I believe, after this exposure of facts, no man can entertain a doubt of the collusion of ministers with the corrupt interest of the delinquents in India.  Whenever those in authority provide for the interest of any person, on the real, but concealed state of his affairs, without regard to his avowed, public, and ostensible pretences, it must be presumed that they are in confederacy with him, because they act for him on the same fraudulent principles on which he acts for himself.  It is plain that the ministers were fully apprised of Benfield’s real situation, which he had used means to conceal, whilst concealment answered his purposes.  They were, or the person on whom they relied was, of the cabinet council of Benfield, in the very depth of all his mysteries.  An honest magistrate compels men to abide by one story.  An equitable judge would not hear of the claim of a man who had himself thought proper to renounce it.  With such a judge his shuffling and prevarication would have damned his claims; such a judge never would have known, but in order to animadvert upon, proceedings of that character.

I have thus laid before you, Mr. Speaker, I think with sufficient clearness, the connection of the ministers with Mr. Atkinson at the general election; I have laid open to you the connection of Atkinson with Benfield; I have shown Benfield’s employment of his wealth in creating a Parliamentary interest to procure a ministerial protection; I have set before your eyes his large concern in the debt, his practices to hide that concern from the public eye, and the liberal protection which he has received from the minister.  If this chain of circumstances does not lead you necessarily to conclude that the minister has paid to the avarice of Benfield the services done by Benfield’s connections to his ambition, I do not know anything short of the confession of the party that can persuade you of his guilt.  Clandestine and collusive practice can only be traced by combination and comparison of circumstances.  To reject such combination and comparison is to reject the only means of detecting fraud; it is, indeed, to give it a patent and free license to cheat with impunity.

I confine myself to the connection of ministers, mediately or immediately, with only two persons concerned in this debt.  How many others, who support their power and greatness within and without doors, are concerned originally, or by transfers of these debts, must be left to general opinion.  I refer to the reports of the Select Committee for the proceedings of some of the agents in these affairs, and their attempts, at least, to furnish ministers with the means of buying General Courts, and even whole Parliaments, in the gross.[65]