ment, more adapted to his being able to perform what his conscience told him his religion required.

Mr. Francis concluded with observing that, as the best evidence against any man was that of the man himself, he would undertake to satisfy the Committee, that sir Elijah Impey, when he was in Bengal, never looked upon the transaction, on which he now pretended to place so much reliance in the sense in which he had lately represented it :-that he never once before now thought of giving that construction to our act, in burning the petition of Nundcomar, which he had lately endeavoured to fix upon it, namely, that it amounted not only to a flat contradiction of any opinion we had or might deliver to the disadvantage of the judges in that business, but did express and convey a direct and explicit justification of their conduct. To prove that this was not the opinion of sir Elijah in 1775, Mr. Francis read several passages out of a letter from sir Elijah to the Secretary of State, dated the 20th of January 1776, written on purpose to vindicate his character from the aspersions" uniformly thrown upon it," by Clavering, Monson, and Francis, for his conduct in the business of Nundcomar, and to charge them with having constantly imputed to the Court the most atrocious motives for their conduct by strong insinuation, malignant sarcasm, and severe censure; and to accuse them also of attempting on sundry occasions, to over-awe or reduce the authority of the Supreme Court.

of the common gaol of Calcutta, and put into some place where he could take food, and perform his ablutions, &c. conformable to his religious scruples. He said, he believed Nundcomar to be serious in those scruples; that he gave a strong proof that he was so, by continuing to refuse food for 60, and as it had been stated, for 80 hours together. The manner in which general Clavering's daughters had been treated by sir Elijah at the bar of the court, had been most unwarrantable. Their conduct had been grossly misconstrued; not all their virtues their youth, their beauty, nor their many accomplishments, could rescue them from the most illiberal misrepresentatión, and that hazarded merely to make them, by a forced and false construction of their conduct, to appear as evidence against their father. That act, an act of charity, which would have thrown a lustre over age and deformity, and sheltered even vice itself from reproach, was perverted and falsely urged as a proof against their parent. They had constantly sent to inquire about Nundcomar's health in his confinement, and endeavour to make his situation as easy as possible. He avowed that he had done the same. If it was a crime in the ladies, it was equally a crime in him. He had done it continually, and he should have considered himself as devoid of humanity had he done otherwise. The common gaol of Calcutta was a most miserable place; bare commitment to it was equal to a sentence of death. Mr. Naylor had died in consequence of being confined in that prison. Many who had heard him, knew it to be a fact. Let gentlemen, then, Mr. Francis then observed, that if sir consider what Nundcomar, a man higher Elijah had at that time considered their in rank than he or any of the council, declaration, that Nundcomar's petition must have felt from a confinement in such was a libel, and burning it in consequence, a place. Nundcomar, who had held the as any proof of their opinion in his (sir office of prime minister of his country! It Elijah's) favour, he would have stated and was true, the Supreme Court sent Pundits urged it for that purpose, in his letter to to him, who declared that Nundcomar the Secretary of State; which, consisting might take sustenance without incurring of a great number of sheets, was from more than a very trivial censure; but beginning to end a professed defence of Nundcomar had told him, the Pundits himself against their charges; and a lawere not of so high a cast as himself, and boured effort to recriminate on them. were incapable of advising him or feeling Instead of doing so, the fact was not menhis scruples. Nundcomar, he declared, tioned, or so much as alluded to, in the was of the highest order of the Brahmins, whole of that voluminous letter. Yet, and, therefore, what he had asserted was that was the time, if ever, for him to have most probable, especially as he continued, availed himself of the evidence of the though an old man, upwards of seventy to persons he calls his enemies against themrefuse sustenance, till the judges themselves, and to invalidate any declarations selves were alarmed at the idea of an "illegal murder," and did cause Nundcomar to be removed to a place of confine

they might have made against him on other occasions. The conclusion was irresistible, that while he was in Bengal, or

