e time after the death of Colonel Monson, when the
whole power of the board had devolved to Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell.
When they sent what they call _their positive orders_, in March, 1778,
they had long been apprised of the death of Colonel Monson, and must
have been perfectly certain of the effect which that event would have on
the subsequent measures and proceedings of the Governor-General and
Council. Their opinion of the principles of those gentlemen appears in
their letter of the 28th of November, 1777, wherein they say "they
cannot but express their concern that the power of granting away their
property in perpetuity should have devolved upon such persons."

But the conduct of the Court of Directors appears to be open to
objections of a nature still more serious and important. A recovery of
the amount of Mr. Barwell's profits seems to be the only purpose which
they even professed to have in view. But your Committee are of opinion
that to preserve the reputation and dignity of the government of Bengal
was a much more important object, and ought to have been their first
consideration. The prosecution was not the pursuit of mean and
subordinate persons, who might with safety to the public interest remain
in their seats during such an inquiry into their conduct. It appears
very doubtful, whether, if there were grounds for such a prosecution, a
proceeding in Great Britain were not more politic than one in Bengal.
Such a prosecution ought not to have been ordered by the Directors, but
upon grounds that would have fully authorized the recall of the
gentleman in question. This prosecution, supposing it to have been
seriously undertaken, and to have succeeded, must have tended to weaken
the government, and to degrade it in the eyes of all India. On the other
hand, to intrust a man, armed as he was with all the powers of his
station, and indeed of the government, with the conduct of a prosecution
against himself, was altogether inconsistent and absurd. The same letter
in which they give these orders exhibits an example which sets the
inconsistency of their conduct in a stronger light, because the case is
somewhat of a similar nature, but infinitely less pressing in its
circumstances. Observing that the Board of Trade had commenced a
prosecution against Mr. William Barton, a member of that board, for
various acts of peculation committed by him, they say, "We must be of
opinion, that, as _prosecutions are actually carrying