this house, in confequence of thefe reports, declared it to be the duty of the directors to remove from their stations, and recal to Great Britain, "because they had acted in a manner repugnant to the "honour and policy of this nation, and thereby brought great calamities on India, and enormous expences on "the Eaft-India company."

Here was no attempt on the charter. Here was no queftion of their privileges. To vindicate their own honour, to fupport their own interests, to enforce obedience to their own orders; these were the fole object of the monitory refolution of this houfe. But as foon as the general court could affemble, they affembled to demonftrate who they really were. Regardless of the proceedings of this houfe, they ordered the directors not to carry into effect any refolution they might come to for the removal of Mr. Haftings and Mr. Hornby. The directors, ftill retaining fome fhadow of respect to this house, inftituted an inquiry themselves, which continued from June to October; and after an attentive perufal and full confideration of papers, refolved to take steps for removing the perfons who had been the objects of our refolution; but not without a violent ftruggle againft evidence. Seven directors went fo far as to enter a proteft against the vote of their court. Upon this the general court takes the alarm; it re-affembles; it orders the directors to refcind their refolution, that is,

not

1

not to recal Mr. Haftings and Mr. Hornby, and to defpife the refolution of the house of commons. Without fo much as the pretence of looking into a single paper, without the formality of inftituting any committee of inquiry, they fuperfeded all the labours of their own directors, and of this house. It will naturally occur to afk, how it was poffible that they fhould not attempt fome fort of examination into facts, as a colour for their refiftance to a publick authority, proceeding fo very deliberately; and exerted, apparently at least, in favour of their own? The answer, and the only answer which can be given, is, that they were afraid that their true relation fhould be mistaken. They were afraid that their patrons and mafters in India fhould attribute their fupport of them to an opinion of their caufe, and not to an attachment to their power. They were afraid it should be fufpected, that they did not mean blindly to support them in the ufe they made of that power. They determined to fhew that they at least were fet against reformation; that they were firmly refolved to bring the territories, the trade, and the ftock of the company, to ruin, rather than be wanting in fidelity to their nominal fervants and real mafters, in the ways they took to their private fortunes.

L

Even fince the beginning of this feffion, the fame act of audacity was repeated, with the fame, circumftances

I

circumftances of contempt of all the decorum of inquiry on their part, and of all the proceedings of this houfe. They again made it a request to their favourite, and your culprit, to keep his poft; and thanked and applauded him, without calling for a paper which could afford light into the merit or demerit of the tranfaction, and without giving themselves a moment's time to confider, or even to understand the articles of the Maratta peace. The fact is, that for a long time there was a ftruggle, a faint one indeed, between the company and their fervants. But it is a ftruggle no longer. For fome time the fuperiority has been decided. The interefts abroad are become the fettled preponderating weight both in the court of proprietors, and the court of directors. Even the attempt you have made to inquire into their practices and to reform abuses, has raised and piqued them to a far more regular and steady support. The company has made a common caufe, and identified themselves, with the deftroyers of India. They have taken on themselves all that mafs of enormity; they are supporting what you have réprobated; thofe you condemn they applaud; those you order home to anfwer for their conduct, they requeft to ftay, and thereby encourage to proceed in their practices. Thus the fervants of the EaftIndia company triumph, and the reprefentatives of the people of Great Britain are defeated.

I there

I therefore conclude, what you all conclude, that this body, being totally perverted from the purposes of its inftitution, is utterly incorrigible; and because they are incorrigible, both in conduct and conftitution, power ought to be taken out of their hands; just on the fame principles on which have been made all the juft changes and revolutions of government that have taken place fince the beginning of the world.

I will now fay a few words to the general principle of the plan which is fet up against that of my right honourable friend. It is to re-commit the government of India to the court of directors. Thofe who would commit the reformation of India to the destroyers of it, are the enemies to that reformation. They would make a distinction between directors and proprietors, which, in the prefent ftate of things, does not, cannot exist. But a right honourable gentleman fays, he would keep the prefent government of India in the court of directors; and would, to curb them, provide falutary regulations;-wonderful! That is, he would appoint the old offenders to correct the old offences; and he would render the vicious and the foolish wife and virtuous, by falutary regulations. He would appoint the wolf as guardian of the fheep; but he has invented a curious muzzle, by which this protecting wolf fhall not be able to open his jaws above an inch or two at the utmoft.

Thus

Thus his work is finished. But I tell the right honourable gentleman, that controuled depravity is not innocence; and that it is not the labour of de linquency in chains, that will correct abuses. Will thefe gentlemen of the direction animadvert

the partners of their own guilt? Never did a fe rious plan of amending of any old tyrannical eftablishment propose the authors and abettors of the abuses as the reformers of them. If the undone people of India fee, their old oppreffors, in, con. firmed power, even by the reformation, they will expect nothing but what they will certainly feel, a continuance, or rather an aggravation, of all their former fufferings. They look to the feat of power, and to the perfons who fill it; and they defpife thofe gentlemen's regulations as much as the gen. tlemen do who talk of them.

しょ

;

But there is a cure for every thing. Take away, fay they, the court of proprietors, and the court of directors will do their duty. Yes; as they have done it hitherto. That the evils in India have folely arifen from the court of proprietors, is grofsly falfe. In many of them, the directors were, heartily concurring, in moft of them, they were encouraging, and fometimes commanding; in all, they were conniving, oda tajoera hoV 95

But who are to choose this well-regulated and reforming court of directors? Why, the very proprietors who are excluded from all manage

ment,