tion at all effectual towards extenuating, or in some degree atoning for, the guilt of having taken money from individuals illegally was, to be full and fair in his confession of all the particulars of his offence. This might not obtain that confidence, which at no time he has enjoyed, but still the company and the nation might derive essential benefit from it; the directors might be able to afford redress to the sufferers; and by his laying open the concealed channels of abuse, means might be furnished for the better discovery, and possibly for the prevention, or at least for the restraint, of a practice of the most dangerous nature; a practice, which the mere prohibition, without the means of detection, must ever prove, as hitherto it had proved, altogether frivolous.

Your committee, considering that so long a time had elapsed without any of that information which the directors expected, and perceiving that this receipt of sums of money, under colour of gift, seemed a growing evil, ordered the attendance of Mr. Hastings's agent, Major Scott. They had found on former occasions, that this gentleman was furnished with much more early and more complete intelligence of the company's affairs in India than was thought proper for the court of directors; they therefore examined him concerning every particular sum of money, the receipt of which Mr. Hastings had confessed in his account. It was to their surprise, that Mr. Scott professed himself perfectly uninstructed upon almost every part of the subject, though the express object of his mission to England was to clear up such matters as might be objected to Mr. Hastings; and for that purpose he had early qualified himself by the production to your committee of his powers of agency. The ignorance in which Mr. Hastings had left his agent was the more striking, because he must have been morally certain, that, if his conduct in these points should have escaped animadversion from the court of directors, it must become an object of parliamentary enquiry; for, in his letter of the 15th of December 1782 to the court of directors, he expressly mentions his fears, that those parliamentary enquiries might be thought to have extorted from him the confessions which he had made.

Your committee, however, entering on a more strict examination concerning the two lacks of rupees, which Mr. Hastings declares he had no right to take, but had taken from some person then unknown, Major Scott recollected, that Mr. Hastings had, in a letter of the 7th of December 1782, (in which he refers to some former letter,) acquainted him with the name of the person from whom he had received these two lacks of rupees, mentioned in the minute of June 1780-It turned out to be the rajah of Benares, the unfortunate Cheyt Sing.

In the single instance, in which Mr. Scott seemed to possess intelligence in this matter, he is preferred to the court of directors. Under their censure as Mr. Hastings was, and as he felt himself to be, for not informing them of the channel in which he received that money, he perseveres

obstinately and contemptuously to conceal it from them; though he thought fit to intrust his agent with the secret.

Your committee were extremely struck with this intelligence. They were totally unacquainted with it when they presented to the house the supplement to their second report on the affairs of Cheyt Sing. A gift received by Mr. Hastings from the rajah of Benares gave rise in their minds to serious reflections on the condition of the princes of India subjected to the British authority. Mr. Hastings was, at the very time of his receiving this gift, in the course of making on the rajah of Benares a series of demands, unfounded and unjustifiable, and constantly growing in proportion as they were submitted to. To these demands the rajah of Benares, besides his objections in point of right, constantly set up a plea of poverty. Presents from persons, who hold up poverty as a shield against extortion, can scarcely in any case be considered as gratuitous, whether the plea of poverty be true or false. In this case the presents might have been bestowed, if not with an assurance, at least with a rational hope, of some mitigation in the oppressive requisitions, that were made by Mr. Hastings; for to give much voluntarily, when it is known that much will be taken away forcibly, is a thing absurd and impossible. On the one hand, the acceptance of that gift by Mr. Hastings must have pledged a tacit faith for some degree of indulgence towards the donor; if it was a free gift, gratitude; if it was a bargain, justice obliged him to it. If, on the other hand, Mr. Hastings originally destined (as he says he did) this money, given to himself secretly, and for his private emolument, to the use of the company, the company's favour, to whom he acted as trustee, ought to have been purchased by it. In honour and justice he bound and pledged himself for that power, which was to profit by the gift, and to profit too in the success of an expedition, which Mr. Hastings thought so necessary to their aggrandizement. The unhappy man found his money accepted, but no favour acquired on the part either of the company or of Mr. Hastings.

Your committee have, in another report, stated to the house, that Mr. Hastings attributed the extremity of distress, which the detachments under Colonel Camac had suffered, and the great desertions, which ensued on that expedition, to the want of punctuality of the rajah in making payment of one of the sums, which had been extorted from him; and this want of punctual payment was afterwards assigned as a principal reason for the ruin of this prince. Your committee have shewn to the house by a comparison of facts and dates, that this charge is wholly without foundation. But if the cause of Colonel Camac's failure had been true as to the sum, which was the object of the publick demand, the failure could not be attributed to the rajah, when he had on the instant privately furnished at least £.23,000 to Mr. Hastings; that is, furnished the identical money, which he tells us (but carefully concealing the name of the giver)

he had from the beginning destined, as he afterwards publickly offered, for this very expedition of Colonel Camac's. The complication of fraud and cruelty in the transaction admits of few parallels. Mr. Hastings at the council board of Bengal displays himself as a zealous servant of the company, bountifully giving from his own fortune; Vide Appen- and in his letter to the directors, (as dix B. No. 1. he says himself,) as going out of the ordinary roads for their advantage; and all this on the credit of supplies derived from the gift of a man, whom he treats with the utmost severity, and whom he accuses, in this particular, of disaffection to the company's cause and interests.

