Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

-

which had taken up so much time already for evidence, did not also require great time for deliberation? On the part of the managers, much of the time had been taken up in reading the articles of charge, and the evidence to support them. Let them look also at the different mode adopted for the other side. On the part of the prosecution, the whole of the evidence, at the request of the defendant's council, was read at length. On the part of the defence, various parts of the evidence were entered as read, for the purpose of saving time, referring to volumes of evidence to be printed by the managers before they should proceed to reply. The managers might have insisted on the evidence for the defence being read at large, but, for the purpose of avoiding delay, they had consented to this expeditious mode. But it had been said, that the managers had occasioned delay, by proposing questions which could not regularly be asked, that the opinion of the judges had been often given against them upon that occasion, and that they had offered evidence which was inadmissible. Upon this he must confess, that if there was any reproach to attach to the managers for such conduct, he was ambitious of having his share of it, and he claimed a great one. He should not now say any thing upon the opinions of those who thought the proceedings of the managers vexatious in that respect; but would be content with observing, that what ever their lordships might think upon the propriety of refusing evidence offered by the managers, he thought that the managers would have been highly reprehensible if they had neglected to tender it, and that the general ground for refusing to receive that evidence appeared to him ridiculous, and the argument upon it preposterous; for it was said, that although the evidence in itself might amount to something, yet it would not raise a degree of presumption in its favour to entitle it to admission, thus taking the weight of evidence as an argument against its competency; and with respect to the opinions of the judges, he could only say, that the managers never knew the principle on which they proceeded, as they always gave those opinions before the Lords, shut up in their chamber of parliament, to the absolute exclusion of strangers; consequently, from such opinions given in the dark, the managers had no rule for their guidance, and therefore they were obliged to persist

in every question they put that might have been objected to by the defendant's counsel, not knowing what the judges would approve or what they would disapprove.-The next consideration was, upon the matter of fact, with respect to the time which the discussion of this impeachment had already taken up. It was said, it had lasted six years. It had so. But how many days had been employed in that period? Only 116. In one year only 20 days had been allowed. If the Lords required any extraordinary diligence from the managers, their lordships, from the example they gave, did not require that diligence with a very extraordinary good grace. The managers, however,did not wish to be extravagant; for they asked only for a week, upon important ground, for proceeding upon this trial, although the Lords had taken months for themselves without condescending to assign any ground whatever. How stood the case with respect to speeches before the Lords upon this trial? Upon the Benares charge, which he had the honour of opening, he spoke only one day, and an hon. friend of his another day. Two days were consumed in speeches from the managers on this point; eight were taken up by the counsel for the defendant in answering them. He did not say that the counsel took up too much time; he dared say it was too little for the business they undertook; but he mentioned this to show how the truth was with regard to the question of delay.-Another thing was to be noticed upon this trial, and it arose out of the circumstances of its commencement, When the lords said to the managers that they should not ask for judgment charge after charge separately, but that Mr. Hastings should hear the whole of the charges to be exhibited against him before he should be called upon to make a defence to any,-why was this rule not to be followed with respect to the managers in making their reply to the defence of Mr. Hastings? Why was one rule to be followed by the defendant, and another to be marked out for the prosecutors? For, according to the mode allowed Mr. Has tings for his defence, the managers ought to have time to peruse the whole of the defence before they proceed to reply to it. And, if the counsel for the defendant required time to answer the speeches of the managers and to rebut the evidence called for the prosecution, why was there not to be time for the reply in the same man,

