LIX.  That, instead of the said support or instruction, he, the said Hastings, did countenance, or more probably cause or direct, a representation to be made to him by the acting minister of the Nabob of Oude, complaining grievously of the proceedings of the Resident aforesaid, as usurpations on the Nabob’s authority and indignities on his person.  And although he, the said Hastings, did instruct the Resident, Bristow, to inform the said Hyder Beg Khan that he would not receive from the Nabob, as his, letters directed by the spirit of opposition, but should consider every such attempt as his, the minister’s, as an insult on our government, yet he did receive as his the Nabob’s own letters, and as written from the impressions on his own mind, and as the suggestions of his own judgment, letters to the same effect as those written by the minister, although he had declared upon record that the said “Nabob was a mere cipher in his, the said minister’s, hands,” and “that he had dared to use both the Nabob’s name, and even his seal, affixed to letters either directed to the Nabob or written as from him without his knowledge,” and although he did assert or record as aforesaid, that, in a letter which he had lately received from the Nabob, the minister had the presumption to make the Nabob declare that which was true to be false, and that “his making use of the Nabob in such a manner did show how thin the veil was by which he covered his own acts, and that such artifices would only tend to make them the more criminal from the falsehood and duplicity with which they were associated.”

LX.  That the said Hastings did act upon the letters pretended to be written by the Nabob, as well as on those actually written by the minister, without previously communicating the matter of the said complaint to the said Resident, and did give credit to the same, and coming, as aforesaid, from a person by himself, the said Hastings, charged with artifice, falsehood, and duplicity, and with abusing to his own evil purposes the name and seal of his master without his knowledge, and without any previous inquiry into the facts and circumstances; and did thereon ground an accusation against the said Resident, Bristow, before the board at Calcutta, in which he did represent the conduct of the said Bristow, in attempting to limit the household expenses of the Nabob, as an indignity “which no man living, however mean his rank in life, or dependent his condition in it, would permit to be exercised by any other, but with the want or forfeiture of every manly principle.”  And he did further accuse the said Bristow for that, in his proceedings in the regulation of the Nabob’s household, “he should receive to himself, or Mr. Cowper for him, or a treasurer for both, (for the arrangement has never been well defined,) the money assigned for the support of the Nabob’s household,—­issue it as he pleased, not to the Nabob, but to the menial