o startle; the eloquence of the managers had
become commonplace by the repetition which had deprived the horrors of
their sting. The prosecution was yawned to death.

Perhaps there was not a peer in the seats of Westminster Hall, nor a
member of the committee, nor a man in the kingdom, except Burke and
Pitt, who would not have forgiven Hastings twice the amount of his
offences, to have silenced the subject at once and for ever.

With Burke, the impeachment was a vision, half Roman, half Oriental--the
august severity of a Roman senate, combining with the mysterious
splendour of the throne of Aurungzebe. He was the Cicero impeaching
Verres in the presence of the eighteenth century, or a high-priest of
some Indian oracle promulgating the decrees of eternal justice to the
eastern world.

With Pitt, the whole event was a fortunate diversion of the enemy, a
relief from the restless assaults of a Whig opposition, a perpetual
drain on Whig strength, and by a result more effective still, a fruitful
source of popular ridicule on the lingering impotence of Whig labours.

On the acquittal of Hastings, Burke wrote several letters to Addington
as Speaker, which have a tone of the deepest despondency. He writes in
the impassioned anguish of a man to whom the earth exhibited but one
aspect of despair. They were letters such as Priam might have indited on
the night when his Troy was in a blaze. It was evident that the powerful
genius of Burke was partially bewildered by the bent of his feelings. He
raised an imaginary sepulchre for England on the spot where he had
contemplated the erection of a dungeon for Indian crime through all ages
to come.

The Indian directors voted Hastings, an annuity of five thousand pounds,
which he enjoyed to a very advanced age: yet his acquittal has not
received the seal of posterity. A calmer view has regarded him as the
daring agent of acts fitter for the meridian of Hindoo morality than
European. To serve the struggling interests of the Company seems to
have been his highest motive, and there can be no doubt that he served
them with equal sagacity and success. That he was a vigorous
administrator, an enterprising statesman, and a popular governor, is
beyond denial; that he was personally unstained by avarice or extortion,
is admitted. But history demands higher proofs of principle; and no
governor since his time has ever attempted to imitate his example, or
ever ventured to excuse his own errors, by