Page images
PDF
EPUB

was, he observed, a cafe in which the Houfe fhould be particularly adherent to the precedents which occurred, and most observant of the regular order of their proceedings. Every principle of equity, without doubt, demanded that the perfon accused fhould be made acquainted with the nature and extent of the charges exhibited against him; but it by no means followed that these charges fhould be produced until they were finally and articulately arranged. Every precedent he had heard on the occafion militated ftrongly against the procedure; and until one was adduced which gave it fanétion, he fhould certainly perfevere in his oppofition

to the demand.

Mr. Pitt faid, that on a fubject so new, it fhould not appear ftrange if few precedents could be found; and the difficulty of the refearch was encreased, when it was confidered that the charges were brought by a Member of that House against a person who was not fo. This, however, he apprehend ed, was an immaterial difference, and as fuch he hoped it would be viewed by the House. If this diftinction was overlooked, the cafe of Mr. Seymour in the year 1510 then became a precedent exactly in point. On the impeachment of that gentleman, a copy of the original charges had been granted him, to which he was likewife permitted to reply; and the conclufive proceedings were founded on a comparison of both. Nor was this the only precedent which occurred. In 1620 Sir John Benning was alfo allowed a copy of the heads of the charges aginft him, before evidence had been adduced to fubftantiate them. In these cafes the charges repeating only the crime of peculation, were cafily anfwered; bu in the prefent inftance the neceffity was greater, as the charges were more voluminous and complicated.

He then adverted, in ftrong terms, to the importance of the charges on the table. From the fituation of the perfons accused, and the nature of the charges brought against them, the honour of that House was materially concerned, and would be injured by an hafty or erroneous decifion; a condign punishment or a fignal and unequivocal deliverance was indifpenfably neceffary.

What defence or what excuipation Mr. Haftings might be able to adduce, he knew not; but as he hoped and trufted that he would be able to clear himself from the guilt imputed to him, he was confequently defrous of giving him the earlicft opportunity. On the fubject of the charges on the table, he thought it neceffary to remark, that they were in many parts overloaded with extraneous matter; in others filled with circumstances totally irrelevant; that they were frequently obfcure, and fometimes unintelligible. However therefore he wifhed for a speedy and ferious investigation,

he thought it previously neceffary that thefe charges fhould be difencumbered and explained.

Mr. Fox declared himself ready to abide by the precedents which the Right Hon. Gentleman had quoted, if on being read they appeared to be really in point. He animadverted on the affertion that the charges contained much of irrelevant and extraneous matter. This he totally denied. That they were copious and diffuse he would readily allow, but could not admit that they were burthened by any extenfion which was not justified by the circumftances of the cafe, and the neceffity of fupplying the fullest information on the subje&. He concluded with defiring that the precedents might be read.

A long converfation then took place on the relation which those precedents bore to the cafe now pending.

Mr. Burke in the courfe of his remarks took occafion to vindicate the charges he had made, and the manner in which they were given to the House.

Mr. Pitt faid, that if the Right Hon. Gentleman would reduce his particular charges to certain iffuable points, and bring them into a narrow compaís, he apprehended it might be attended with great convenience.

Mr. Fox contended, that the Right Hon. Gentleman upon the Treasury Bench attempted to impofe a task on his Right Hon. Friend, which by no means he thought it incumbent upon him to undertake. He argued with great force and ability, that there was abundant matter contained in the charges for that House to form an opinion, aye or no, whether there was fufficient reason to ground an impeachment against Mr. Haftings.

Mr. Fox, in pointing out the feveral manœuvres which appeared to him to have been made on the other side of the House to kifle the enquiry, worked himself up to a pitch of extraordinary warmth.

Mr. Pitt retorted, that the Right Hon. Gentleman had given a truly striking fpecie men of the moderation and temper with which the charges against Mr. Haflings would be conducted. If his arguments had not been made the vehicle of his malice; if the Right Hon. Gentleman's infinuations had been lefs boisterous and indecent, they perhaps would have been attended to by the Houfe with equal refpect. Without endeavouring to copy the example, he should still continue of opinion, that there were many parts of the charges that would not require evidence, because they were not fufficiently grounded against Mr. Haflings, although they feemed to be urged in aggravation of his offence. Others, he was again free to acknowledge, tended ftrongly to criminate that gentleman. For his own part, he had

DO

no wish to stifle the enquiry. If he had any particular with, it was that Mr. Haftings might be able to affert his innocence, because he had much rather a man fhould be innocent than guilty; but he defied the dark infinuations of the Hon. Gentleman, that there was any intention on his part to ftifle the bufinefs, or to preclude it from a fair and candid hearing.

