the honour of the Houfe, to fuffer the witneffes, whom they had themselves ordered to attend, to be called to the bar and examined, and therefore he once more defired that Captain Leonard Jaques be called to the bar.

The Mafter The Master of the Rolls expreffed his concern and aftoof the Rolls nifhment that the right honourable gentleman fhould venture, without a fair foundation, to infinuate, that he, and others of his profeffion, had been brought down upon that day for the purpose of preventing the witneffes from being examined; fo far from it, he moft folemnly declared, that he had not communicated or confulted with any individual upon the fubject; and he came down, he protefted, expecting to have heard the charges intended to be brought in against Mr. Haftings, ftated by the right honourable gentleman. When the motion was made for calling Captain Jaques to the bar, he caft about in his own mind to difcover, whether that mode of proceeding was fair and juft to the fuppofed delinquent, and to afk himself how far it approached any fort of procefs of criminal jurifdiction within his knowledge, because he felt the great magnitude and importance of the business, and was fully convinced that the House could not proceed with too much caution. He quoted Sir Michael Fofter, in his Treatife on the Crown Law, in which, fpeaking of parliamentary profecution, Sir Michael fays, it is the duty of the Houfe of Commons to be more peculiarly guarded than any other, because of their extraordinary feverity, all the people of England being virtually the profecutors of one` man. In the prefent cafe, practices had been reforted to, the most scandalous and the most unjuft. Pamphlets, artfully calculated to prejudice thofe who were to fit in judgement on the impeachment (should any go to the Lords) had been fent under cover to noble Lords, with a view to inflame their paffions and mislead their judgements; in like manner, newspapers, crammed with articles calcu lated to answer the fame end, had been induftrioufly circulated: fuch conduct was equally indecent and unjuft, and confequently unworthy thofe concerned. On fuch occafions, it had been ufual for the law courts feverely to pue nifh the offenders, holding it a daring contempt to publifh any thing whatever while a criminal caufe was pending.The particular publication which he happened to take in, and which he read with great pleafure, contained a ftate of the cafe upon the present fubject very ingeniouly put, but in the most unfair way poffible; and he had feen a pamphlet, fent under cover anonimoufly to a noble Lord, whofe name if it were neceffary he would mention, which was clearly published for the fame iniquitous purpofe; whoever was

guilty of thefe practices he should be glad to fee feverely punifhed. He hoped and believed none of the accusers of Mr. Haftings (to whom he declared he was a profound franger) either countenanced or encouraged any fuch pra

tices.

Mr. Fox faid, that his right honourable friend was per- Mr. Foxr fectly right in wishing to have his witneffes' parole evidence immediately taken. He reminded the Committee, that his right honourable friend had not only opened fome general grounds to the House at the commencement of the business, but on moving for each fpecific paper, had ftated the particular facts, to prove which the papers were called for. The Committee knew enough therefore of the general grounds of the charge to be laid in future, to fee the neceffity of calling for the witneffes at that time.

It was his right honourable friend's intention to keep each article of charge as separate and distinct as poffible. There was one fpecies of criminality however, fo implicated and involved in all of them, that it would be difficult (if not utterly impoffible) to feparate it; and that was, the uniform and invariable neglect on the part of Mr. Haftings to fend home and communicate full and complete information of what paffed in India, to the Directors: that pervaded every charge, and was to be met with at every place, and mixed in every tranfaction. The matter in conteft was merely a queftion as to the form of their proceedings, rather than any difference of opinion upon other points.

The Speaker (Mr. Cornwall) rofe, in order to endeavour The Spea to settle the form of their proceedings, which appeared to ker. him extremely effential and inportant to be adjusted before they went farther, fince an error in that refpect might eftablish a very improper precedent. The better to bring all the circumstances of the cafe before the Committee, that they might fee precifely how they stood, Mr. Cornwall recapitulated every fingle ftep which had been taken, from the commencement of the business to that hour, and stated Mr. Burke's declarations at the outfet, and at different times, as to the course of proceeding which he meant to purfue. He defcribed the modes which ftruck his mind as the only poffible modes to be adopted and followed intelligibly and effectually; the refult was, that the whole depended on the question, whether that Committee was a Committee of inquiry, or a Committee appointed to receive a charge or certain refolutions tantamount to a charge? Mr. Cornwall declared, that it forcibly ftruck him, that the Committee was not a Committee of inquiry, but merely a Committee to receive a charge; and that in ftating the charge, the right

honour

Mr. Fox.

The Solici

honourable gentleman would attach to it, or to the refolutions which he should propofe, criminality of a certain coJour or quality it would then remain to be feen, whether the charge or refolutions were grounded in facts, and whether the criminal colour and quality attached really belonged to thofe facts. That being his opinion, he did not think the Committee could receive oral evidence; they were not directed fo to do; and if it had been moved, that the written papers fhould be read, upon the fame principle that he was against receiving oral evidence, he fhould have objected to the reading a fingle line of the papers.

Mr. Fox admitted, that the right honourable gentleman who spoke laft had, with a correct memory, recapitulated every thing which paffed in the Houfe in the courfe of the various debates and converfations which had taken place on the fubject, but he could by no means agree with the latter part of the right honourable gentleman's fpeech: he knew not that any Committee was formally entitled a Committee of Inquiry; but nevertheless he was satisfied that the bufinefs of the Committee was, to inquire into the grounds of evidence, and examine the witneffes; elfe why had the House referred the papers to them, and ordered the witneffes to attend them? He concurred in the opinion, that on this cafe the written and the parole evidence were the fame, and to be treated in the fame manner; but the manner of ftating and fupporting the feveral charges, could, he conceived, only be by felecting the facts from the evidence before the Houfe, and referring to the papers from which they were selected.

