instead
of being excepted from the spirit of the restriction, must be supposed
the persons who are chiefly meant to be comprehended in it; for abstract
the idea of an European from the ideas of power and influence, and the
restriction is no longer rational.

Your Committee are therefore of opinion that the nature of the evil
which was meant to be prevented by the above orders and regulations was
not altered, or the evil itself diminished, by the collusive methods
made use of to evade them,--and that, if the regulations were proper,
(as they unquestionably were,) they ought to have been punctually
complied with, particularly by the members of the government, _who
formed the plan_, and who, as trustees of the Company, were especially
answerable for their being duly carried into execution. Your Committee
have no reason to believe that it could ever have been generally
understood "that the Company's prohibition of farms to Europeans was
meant only to exclude such as could not possibly, in their own persons,
come under the jurisdiction of the Duanne courts": no such restriction
is so much as hinted at. And if it had been so understood, Mr. Barwell
was one of the persons who, from their rank, station, and influence,
must have been the principal objects of the prohibition. Since the
establishment of the Company's influence in Bengal, no Europeans, of any
rank whatever, have been subject to the process of the country
judicature; and whether they act avowedly for themselves, and take farms
in their own name, or substitute native Indians to act for them, the
difference is not material. The same influence that screened an European
from the jurisdiction of the country courts would have equally protected
his native agent and representative. For many years past the Company's
servants have presided in those courts, and in comparison with _their_
authority the native authority is nothing.

The earliest instructions that appear to have been given by the Court of
Directors in consequence of these transactions in Bengal are dated the
5th of February, 1777. In their letter of that date they applaud the
proceedings of the board, meaning the majority, (then consisting of
General Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis,) _as highly
meritorious_, and promise them their _firmest support_. "Some of the
_cases_" they say, "_are so flagrantly corrupt, and others attended with
circumstances so oppressive to the inhabitants, that it would be unj