This person, who, in one of those sales of which I have already given you some account in the history of the last period of the revolutions of Bengal, had been, or thought he had been, cheated of his money, had made some discoveries, and been guilty of that great irremissible sin in India, the disclosure of peculation.  He afterwards came with a second disclosure, and was likely to have odium enough upon the occasion.  He directly charged Mr. Hastings with the receipt of bribes, amounting together to about 40,000_l._ sterling, given by himself, on his own account and that of Munny Begum.  The charge was accompanied with every particular which could facilitate proof or detection,—­time, place, persons, species, to whom paid, by whom received.  Here was a fair opportunity for Mr. Hastings at once to defeat the malice of his enemies and to clear his character to the world.  His course was different.  He railed much at the accuser, but did not attempt to refute the accusation.  He refuses to permit the inquiry to go on, attempts to dissolve the Council, commands his banian not to attend.  The Council, however, goes on, examines to the bottom, and resolves that the charge was proved, and that the money ought to go to the Company.  Mr. Hastings then broke up the Council,—­I will not say whether legally or illegally.  The Company’s law counsel thought he might legally do it; but he corruptly did it, and left mankind no room to judge but that it was done for the screening of his own guilt:  for a man may use a legal power corruptly, and for the most shameful and detestable purposes.  And thus matters continued, till he commenced a criminal prosecution against this man,—­this man whom he dared not meet as a defendant.

Mr. Hastings, instead of answering the charge, attacks the accuser.  Instead of meeting the man in front, he endeavored to go round, to come upon his flanks and rear, but never to meet him in the face, upon the ground of his accusation, as he was bound by the express authority of law and the express injunctions of the Directors to do.  If the bribery is not admitted on the evidence of Nundcomar, yet his suppressing it is a crime, a violation of the orders of the Court of Directors.  He disobeyed those instructions; and if it be only for disobedience, for rebellion against his masters, (putting the corrupt motive out of the question,) I charge him for this disobedience, and especially on account of the principles upon which he proceeded in it.

Then he took another step:  he accused Nundcomar of a conspiracy,—­which was a way he then and ever since has used, whenever means were taken to detect any of his own iniquities.

And here it becomes necessary to mention another circumstance of history:  that the legislature, not trusting entirely to the Governor-General and Council, had sent out a court of justice to be a counter security against these corruptions, and to detect and punish any such misdemeanors as might appear.  And this court I take for granted has done great services.