The Solicitor General faid, that he fully expected to have tor General heard the charge ftated that day by the right honourable gentleman, and with that expectation he came down to the House. The proper and ftrictly formal mode of proceeding was, by ftating the charge firft, and annexing additional references to it afterwards: by these means the Coinmittee would be enabled to examine witneffes, knowing to what their evidence was to be applied. The voting an impeachment was immediately analogous to the finding of a grand jury, and a great part of the charge was not impeachable inatter. The word evidence, of itfelf, implied a charge, fince every body knew it fignified the grounds of making a charge evident: and no man who regarded his reputation would like to have a bill of indictment found against him, although he might afterwards be acquitted by the petty jury. The liberal and judicious would certainly not think the worfe of him, but the bulk of mankind would be ftrongly prejudiced; and where one fet of men on their oaths had

fup

fuppofed that he might be guilty, although another had decided that he was innocent, ftill an unfeafonable impreffion would remain. Mr. Haftings had a great reputation at fake, and as every man was prefumed innocent till he was proved guilty, it behoved that Houfe, in juftice and in candor, to avoid fixing any thing like a ftigma of guilt before they knew that it was merited.

Mr. Burke warned the House against doing any thing fo Mr. Burk incongruous as to call their own acts in question: what they were now urged to do, was neither more nor less than to reprobate their former proceedings. As to the idea, that the charge ought to be ftated firft inftead of the evidence, out of which it would naturally arife, it reminded him of a parcel of philofophers, who were difputing among themfelves about the reason why a flock of fheep ran fafter when the wolf came than at any other timewhen a poor fimple fellow like himself faid, "But before "you enter deep into your controverfy, would it not be "wife to afcertain the fact, and to fee whether sheep do "run fafter when the wolf comes than at any other "time?"

fon.

Mr. Jenkinjon denied that the gentlemen of the law had Mr.Jenkin either been brought down to oppofe the motion, or that what they had faid by any means tended to defire the House to reprobate its former proceedings.

Mr. Ellis contended that the practice of that Houfe had Mr. Ellis.. been different from what had been ftated. He cited the parliamentary proceeding against Sir Robert Walpole, when an inquiry into his whole twenty years adminiftration was the object proposed.

The Lord Advocate faid, that he felt it neceffary to clear The Lord himfelf from the unmerited infinuation of having been Advocate. brought down to oppofe the examination of witneffes, declaring that he really had imagined their bufinefs that day would have been to have heard the charges of the right honourable gentleman, that they might know what they were about, and not proceed any farther in the dark. He never heard of an inquifition after guilt, until it was known that guilt exifted. There was no fuch practice in any part of Great Britain. Suppofing that a man was found murdered; in fuch a cafe the Coroner held his inquifition in order to find who had commited the crime, for the crime was notorious, but the crime should firft be afcertained, and the party accufed of it, and the witneffes examined to prove the guilt; but never could it be just to bring witneffes to be examined before a charge was made, much lefs before guilt was proved, or a crime was known to have been perpetrated. In the cafe of Mr. Haftings, what was the guilt? Was India VOL. XX

loft?

Mr. Sheri

dan.

Mr. Burke.

loft? Were our dominions there diminished? Were they not rather enlarged? Had fuch a proceeding been instituted in the cafe of the American war? Then the guilt appeared prima facie from the lofs of thirteen provinces, and from the capture of a whole army, and other obvious mifcarriages On the contrary, in the Eaft, there was the strongest reafon at firft fight to applaud rather than to condemn the government of India, from the whole of our poffeffions in that quarter being preserved, and from the prefent flourishing itate of them.

Mr. Sheridan contended that the Houfe were not then fitting as judges, nor did Mr. Haftings want an advocate ; neither was the lofs of thirteen provinces, nor of a whole army at all in point to the fubject under confideration; but, he owned, that he was a good deal surprised at hearing the learned Lord fevere on the noble Earl, (Earl Cornwallis) for when he talked of the lofs of an army, he prefumed the learned Lord must have meant him; and furely the noble Earl was, at this time, a favourite with Administration! Their granting to him the poft of Governor General proved clearly that his fins were forgiven him, and his pardon figned. If the Committee were rightly to adhere to forms, they had it not in their power to receive any charge, notwithstanding the charge had been called for so often. He defired that the order of the day might be minutely and diftinctly read, which being done, he contended that the order clearly confined them to the examination of the written, and to the receipt of the parole evidence; and that the natural duty of the Committee would be to make a Report, out of which Report the House would have to draw and extract the charge. If therefore the arguments of the gentlemen on the other fide of the House were to prevail, the Report muft certainly be to this purport: "Your Committee have not examined "the evidence, which you referred to us, and directed us "to investigate; but we report the charge, which you did "not direct us to receive."

Mr. Burke propofed an amendment, expreffing more fully the object of calling Captain Jaques to the bar, by adding in words, that he was to be examined touching the letter fent by him to Mr. Nathaniel Middleton and to Jofeph Richards, Efq. which gave an account of the-confining the King of Oude's mother and grandmother, and fettering others of the royal family for the purpose of extorting money from them. Mr. Burke ridiculed the Lord Advocate's idea, that because India was not utterly loft and gone, the conduct of the government, and the perfon who held it must be laudable. Such an argument was abfurd in the extreme, fince the tendency of it went the length of afferting, that