"are," says he, "upon the spot. It is happy "for me that you are so. You can now inquire "into my conduct." Did Mr. Hastings so in

quire? No my Lords, we have not a word of any inquiry; he even found fresh matter of charge in the answer of the Rajah; although if there is any fault in this answer, it is its extremely humble and submissive tone. If there was any thing faulty in his manner, it was his extreme humility and submission. It is plain he would have almost submitted to any thing. He offered in fact, 220,000l. to redeem himself from greater suffering. Surely no man going into rebellion would offer 220,000l. of the treasure which would be so essential to his success; nor would any government, that was really apprehensive of rebellion, call upon the suspected person to arm and discipline two thousand horse. My Lords, it is evident no such apprehensions were entertained; nor was any such charge made until punishment had commenced. A vague accusation was then brought forward, which was answered by a clear and a natural defence, denying some parts of the charge, evading and apologizing for others, and desiring the whole to be inquired into. To this request the answer of the governour general was, That won't do, you shall have no inquiries. And why? Because I have arbitrary power, you have no rights, and

I can and will punish you without inquiry. I admit, that if his will is the law, he may take the charge before punishment, or the punishment before the charge, or he may punish without making any charge. If his will is the law, all I have been saying amounts to nothing. But I have endeavoured to let your Lordships see, that in no country upon the earth is the will of a despot, law. It may produce wicked, flagitious, tyrannical acts, but in no country is it law.

The duty of a sovereign in cases of rebellion, as laid down in the Hedaia, agrees with the general practice in India. It was usual, except in cases of notorious injustice and oppression, whenever a rebellion or a suspicion of a rebellion existed, to admonish the rebellious party and persuade him to return to his duty. Causes of complaint were removed and misunderstandings explained, and, to save the effusion of blood, severe measures were not adopted until they were rendered indispensable. This wise and provident law is or ought to be the law in all countries; it was in fact, the law in that country, but Mr. Hastings did not attend to it. unfortunate victim was goaded to revolt and driven from his subjects, although he endeavoured by message after message to reconcile this cruel tyrant to him. He is told in reply, You have shed the blood of Englishmen, and I will

M 3

His

I will never be reconciled to you. Your Lordships will observe, that the reason he gives for such an infernal determination (for it cannot be justly qualified by any other word) is of a nature to make tyranny the very foundation of our government. I do not say here upon what occasion people may or may not resist : but surely, if ever there was an occasion on which people, from love to their sovereign and regard to their country, might take up arms, it was this. They saw a tyrant violent in his demands, and weak in his power. They saw their prince imprisoned and insulted, after he had made every offer of submission, and had laid his turban three times in the lap of his oppressor. They saw him, instead of availing himself of the means he possessed of cutting off his adversary, (for the life of Mr. Hastings was entirely in his power,) betaking himself to flight. They then thronged round him, took up arms in his defence, and shed the blood of some of his insulters. Is this resistance so excited, so provoked, a plea for irreconcileable vengeance?

I must beg pardon for having omitted to lay before your Lordships, in its proper place, a most extraordinary paper, which will shew you in what manner judicial inquiries are conducted, upon what grounds charges are made, by what sort of evidence they are supported, and, in short,

to

to what perils the lives and fortunes of men are subjected in that country. This paper is in the printed minutes, page 1608. It was given in agreeably to the retrograde order which they have established in their judicial proceedings. It was produced to prove the truth of a charge of rebellion, which was made some months before the paper in evidence was known to the

accuser.

"To the Honourable Warren Hastings. Sir, 66 About the month of November last, I communicated to Mr. Markham, the substance of a conversation said to have passed between Rajah Cheit Sing and Saadut Ally, and which was reported to me by a person in whom I had 66 some confidence. The mode of communi

cating this intelligence to you, I left entirely "to Mr. Markham. In this conversation, which "was private, the Rajah and Saadut Ally were "said to have talked of Hyder Ally's victory over Colonel Baillie's detachment; to have

66

agreed that they ought to seize this oppor

tunity of consulting their own interest, and to "have determined to watch the success of Hyder's arms. Some days after this conver"sation was said to have happened, I was in"formed by the same person, that the Rajah "had received a message from one of the

Begums at Fyzabad (I think it was from Sujah

"ul Dowlah's widow,) advising him to comply "with the demands of government, and en

couraging him to expect support in case of "his resisting. This also, I believe, I commu"nicated to Mr. Markham, but not being per"fectly certain, I now think it my duty to remove the possibility of your remaining unacquainted with a circumstance, which may not "be unconnected with the present conduct of "the Rajah."

Here then is evidence of evidence given to Mr. Markham by Mr. Balfour, from Lucknow, in the month of November 1781, long after the transaction at Benares. But what was this evidence: I communicate, he says, the subject of "a conversation said to have passed." Observe, said, not a conversation that had passed to his knowledge or recollection; but what his informant said had passed. He adds, this conversation was reported to him by a person whom he won't name, but in whom, he says, he had some confidence. This anonymous person, in whom he had put some confidence, was not himself present at the conversation. He only reports to him, that it was said by somebody else, that such a conversation had taken place. This conversation, which somebody told Colonel Balfour he had heard, was said by somebody to have taken place, if true, related to matters of great importance;