Mr. Burke recommended to the Right Hon. Gentleman, when he spoke next time upon moderation, to recollect the following couplet of Arbuthnot:

Then roar'd the prophet of a Northern Nation, Scorch'd with a flaming speech on Modera

tion.

After Mr. Burke had fuccefsfully turned the laugh of the House upon Mr. Pitt, for his attack on Mr. Fox's modération, he refumed himself, and afferted, that any idea of his having aggravated the crimes of Mr. Haltings, was a moft unjuft infinuation. It was necellary, for his own honour, and the honour of that Houfe, that the charges fhould be brought home. He was determined to proceed ftep by step; if he was ftripped of one argument, he would clofely Follow up another, until he had fairly brought the matter to an iffue, unless the Houfe, in its great judgment, fhould cut him fhort; there indeed he must bow obedience. If an arm was lopped, ftill he would affail the enemy; if a leg was taken off; nay, if both were amputated, ftill, like Widdrington, he would fight upon his ftumps. In fhort, nothing less than political death, by the direct orders of the Houfe, fhould prevent him from going regularly on in the purfuit of his object, to repair the injury fuftained in the honour and humanity of his country.

Mr. Martin wifhed that Mr. Haftings might be brought to condign punishment if guilty, and if innocent acquitted. The Hon. Member earnestly hoped that the Hon. Mover in this bufinefs would receive every affiftance in the power of the Houfe to give him. This would encourage the Hon. Member to proceed against another criminal of high rank and great authority in that Houfe. The Houfe felt the allufion to Lord North, and there was a continued call of hear! hear! accompanied with laughter, &c.] The noble culprit had frequently challenged his accufers, who were formerly pretty numerous on the other fide of the Houle, to bring forward their charges, and they had frequently pledged themselves fo to do, but fince the late Coalition their tone was altered. Lord North rofe to urge what he had fo frequently done in that Houfe with refpect to the allufion which had been fo strongly made to him by the laft Hon. Gentleman. He had frequently courted an enquiry; he wifhed it to be fair and full; and he was

ready to meet it whenever it might take place. He had nothing to fear from the enquiry; all he deprecated was, that he might not be continually harraffed with a repetition of the fame charge upon every question, merely to effect temporary purpofes. Of this he was confident, that the enquiry was not kept off by any favour, by power, or by the authority of that House. In the mean time he relied upon the candour of that House, that he should not be continually attacked in the like unbecoming

[blocks in formation]

Mr. Burke then prefented other two charges relating to a libel written by Mr. Haftings against the Court of Directors-and the final abandonment of Shaw Allum, on concluding a treaty with the Mahrattas.Thefe, with other two, which were in great forwardness, he intended fhould complete the whole.

Mr. Burkenext reminded the House, that the prefent was the day appointed for going into a Committee, and hearing evidence on this bufinefs. He had to lament, he faid, that from the decayed conftitutions which gentlemen in general brought from the EaftIndies, he was, for the prefent, deprived of the affiftance of some very material evidence. He read a letter from Col. Gardner, apologizing for non-attendance on account of indifpofition, and enclofing a certificate from his phyfician to that purpofe. He faid, that on this account he fhould be compelled to change the order of the witneffes who were to be examined; that those who were most infirm should be firit attended to: amongst them, he faid, was Sir Robert Barker, who now attended as an evidence. He therefore wished that the Houfe would refolve itself into a Commitee, and for that purpote moved that the Speaker do now leave the

chair.

The Master of the Rolls (Sir Lloyd Kenyon) contended, that as the House had confented to hear Mr. Haflings on the subject of the charges now before them, it would be unfair to make any addition to thofe charges, or to call in any fuppletory evidence until Mr. Haftings fhould have been heard.

