the begums and others, and the horrible tortures of the unhappy natives by his agents. "My lords," he said, "you are now better enabled to judge of the difficulties which I had to encounter in the last war, than I did suppose it possible for your lordships to be when this trial commenced. Your lordships will now feel for the necessities under which I laboured, when I had to contend with all the powers of India combined with the French and Dutch, because your lordships have proofs before you, in the council chamber of parliament,

VOL. V.-No. 252.

nabob vizier had completely liquidated his debts, and his subsidy was paid with the utmost punctuality. Benares afforded the full revenue, which I am impeached for having procured! The salt, the opium, and the land revenues of Bengal, added to the subsidies from Oude and Benares, produced annually nearly five millions four hundred thousand pounds. But, my lords, so inadequate have these resources proved, with the addition of the revenues of Fort St. George and Bombay, that since the commencement of

the present war a very considerable sum in specie has been transmitted from England to India; money has been borrowed to the utmost extent of their credit in Bengal; and Hyder Beg Khan, whom your lordships have heard of so often, has assisted lord Cornwallis with a loan of twenty-two lacs of rupees. I mention these circumstances to your lordships to prove that the resources of India cannot, in time of war, meet the expenses of India. Your lordships know that I could not, and lord Cornwallis cannot, do what every minister has done since the revolution. I could not borrow to the utmost extent of my wants, and tax posterity to pay the interest of my loans.”

Now, if this argument meant anything, it meant plainly that, as he could not borrow what he wanted for his wars of aggression in India, he was compelled to steal. He was, in fact, confessing all that Burke and the rest of the managers accused him of. That, to carry on his wars, he had, without any scruple, plundered the people and the princes of friendly states to an enormous extent, and under circumstances of coercion and horror, unparalleled by anything except the tortures of the inquisition. What justified him would justify the inquisitions of Rome and Madrid; it would justify all the atrocities and exterminations of Cortez and Pizarro; it would justify all the aggressions and the oppressions of Napoleon, over the whole of continental Europe. There is nothing which such an argument will not justify, if we allow that a man, or a nation, may voluntarily place himself or itself in a position which compels violence, and robbery, and personal coercion, or retreat. The inquisitions assumed the right to compel all men to believe as the catholic church did; and, because certain persons refused, they proceeded to those systems of torture which have made their very name an infamy. Pizarro and Cortez overran Mexico and Peru; and, because they wanted to amass wealth, and the natives wanted to keep it, they massacred or tortured them. Napoleon chose to overrun Europe, and exercise dominion over it, and this required vast funds; and therefore it was necessary to find these funds, or to steal them: hence, he plundered all Europe. Whoever will venture to say that he was justified-that he committed no crime? Such a man only can justify the violences of Hastings; in justifying them, he condemns himself; for, assuredly, such a man cannot be a christian. Hastings found himself in a position in which he must rob, and imprison, and set others to rob and massacre innocent people, or he must resign his power. Can there be a question what a christian should do under such circumstances? But Hastings flattered himself that he was addressing a body who, with the convenient name of christian, were in reality actuated by all the old selfishness of heathenism. He was addressing the selfishness and not the honourable integrity of the house of lords and of the nation. He told them plainly, "I could not borrow, and, therefore, I did what I did, and you have the benefit of it. I have preserved what the Indian minister (Dundas) called the brighest jewel of the British crown; and I know you don't much mind that the jewel was stolen." That was the real language of Hastings to the house of lords stripped of its thin disguise, and it was either a gross insult to the peers, or it was a severe satire on them.

He next referred to his life before his Indian rule, and

argued the old " nemo repente turpissimus " ground, willing to forget that some of the mildest men, under tempting circumstances, have become very speedily mousters; and that Hazael, the Syrian prince, was terrified at his own character drawn by the prophet beforehand. Hastings had the impudence to infer from this his previous character, "that he was innocent of any particular wrong imputed to him, especially as those who were the alleged sufferers by the wrong made no complaint against him!" and this after the most determined and the most persevering resistance of his counsel to the hearing of these complaints! This, indeed, was the cause of the bitterest complaints of the managers, that the evidence of all these sufferers—even the letter of the begum, charging Hastings with his bribing-were refused admission, though this evidence had been produced in the council in Calcutta, according to the regular mode of taking native evidence. The whole plea was the assassin's and the robber's plea-necessity; and the adoption of this plea was an admission of all that which the managers, and all persons of sound mind and christian morals, deem crimes of the darkest dye.

There were other parts of his defence which were more just. He claimed the merit of having introduced many improvements into the mode of transacting the public business of India, in the collection of the revenue, and in the courts of justice. But he claimed more—the merit of having made the machinery which governed India; in other words, he inaugurated the system which has sanctioned all the crimes and caused all the bloodshed which leaves India in our hands at this moment prostrate from a terrible rebellion and wholesale massacre of blacks and whites, and with a debt of seventy millions sterling to add to another debt of eight hundred millions. The lords, after hearing him, retired to their own house, and then adjourned the trial to the first Tuesday of the next session of parliament.

On the 10th of June parliament was prorogued by the king in person. Besides the transactions in parliament during this session which we have mentioned, Pitt made a statement of the revenue as follows:-The income for the year, £16,030,285; the expenditure, including one million for liquidating the national debt, £15,969,178; so that there was an apparent surplus of £61,107; and on this the minister indulged in the balmiest dreams of rapid reduction of the debt, at the very moment that the events across the channel, and the view which the government of England was about to take of them, were preparing the wildest scene of expenditure ever witnessed since the world began. Dundas, as the head of the board of control, also presented an equally flattering account of the state of the Indian finances, showing a clear surplus of £1,500,000, at the very moment that Warren Hastings was declaring, and justifying himself on the declaration, that lord Cornwallis was at his wit's end for money, and that the resources of India in time of war never could equal the expenses—a most melancholy truth!

