w their fidelity not merely to
the spirit but to all the forms of English law, had worn their heavy
wigs all through the torrid heat of those Calcutta June days. By the
English law he was convicted and sentenced to death. The triumvirate
made little or no attempt to save the man on whose word they had
relied. On August 5, 1775, Nand Kumar was hanged on the Maidan outside
Calcutta. He met his death with the composed courage of a man who
looked upon himself as a martyr. Whatever his offences may have been,
he had done nothing which in his own eyes, or in the eyes of his
fellow-countrymen, called for the pitiless punishment which fell upon
him.

Of course, the important question is how far, if at all, {263} Hastings
was concerned in the death of Nand Kumar. That is just the question
which it is impossible to answer definitely. The certain facts are
that Nand Kumar was Hastings's enemy, that Impey was Hastings's friend;
that at a moment of grave crisis in Hastings's life, when Nand Kumar
was the most eminent witness against his name and fame, that witness,
was arraigned on a charge that was very old, that had been suddenly
converted from a civil to a criminal charge; that he was tried, found
guilty, and executed. On the basis of that bare narrative of facts it
would seem that if Hastings had nothing to do with the matter, he might
almost as well have had as far as the judgment of posterity went. The
thing was too apt, the conditions too peculiar not to leave their
stigma upon the memory of the man who gained most by them.

At the same time it must be remembered that, however black the
arguments against Hastings may seem, there is no positive proof that he
was directly implicated in what his enemies called the judicial murder
of Nand Kumar. It must be remembered that the writer who has gone most
deeply into the whole ugly story, Sir James Stephen, in his careful
"Story of Nuncomar," has after long and exhaustive analysis of every
particular of the case recorded his judgment in favor of Impey and of
Hastings. Sir James Stephen's judgment is not final, indeed, but it
must have weight with any one who attempts impartially to appreciate
two public men who have been accused for more than a century of a
terrible crime. Sir James Stephen believes that Nand Kumar's trial was
perfectly fair, that Hastings had no share whatever in the prosecution,
and that there was no collusion of any kind between Hastings and Impey
wit