Page images

of £200,000. Mr. Markham gave, as his opinion, that £200,000 was not sufficient; and the next day the rajah offered £20,000 more, in all £220,000. 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 lacks, 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 lacks, 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 remark, that Mr. Hastings refused the £200,000 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 £40,000 from Mr. Sullivan in one morning, and raising by other under jobs £27,000 more. In the distress which his own extravagance and prodigality had involved him, £200,000 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 any where 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 Cheit 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 £200,000. For when he met Mr. Markham at Bauglepore, and for the first time mentioned the sum of £500,000 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 Cheit Sing 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 lacks, 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. 6. If I ever 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 dependent on the company, guaranteed, 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?

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.

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 under the dominion of Bulwant Sing, that they might be recovered from his son rajah Cheit Sing. The pergunnahs of Kera, Mungrora, and Bidjigur 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 Fussel era, stated at twenty-four lacks. Mr. Hastings said, 'Give a copy of this to Roy Radha Churn, that if Cheit Sing is backward in acknowledging this claim, Radha Churn may answer and confute him.' Why Mr. Hastings, when he arrived at Benares, and had called rajah Cheit 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 Nundcomar, concerning the pretended usurpations made by the rajah of Benares, of the pergunnahs of Kera, Mungrora, and Bidjigur.” Your lordships will recollect, that Bidjigur is one of those very forts 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 Cheit 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

« PreviousContinue »