Mr. Bristow, however, was recalled by Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell, who
had then acquired the majority, without any complaint having been
assigned as the cause of his removal, and Mr. Middleton was sent in his
stead to reside at the capital of Oude. The Court of Directors, as soon
as they could be apprised of this extraordinary step, in their letter of
the 4th of July, 1777, express their strongest disapprobation of it:
they order Mr. Middleton to be recalled, and Mr. Bristow to be
reinstated in his office. In December, 1778, they repeat their order. Of
these repeated orders no notice was taken. Mr. Bristow, fatigued with
unsuccessful private applications, which met with a constant refusal,
did at length, on the 1st of May, 1780, address a letter to the board,
making his claim of right, entitling himself to his offices [office?]
under the authority of the Court of Directors, and complaining of the
hardships which he suffered by the delay in admitting him to the
exercise of it. This letter your Committee have inserted at large in the
Fifth Report, having found nothing whatsoever exceptionable in it,
although it seems to have excited the warmest resentment in Mr.
Hastings.

This claim of the party gave no new force to the order of the Directors,
which remained without any attention from the board from Mr. Bristow's
arrival until the 1st of May, and with as little from the 1st of May to
the 2nd of October following. On that day, Mr. Francis, after having
caused the repeated orders of the Court of Directors to be first read,
moved that Mr. Bristow should be reinstated in his office. This motion,
in itself just and proper in the highest degree, and in which no fault
could be found, but that it was not made more early, was received by Mr.
Hastings with the greatest marks of resentment and indignation. He
declares in his minute, that, "were the most determined adversary of the
British nation to possess, by whatever means, a share in the
administration, he could not devise a measure in _itself_ so pernicious,
or _time_ it so effectually for the _ruin_ of the British interests in
India." Then turning to the object of the motion, he says, "I will ask,
Who is Mr. Bristow, that a member of the administration should, at such
a time, hold him forth, as _an instrument for the degradation of the
first executive member of this government?_ What are the professed
objects of his appointment? What are the _merits_ and services, or what
the