ner? He would go farther, and say, that even if he had known a good while ago that the defence would have been closed at the time it was, he was then entitled to think and expect from the conduct of the Lords, upon former stages of this trial, that they would not have called upon the managers for their reply till the next session of parliament. How stood facts upon this point? On the 14th of February, 1791, the Commons sent a message to the Lords, importing that they were ready to proceed upon this trial. What were their lordships pleased to do? Not a word was heard from them until the 17th of May, and then, it might be supposed, they made up by their activity for their past neglect. How stood the fact? How many days did their lordships allow the managers to proceed upon this trial in the whole of that year? Only four; and on the 30th of May their lordships diligence closed for the session. Did they then tell Mr. Hastings, that he must make his defence to what had been exhibited against him in a week, as they called upon the managers to reply? Nothing like it; for they allowed him till the next year to prepare it. Was there one law for Mr. Hastings, and another for the managers? He confessed, that upon every view he had of the subject, and from the conduct of the Lords, he fully expected that they would not have called upon the managers for their reply until the next session.-Another part of the business had been alluded to by the learned gentleman, which was, that Mr. Hastings had been obliged to request his friends to come down to the House on the day of trial in time to form a House, to prevent delay that must otherwise have happened. Upon this he must say, that there might, out of the 116 days which had been taken up in this trial, be three or four on which the Lords might have waited for the Commons for, perhaps, the space of half an hour. This, he presumed, was not very disgraceful to the managers, nor very extraordinary, for on some days the chancellor did not come before three o'clock in the afternoon, frequently at one, and if he should by accident, without any intimation to the managers, be in the hall at twelve, it was not very surprising that the managers, were not in court much before one o'clock. It seemed, however, that now Mr. Hastings called for expedition in the course of this trial, in hopes of having final judgment this session. Had any

body possessed of the least knowledge of the subject, the most distant idea that final judgment could be obtained in this mighty business this session? If there was, he confessed himself bound to admire his candour, and his confidence in the diligence of the Lords.-It was pretended that the managers must know, or might have known, the whole of the evidence long ago, for that the whole of it might have been printed. To which he answered, that was impossible; for a great part of the evidence on the part of the defence had not, by the express desire of the defendant's counsel, been heard as yet by any body in that court, having been carried on from page to page, and entered upon the trial as read, to be printed hereafter; and even this could not be ready for their lordships before the very day on which they had called upon the managers to appear in Westminister-hall to rebut it. And how could the managers do justice to that House, to themselves, and to the public, under such singular circumstances, if they were to comment upon evidence which they had never heard? With regard to the speeches of the counsel for the defendant, he confessed himself unable to reply to them also, without time to read them from the transcript of the short-hand notes taken at the trial; for under the idea of being allowed to have that advantage, he had waved the thought of taking full notes himself. Was it, therefore, fit that the managers should now be called upon to reply in this situation? Were they to comment upon 206 pages of evidence which they had not, and which they could not have read? Were they to reply to speeches which took up altogether nearly twenty-four hours to deliver without reading them, and weighing the arguments contained in them? He confessed himself unable to do so in less than a fortnight; more he did not require.-There was another point which he had hinted at before, which was, that it was possible that evidence would be produced in reply, and yet gentlemen persisted in saying, that the managers ought to go on without farther time, before they had seen all the evidence on the part of the defence. How was it possible to know what the evidence, which had been entered as read, might turn out to be? When gentlemen came to consider these points properly, he hoped the time the managers asked would not appear too much, and that they were not guilty of delay on their part in taking it,

if allowed. He was glad this debate had taken place, because it had afforded him an opportunity of proving that no delay was imputable to the managers.

Mr. Burke said, that the managers never thought of speaking from their own notes, which must be very imperfectly taken, when there was a person employed by the House for taking down in short hand every thing that was said. The managers were willing to do what ever they could; and more was not to be expected from them. He was convinced that neither Mr. Hastings's counsel, nor any man upon earth, would undertake to reply from his own notes, to the astonishingly able speech made by his hon. friend (Mr. Sheridan) on the article respecting the begums. The volume of evidence given in the course of the trial was immense, and the abilities of learned men were employed by the managers in arranging, methodising, and digesting it, without which neither the managers, nor the Lords themselves who were to decide upon it, could understand it. The Lords therefore ought not to expect the managers to do what they themselves were not equal to. It was said, when great monarchs issued any improper decree, that "their conscience had been surprised" the same might be said of the Lords, when they directed that the trial should be resumed so soon as the 5th of June: their conscience had been taken by surprise, or by storm, just as Heaven was stormed, by prayers and entreaties; but it was the duty of the Commons to take care that national justice did not suffer through any act of the upper House: the judicial character of the Lords must for the sake of the constitution be preserved; to be preserved, it must be respected; and it was the business of the Commons to see that it was respected; the constitution rested upon two pillars-one, the right of the Commons to hold the purse of the nation, and to take care that the Lords did not in any degree trench upon that right by modifying money bills. The other was the right of the Commons to impeach a right which they were bound to maintain, and not suffer any thing to be done by the Lords, or by any other set of men, which might weaken or evade it.

