So far as may be collected from the evidence of the Company’s records, Mr. Barwell’s assertions do not appear well supported; but even if they were more plausible, your Committee apprehend that he could not be discharged from his solemn recorded promise to abide by the judgment of the Court of Directors.  Their judgment was declared by their resolution to prosecute, which it depended upon himself to satisfy by making good his engagement.  To excuse his not complying with the Company’s claims, he says, “that his compliance would be urged as a confession of delinquency, and to proceed from conviction of his having usurped on the rights of the Company.”  Considerations of this nature might properly have induced Mr. Barwell to stand upon his right in the first instance, “and to appeal” (to use his own words) “to the laws of his country, in order to vindicate his fame.”  But his performance could not have more weight to infer delinquency than his promise.  Your Committee think his observation comes too late.

If he had stood a trial, when he first acknowledged the facts, and submitted himself to the judgment of the Court of Directors, the suit would have been carried on under the direction of General Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Mr. Francis; whereas in the year 1779 his influence at the board gave him the conduct of it himself.  In an interval of four years it may be presumed that great alterations might have happened in the state of the evidence against him.

In the subsequent proceedings of the Governor-General and Council the House will find that Mr. Barwell complained that his instances for carrying on the prosecution were ineffectual, owing to the legal difficulties and delays urged by the Company’s law officers, which your Committee do not find have yet been removed.  As far as the latest advices reach, no progress appears to have been made in the business.  In July, 1782, the Court of Directors found it necessary to order an account of all suits against Europeans depending in the Supreme Court of Judicature to be transmitted to them, and that no time should be lost in bringing them to a determination.

SALTPETRE.

The next article of direct monopoly subservient to the Company’s export is saltpetre.  This, as well as opium, is far the greater part the produce of the province of Bahar.  The difference between the management and destination of the two articles has been this.  Until the year 1782, the opium has been sold in the country, and the produce of the sale laid out in country merchandise for the Company’s export.  A great part of the saltpetre is sent out in kind, and never has contributed to the interior circulation and commerce of Bengal.  It is managed by agency on the Company’s account.  The price paid to the manufacturer is invariable.  Some of the larger undertakers receive advances to enable them to prosecute their work; but as they are