cently committed a breach of trust to his employers.

That the court of directors, in their letter to Bengal, dated the 12th of July 1782, and received there on the 18th of February 1783, did condemn and revoke the said appointment. That the said directors, in theirs to Fort St. George, dated the 28th of August 1782, and received there the 31st of January 1783, did highly condemn the conduct of the said Sullivan; and, in order to deter their servants from practices of the same kind, did dismiss him from their service.

That the said Hastings knowing, that the said Sullivan's appointment had been condemned and revoked by the court of directors, and pretending, that on the 15th of March 1783 he did not know, that the said Sullivan was dismissed from the com

pany's service, though that fact was known at Madras on the 31st of the preceding January, did recommend the said Sullivan to be ambassadour at the court of Nizam Ally Cawn, subahdar of the Deccan, in defiance of the authority and orders of the court of directors.

That even admitting, what is highly improbable, that the dismission of the said Sullivan from the service of the said company was not known at Calcutta in forty-three days from Madras, the lastmentioned nomination of the said Sullivan was made at least in contempt of the censure already expressed by the court of directors at his former appointment to the durbar of the nabob of Arcot, and which was certainly known to the said Hastings.

THAT on the 2d of December 1779 the governour-general and council of Fort William, at the special recommendation and instance of Warren Hastings, Esquire, then governour-general, and contrary to the declared opinion and protest of three of the members of the council, (viz.) Philip Francis and Edward Wheler, Esquires, who were present; and of Sir Eyre Coote, who was absent, (by whose absence the casting voice of the said Warren Hastings, Esquire, prevailed,) did conclude a treaty of perpetual friendship and alliance, offensive and defensive, with a Hindoo prince, called the Ranna of Gohud, for the express purpose of using the forces of the said ranna in opposition to the Mahrattas.

That, among other articles, it was stipulated with the said ranna by the said Warren Hastings, "that whenever peace should be concluded be"tween the company and the Mahratta state, the "Maha rajah should be included as a party in "the treaty, which should be made for that purpose; and his present possessions, together with "the fort of Gualior, which of old belonged to "the family of the Maha rajah, if it should be "then in his possession, and such countries as he "should have acquired in the course of war, and "which it should then be stipulated to leave in "his hands, should be guarantied to him by such treaty."

That in the late war against the Mahrattas the said ranna of Gohud did actually join the British army, under the command of Colonel Muir, with two battalions of infantry, and 1,200 cavalry, and did then serve in person against the Mahrattas, thereby affording material assistance, and rendering essential service to the company.

That in conformity to the above-mentioned treaty, in the fourth article of the treaty of peace, concluded on the 13th of October 1781, between Colonel Muir on the part of the English company, and Madajee Scindia the Mahratta general, the said ranna of Gohud was expressly included.

That, notwithstanding the said express provision and agreement, Madajee Scindia proceeded to attack the orts, and lay waste the territories, of the said Ranna, and did undertake and prosecute a war against him for the space of two years; in the course of which the ranna and his family were reduced to extreme distress, and in the end he was deprived of his forts, and the whole not only of his acquired possessions, but of his original dominions, so specially guarantied to him by the British government in both the above-mentioned treaties.

That the said Warren Hastings was duly and regularly informed of the progress of the war against the ranna, and of every event thereof; notwithstanding which, he not only neglected in any manner to interfere therein in favour of the said ranna, or to use any endeavours to prevent the infraction of the treaty, but gave considerable countenance and encouragement to Madajee Scindia in his violation of it, both by the residence of the British minister in the Mahratta camp, and by the approbation shewn by the said Warren Hastings to the promises made by his agent of observing the strictest neutrality, notwithstanding he was in justice bound, and stood pledged by the most solemn and sacred engagements, to protect and preserve the said ranna from those enemies, whose resentment he had provoked only by his adherence to the interests of the British nation.

That in the only attempt made to sound the disposition of Madajee Scindia, relative to a pacification between him and the ranna of Gohud, on the 14th of May 1783, Mr. Anderson, in obedience to the orders he had received, did clearly and explicitly declare to Bhow Bucksey, the minister of Madajee Scindia, the sentiments of the said Warren Hastings in the words following:-" that "it was so far from your (the said Hastings's) "meaning to intercede in his (the said ranna's) favour, that I only desired him to sound Scin"dia's sentiments, and in case he was desirous of peace, to mention what I had said; but if he "seemed to prefer carrying on the war, I begged, "that he would not mention a syllable of what "had passed, but let the matter drop entirely." That it afterwards appeared, in a minute of the said Hastings in council at Fort William, on the 22d of September 1783, that he promised, at the instance of a member of the council, to write to Lieutenant James Anderson in favour of the ranna of Gohud, and lay his letter before the board.

