaker's illness, which occasioned an adjournment, and at the next meeting of the House the motion was withdrawn. Mr. Burke having demanded some other papers relative to transactions in Oude, Mr. Dundas made some opposition, and the debate which ensued before they were granted is chiefly remarkable for the obserdeclaration of vations of Mr. Pitt, who, having congratulated the Mr. Pitt's impartiality. p. 216. They were the subject of eight motions, for which, see Journals, vol. xli. House on the apparent moderation shewn by those who forwarded the prosecution, a temperance which would greatly conduce to accelerate the investigation, declared that he was neither a determined friend nor foe to Mr. Hastings, but resolved to support the principles of justice and equity. If crimes of enormity were proved beyond a doubt, the character of that House, the reputation of the British name, the honour and dignity of the human species, called aloud for punishment; but Mr. Hastings, notwithstanding assertions to the contrary, might be perfectly innocent; the assertions on either part must be sustained by incontestible evidence. CHAP. LXI. 1786. examine witnesses at the bar. It would be, at this time, equally tedious and useless Mr. Burke to recapitulate the various motions for papers which proposes to were made, and, after animated discussions, rejected*. Mr. Burke, steadily pursuing his object, next proposed to call witnesses to the bar; but this was resisted, unless April 2. specific charges were first preferred, so that the House might judge whether the proposed evidence was, or was not, admissible or applicable. Yielding reluc- 4th, 12th, 26th, tantly to this objection, Mr. Burke produced twenty- and 27th. two articles of charge, extending to a great length, twenty-two and comprising a prodigious variety of mattert. Produces charges. It was moved, on the petition of Mr. Hastings Mr. Hastings that he should be allowed copies, and be heard in applies for his defence. To the latter part of the motion there copies of the was no opposition; but to the granting of copies, Sir See debates on the 3rd, 6th, and 17th of March. †Their heads are, 1, The Rohilla War; 2, Shah Allum; 3, Benares, which branches out into five divisions; 4, Princes of Oude; 5, Revolution in Farruckabad; 6, destruction of the Rajah of Salone; 7, Contracts; 8, Presents; 9, Resignation of his office; 10, 11, 12, Contracts of different kinds, particularly opium; 13, Appointment of Richard Joseph Sullivan to be resident at Delhi; 14, Treaty with and conduct toward the Rama of Gohud; 15, Mismanagement of the Revenues; 16, Misdemeanours in Oude; 17, Arresting and displacing Mahomed Reza Khan; 18, The Mogul delivered up to the Mahrattas; 19, a libel on the Court of Directors in his narrative of transactions at Benares; 20, Mahratta war and peace; 21, Concealing from the Council and from the Court of Directors his correspondence with native princes and country powers; and 22, Treatment of Fyzoola Khan, Vizier of Rampore. See the charges as thus presented, Journals, vol. xl. p. 483 to 537-to 595-612 to 623-627 to 629-648 to 654. Burke's Work's, 8vo. vol xi. p. 370 to the the end; and the whole twelfth volume, being five hundred and twenty-eight pages; see also the same matter in pamphlets, published respectively by Stockdale and Debrett. The twentysecond, or last charge, was not delivered until the fifth of May, after the defence of Mr. Hastings had been entered into. Journals, vol. xli. page 750 to 761. charges. CHAP. LXI. 1786. Application opposed. But acceded to. 1786. May 1st and 2nd. answer. Grey Cooper, Mr. Burke, and Mr. Fox, made strong objections, as being contrary to precedent. Mr. Fox observed, that they were not articulated charges, but merely general collections of accusatory facts, out of which the real charges were to be extracted. Mr. Pitt, on the other hand, maintained that it was necessary to give the required copy; for, without it, the party accused could not judge what to admit, what to deny, and what to justify; or, whether he might not demur altogether. The whole motion was granted; but when Mr. Burke, after presenting an article, moved that the Speaker should leave the chair, in order that the committee might proceed, it was insisted, and, after a long debate, carried, that Mr. Hastings should first be heard on the charges, as it was possible that he might convince the House that they were altogether unfounded or untenable. At the day appointed, Mr. Hastings appeared at the bar, and delivered, from written minutes, his anMr. Hastings's swer to the charges. He examined them separately, and reasoned upon the facts with great force, or denied them with much appearance of consistency*. Twenty witnesses were examined in support of the charges, an investigation which took up many days in two sessions of Parliament†. Witnesses examined. 2nd May 1786 to 30th March 1787. 1786. Mr. Burke charge. When these preliminaries had been gone through, Mr. Burke moved the first charge on the Rohilla war. moves the first He viewed the question as an appeal from British power to British justice. The matter must either be criminal, or a very false accusation: there was no medium; no alternative: the result must be, that Warren Hastings had been guilty of gross, enormous, and flagitious crimes, or, himself be a base, calumniatory, wicked, and malicious accuser. There were but three motives which were known to actuate men and excite them to turn accusers; ignorance, inadvertency, and passion. When he considered that Mr. Hastings had been fourteen years at the head of government in India, and not one complaint sent home against him, he trem *See Journals, v. xli. p. 668 to 733, and pamphlets by Stockdale and Debret. See the evidence in a pamphlet by Stockdale, 1786. |