With £.23,000 of the rajah's money in his pocket he persecutes him to his destruction; assigning for a reason, that his reliance on the rajah's faith, and his breach of it, were the principal causes, that no other provision was made for the detachment on the specifick expedition, to which the rajah's specifick money was to be applied; the rajah had given it to be disposed of by Mr. Hastings; and if it was not disposed of in the best manner for the accomplishing his objects, the accuser himself is the criminal.

To take money for the forbearance of a just demand would have been corrupt only; but to urge unjust publick demands; to accept private pecuniary favours in the course of those demands; and, on the pretence of delay or refusal, without mercy to prosecute a benefactor; to refuse to hear his remonstrances; to arrest him in his capital, in his palace, in the face of all the people; thus to give occasion to an insurrection, and, on pretext of that insurrection, to refuse all treaty or explanation; to drive him from his government and his country; to proscribe him in a general amnesty; and to send him all over India, a fugitive, to publish the shame of British government in all the nations, to whom he successively fled for refuge; -these are proceedings, to which, for the honour of human nature, it is hoped few parallels are to be found in history; and in which the illegality and corruption of the acts form the smallest part

of the mischief.

Such is the account of the first sum confessed to be taken as a present by Mr. Hastings, since the year 1775; and such are its consequences. Mr. Hastings apologizes for this action by declaring, "that he would not have received the money but Vide Appendix "for the occasion, which prompted B. No. 1. "him to avail himself of the accidental means, which were at that instant afforded him, "of accepting and converting it to the use of the company." By this account he considers the act as excusable only by the particular occasion, by the temptation of accidental means, and by the suggestion of the instant. How far this is the case, appears by the very next paragraph of this letter, in which the account is given, and in which the apology is made. If these were his opinions in June 1780, they lasted but a very short time; his accidental means appear to be growing habi

66

tual.

66

To point out in a clear manner the spirit of the second money transaction, to which your committee adverted, which is represented by Mr. Hastings as having some affinity with the former anecdote," (for in this light kind of phrase he vide above chooses to express himself to his mas- Appendix. ters,) your committee think it necessary to state to the house, that the business, namely, this business, which was the second object of their enquiry, appears in three different papers, and in three different lights; on comparing these authorities, in every one of which Mr. Hastings is himself the voucher, if one of the three be true, the other two must necessarily be false.

These three authorities, which your committee has accurately compared, are, first, his Ap. B. No. 8 minutes on the consultation: secondly, Ap. B. No. I. Ap. B. No. 4. his letter to the court of directors on the 29th of November 1780: thirdly, his account, transmitted on the 16th of December 1782.

About eight months after the first transaction relative to Cheyt Sing, and which is just reported, that is, on the 5th of January 1781, Mr. Hastings produced a demand to the council Ap. B. No. 8. for money of his own, expended for the company's service.

Here was no occasion for secrecy. Mr. Francis was on his passage to Europe; Mr. Wheler was alone left, who no longer dissented from any thing; Mr. Hastings was in effect himself the whole council. He declared, that he had disbursed three lacks of rupees, that is, thirty-four thousand five hundred pounds, in secret services; which having (he says) "been advanced from my own private cash, I re

quest, that the same may be repaid to me in "the following manner:"-He accordingly desires three bonds, for a lack of Sicca rupees each, to be given to him in two of the company's subscriptions, one to bear interest on the eight per cent. loan, the other two in the four per cent. The bonds were ante-dated to the beginning of the preceding October.

No. 9.

On the 9th of the same month, that Vide above is, on the 9th of January 1781, the Appendix. three bonds were accordingly ordered; so far the whole transaction appears clear, and of a piece. Private money is subscribed, and a publick security is taken for it. When the com- Appendix B. pany's treasury accounts are compared with the proceedings of their council-general, a perfect correspondence also appears. The three bonds are then entered to Mr. Hastings, and he is credited for principal and interest on them, in the exact terms of the order. So far the official accounts; which, because of their perfect harmony, are considered as clear and consistent evidence to one body of fact.

No. 1.

