constantly read all the public papers, the unmerited abuse with which they frequently abounded never excited in her the least emotion of anger or resentment. . . . She was for many years the very idol of the people of England.'

...

Note 7. See ante, p. 210, n. 26, for Alderman Townsend's attack on her in the House of Commons on March 25, 1771. Horace Walpold wrote on March 15, 1770 :-'As a prelude to what was to follow, rather as the word of battle, Lord Chatham some days ago declared to the Lords, that there is a secret influence (meaning the Princess) more mighty than Majesty itself, and which had betrayed or clogged every succeeding Administration. His own had been sacrificed by it. In consequence of this denunciation, papers to which the North Britons were milk and honey have been published in terms too gross to repeat. The Whisperer and The Parliamentary Spy are their titles. Every blank wall at this end of the town is scribbled with the words, Impeach the King's Mother; and in truth I think her person in danger.' Letters, v. 229.

Note 8. Horace Walpole wrote to Mann on Feb. 12, 1772 :-'The East Indies are going to be another spot of contention. Such a scene of tyranny and plunder has been opened as makes one shudder! The heaven-born hero', Lord Clive, seems to be Plutus, the dæmon who does not give, but engrosses riches. There is a letter from one of his associates to their Great Mogul, in which our Christian expresses himself with singular tenderness for the interests of the Mahometan religion! We are Spaniards in our lust for gold, and Dutch in our delicacy of obtaining it.' Letters, v. 375. On March 5 he wrote:-'We have another scene coming to light, of black dye indeed. The groans of India have mounted to heaven, where the heaven-born General Lord Clive will certainly be disavowed. Oh! my dear sir, we have outdone the Spaniards in Peru! They were at least butchers on a religious principle, however diabolical their zeal. We have murdered, deposed, plundered, usurped—nay, what think you of the famine in Bengal, in which three millions perished, being caused by a monopoly of the provisions by the servants of the East India Company? All this is come out, is coming out-unless the gold that inspired these horrors can quash them.' Ib. p. 378. On March 27 he added 'The House of Commons is going to tap the affairs of India, an endless labyrinth! We shall lose the East before we know half its history. It was easier to conquer it than to know what to do with it. If you or the Pope can tell, pray give us your opinion.' Ib. p. 379.

The Select Committee of Enquiry into the East India Company was not appointed till April 13, 1772. Ann. Reg. 1772, i. 103. The King in his speech of Jan. 21, on opening Parliament, had said: "The concerns of this country are so various and extensive as to require

1 According to Horace Walpole (Memoirs of the Reign of George II, ed. 1822, ii. 276), Pitt, in a debate on the army estimates on Dec. 14, 1757, had described Clive as that man, not born for a desk-that heaven-born general.'

LIX.]

MAL-ADMINISTRATION IN INDIA.

239

the most vigilant and active attention, and some of them, as well from remoteness of place as from other circumstances, are so peculiarly liable to abuses and exposed to danger that the interposition of the legislature for their protection may become necessary.' Parl. Hist. xvii. 233. In the Correspondence of George III with Lord North (i. 81) is given the following letter:-'Queen's House, Jan. 6, 1772, 15 min. pt. 5 p.m. Lord North,-The sketch of the Speech meet with my approbation. When the sentences are a little more rounded ... I doubt not but it will make a very good one.' On this the editor remarks:-'The sentences are rounded, and almost without meaning.' That so far from being without meaning, one of them was full of the weightiest meaning, implying at it did a parliamentary enquiry of the highest importance, is shown not only by Hume's mention of this enquiry seven weeks before it was appointed, but also by the Annual Register, 1772, i. 101, and 1773, i. 67. In the latter Burke says 'The mal-administration in India, with all its consequences, were [sic] suffered to pass without notice or observation; and we have already seen in the transactions of the year 1772 that, though the affairs of the Company were evidently alluded to at the opening of the session in the speech from the throne, they were nevertheless suffered to lie over till near its close, when a bill was brought in by the deputy-chairman for enlarging the controlling powers of the Company with respect to their servants in India. The bill came to nothing in that session. But a member, though in the King's service, not connected with Ministry, whether with or without their consent, at length awakened their attention to this object. This gave birth to the Select Committee, which was armed with full powers for all the purposes of enquiry.' The passage which I have printed in italics is some evidence of the truth of the report which had reached Hume.

