orders which have so much as that tendency, puts them in possession of a complete independence, an independence including a despotic authority over the subordinates and the country.  The very means taken by the Directors for enforcing their authority becomes, on this principle, a cause of further disobedience.  It is observable, that their principles of disobedience do not refer to any local consideration, overlooked by the Directors, which might supersede their orders, or to any change of circumstances, which might render another course advisable, or even perhaps necessary,—­but it relates solely to their own interior feelings in matters relative to themselves, and their opinion of their own dignity and reputation.  It is plain that they have wholly forgotten who they are, and what the nature of their office is.  Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell are servants of the Company, and as such, by the duty inherent in that relation, as well as by their special covenants, were obliged to yield obedience to the orders of their masters.  They have, as far as they were able, cancelled all the bonds of this relation, and all the sanctions of these covenants.

But in thus throwing off the authority of the Court of Directors, Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell have thrown off the authority of the whole legislative power of Great Britain; for, by the Regulating Act of the thirteenth of his Majesty, they are expressly “directed and required to pay due obedience to all such orders as they shall receive from the Court of Directors of the said United Company.”  Such is the declaration of the law.  But Mr. Barwell declares that he declines obedience to any orders which he shall interpret to be indignities on a Governor-General.  To the clear injunctions of the legislature Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell have thought proper to oppose their pretended reputation and dignity; as if the chief honor of public ministers in every situation was not to yield a cheerful obedience to the laws of their country.  Your Committee, to render evident to this House the general nature and tendency of this pretended dignity, and to illustrate the real principles upon which they appear to have acted, think it necessary to make observations on three or four of the cases, already reported, of marked disobedience to particular and special orders, on one of which the above extraordinary doctrine was maintained.

These are the cases of Mr. Fowke, Mr. Bristow, and Mahomed Reza Khan.  In a few weeks after the death of Colonel Monson, Mr. Hastings having obtained a majority in Council by his casting vote, Mr. Fowke and Mr. Bristow were called from their respective offices of Residents at Benares and Oude, places which have become the scenes of other extraordinary operations under the conduct of Mr. Hastings in person.  For the recall of Mr. Bristow no reason was assigned.  The reason assigned for the proceeding with regard to Mr. Fowke was, that “the purposes for which he was appointed were then fully accomplished.”