at least when he wrote that letter, he had not the most remote idea, that the act of those gentlemen, on which he now insists, would bear the construction he now gives it. But why does sir Elijah declare that he never saw the minutes of the secret committee till lately? The reason is obvious -because, had he admitted that he had seen the minutes in Calcutta, as he certainly did, his letter to the Secretary of State, dated Jan. 20, 1775, would have been a manifest falsehood as a charge, and palpably defective as a defence. It would have been false upon the face of it, and his answer to the charge criminating him on account of the execution of Nundcomar, would have been most unaccountably defective by the omission of that, which, if true and agreeable to his construction of it, would have been the best answer of all, viz. our own acquittal of him by the minutes in question.

everlastingly remain contrasted and considered in eternal hostility with the names, conduct, character, and hearts of Mr. Hastings and sir Elijah Impey.

As soon as Mr. Francis had concluded, Major Scott rose to make some observations, but was told that the present was not the fit opportunity. Several witnesses were then examined upon the subject of the first charge. After which the chairman reported progress, and asked leave to sit again.

Debate in the Lords on the Mode of Procecding upon the Impeachment of Mr. Hastings.*] Feb. 21, The order of the day

On the 19th of February, the sixth day of the trial of Mr. Hastings in Westminsterhall, as soon as Mr. Burke had concluded his opening speech, Mr. Fox rose and stated, that he was directed by the Committee to submit to their lordships, that it was their intention each article separately, before they opened to proceed to a conclusion, on both sides, upon another; that is, to open and adduce evidence to substantiate one charge at a time, to hear the prisoner's defence and evidence upon that charge, and afterwards to reply; and to proceed in the same manner in all the other articles. The Lord Chancellor called upon Mr. Hastings's counsel to know whether this their answering in the negative, his lordship mode would be agreeable to them; and upon addressed himself to the Committee, and said, that their lordships would be glad to know the reasons which induced the managers to call upon the court to adopt that mode. Mr. Fox immediately stated, that in a cause of such magnitude, variety, and complexity, the mode proposed appeared absolutely necessary, obscurity, to aid their lordships memory, and and was calculated to prevent confusion and to enable them to form a more clear and distinct view of the merits of the charge and defence, upon each article, than could possibly be done by any other mode of proceeding. He mentioned the cases of the earls of Strafford and Middlesex, as precedents of the mode contended for by the managers.-The counsel for Mr. Hastings being called upon for their objections, stated, that the mode proposed

Having put this appeal to common sense in the most forcible point of view, Mr. Francis said, he hoped he had answered the accusation and the censure cast upon sir John Clavering, col. Monson, and himself, in a manner satisfactory to the feelings of every gentleman present, and of every honest man who heard him. He had been under some difficulty on account of sir Elijah having made the imputation orally, and without delivering in this part of his defence in writing. He would act more fairly, and challenge sir Elijah to put his charge upon paper, declaring, in the face of the House, on his part, that if he would do that, he would deliver in his defence in writing likewise. He wished but to make one farther observation, and that was to remind the House of the extraordinary manner in which Mr. Hastings and sir Elijah Impey had both proceeded in defending themselves from the charges stated in express terms againt them, and in specific form. The very first thing those men thought it necessary to do, was to mark him as their enemy; they deemed it essential to their safety, to single him was contrary to the practice of all courts of out as a person proper to attack, to calum-justice, and was inconsistent with all princiniate, to discredit, to disqualify, and to ples of equity, as it subjected the defendant remove. He knew not how other gen- to many obvious and most material disadvantlemen might feel, but he owned himself tages. With respect to the precedents adproud of the distinction: he considered duced, they contended, that in both cases the it as an honour. He was not the per- proceedings were regulated by mutual consonal enemy of either of those men, but sent of the parties. Mr. Fox replied, and enas long as his name and his character did not subject the defendant to any unfair deavoured to prove that the mode proposed should exist, he hoped they would be disadvantages; and, in short, that neither the known in opposition to theirs, and that prosecutors could obtain justice, nor the prihis name, conduct, and character would soner have a fair hearing, nor the court dis

