re the House had squeezed out of him that some such money had
been received, he never once told the Court of Directors that his black
bribe-agent, whom he recommended to their service, had cheated both them
and him of 20,000_l._ out of the fund of the bribe-revenue. If it be
asked, Where is the record of this? Record there is none. In what office
is it entered? It is entered in no office; it is mentioned as privately
received for the Company's benefit: and you shall now further see what a
charming office of receipt and account this new exchequer of Mr.
Hastings's is.

For there is another and a more serious circumstance attending this
business. Every one knows, that, by the law of this, and, I believe, of
every country, any money which is taken illegally from any person, as
every bribe or sum of money extorted or paid without consideration is,
belongs to the person who paid it, and he may bring his action for it,
and recover it. Then see how the Company stands. The Company receives a
bribe of 40,000_l._ by Mr. Hastings; it is carried to its account; it
turns bribery into a revenue; it sanctifies it. In the mean time, the
man from whom this money is illegally taken sues Mr. Hastings. Must not
he recover of Mr. Hastings? Then, if so, must not Mr. Hastings recover
it again from the Company? The Company undoubtedly is answerable for it.
And here is a revenue which every man who has paid it may drag out of
the treasury again. Mr. Hastings's donations of his bribes to the
treasury are liable to be torn from it at pleasure by every man who
gives the money. First it may be torn from him who receives it; and then
he may recover it from the treasury, to which he has given it.

But admitting that the taking of bribes can be sanctified by their
becoming the property of the Company, it may still be asked, For what
end and purpose has the Company covenanted with Mr. Hastings that money
taken extorsively shall belong to the Company? Is it that satisfaction
and reparation may be awarded against the said Warren Hastings to the
said Company for their own benefit? No: it is for the benefit of the
injured persons; and it is to be carried to the Company's account, "but
in trust, nevertheless, and to the intent that the said Company may and
do render and pay over the moneys received or recovered by them to the
parties injured or defrauded, which the said Company accordingly hereby
agree and covenant to do." Now here is a revenue to be receiv