Mr. Burton insisted, that there were two things which every subject might claim as his birth-right, that justice should be administered, and that it should be

administered speedily. In the present impeachment, Mr. Hastings could not be said to enjoy the benefit of that right; for he was made the subject of a prosecution of unexampled length; to him justice certainly was not administered in mercy. The delay that was now required would be an additional hardship upon him; and if the managers were to require a fortnight's preparation for each charge, it was easy to see the trial could not end this session.

Mr. Pitt bore honourable testimony to the conduct of the managers, and maintained that they ought to be supported by the House. He thougt the time proposed beyond the day appointed by the Lords by no means too much. The character of the House, and the honour of the nation, were involved in this proceeding, and he was clearly of opinion that they should avoid precipitation as much as they should fear the imputation of delay.

42.

The House divided: Yeas, 87; Noes,

Mr. Burke then took notice of the impropriety of suffering false impressions to be made upon the public mind respecting this trial, through the medium of certain prostituted channels, and by means of insinuations thrown out in that House, and at another place, that delay had been the object of the managers. He reminded the House of what was due to their own dignity, to the character of the managers, to the honour of the British nation, and the regard they ought to have for the opinion of posterity, and moved, "That the managers of the impeachment against Warren Hastings, esq., do prepare and lay before the House, a statement of the proceedings on the trial of the said impeachment, together with an account of the circumstances which have occurred in the course of the said trial, with such observations as may tend to the explanation of the same."

Mr. Long objected to the taking up the time of the managers in this way.

Mr. Wigley moved the previous question.

Mr. Sheridan ridiculed the idea of there not being time for the purpose, and observed, that the managers had several hands unemployed at this time, and indeed, that he was unemployed himself, and should be so with regard to this impeachment until the speeches and the evidence alluded to in the course of this

day should be printed; for he should [ Mr. Dundas recommended withdrawnot begin to think what he should saying the motion for the present as a matin reply before he knew what he was to ter of prudence, because it might lead to reply to. a dispute with the Lords, a circumstance most carefully to be guarded against by all who wished to see the impeachment brought to an honourable conclusion. At the same time, he felt that the managers were entitled to the protection of the House, and if they should think it expedient to press the motion, he should vote for it.

Mr. Francis would offer but one short observation on the violent opposition made to the motion. The fact, he trusted, would make a proper impression on the House and on the public. On every other occasion that had offered, both within doors and abroad, a certain set of men had made it their constant business to load the managers with the basest accusations, with a view of persuading the public that they had purposely protracted the trial, to the vexation and oppression of Mr. Hastings, and to the disgrace of public justice. But now, what was the conduct of the same persons, when his right hon. friend came forward, and offered to lay a state of the facts before the House, and before the nation? Instead of meeting him fairly on the truth of their own charges, they turned short upon him, and said, they would hear nothing of facts: they would not suffer him to clear himself and his fellow managers from their malicious calumnies. They could abuse and calumniate; but, when they were challenged to a fair trial, they shrunk like cowards, and fled from the proof. What farther proof could the House or the nation desire, that every word these persons had uttered on the subject was utterly false, and incapable of being supported. Let this fact go forth to the world with all the rest of their proceedings.

Mr. Pitt saw no parliamentary ground upon which that House should call upon the managers to give a formal account of their conduct, and therefore the motion appeared to him to be needless. If any complaint had heen made against them, the House should vindicate their character; but that not being the case, he owned he wished the House not to proceed to a step so unusual as that involved in the present motion; he therefore wished he could prevail on the right hon, gentleman to withdraw it.

Mr. Burke appealed to the justice of the House to vindicate his character against the gross calumnies with which it was loaded, and expressed great indignation at the manner these calumnies had been sundered to pass without proper notice. He concluded with leaving the case entirely to the sense and pleasure of the House.

Mr. Fox admitted, that there might be grounds of prudence for withdrawing the motion, which his right hon. friend would consider; but the objection that there was nothing in a parliamentary form before the House, to induce them to call for such an account from the managers, was not well founded, for whatever was said in court by Mr. Hastings or his counsel, was regularly before the House.