The second scrt of document rela- Appendix B. tive to these bonds (though the first in order of time) is Mr. Hastings's letter of the 29th of November 1780. It is written between the time of the expenditure of the money for the company's use, and the taking of the bonds. Here, for the first time, a very material difference ap

pears; and the difference is the more striking, because Mr. Hastings claimed the whole money as his own, and took bonds for it as such, after this representation. The letter to the company discovers, that part of the money (the whole of which he had declared on record to be his own, and for which he had taken bonds) was not his, but the property of his masters, from whom he had taken the security. It is no less remarkable, that the letter, which represents the money as belonging to the company, was written about six weeks before the minute of council, in which he claims that money as his own. It is this letter, on which your

committee is to remark.

Vide Appen

Mr. Hastings, after giving his readix B. No. 1. sons for the application of the three lacks of rupees, and for his having for some time concealed the fact, says, "two-thirds of that sum "I have raised by my own credit, and shall charge "it in my official account; the other third I have "supplied from the cash in my hand, belonging "to the honourable company."

The house will observe, that in November he tells the directors, that he shall charge only twoVide Appenthirds in his official accounts; in the dix B. No. 8. following January he charges the whole. For the other third, (although he admitted that to belong to the company,) we have seen, that he takes a bond to himself.

It is material, that he tells the company in his letter, that these two lacks of rupees were raised on his credit. His letter to the council says, that they were advanced from his private cash. What he raises on his credit may, on a fair construction, be considered his own; but in this too he fails; for it is certain he has never transferred these bonds to any creditor; nor has he stated any sum he has paid, or for which he stands indebted on that account, to any specifick person. Indeed, it was out of his power; for the first two-thirds of the money, which he formerly stated as raised upon his credit, he now confesses to have been from the beginning the company's property; and therefore could not have been raised on his private credit, or borrowed from any person whatso

ever.

Appendix B. To these two accounts thus essentiNo. 4. The ally varying he has added a third, vagov. general's account of rying at least as essentially from both. monies reIn his last, or third account, which is ceived, dated 22d May 1782. a statement of all the sums he has received in an extraordinary manner, and confessed to be the company's property, he reverses the items of his first account; and, instead of allowing the company but one-third, and claiming two-thirds for himself, he enters two of the bonds, Also Appendix B. No. 9. The each for a lack of rupees, as belonging count of bonds to the company; of the third bond, granted to the which appears so distinctly in the congov. general. sultations, and in the treasury accounts, not one word is said-ten thousand pounds is absorbed, sinks, and disappears at once; and no explanation whatever concerning it is given; Mr. Hastings seems not yet to have decided to whose

auditor's ac

account it ought to be placed. In this manner his debt to the company, or the company to him, is just what he thinks fit. In a single article he has varied three times. In one account he states the whole to be his own; in another he claims twothirds; in the last he gives up the claim of the two-thirds, and says nothing of the remaining portion.

To make amends, however, for the suppression of this third bond, given with the two others in January 1781, and ante-dated to the beginning of October, Mr. Hastings, in the above-mentioned general account subjoined to his letter vide Appendix of the 22d May 1782, has brought to the company's credit a new bond.

This bond is for £.17,000.

B. No. 4.

It was taken from the company (and so it appears on their treasury accounts) on the 23d of November 1780. He took no notice of this when in January following he called upon his own council for the three others. What is more extraordinary, he was equally silent with regard to it when, only six days after its date, he wrote concerning the subject of the three other bonds to the court of directors; yet now it comes out, that that bond also was taken by Mr. Hastings from the company for money, which he declares he had received on the company's account; and that he entered himself as creditor, when he ought to have made himself debtor.

Your committee examined Major Scott concerning this money, which Mr. Hastings must have obtained in some clandestine and irregular mode; but they could obtain no information of the persons from whom it was taken, nor of the occasion or pretence, for taking this large sum; nor does any order of council appear for its application to any service. The whole of the transaction (whatsoever it was) relative to this bond is covered with the thickest obscurity.

Mr. Hastings, to palliate the blame Vide Mr. Hastof his conduct, declares, that he has ings's account, in Appendix not received any interest on these B. No. 4. bonds; and that he has endorsed them as not belonging to himself, but to the company. As to the first part of this allegation, whether he received the interest, or let it remain in arrear, is a matter of indifference, as he entitled himself to it; and, so far as the legal security he has taken goes, he may, whenever he pleases, dispose both of principal and interest. What he has endorsed on the bonds, or when he made the endorsement, or whether in fact he has made it at all, are matters known only to himself: for the bonds must be in his possession, and are no where by him stated to be given up or cancelled; which is a thing very remarkable, when he confesses, that he had no right to receive them.

ings's account,

These bonds make but a part of the Vide Mr. Hastaccount of private receipts of money dated 224 May by Mr. Hastings, formerly paid into 1782, in Appenthe treasury as his own property, and dix B. No. 4. now allowed not to be so. This account brings into view other very remarkable matters of a similar nature and description.