Mr. Burke replied, that as no limited time had been affigned, in which the perfon ac, cused was to make his reply, it would be in the power of Mr. Haftings to give in his anfwer alfo to whatever additions may be made by the parole evidence to the charges already before them. It would, in his opinion, be even more advantageous to the party accused, as the more complete the charges were made, the less addition would be neceffary to his defence.

This difference of opinion produced a long and defultory conversation. The Z za Speakers

fpeakers on the part of Adminiftration, against the calling in of evidence, were Mr. Pitt, Mr. Dundas, the Attorney-General, Mr Wilberforce, and Mr. Bearcroft; on the part of Oppoution, Mr. Fox, Mr. Burke, Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Anftruther, and Mr. Hardinge.

A divifion enfued on the queftion for the Speaker's leaving the chair, in which the numbers were,

Ayes
Nocs

Majority against the motion

80

139

59

On the return of the Members from the divifion, the Speaker started a doubt whether in point of order Mr. Haftings should be heard before the Committee of the whole House, to which the papers had been referred, or before the Houfe, who had given him the permiffion to speak.

It was after fome time determined that Mr. Haftings should be heard at the bar of the House on Monday next, and that the evidences should be examined on Tuesday. APRIL 27.

As foon as the private bufinefs of the day was over, the Houfe adjourned. APRIL 28.

Mr. Pringle took the oaths and his feat for Selkirk.

Sir George Warren took his feat for Lancafter.

Received and read a petition from Helflon against the tax on hawkers and pedlers. Ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. Burke prefented two other charges against Mr. Haftings. Referred to the former Committee.

Mr. Dempster prefented a petition from the American loyalifts, ftating in ftrong terms their reduced fituation, and the inadequacy of the relief they had found.

The Houfe having refolved itself into a Committee on the Newfoundland Bill, Sir George Yonge in the chair,

Lord Beauchamp moved, that the propofed bounties fhould extend alfo to the iftands of Jerfey, Guernfey, and Alderney, by the infertion of their names in the claufe. This was agreed to.

QUEBEC PETITION.

Mr. Powys entered into the hiftory of the different laws that existed in the province of Quebec ince the year 1763, when it first came into our hands. Having made fome very good remarks on the bill in 1774, he proceeded to the heads of the petition, which amounted in number to thirteen; to every article of which he faid a few words, to point out the neceffity of indulging them; as the whole amounted only to the requeft of a participation of the British laws, fuch as an optional jury, the independency of the judges, the trial by jury, the permanency of the Habeas Corpus Act, together with an earnest request that the retention and dif

mission of the officers in civil departments, &c. may not, as they do at present, depend on the will of the Governor-General, but on his Majesty alone: it was also the wish of the inhabitants to have an Affembly, with many other points on which he dwelt with much clearness and perfpicuity. · After this he moved for leave to bring in a bill to explain and amend the laft Canadian A&.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer was wil ling to make every thing as eafy to the inhabitants of that country as poffible, and to extend the influence of the British conftitu tionas far as prudence would dictate; but he had petitions in his hand, he said, counter to that prefented by the Hon. Gentleman. It was a fubject of much complication, on which it was not easy to decide- the mixture of language, religion, and opinion, rendered it peculiarly fo. Sir Guy Carleton was to fet out fhortly for that country, who had it in orders to report the situation of affairs, to enable Minifters to compofe a proper system for the government of that country, which promifed to be a flourishing one.

Mr. Fox was much furprised, that after twenty-two years, we should be fo ignorant of the affairs of that quarter, as not to be able to do fomething to fatisfy the minds of the people, whose petition had laid on the table for two years.

Mr. Courtenay insisted, that the Governor of that province should not be invested with that extraordinary power he had hitherto enjoyed-as Chief Juftice Livius was dismissed in 1774 for doing his duty. This

Alderman Watson denied.

Mr. Courtenay confirmed it from the minutes of the Committee and the order of his Majefty.

Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Sloper, Mr. Pye, Sir Jofeph Mawbey, Mr. Dempfter, Mr. Smith, Mr. Brickdale, and others delivered their opinions on the fubject. Many compliments on both fides were paid to the integrity and profeffional merit of Sir Guy Carleton. After which the House divided, For the motion Against it

Majority
MAY 1.