being read for taking into consideration | knew not, he had abandoned. If the arthe mode of proceeding, upon the impeachment,

cles, might be a matter of future conside-him to allude to it, but he would put a ration. It was impossible for their lord- case. Suppose the House of Commons ships to adopt the mode wished for by Mr. had preferred a variety of charges against Hastings, with safety to the inquiry. The a gentleman, and that that person, anxious multiplicity of matter contained in one to clear his fame, should agree to be charge, was sufficiently intricate, without heard; suppose, after being heard, he uniting the several charges together; should be weak enough to give in his deeach charge contained crimes of diffe- fence, and allow it to be printed, and that rent complexions. He asked if any his prosecutors should actually make use lord present, would, for a moment, con- of that defence, for the purpose of drawing tend that such a precedent existed, where articles of crimination against him, should crimes of different descriptions and magni- he not, in future, be cautious not to say tudes were blended together, and on a syllable, till he had heard every thing which their lordships were bound to give that could be said against him? Suppose one ultimate opinion? it would lead their another person, of some wisdom and lordships into a labyrinth of perplexity. caution, should be accused, should be He contended, that the analogy between heard, should make a very fine speech, the present case and indictments and in- which carried the whole House with him. formations, must fall to the ground. He Profiting by a former example, suppose, then gave a fine description of an English when applied to for the minutes of his trial by jury, and contended, that the speech, he should decline to deliver them law of parliament was not to be shackled in, declaring it impossible to arrange by the rules of the courts below, while them. If such things had happened, or they did not violate the substantial rules could happen, he who sat as a judge of justice; that they had a right to con- would never agree to place Mr. Hastings sult their own convenience with a view to in a situation, by which, from inattention, the clearer comprehension of the case. or not making the best of his case, he He warned their lordships against a might become his own accuser. By every hasty decision of a question on which the law, human and divine, Mr. Hastings was interest of thousands was dependent. entitled to hear every allegation, opened He then moved, "To agree with the pro- and proved against him, before he entered position, as stated by the Managers for upon his defence. In the courts below, the Commons." no prisoner was called upon for his defence, till every clear account in the indictment was proved, or attempted to be so. If then, said his grace, for crimes of so much inferiority comparatively with the present, a prisoner can, in those courts, demand that as a right, which the managers wish to deprive Mr. Hastings of here, your lordships should step forward, and support the cause of humanity. The crimes imputed to Mr. Hastings, were of so black a dye, as to make humanity shudder, and degraded human nature. But, observed his grace, no man in this country is thought guilty, till he is proved so; and if the crimes imputed to Mr. Hastings are of the description I have mentioned, God forbid we should deprive him of that glorious privilege every subject ought to enjoy, the privilege of choosing the best mode of defending himself and overturning those imputations. His grace then observed upon Mr. Burke's opening, and Mr. Fox's reply to Mr. Hasting's counsel, declaring himself insulted, as an individual of that House, by the expressions of Mr. Fox on that day, and expressing his disapprobation of

The Duke of Richmond expressed his inability to follow the learned ford in that strain of eloquence which had at all times distinguished him in that House, and never more so than upon the present occasion. His reading on legal points was rather superficial, and therefore he could not be expected to define with such perspicuity and nicety as the learned lord; but the little information he had of legal and constitutional forms, led him to differ most materially with his lordship. His grace entirely concurred with the Chancellor, and professed himself to come with a mind perfectly free and unbiassed, and conscientiously determined to do justice. As to what had been said, that at the close of the whole, a separate question might be put upon each article, that point was by no means so clear to him. He thought the question of guilty, or not guilty, would be more proper; but that was a point for future discussion. If he could have had a doubt upon the present occasion, that doubt would be removed, by reflecting upon what had passed in another place; it would be indecent in