he said, sufficiently explained, or insisted on, and some of them not even understood. He mentioned that the Begum had faved the life of her fon, the present Nabob Asoph ul Dowla, at the hazard of her own. When the father once drew his sabre to kill him, she fell down upon him, and thus rescued him, though at the loss of her own blood, for she was wounded in the scuffle. This was an action Sujah ul Dowla was very capable of, for he hated and despised his fon, and so far from leaving him his treasures and his personal estate, he would willingly have deprived him of his succession-that he heard this fact from Mr. Hastings himself. Mr. Francis said, when he was at Calutta, Mr. Hastings used to assign a reason for his partiality to the Begum, which he thought at the time a very tolerable one, viz. that the Begum had been recommended to his particular care and protection by the late Sujah Dowlah, in the most pathetic manner. That Mr. Hastings did take her part in 1775, when, as he said, (with a view to reflect on General Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis) Mr. Bristow, appointed by them, had taken an improper part against the Begum. That the elder Begum was the rightful heir to the Soubadarry of Oude; at least, it was through her that the principality came into the family of Sujah Dowlah; consequently she had a better right to the jaghires than the present Nabob had to his throne. That whereas it was infifted on, that the plunder of the personal property was resolved on by Mr. Hastings in consequence, and as a punishment of the resistance made by the Begums to the resumption of the jaghires, it appeared by the positive evidence of Mr. Middleton given at the bar, that the resumption of the jaghires was resolved on after the seizure of her treasures.

Here he earnestly entreated the Committee to observe that when all the other pretences by justifications, set up in defence of this atrocious act of violence, had been refuted or abandoned, the friends and advocates of Mr. Hastings had been driven at last to the old-established resource of tyranny, to the common profligate plea of state neceffity, viz. that the Company's affairs, in the middle of the year 1781, when Mr. Hastings went up to Benares, were reduced to fuch diftress, and all their pecuniary resources so completely exhausted, that measures of all forts, and any fort, were to be juftified, provided they tended to procure a supply of money, and an immediate relief to that extreme distress. That, from the death of Sir John Clavering, in August 1777, Mr. Haftings was unquestionably the master of the British Government, not only of Bengal, but of all India; and, as he would be fairly entitled to the merit, so he ought to answer for the

الذ

ill confequences of every thing that was done during the existence of that power.

That, on the 10th of August 1778, Mr. Hastings had laid before the Board an official estimate of resources and disbursements, which stated an unappropriated balance of current rupees 2.35.66.000, or about two millions four hundred thousand pounds sterling, which he expected to remain in the Company's treasury, (after deducting all the probable difbursements from the expected refources) on the 30th of April 1779. From this balance, Mr. Hastings deducted thirty lacks for extra disbursements, not provided for in the estimate, leaving a corrected balance of cash to the amount of current rupees 2.05.60 000, or above two millions sterling, which he afferted, and, by all manner of official documents, proved, would exist in the Bengal treasury on the 30th of April 1779. -Of what nature then were the subsequent measures, purfued by Mr. Haftings, which, in so short a period as from April 1779, to July 1781, had not only wafted that great forplus, but which forced him to incur a heavy bonded debt, and yet left the Company's affairs in fuch an abandoned ftate of penury and distress, as might, with some colour of reason, be alledged and pleaded in justification of the various crimes committed by Mr. Hastings for the avowed purpose of getting money, and which were the fubject of the last and present charge against him. Mr. Francis requested the Committee to carry this reflection in their minds when they should come to inquire into the wars made by Mr. Hastings, and other causes of the monstrous waste of the public property committed to his care.

Mr. Francis offered other pertinent observations as to the facts stated in the charge, and, among others, he quoted the following paffage from a letter of Mr. Middleton to Sir Elijah Impey: "I foon found that no real advantage was to be ob"tained by proceeding, at once, to violent extremities with "the Begum ; and that she was only to be attacked through "the medium of her confidential fervants, whom it required " confiderable address to get hold of: however, we at last " effected it; and, by using some few feverities with them, we

at length came at the fecret boards of this old lady!" What was this, asked Mr. Francis, but the language of thieves and ruffians, plotting in a night cellar to break into a house, and rob some innocent woman of her property? - Mr. Francis went on with a series of observations, in allufion to the facts in the charge. He said, that it was true, he thought the Begum had no right to appropriate the produce of the conquest and plunder of the Rohilla country, while the money due to the Company on account of that war remained mpaid. No opinion of his ever went farther than that. The

1

The Council never interfered, otherwise than by approving and confirming the guarantee given by our Resident to the final settlement between the Nabob and his mother, on the 15th October 1775, after he had already obtained from her above 600,000l. That treaty was a receipt in full, a fecurity against farther demands, and a quietus for ever. Mr. Haftings went farther than any Member of the Council, in approving that settlement; though now he says, that the whole of this transaction passed under the order and guidance of the Board, which excluded him from any share in their acts, equally in fuch as he approved, and in such as he disapproved! At that time, his language was different; but now, it seems, he may approve of an act, and vote for it, and yet he is to have no share in it. Whether he approved of it or not, he was bound by the sense of the majority, which constituted the act of Government. In the prefent inftance, the Council were unanimous, and Mr. Hastings took the lead. It was true, the Begum, at her own defire, paid a small part of the above demand in goods of different forts. Whether Mr. Bristow did right or wrong in accepting of fuch articles, the Council cer.. tainly did right in ordering them to be fold by public auction. The fufpicion which unavoidably fixed itself upon arbitrary valuations and private contracts, cannot exist in the case of a public auction. Mr. Middleton's evidence will shew in what manner the property of the Begums was fold in 1782. That it was true, that he, (Mr. Francis) in the year 177.5, had expressed his suprise that two ladies, locked up in a feraglio, should talk of meddling with affairs of state: but was that any reason for plundering them of their property; for robbing them of all they had; for treating them with the most scandalous injustice, extortion, violence, and cruelty? Could the opinion attributed to him be accommodated to such actions? And if it could, was it just to allow Mr. Hastings, who never followed his advice in any thing, to shelter himself under the concurrence of his opinion?- 1 hat these unfortunate women were, indeed, disqualified by their sex and situation from meddling in the affairs of government, and perfectly incapable of disturbing it if they would. That the attempt to charge them with a design to extirpate the English out of India, was equally base and ridiculous; as if it were possible for two old women, locked up in a feraglio, and two decrepit eunuchs, first to depose the Nabob, their fon and fovereign, and then to expel the English, which could not be effected by a combination of the four first powers of India, assisted by the French; - that this abfurd pretence, in addition to all the cruelty and injustice of the proceeding, fixed upon it a brand of falfehood and ignominy which would render the name of an Englishman, in Afia, contemptible as well as