21

68

47

Lord Surrey prefented a petition from Mr. Chriftian and several of the Electors of the city of Carlifle, complaining of the undue election of Mr. Lowther. The petition was read, and ordered to be taken into cont deration the 18th inftant.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer gave notice, that he should on Friday next bring forward a subject, refpecting which he had a few days before the late recefs fignified bis inten;ion of offering some motion fharti What he meant was, to put fome particulari forts of wines under the management and regulation of the Excife.

Mr. Dundas ftated, that a doubt had arifen in India, as to the construction of the clauses of two diftinct Acts of Parliament of the 13th and 24th of the prefent King, in refpect to the removal of a covenanted fervant of the Company from one fettlement to another. This doubt had, Mr. Dundas faid, he understood been entertained at Calcutta, when a noble Lord lately arrived there from Madras, to take upon him the office of Governor-General, and therefore it was proper to bring in a Bill to explain it with this view he moved for leave to bring in a Bill; and he gave notice, that his intention was to bring in the Bill this day, and to get it paffed through all its different stages the fame day, unlefs fome particular objections were made against it.

The Speaker, in confequence of the refolution of the Honfe, called Mr. Haftings to the bar, who, having been informed of the purpose for which he was admitted there, obferved, that he was not accustomed to public fpeaking, and therefore begged the House would indulge him with the hearing of what he had drawn up in his defence. His memory was not remarkably tenacious, and as the refutation or contradiction of the charges brought against him required frequent references to certain documents and papers neceffary to be produced, he flattered himfelf that the Houle would eafily conceive the propriety of his requifition. This having been readily affented to, Mr. Haftings proceeded to read his defence. He began by remarking, that the grounds of the crimination were ill-founded, afperfive, and malicious; that the various publications of the times contained the most unwarrantable obfervations on his conduct, and that the prefs daily teemed with the moft grofs libels upon every part of his administration in India; that the most extraordinary of all was, the pamphlet lately published, in which the charges of delinquency were not only copioufly difplayed, but the name of the accufer himself (Mr. Burke) printed in the title page, by which it would appear that it had not only his fan&tion and authority, but that the accu'er had officiously condefcended to become the publisher; that thefe charges had been the refult of much deliberation; and that, during a period of five years, his enemies had exerted their abilities in order to specify the different grounds of accufation. That he only refolved on Monday laft, with the permiffion of the Hon Houfe, to enter himfelf upon his defence; and that he now appeared prepared to meet his accusers, in as tew days almost as the years in which his enemies had been engaged in bringing forward the matters which tended to criminate and afperfe him. That he was obliged to

reply to charges containing nothing specific; and that they might be called hiftorical narratives, with voluminous commentaries.That he had been in India from a schoolboy; and that during a period of thirty-fix years fervitude, he had always the happiness to maintain a good and refpectable character.-That by the evil machinations of a few individuals, men of notoriety, he now appeared in an unfortunate fituation; but that he chofe to come forward on the occafion, and ineet his fate, rather than be subjected to the continual threats of a Parliamentary profecution. That with regard to the indulgence now granted, it was a matter of indifference whether it proceeded from the humanity or the juftice of the Houfe; he confidered himself as equally indebted to them. That he had acted according to the emergencies of the times; and that he had been frequently reduced to fuch extremities, as to defy the fanction of any precedent.That no man had been in more perilous fituations, and that in those disasters he was entirely left to the refources of his own mind. That he had refigned his government in India amidit the regret of his fellow-fubjects.-That he had repeatedly received the thanks of his employers, the Court of Directors of the Eat-India Company; and as he had the fatisfaction of discharging the truft repofed in him with fuch unanimous approbation, he believed, that no other power on earth had a right to call his conduct in quetion. Mr. Haftings was interrupted by

Mr. Rolle, who, upon Mr. Haftings hav ing withdrawn, begged to know whether his defence might not be received without being read, and afterwards printed; but being informed that the Houfe had already refolved to hear the defence,

Mr. Haftings was called in, and went on with his defence for about two hours; when appearing to be much fatigued, he was relieved by Mr. Markham *, and afterwards fucceffively by the two Clerks. The House continued hearing the defence till near eleven o'clock.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer then obferved, that as he had been informed the remainder of the defence would take up a confiderable time, he would move that the proceeding fhould be adjourned till next day.

