the ministers [the Nabob of
Oude's ministers] are to choose _all_ aumils and collectors of revenue
with your concurrence." And the dishonor to the Company, in thus
deceitfully concurring in oppression, which they were able and were
bound to prevent, is much aggravated by the said Warren Hastings's
receiving from the person to whose oppression he had delivered the said
prince, as a private gift or donation to himself and for his own use, a
sum of money amounting to one hundred thousand pounds and upwards, which
might give just ground of suspicion that the said gift from the
oppressor to the person surrendering the person injured to his mercy
might have had some share in the said criminal transaction.

V. That the said Warren Hastings did (in the paper justifying the said
surrender of the prince put by himself under the protection of the East
India Company) assert, "that it was a fact, that the Nabob Muzuffer
Jung [the Nabob of Furruckabad] is equally urgent with the Nabob Vizier
for the removal of a Resident," without producing, as he ought to have
done, any document to prove his improbable assertion, namely, his
assertion that the oppressed prince did apply to his known enemy and
oppressor, the Nabob of Oude, (who, if he would, was not able to relieve
him against the will of the English government,) rather than to that
English government, which he must have conceived to be more impartial,
to which he had made his former complaint, and which was alone able to
relieve him.

VI. That the said Warren Hastings, in the said writing, did further
convey an insinuation of an ambiguous, but, on any construction, of a
suspicious and dangerous import, viz.: "It is a fact, that Mr. Shee's
[the Resident's] authority over the territory of Furruckabad is in
itself as much subversive of that [_of the lawful rulers_] as that of
the Vizier's aumil [collector] ever was, and is the more _oppressive_ as
the power from whence it is derived is greater." The said assertion
proceeds upon a supposition of the illegality both of the Nabob's and
the Company's government; all consideration of the _title_ to authority
being, therefore, on that supposition, put out of the question, and the
whole turning only upon the _exercise_ of authority, the said Hastings's
suggestion, that the oppression of government must be in proportion to
its power, is the result of a false and dangerous principle, and such as
it is criminal for any person intrusted with the