That nevertheless the said Hastings, professing not to recollect his said promise, did neglect to write a formal letter to Lieutenant Anderson in favour of the said ranna of Gohud, and that the private letter, the extract of which the said Hastings did lay before the board on the 21st of October 1783, so far from directing any effectual interference in favour of the said ranna, or commanding his agent, the said James Anderson, to interpose the mediation of the British government to procure "honourable terms" for the said ranna, or even "safety to his person and family," contains the bitterest invectives against him, and is expressive of the satisfaction, which the said Hastings acknowledges himself to have enjoyed in the distresses of the said ranna, the ally of the company. That the measures therein recommended appear rather to have been designed to satisfy Madajee Scindia, and to justify the conduct of the British government in not having taken a more active and a more hostile part against the said ranna, than an intercession on his behalf.

That though no consideration of good faith, or observance of treaties, could induce the said Hastings to incur the hazard of any hostile exertion of the British force for the defence or the relief of the allies of the company, yet in the said private letter he directed, that, in case his mediation should be accepted, it should be made a specifick condition, that, if the said ranna should take advantage of Scindia's absence to renew his hostilities, we ought in that case, on requisition, to invade the dominions of the ranna.

That no beneficial effects could have been procured to the said ranna by an offer of mediation delayed till Scindia no longer wanted " our assist"ance to crush so fallen an enemy;" at the same time that no reason was given to Scindia to apprehend the danger of drawing upon himself the resentment of the British government by a disregard of their proposal, and the destruction of their ally.

That it was a gross and scandalous mockery in the said Hastings to defer an application to obtain honourable terms for the ranna, and safety for his person and family, till he had been deprived of his principal fort, in defence of which his uncle lost his life, and on the capture of which his wife, to avoid the dishonour consequent upon falling into the hands of her enemies, had destroyed herself by an explosion of gunpowder.

That, however, it does not appear, that any offer of mediation was ever actually made, or any influence exerted, either for the safety of the ranna's person and family, or in mitigation of the rigorous intentions supposed by Lieutenant Anderson to have been entertained against * 29 February him by Madajee Scindia after his surrender.

*

1784.

Dated Benares

ber 1781.

That the said Hastings, in the instructions given by him to Mr. David 4th of NovemAnderson for his conduct in negociating the treaty of peace with the Mahrattas, expressed his determination to desert the ranna of Gohud, in the following words: "you will of course be attentive to any engagements subsist

ing between us and other powers, in settling the "terms of peace and alliance with the Mahrattas; "I except from this the ranna of Gohud.""Leave him to settle his own affairs with the "Mahrattas."

That the said Anderson appears very assiduously to have sought for grounds to justify the execution of this part of his instructions, to which, however, he was at all events obliged to conform.

That even after his application for that purpose to the Mahrattas, whose testimony was much to be suspected, because it was their interest to accuse, and their determined object to destroy, the said ranna, no satisfactory proof was obtained of his defection from the engagements he had entered into with the company.

That moreover, if all the charges, which have been pretended against the ranna, and have been alleged by the said Hastings in justification of his conduct, had been well founded, and proved to be true, the subject-matter of those accusations, and the proofs, by which they were to be supported, were known to Colonel Muir before the conclusion of the treaty he entered into with Madajee Scindia; and therefore, whatever suspicions may have been entertained, or whatever degree of criminality may have been proved against the said ranna, previous to the said treaty, from the time he was so provided for and included in the said treaty, he was fully and justly entitled to the security stipulated for him by the company, and had a right to demand and receive the protection of the British government.