odious for ever. - Mr. Francis, in the course of his speech, took occasion to set Mr. Burgess right as to a point he had set out with on the preceding night, namely, saying that Mr. Hastings began his Indian career with making the treaty of Illahabad, whereas the treaty of Illahabad was made fo long ago as 1765, by Lord Clive and General Carnac, who were the political opponents of Mr. Haftings.

1

Mr. Burgess rose next, and, addressing himself to the Chair, faid,

Sir,

As the honourable gentleman has particularly alluded to me in what he is pleased to say I asserted last night, I rise merely to explain that point. I imagined, from the manner in which the honourable gentleman set out, that he would have answered, and, if possible, have controverted some of the propofitions I then advanced. Instead of this, he has thought fit to affert, that, in the debate of last night, I faid the treaty of Illahabad had been made by Mr. Haftings. This, I am clear, could not have been the cafe, as I neither knew, nor had ever inquired who made it. Nor was it material to my argument that I should. I mentioned it merely to prove, that an actual treaty existed, made by two powers competent to contract; which treaty, the honourable gentleman himself, jointly with General Clavering and Colonel Monfon, who then formed a constant and decided majority in the Council, had broken; and that this very circumstance was now included in the charge againft Mr. Hastings, who at that time was in the minority. This fact, Sir, with others which I also stated, the honourable gentleman has thought proper to pass over. That he has, I hope, the Committee will remark, and put the proper construction upon it.

Mr. Francis answered, that he was not upon his trial. That when the treaty of Illahabad was put an end to, it was a matter of opinion whether the treaty was meant to continue for Sujah Dowlah's life only, or whether it was a permanent treaty depending on no such contingency. Mr. Francis said, he hoped, till he knew any thing ill of him, the honourable gentleman would presume well of him, but the characters of General Clavering and Colonel Monfon ought at all events to be holden sacred. Unfortunately they were no more, and had left the weakest of the triumvirate to defend their characters.

し

Mr. Nicholls observed, that whilst he paid a just tribute to the astonishing eloquence and highly cultivated talents of an honourable gentleman (Mr. Sheridan) he must presume, even in opposition to all his brilliant oratory, to contend, that the whole of his fafcinating harangue had turned upon a fallacy;

3

lacy; the question was not whether the Begums were in
actual rebellion, but whether Mr. Hastings was given to un-
derstand that they were so, in a manner fufficiently plaufible,
to induce him to credit the alleged fact. Mr. Nicholls en-
tered into a series of reasoning upon the right conftruction
of the words in Mr. Middleton's letter of the 6th of De-
cember, 1781, and the measure heretofore proposed, which he
affirmed were to be understood differently from the manner
in which they had been argued in the speech of the mover
of the motion. Mr. Nicholls remarked, that taking the
jaghire from the Begums, two women shut up in a Zenana,
and incapable of managing such a property, for which they
received an equivalent, was a benefit, and not an injury.
He alfo defended the seizure of the treasures, referring the
Committee to Mr. Middleton's letters, and to other docu-
ments, to prove that the Nabob had always confidered the
wealth as his property, by inheritance.
Major Scott now rose, and faid,

Mr. St. John,

Before I request the indulgence of the Committee on the Maj. Scott. subject of the present debate, I shall take the liberty of offering a few words, in reply to the honourable gentleman (Mr. Francis) who has just fat down, and who has told you, that I generally pay particular attention to whatever falls from him. Allufions have been made to publications out of this House, and to the means that have been taken to hias the Public, upon the important question now under confideration. I have no scruple to say, that Mr. Hastings, instead of being merely an accused, is a perfecuted, a shamefully perfecuted man, and that means the most indecent, means the most scandalous and infamous, have been resorted to, in order to prejudice Mr. Hastings in the opinion of those parties who divide this kingdom, and who may be the ultimate judges of this important question. In the first speech, made by the honourable gentleman in this House, he declared, in the most solemn manner, "that he should be " forry to be fsuspected of retaining a spark of personal ani" mosity against Mr. Hastings. - We are both, he added, I " believe, men of tempers too warm to be capable of resent"ments; our contest is at an end, and the hoftilities it pro"duced expired with it." If it had not been for this folemn declaration, made by the honourable gentleman, in his first speech in this House, and afterwards carefully printed, and published by himself, I should be led to conclude, that he was the author of a pamphlet, which I now hold in my hand, as the style of the work bears so near a refemblance to the minutes and writings of the honourable gentleman. Sir, I pay him na compliment, when I say his style is a good one, and VOL. XXI, fome