Note 9. Andrew Stuart was the author of Letters to the Right Hon. Lord Mansfield. In them he attacked that Judge for his conduct in the famous Douglas cause, when it came, on appeal, before the House of Lords. That this work, which was never on sale, had been written for publication is shown by the following passage in Strahan's letter to Hume of Jan. 25, 1773:-'The Letters have been in Lord Mansfield's hands this fortnight, but I have not yet heard how he is affected by them. This will appear in due time. They are not yet made public, only distributed among his friends, but will be published in a few days.' M. S. R. S. E. Johnson speaking about them to Boswell on April 27, 1773, said :-'They have not answered the end. They have not been talked of; I have never heard of them. This is owing to their not being sold. People seldom read a book which is given to them.' Boswell's Life of Johnson, ii. 229. Horace Walpole had written about it on Jan. 25:- -There is a book you will see that makes and intends to make noise enough. . . . Indeed it is admirable, and it must be confessed that a Scot dissects a Scot with ten times more address than Churchill and Junius. They know

each other's sore places better than we do.' Letters, v. 430. On May 27 he wrote:-The book will be a great curiosity, for after all the author's heroism, fear or nationality have preponderated, and it will not be published.' Ib. p. 466.

Hume, who was as strong against the successful litigant as Boswell was for him, of course sided with Andrew Stuart. I was struck,' he wrote on March 28, 1769, 'with a very sensible indignation at the decision of the Douglas cause, though I foresaw it for some time. It was abominable with regard to poor Andrew Stuart, who had conducted that cause with singular ability and integrity; and was at last exposed to reproach which unfortunately never can be wiped off.' Burton's Hume, ii. 423. According to Lord Campbell (Lives of the Chancellors, ed. 1846, v. 494), Stuart took so ill the attack made on him in court by Thurlow, who was engaged as counsel on the other side, that he sent him a challenge. 'Thurlow wrote back for answer that the desired meeting Mr. Stuart should have, but not till the hearing of the appeal was concluded. . . . They met in Kensington Gardens, and shots were exchanged-happily without effect. Mr. Stuart afterwards declared that Mr. Thurlow advanced and stood up to him like an elephant.' Lord Campbell adds in a note :-' A gentleman still alive, who remembers the duel well, says that Thurlow, on his way to the field of battle, stopped to eat an enormous breakfast at a tavern near Hyde Park Corner.' Dr. Burton (Life of Hume, ii. 425) says that it was not with Thurlow but with Wedderburne that Stuart fought. He corrects this statement in Letters of Eminent Persons to David Hume, p. 110. Neither he nor Lord Campbell gives any reference. Stuart was member for Lanarkshire in the Parliament elected in Nov. 1774. Parl. Hist. xviii. 29. In 1779 he and Gibbon became colleagues as Lords Commissioners of Trade and Plantations. Ib. 7, 29.

Note 10. It was not, says Burke, till the year 1767 that the affairs of the East India Company were first introduced into Parliament. Ann. Reg. 1773, i. 63. This introduction was regarded as a startling innovation. The novelty of an English minister of state venturing to interfere, as an officer of the Crown, in a matter of private property excited in the highest degree the attention of all sorts of people.' Ib. 1767, i. 43. By an annual payment by the Company to the Government of £400,000 a year a respite was purchased from state interference. Ib. i. 43. In 1769, in the alarm caused by the news of Hyder Ali's successes in war, India stock had fallen above 60 per cent. in a few days. The Directors, 'to put a stop to the abuses and mismanagements which had so much disgraced the Company's government in India,’

The pagination of the Annual Register is so clumsy that it is not always easy either to give or to find a reference. In the number from which I am quoting page 43 is found three times. My first reference is to the first page 43, my second to the second, which is separated from it by only eight pages and is distinguished by an asterisk.

LIX.]

DR. ADAM FERGUSON.