Mr. Burke immediately rofe, and declared his entire fatisfaction with the minute manner in which the defence was couched. He was perfectly fatisfied that Mr. Haftings fhould have full fcope, and every poffible indulgence allowed him. But he was in great hopes that the whole would have been one day's business, and therefore

Son of the Archbishop of York, formerly Refident at Benares, and who narrowly efcaped with his life at the time of the infurrection there.

he

[blocks in formation]

Mr. Haftings being placed at the bar, renewed his defence to the remaining charges, in which he denied pofitively being the author of the Mahratta war; but claimed all the merit to himself in making the Mahratta peace, which had now lafted three years. He charged Nundocomar with bring a Prince of the greatest treachery, and of fuch infamy of character, as to be a rogue even where it was his intereft to be honelt. He charged Mr. Burke, the author of the charges against him, with having made partial extracts from his own letters, for the purpose of criminating him, and of omitting material paffages, which would have redounded to his honour.

He concluded with thanking the House. for the indulgence they had thewu, and expreffed a wifh, that he might be permitted to lay upon the table the minutes and papers from which he had read his defence.

The Speaker afked the Hon. Gentleman, whether he had any thing further to say? and being anfwered in the negative, he was ordered to withdraw.

Major Scott moved, that Mr. Haflings be permitted to deliver in to the House, the minutes and papers from which he had read aufwers to the matters contained in the Charges of high crimes and mifdemeanors.

Alderman Le Mefurier feconded the motion.

Mr. Burke defired to fecond the motion likewife.

The queftion was put, and agreed to unanimoufly.

The Speaker then ordered Mr. Haftings in, who being placed at the bar, was informed that the Houfe had complied with his request, as moved for by an honourable Member; therefore the Clerk would come down to the bar, and receive the papers from him; on which Mr. Lee went to the bar, and Mr. Haftings delivered him a large bundle of papers.

Major Scott next moved, that a fufficient number of copies of the faid papers be printed for the ufe of the Members.

Sir Jofeph Mawbey and Alderman Townfend both feconded it.

Mr. Burke faid he approved of the motion; on which the question was put, and unanimously agreed to.

Mr. Burke then defired the order of the day to be read, for going into a Committee of the whole Houfe, to confider of the charges of high crimes and misdemeanors against Warren Haftings, Efq. and

The Speaker having left the chair, the Houfe refolved itfelf into a Committee of the whole Houfe on Mr. Haftings's business, the Hon. Mr. St. John in the chair.

Mr. Burke rofe, and acquainted the Committee, that, with their permiffion, he would inftantly proceed to the calling wit neffes-which being granted, he called in

Sir Robert Barker, who was examined relative to the difpofition of the Rohilla Chiefs, and the Rajah Dowlah. The chief points turned upon the pacific difpofitions of thefe princes.

The examination of Sir Robert Barker was directed chiefly towards the motives that occafioned the Rohilla war, and continued uninterrupted until

Mr. Burke demanded to know, whether the witness was not one of the subscribing witneffes to the peace concluded between the Vizier Sujah Dowlah and the Rohillas, by which it was stipulated that the Rohillas fhould pay to the Vizier a certain fum ?— Answer, Yes. Whether he did not confider the Company bound by fuch subscription to guarantee that peace ?-To this question Mr. Nichols objected. The witness withdrew. Mr. Nichols alledged, that as he fat in that Houfe as a Judge, he confidered the quel tion not only irrelevant but unfair, inafmuch as it went to matter of opinion instead of matter of fact; for that reafon, he confider. ed it to be his duty to refift the queftion.

Mr. Burke contended, that many circumftances connected with an enquiry like the prefent, muft, of neceffity, be explained by the opinions of the witneffes; for inftance, fuppofe a General was asked his opinion as to the mode of attack-of defence, &c. &c.

The Attorney and Solicitor General both infifted that matters of opinion did not fquare with the form which the law pres fcribed upon the folemn proceedings of au important trial.

Mr. Burke reminded the learned Gentlemen, that the prefent proceeding did not partake of the nature of a trial; that was referved for the Houfe of Lords: it was only an enquiry into the conduct of Mr. Haftings, whereon to ground an impeachment; therefore, not only the prefent, but any similar, queftions were perfectly relevant. House coincided with Mr. Burke.

[ocr errors]

The

« PreviousContinue »