ument he was made for every bad
one.

SPEECH

IN

GENERAL REPLY.

EIGHTH DAY: SATURDAY, JUNE 14, 1794

My Lords,--Your Lordships heard, upon the last day of the meeting of
this high court, the distribution of the several matters which I should
have occasion to lay before you, and by which I resolved to guide
myself in the examination of the conduct of Mr. Hastings with regard to
Bengal. I stated that I should first show the manner in which he
comported himself with regard to the people who were found in possession
of the government when we first entered into Bengal. We have shown to
your Lordships the progressive steps by which the native government was
brought into a state of annihilation. We have stated the manner in which
that government was solemnly declared by a court of justice to be
depraved, and incompetent to act, and dead in law. We have shown to your
Lordships (and we have referred you to the document) that its death was
declared upon a certificate of the principal attending physician of the
state, namely, Mr. Warren Hastings himself. This was declared in an
affidavit made by him, wherein he has gone through all the powers of
government, of which he had regularly despoiled the Nabob Mobarek ul
Dowlah, part by part, exactly according to the ancient formula by which
a degraded knight was despoiled of his knighthood: they took, I say,
from him all the powers of government, article by article,--his helmet,
his shield, his cuirass; at last they hacked off his spurs, and left him
nothing. Mr. Hastings laid down all the premises, and left the judges to
draw the conclusion.

Your Lordships will remark (for you will find it on your minutes) that
the judges have declared this affidavit of Mr. Hastings to be a
_delicate_ affidavit. We have heard of affidavits that were true; we
have heard of affidavits that were perjured; but this is the first
instance that has come to our knowledge (and we receive it as a proof of
Indian refinement) of a delicate affidavit. This affidavit of Mr.
Hastings we shall show to your Lordships is not entitled to the
description of a good affidavit, however it might be entitled, in the
opinion of those judges, to the description of a delicate affidavit,--a
phrase by which they appear to have meant that he had furnished all the
proofs of the Nabob's deposition, but had delicately avoided to declare
him expressly deposed. The judges drew, however, this indelicate
conclusion; the