mpany. Why,
therefore, should it be held improbable?--But I cannot mention this
proceeding without shame and horror.

My Lords, when this man appeared as an accuser of Mr. Hastings, if he
was a man of bad character, it was a great advantage to Mr. Hastings to
be accused by a man of that description. There was no likelihood of any
great credit being given to him.

This person, who, in one of those sales of which I have already given
you some account in the history of the last period of the revolutions of
Bengal, had been, or thought he had been, cheated of his money, had made
some discoveries, and been guilty of that great irremissible sin in
India, the disclosure of peculation. He afterwards came with a second
disclosure, and was likely to have odium enough upon the occasion. He
directly charged Mr. Hastings with the receipt of bribes, amounting
together to about 40,000_l._ sterling, given by himself, on his own
account and that of Munny Begum. The charge was accompanied with every
particular which could facilitate proof or detection,--time, place,
persons, species, to whom paid, by whom received. Here was a fair
opportunity for Mr. Hastings at once to defeat the malice of his enemies
and to clear his character to the world. His course was different. He
railed much at the accuser, but did not attempt to refute the
accusation. He refuses to permit the inquiry to go on, attempts to
dissolve the Council, commands his banian not to attend. The Council,
however, goes on, examines to the bottom, and resolves that the charge
was proved, and that the money ought to go to the Company. Mr. Hastings
then broke up the Council,--I will not say whether legally or illegally.
The Company's law counsel thought he might legally do it; but he
corruptly did it, and left mankind no room to judge but that it was done
for the screening of his own guilt: for a man may use a legal power
corruptly, and for the most shameful and detestable purposes. And thus
matters continued, till he commenced a criminal prosecution against this
man,--this man whom he dared not meet as a defendant.

Mr. Hastings, instead of answering the charge, attacks the accuser.
Instead of meeting the man in front, he endeavored to go round, to come
upon his flanks and rear, but never to meet him in the face, upon the
ground of his accusation, as he was bound by the express authority of
law and the express injunctions of the Directors to do. If the bribery
is not admitted