Mr. Burke said, he would be induced to do much from motives of prudence, but prudence and policy called upon him to persist in his motion. Whoever in trust for public business, sacrificed his reputation, sacrificed the business with which he was entrusted. The managers had borne with many things to avoid a dispute with the Lords, which under different circumstances, they would not have borne ; but they could do so no longer, without betraying their duty, and the honour of the House, whose delegates they were. Could the Lords imagine, that the House of Commons, by justifying themselves, did an injury to them, unless they had set up an interest of their own, in opposition to that of the House of Commons? If they have done so (said he) there is an end of us both to any useful purpose. collidimur frangimur. If the Lords decide this cause on feeling, not on justice, depend upon it we are gone. It is the last of the kind that will ever come before that tribunal, on which rests the main security of our constitution. I call upon you, as you prize your honour, as you value that constitution, to vindicate your character, by affording the managers an opportunity of refuting the charges made against them if they can, or by punishing them if they cannot, or, so help me God, I believe this will be the last impeachment you will ever prefer.

Si

Mr. Windham said, there was neither prudence nor policy in submitting to ill usage beyond a certain point-that point was already passed-least of all to aban

[blocks in formation]

NOES

Mr. Hyde East

Mr. Sumner

[ocr errors]

}

69

69

And the members being equal, Mr. Speaker said, that, as the original motion appeared to have been made in conformity to the wishes of the ma nagers appointed to conduct the impeachment against Mr. Hastings, he thought it entitled, in a peculiar degree,

to the attention of the House. In con

So it passed in the negative. Mr. Burke lamented the fate of the motion, but said that the managers had done their duty in bringing it forward, and though the House had now thought proper to reject it, a similar proposition might perhaps be more successful on a future occasion under better auspices.

June 6. Mr. Grey said, that the motion which he should have the honour to make would, he trusted, meet with the general nion, the managers of the impeachment concurrence of the House. In his opiagainst Mr. Hastings ought not to be placed in the situation in which they stood at present, and he thought it was a duty they owed to themselves, to do every thing in their power to remove the odium which had been industriously cast upon sequence of some observations which had them in consequence of the delay of the been made with respect to the proceed- present trial; and yet they must not, ings on the trial, they had desired per- under the fear of the imputation of delay, mission to lay before the House an account of those proceedings, together with proceed hastily, and sacrifice the great such remarks as they might judge neces-duty of their station. Did gentlemen sary to explain them: he concurred with those who were of opinion that such a request should be complied with, particularly as in the conduct of the managers, the honour of the House was materially

involved. That whilst the managers enjoyed the confidence of the House in their present arduous and important trust, they might justly consider themselves as entitled to its protection and support, and they might therefore reasonably hope for

the concurrence of the House in a motion, the immediate object of which was to state all the circumstances of the trial, upon which alone a proper judgment could be formed of their conduct in the course of it; and therefore he declared himself with the yeas.

So it was resolved in the affirmative. Then the question being put," That the managers of the impeachment against Warren Hastings, esq., do prepare, and lay before the House, a statement of the proceedings on the trial of the said impeachment, together with an account of the circumstances which have occurred

in the course of the said trial, with such observations as may tend to the explanation of the same," the House divided:

[ocr errors]

Tellers.
Mr. Whitbread
Mr. John Smyth

YEAS
NOES Mr. Jenkinson

{Mr. Sargent

[ocr errors]

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

think the managers could derive much
amusement from such delay? He wished
such gentlemen, if any such there were,
would take upon themselves the task of
longed to this trial, and which he had
reading some of the papers which be
been compelled to attend to for six hours
not consider the business as a matter of
a day, and then he believed they would
amusement. He maintained that no ad-

Vantage whatever could be derived from
proceeding at the time required upon one
part of this great trial, unless Mr. Hast-
ings wished that the cause should be puz-
zled and perplexed, and the evidence and
arguments obscured, from the length of
time between the reply upon one charge,
and the final judgment upon the whole
together. But upon the question of delay,
he should distinctly state the reasons why
it took place; by which it would appear,
beyond a doubt, that the managers had no
share in creating it.
share in creating it. Here Mr. Grey en-
tered into a history of the trial, stating
that the managers had done every thing
in their
to accelerate the progress
power
of it, and that they were brought into this
dilemma by the sudden close of the evi-
dence on the part of the defence, and the
short notice which the Lords were pleased
to give for the managers to prepare a reply
on the charge of Benares, and upon this
he must submit to the House two consi-
derations: first, that by being thus sud-
denly called upon to make a reply before

« AnteriorContinuar »