m charged, Parliament appointed me to my trust, and
consequently has acquitted me."--Has it, my Lords? I am bold to say that
the Commons are wholly guiltless of this charge. I will admit, if
Parliament, on a full state of his offences before them, and full
examination of those offences, had appointed him to the government, that
then the people of India and England would have just reason to exclaim
against so flagitious a proceeding. A sense of propriety and decorum
might have restrained us from prosecuting. They might have been
restrained by some sort of decorum from pursuing him criminally. But the
Commons stand before your Lordships without shame. First, in their name
we solemnly assure your Lordships that we had not in our Parliamentary
capacity (and most of us, myself I can say surely, heard very little,
and that in confused rumors) the slightest knowledge of any one of the
acts charged upon this criminal at either of the times of his being
appointed to office, and that we were not guilty of the nefarious act of
collusion and flagitious breach of trust with which he presumes
obliquely to charge us; but from the moment we knew them, we never
ceased to condemn them by reports, by votes, by resolutions, and that we
admonished and declared it to be the duty of the Court of Directors to
take measures for his recall, and when frustrated in the way known to
that court we then proceeded to an inquiry. Your Lordships know whether
you were better informed. We are, therefore, neither guilty of the
precedent crime of colluding with the criminal, nor the subsequent
indecorum of prosecuting what we had virtually and practically approved.

Secondly, several of his worst crimes have been committed since the last
Parliamentary renewal of his trust, as appears by the dates in the
charge.

But I believe, my Lords, the judges--judges to others, grave and weighty
counsellors and assistants to your Lordships--will not, on reference,
assert to your Lordships, (which God forbid, and we cannot conceive, or
hardly state in argument, if but for argument,) that, if one of the
judges had received bribes before his appointment to an higher judiciary
office, he would not still be open to prosecution.

So far from admitting it as a plea in bar, we charge, and we hope your
Lordships will find it an extreme aggravation of his offences, that no
favors heaped upon him could make him grateful, no renewed and repeated
trusts could make him faithful an