As the trial of Hastings continued still to linger on for four years, yet presenting no new features, we shall here rapidly close our account of it, to prevent its continually breaking up the narrative of more important events. The defence was begun by Hastings's counsel on the 14th

accepting this as a sufficient excuse; for monstrous crimes and cruelties-and those of Hastings were very monstrous -can never be justified on the plea of patriotism. To do evil that good may come of it, is a system of morals which christianity disowns, and which cannot be practised without loading a country with infamy, at the same time that it does not at all whiten the soul of the perpetrator. He protested also he had come from India with only the moderate sum of a hundred thousand pounds; and, though avarice was by no means the ruling passion of Hastings, we may well doubt the accuracy of this statement. Such a sum, after such a process, continuel through nine years, would have left him a beggar. Burke asserted that the press had been bribed to the extent of twenty thousand pounds; major Scott, his great agent in these affairs, received another twenty thousand pounds; and the costs of the impeachment, besides, were estimated at seventy-one thousand and eighty pounds; which items of themselves amount to more than eleven thousand pounds in excess of that sum. Yet Hastings remained a comparatively rich man, and his natural son, Imhoff Hastings, was distinguished on the continent for the lavish style of his expenditure. In fact, two hundred and thirty-eight thousand seven hundred and fifty-s y-seven pounds had been remitted home by Hastings Hastings took care to share the odium of his deeds liberally with the directors of the India House, and with the ministry; for he declared in his address that he kept all these gentlemen fully apprised of his proceedings, and he contended that as they might have censured them, and did not, the blame was truly theirs; in himself, they could be only considered errors of judgment. He did not conclude without charging the managers with the design to prolong the trial another year; an accusation which excited the just indignation of Burke and Fox, who challenged him to produce the slightest proof not only of such design, but of their having caused a single moment of unnecessary delay. In fact, none were more heartily tired of the business than the managers.

The defence terminated on the 28th of May, 1793; and the lords, on retiring to their own house, agreed to allow only a fortnight to the managers to make their reply. Burke, in the commons, declared that this would be far from sufficient time, and he complained greatly of the language of Hastings in his concluding address. He complained that opprobrium had been cast on the managers, not only by Hastings, but by others, in the course of the trial, and instanced a most unseemly outbreak of Markham, archbishop of York, on himself whilst examining a witness in Westminster Hall. The archbishop's son had held a high post under Hastings in India, and the archbishop had declared that Burke had treated witnesses with all the savage illiberality of a Marat or a Robespierre. Burke demanded a committee to examine into the conduct of the managers, which was granted. Much time was then spent in endeavouring to procure more delay from the house of lords for the preparation of the reply, which Hastings as earnestly resisted. Mr. Grey requested to be allowed to resign his post as a manager, finding it impossible to be ready with the part of the reply confided to him. This further time was, at length, conceded, and the lords met

next on the 13th of February, 1794, in Westminster Hall; but the counsel of Hastings then requested a week's delay to enable them to have the advantage of the testimony of lord Cornwallis, who had just arrived from India. A further delay of five days was added, on account of his lordship's illness; and, after all, the counsel agreed to go on without his evidence.

The managers then commenced giving evidence to rebut the defence on the Benares case, and proposed to call Sir Philip Francis, but this was strenuously resisted on the ground of the notorious enmity of Francis towards Hastings, and the lords decided not to admit Francis as evidence. The managers then offered to put in sundry censures passed by the court of directors on Hastings in 1783, to neutralise a vote of thanks by the court of directors passed in 1785, and put in by the counsel for Hastings. This, also, Hastings objected to, because, at the time that the directors censured him, they did not, he contended, understand all the bearings of the circumstances, and yet Hastings had just asserted that he kept them fully informed of all the circumstances. It was clear that Hastings and the court of directors hal come to an understanding in 1785, after his return to England, and when it appeared that his case and theirs must stand or fall together. The lords, however, decided that this evidence, too, should be rejected. During the struggle on this point, Hastings grew so excited that he bluntly gave Burke the lie. The lords then refused to proceed with the case whilst the judges were on circuit, and therefore could not be consulted by them, and adjourned till the 7th of April.

Burke made use of this interval, and obtained from the house of commons authority for the managers to constitute a committee to examine the journals of the house of lords, as to the mode of procedure on the trial, and also that the managers should lay before the commons a statement of the real causes of the impediments to the progress of the trial.

On the re-assembling of the lords in Westminster Hall, earl Cornwallis was examined on behalf of Hastings, but his evidence was of very little service to him. He was not in India during the perpetration of the worst actions of Hastings, especially those regarding the rajah of Benares and the begums of Oude; he could, therefore, say nothing to them, and he candidly admitted that Hastings had no right to call on any of the tributary princes to furnish sums of money beyond their stipulated quotas, and that he had himself never made such demands, much less compelled their payment by force and menaces. This was, in fact, condemning Hastings on the main charges; and yet Hastings had said boldly in his self-defence that lord Cornwallis could neither make the income of India suffice in time of war, nor could he borrow. It was clear, therefore, that lord Cornwallis, though, by Hastings' own showing, placed in similar straits with himself, had not resorted to the same means of robbery and compulsion as he had done. This was also practical condemnation.

A Mr. Larkins was next called in to prove the disinterestedness of Hastings in money matters, which was of little consequence, as extortion for personal purposes was scarcely laid to the charge of the ex-governor. This, the last evidence produced in this interminable trial, was, however, spun out