That these considerations were urged by Mr. Anderson to the said Warren Hastings, in his letter of the 24th of June 1781, and were enforced by this additional argument, "that in point of

66

policy, I believe, it ought not to be our wish, "that the Mahrattas should ever recover the for"tress of Gualior; it forms an important barrier

"that they are the proprietors; that the lands are their estates, and their inheritance; that, "from a long continuance of the lands in their families, it is to be concluded they have rivetted "an authority in the district, acquired an ascendency over the minds of the ryots, and ingra"tiated their affections. That, from continuing "the lands under the management of those, who have a natural and perpetual interest in their "prosperity, solid advantages might be expected " to accrue that the zemindar would be less liable to failure or deficiencies than the farmer, "from the perpetual interest which the former "hath in the country, and because his inheritance "cannot be removed; and it would be improbable, that he should risk the loss of it by eloping "from his district, which is too frequently prac"tised by a farmer when he is hard pressed for "the payment of his balances, and as frequently predetermined when he receives his farm:' that notwithstanding all the preceding declarations made by the said Warren Hastings of the loss of one third of the inhabitants, and general decline of the country, he did, immediately after his appointment to the government, in the year 1772, make an arbitrary settlement of the revenues for five years, at a higher rate than had ever been received before, and with a progressive and accumulating encrease on each of the four last years of the said settlement.

That notwithstanding the right of property and inheritance, repeatedly acknowledged by the said Warren Hastings to be in the zemindars, and other native landholders; and notwithstanding he had declared, that the security of private property "is the greatest encouragement to industry, on "which the wealth of every state depends;" the said Warren Hastings, nevertheless, in direct violation of those acknowledged rights and principles, did universally let the lands of Bengal in farm for five years; thereby destroying all the rights of private property of the zemindars; thereby delivering the management of their estates to farmers, and transferring by a most arbitrary and unjust act of power the whole landed property of Bengal from the owners to strangers :-that, to accomplish this iniquitous purpose, he, the said Warren Hastings, did put the lands of Bengal up to a pretended publick auction, and invited all persons to make proposals for farming the same, thereby encouraging strangers to bid against the proprietors; in consequence of which not only the said proprietors were ousted of the possession and management of their estates, but a great part of the lands fell into the hands of the banyans, or principal black servants of British subjects, connected with and protected by the government: and that the said Warren Hastings himself has since declared, that by this way the sult. 28th Jan. lands too generally fell into the hands of desperate or knavish adventurers-that, before the measure herein before described was carried into execution, the said Warren Hastings did establish certain fundamental

Revenue Con

1775.

regulations in council, to be observed in executing the same:-that among board, 11th these regulations it was specially and strictly ordered, that no farm should exceed the anuual amount of one lack of 66 and rupees; that

66

66

Address to the

court of di

I rectors, 25th March 1775.

no peshcar, banyan, or other servant, of what"ever denomination, of the collector, or relation or dependant of any such servant, should be "allowed to farm lands, nor directly or indirectly "to hold a concern in any farm, nor to be security "for any farmer :"-that, in direct violation of these his own regulations, and in breach of the publick trust reposed in him, and sufficiently declared by the manifest duty of his station, if it had not been expressed and enforced by any positive institution, he, the said Warren Hastings, did permit and suffer his own banyan, or principal black steward, named Cantoo Baboo, to hold farms in different pergunnas, or districts, or to be security for farms, to the amount of thirteen lacks of rupees [£130,000, or upwards] per annum; and that, after enjoying the whole of those farms for two years, he was permitted by the said Warren Hastings to relinquish two of them :-that on the subject of the farms held by Cantoo Baboo, the said Warren Hastings made the following declaration: "many of his farms were "taken without my knowledge, and "almost all against my advice. "had no right to use compulsion, or "authority; nor could I with justice exclude him, "because he was my servant, from a liberty al"lowed to all other persons in the country.-The farms, which he quitted, he quitted by my advice, because I thought, that he might engage himself beyond his abilities, and be involved in disputes, which I did not choose to have come "before me as judge of them."-That the said declaration contains sundry false and contradictory assertions :-that, if almost all the said farms were taken against his advice, it cannot be true, that many of them were taken without his knowledge-that, whether Cantoo Baboo had been his servant or not, the said Warren Hastings was bound by his own regulations to prevent his holding any farms to a greater amount than one lack of rupees per annum; and that the said Cantoo Baboo, being the servant of the governour-general, was excluded by the said regulations from holding any farms whatever :-that if (as the directors observe) it was thought dangerous to permit the banyan of a collector to be concerned in farms, the same or stronger objections would always lie against the governour's banyan being so concerned that the said Warren Hastings had a right, and was bound by his duty, to prevent his servant from holding the same ;-that, in advising the said Cantoo Baboo to relinquish some of the said farms, for which he was actually engaged, he has acknowledged an influence over his servant, and has used that influence for a purpose inconsistent with his duty to the India company, namely, to deprive them of the security of the said Cantoo Baboo's engagement for farms, which on

:

-