ch but the day before he had in such strong terms
declared him personally incapable, whose appointment he considered to be
fatal to those negotiations, and which he then spoke of as a measure in
_itself_ such as the bitterest adversary to Great Britain would have
proposed. But having thus yielded his whole ground of ostensible
objection, he reserved to his own appointment the entire management of
the pecuniary trust. Accordingly he named Mr. Bristow for the former,
and Mr. Middleton for the latter. On his own principles he ought to have
done the very reverse. On every justifiable principle he ought to have
done so; for a servant who for a long time resists the orders of his
masters, and when he reluctantly gives way obeys them by halves, ought
to be remarkably careful to make his actions correspond with his words,
and to put himself out of all suspicion with regard to the purity of his
motives. It was possible that the political reasons, which were solely
assigned against Mr. Bristow's appointment, might have been the real
motives of Mr. Hastings's opposition. But these he totally abandons, and
holds fast to the pecuniary department. Now, as it is notorious that
most of the abuses of India grow out of money-dealing, it was peculiarly
unfit for a servant, delicate with regard to his reputation, to require
a _personal_ and confidential agent in a situation merely official, in
which secrecy and personal connections could be of no possible use, and
could only serve to excite distrust. Matters of account cannot be made
too public; and it is not the most confidential agent, but the most
responsible, who is the fittest for the management of pecuniary trusts.
That man was the fittest at once to do the duty, and to remove all
suspicions from the Governor-General's character, whom, by not being of
his appointment, he could not be supposed to favor for private purposes,
who must naturally stand in awe of his inspection, and whose misconduct
could not possibly be imputable to him. Such an agency in a pecuniary
trust was the very last on which Mr. Hastings ought to have risked his
disobedience to the orders of the Direction,--or, what is even worse for
his motives, a direct contradiction to all the principles upon which he
had attempted to justify that bold measure.

The conduct of Mr. Hastings in the affair of Mahomed Reza Khan was an
act of disobedience of the same character, but wrought by other
instruments. When the Duanne (or un