241

appointed three men 'who should be invested with extraordinary powers, and sent to India under the character of Supervisors, with full authority to examine into and rectify the concerns of every department, and a full power of control over all their other servants in India.' Ann. Reg. 1769, i. 53. The ship in which they sailed was never heard of. The fate of these gentlemen,' wrote Burke, 'was undoubtedly one of the greatest misfortunes that could have befallen the Company.' Ib. 1773, i. 66. It was brought to the brink of bankruptcy and ruin, and could not keep up its payment to the government. In their alarm at the appointment of the Parliamentary Committee the Directors resolved to send out new Supervisors. The resolution came too late. In Dec. 1772 a bill was rapidly carried through Parliament restraining the Company for six months from sending out any such Commission of Supervision. Ib. p. 73, and Parl. Hist. xvii. 651. Before the time had run out the Regulating Act was carried through both Houses, and Warren Hastings was appointed first Governor-General. Thus,' writes Burke, 'this memorable revolution was accomplished. From that time the Company is to be considered as wholly in the hands of the ministers of the Crown.' Ann. Reg. 1773, i. 105. Andrew Stuart was not named one of the four Councillors who were to assist the GovernorGeneral. But among them was one who was a still bitterer enemy of Lord Mansfield-Philip Francis, the author of the Letters of Junius. Note II. The Rev. Dr. Adam Ferguson, Professor of Natural Philosophy in the University of Edinburgh. He had been tutor to the family of Lord Bute, and so had influence at Court. Burton's Hume, ii. 34, 45. Hume wrote to Adam Smith on Nov. 23 of this year :-'Ferguson has returned, fat and fair, and in good humour, notwithstanding his disappointment, which I am glad of.' Ib. p. 461. It was at his house that Scott, a lad of fifteen, saw Burns. Lockhart's Life of Scott, ed. 1839, i. 185. Scott in his review of John Home's Works records the following anecdote of him :-' Dr. Adam Ferguson went as chaplain to the Black Watch or 42d Highland Regiment, when that corps was first sent to the Continent. As the regiment advanced to the Battle of Fontenoy, the commanding officer, Sir Robert Monro, was astonished to see the chaplain at the head of the column, with a broadsword drawn in his hand. He desired him to go to the rear with the surgeons, a proposal which Adam Ferguson spurned. Sir Robert at length told him that his commission did not entitle him to be present in the post which he had assumed. "D-n my commission," said the warlike chaplain, throwing it towards his Colonel. It may easily be supposed that the matter was only remembered as a good jest; but the future historian of Rome shared the honours and dangers of that dreadful day, where, according to the account of the French themselves, "the Highland furies rushed in upon them with more violence than ever did a sea driven by a tempest." Quarterly Review, lxxi. 196.

R

Lord Cockburn in his Memorials, p. 49, describes him in his old age as 'a spectacle well worth beholding. His hair was silky and white; his eyes animated and light-blue; his cheeks sprinkled with broken red like autumnal apples, but fresh and healthy; his lips thin and the under one curled.' In middle age he had had a severe paralytic attack, which so reduced his animal vitality that he always wore a good deal of fur. 'His gait and air were noble; his gesture slow; his look full of dignity and composed fire. He looked like a philosopher from Lapland. His palsy ought to have killed him in his fiftieth year; but rigid care enabled him to live uncrippled, either in body or mind, nearly fifty years more. Wine and animal food besought his appetite in vain; but huge messes of milk and vegetables disappeared before him, always in the never failing cloth and fur. . . He always locked the door of his study when he left it, and took the key in his pocket; and no housemaid got in till the accumulation of dust and rubbish made it impossible to put the evil day off any longer; and then woe on the family. He shook hands with us boys one day in summer 1793, on setting off in a strange sort of carriage, and with no companion except his servant James, to visit Italy for a new edition of his history. He was then about seventy-two, and had to pass through a good deal of war; but returned in about a year younger than ever.' He was born in 1724

and died in 1816.

Note 12. Johnson would certainly have charged Hume with joining in what he calls 'the Scotch conspiracy in national falsehood' (Boswell's Johnson, ii. 297); and with sharing in that 'national combination, so invidious that their friends cannot defend it,' which is one of the chief means 'which enables them to find, or to make their way to employment, riches, and distinction' (Works, ix. 158). No man was better than Hume at magnifying the merits of a countryman. As Ferguson was unsurpassed in the whole world in worth, so 'Wilkie [the author of the Epigoniad] was to be the Homer, Blacklock the Pindar, and Home the Shakespeare or something still greater of his country.' Burton's Hume, ii. 32.

[William Strahan to David Hume.]

LETTER LX.

Life tolerable only by Labour: the Princess Dowager: Bengal. DEAR SIR

The approbation of those whose praise is real fame is, in the very nature of the thing, extremely desireable. Judge then how very acceptable your last kind letter was to me; in which you acknowledge my small merits in a very generous