"to execute; may your wishes be ever crowned "with success! My compliments," &c. &c. &c.

Copy of an address from Mr. Gordon to the Begum:-"Begum Saib of exalted dignity and "generosity, whom God preserve. After pre"senting the usual professions of servitude, &c, "in the customary manner, my address is pre"sented."

"Your gracious letter, in answer to the peti❝tion of your servant, from Gooudah, exalted 66 me. From the contents, I became unspeak"ably impressed with the honour it conferred. May the Almighty protect that royal purity, " and bestow happiness, increase of wealth and "prosperity. The welfare of your servant is intirely owing to your favour and benevolence; "a few days have elapsed since I arrived at "Gooudah, with the Colonel Saib."

"This is presented for your highness's infor "mation, I cherish hopes from your generosity, "that considering me in the light of one of your "servants, always continue to exalt and honour "me with your gracious letters. May the sun "of prosperity continually shine."

These acknowledgments of the Begum's friendly disposition and services were concealed, when the charge was made against this woman at Lucknow before Sir Elijah Impey: I wish to impress this upon your Lordships' mind; and that

before

before Mr. Hastings left Bengal, in the trunk of Major Scott, his private Persian interpreter, was this letter. Did he make that inquiry of Captain Gordon? No. Did he make that inquiry of Colonel Hannay? Did he make any inquiry into the matter after his perusal of these letters; or did he give this poor woman any opportunity of obtaining justice against this Captain Gordon, who, after acknowledging that he owed his life to her favour, calumniates and traduces her to her utter destruction? No, he never did, and therefore he is chargeable, and I charge him with every thing that is wrongful in Captain Gordon's evidence.

These papers, which carry with them a clear refutation of all the charges against the Begums, are never once produced, though Captain Gordon was referred to expressly for inquiry and explanation of the whole transaction, by the woman herself. You hear nothing of them; there is no appearance of them in the affidavits; no such papers were laid before the Supreme Council ; none were transmitted to the Court of Directors: but at last the House of Commons having come at the truth of this matter, Mr. Hastings, not daring to deny the existence of these papers, brings Captain Gordon to be examined here, in order to prove that papers which he had himself

written were false. Is this to be tolerated? What

will

will your Lordships think of a man that comes to attest his own infamy; to declare that he has written papers containing falsehoods, and to invalidate the false testimony which he had be fore given? Is he to be suffered, I say, to come here, and endeavour to prove the absolute falsity of his own deeds, by his own evidence?

The next point for your Lordships' consideration, is the evidence which he produces to prove the falsity of a paper written by himself. Why, he himself is the sole evidence. And how does he prove it? Why, says he, the reason of my writing that letter was this, she had sent a person with me as an escort, and this person was desirous of receiving some proof that he had done his duty; and, therefore, I wrote a complaisant letter. I meant nothing by it. It was written merely to satisfy the mind of the man. Now, is that the way in which formal and solemn letters, written upon great occasions to great people, are to be explained away? If he had said nothing but-your servant-such a one, has done his duty,-this explanation might pass. But, you see, it has another complexion. It speaks of his owing his life to her. But if you admit that it is possible, (for possibilities have an unknown extent,) that he wrote such a letter at such a time, and for such a purpose; and that the letter he wrote was false, and that the falsity

of

of the letter is proved by his own testimony, given in an affidavit, which we have also reason to believe is false, your Lordships must at the same time admit, that it is one of the most complex pieces of fraud and falsehood that I believe ever existed in the world. But it is worse than all this. There is another letter, written some days after, which I will read to you, and which he has not pretended to say was written only to testify that a messenger had executed his commission properly :-"Your gracious letter," (he thus writes,)—" in answer to the petition of your servant from Gooudah, exalted me. From the contents, I became unspeakably impressed with the honour it conferred."

My Lords, this letter was not sent back by a messenger, in acknowledgment of his having done his duty; but was written in consequence of a correspondence in the nature of a petition, for something or other, which he made to the Begum. That petition they have suppressed and sunk. It is plain, however, that the petition had been sent, and was granted; and therefore the apology that is made for the former letter does not apply to this letter, which was written after wards.

How then do they attempt to get rid of this difficulty? Why, says Captain Gordon, "the Colonel Saib, (by whom was meant Colonel VOL. XVI. Hannay)

D

Hannay) was not at Gooudah, as stated in the letter, but at Succara, about eighteen miles from it, and therefore you ought not to pay much regard to this paper:" but he does not deny the letter, nor was it possible for him to deny it. He says, Colonel Hannay was not there; but how do we know whether Colonel Hannay was there or not? We have only his own word for it, but supposing he was not there, and that it was clearly proved that he was eighteen miles distant from it, Major Naylor was certainly with Captain Gordon at the time. Might not his Persian scribe (for he does not pretend to say he wrote the letter himself) take Major Naylor for a colonel (for he was the superior officer to Captain Gordon) and think him the Colonel Saib? for errours of that kind may be committed in our own country. Every day we may take a major for a lieutenant colonel. This was an errour that might easily have happened in such a case. He was in as high rank as Colonel Hannay, for Colonel Hannay at that time was only a major; I do not believe either of them was properly entitled to the name of Colonel Saib. I am ashamed, my Lords, to be obliged to remark upon this prevarication. Their own endeavours to get rid of their own written acts, by contradictory evidence and false constructions, sufficiently clear these women of

the