be added that, in the spring of 1788, when the trial commenced,
no important question, either of domestic or foreign policy, occupied
the public mind. The proceeding in Westminster Hall, therefore,
naturally attracted most of the attention of Parliament and of the
public. It was the one great event of that season. But in the following
year the King's illness, the debates on the Regency, the expectation of
a change of Ministry, completely diverted public attention from Indian
affairs; and within a fortnight after George the Third had returned
thanks in St. Paul's for his recovery, the States-General of France met
at Versailles. In the midst of the agitation produced by these events,
the impeachment was for a time almost forgotten.

The trial in the hall went on languidly. In the session of 1788, when
the proceedings had the interest of novelty, and when the Peers had
little other business before them, only thirty-five days were given to
the impeachment. In 1789 the Regency Bill occupied the Upper House till
the session was far advanced. When the King recovered the circuits were
beginning. The Judges left town; the Lords waited for the return of the
oracles of jurisprudence; and the consequence was that during the whole
year only seventeen days were given to the case of Hastings. It was
clear that the matter would be protracted to a length unprecedented in
the annals of criminal law.

In truth, it is impossible to deny that impeachment, though it is a fine
ceremony, and though it may have been useful in the seventeenth century,
is not a proceeding from which much good can now be expected. Whatever
confidence may be placed in the decision of the Peers on an appeal
arising out of ordinary litigation, it is certain that no man has the
least confidence in their impartiality when a great public functionary,
charged with a great state crime, is brought to their bar. They are all
politicians. There is hardly one among them whose vote on an impeachment
may not be confidently predicted before a witness has been examined;
and, even if it were possible to rely on their justice, they would still
be quite unfit to try such a cause as that of Hastings. They sit only
during half the year. They have to transact much legislative and much
judicial business. The law lords, whose advice is required to guide the
unlearned majority, are employed daily in administering justice
elsewhere. It is impossible, therefore, that during a busy session,