Vide above

B. No. 2.

In the publick records, a sum of Appendix, and not less than £.23,871 is set to his credit as a deposit for his private account, paid in by him into the treasury in gold, and coined at the company's mint. This appears in the account furnished to the directors, under Vide above the date of May 1782, not to be lawAppendix. fully his money, and he therefore transfers it to the company's credit-it still remains as a deposit.

That the house may be apprized of the nature of this article of deposit, it may not be improper to state, that the company receive into their treasury the cash of private persons, placed there as in a bank. On this no interest is paid, and the party depositing has a right to receive it upon demand. Under this head of account no publick money is ever entered. Mr. Hastings, neither at making the deposit as his own, nor at the time of his disclosure of the real proprietor, (which he makes to be the company,) has given any information of the persons from whom this money had been received. Mr. Scott was applied to by your committee, but could not give any more satisfaction in this particular than in those relative to the bonds.

The title of the account of the 22d of May purports, not only that those sums were paid into the company's treasury by Mr. Hastings's order, but that they were applied to the company's service. No service is specified, directly, or by any reference, to which this great sum of money has been applied. Vide Appen

Two extraordinary articles follow dix B. No. 4. this, in the May account, amounting to about £.29,000. These articles are called receipts of durbar charges. The general head for durbar charges, made by persons in office, when analyzed into the particulars, contains various expences, including bounties and presents made by government, chiefly in the foreign department; but in the last account he confesses, that this sum also is not his, but the company's property; but, as in all the rest, so in this, he carefully conceals the means by which he acquired the money, the time of his taking it, and the persons from whom it was taken. This is the more extraordinary, because, in looking over the journals and legers of the treasury, the presents received, and carried to the account of the company, (which were generally small and complimental,) were precisely entered, with the name of the giver.

Your committee, on turning to the account of durbar charges, in the leger of that month, find the sum, as stated in the account of May 22d, to be indeed paid in; but there is no specifick application whatsoever entered.

The account of the whole money thus clandestinely received, as stated on the 22d of May 1782, (and for a great part of which Mr. Hastings to that time took credit for, and for the rest has accounted in an extraordinary manner as his own,) amounts in the whole to upwards of ninety-three thousand pounds sterling;-a vast sum to be so obtained, and so loosely accounted for !--If the taken money

from the rajah of Benares be added, (as it ought,) it will raise the sum to upwards of £.116,000; if the £.11,600 bond in October be added, it will be upwards of £.128,000, received in a secret manner by Mr. Hastings in about one year and five months. To all these he adds another sum of one hundred thousand pounds, received as a present from the soubah of Oude. Total upwards of £.228,000.

Your committee find, that this last is the only sum, the giver of which Mr. Hastings has thought proper to declare. It is to be observed, that he did not receive this £100,000 in money, but in bills on a great native money-dealer resident at Benares, and who has also a house at Calcutta ; he is called Gopâl Dâs. The negociation of these bills tended to make a discovery not so difficult as it would have been in other cases.

With regard to the application of this last sum of money, which is said to be carried to the durbar charges of April 1782, your committee are not enabled to make any observations on it, as the account of that period has not yet arrived.

Your committee have, in another report, remarked fully upon most of the circumstances of this extraordinary transaction. Here they only bring so much of these circumstances again into view as may serve to throw light upon the true nature of the sums of money taken by British subjects in power, under the name of presents; and to shew how far they are entitled to that description in any sense, which can fairly imply in the pretended donors either willingness or ability to give. The condition of the bountiful parties, who are not yet discovered, may be conjectured from the state of those who have been made known; as far as that state any where appears, their generosity is found in proportion, not to the opulence they possess, or to the favours they receive, but to the indigence they feel, and the insults they are exposed to. The house will particularly attend to the situation of the principal giver, the soubah of Oude.

"When the knife (says he) had penetrated to "the bone, and I was surrounded with heavy dis"tresses, that I could no longer live in expecta"tions, I wrote you an account of my difficulties.

"The answer, which I have received to it, is "such, that it has given me inexpressible grief and "affliction. I never had the least idea or expec"tation from you and the council, that you would

66

ever have given your orders in so afflicting a manner, in which you never before wrote, and "which I could not have imagined.--As I am re"solved to obey your orders and directions of the " council without any delay, as long as I live, I "have, agreeably to those orders, delivered up "all my private papers to him, (the resident,) "that when he shall have examined my receipts "and expences, he may take whatever remains. "As I know it to be my duty to satisfy you, the 66 company and council, I have not failed to obey "in any instance; but requested of him, that it might be done so as not to distress me in my necessary expences; there being no other funds

66