unga Govind Sing's
hands; and he afterwards applied to that purpose a part of this fund,
which he must have taken without any view whatever to the Company's
interest. This pretence of the exigency of the Company's affairs is the
more extraordinary, because the first receipt of these moneys was some
time in the year 1779 (I have not got the exact date of the agreement);
and it was but a year before that the Company was so far from being in
distress, that he declared he should have, at very nearly the period
when this bribe became payable, a very large sum (I do not recollect the
precise amount) in their treasury. I cannot certainly tell when the
cabooleat, or agreement, was made; yet I shall lay open something very
extraordinary upon that subject, and will lead you, step by step, to the
bloody scenes of Debi Sing. Whilst, therefore, Mr. Hastings was carrying
on these transactions, he was carrying them on without any reference to
the pretended object to which he afterwards applied them. It was an old,
premeditated plan; and the money to be received could not have been
designed for an exigency, because it was to be paid by monthly
instalments. The case is the same with respect to the other cabooleats:
it could not have been any momentary exigence which he had to provide
for by these sums of money; they were paid regularly, period by period,
as a constant, uniform income, to Mr. Hastings.

You find, then, Mr. Hastings first leaving this sum of money for a year
and three months in the hands of Gunga Govind Sing; you find, that, when
an exigence pressed him by the Mahrattas suddenly invading Bengal, and
he was obliged to refer to his bribe-fund, he finds that fund empty, and
that, in supplying money for this exigence, he takes a bond for two
thirds of his own money and one third of the Company's. For, as I stated
before, Mr. Larkins proves of one of these accounts, that he took, in
the month of January, for this bribe-money, which, according to the
principles he lays down, was the Company's money, three bonds as for
money advanced from his own cash. Now this sum of three lacs, instead of
being all his own, as it should appear to be in the month of January,
when he took the bonds, or two thirds his own and one third the
Company's, as he said in his letter of the 29th of November, turns out,
by Mr. Larkins's account, paragraph 9, which I wish to mark to your
Lordships, to be two thirds the Company's money and one third his own;