attempt has been made to pursue it.  Here you find him corrupt, and you find, in consequence of that corruption, that he screens the whole body of corruption in India, and states an absolute despair of any possibility, by any art or address, of putting an end to it.  Nay, he tells you, that, if corruption did not exist, if it was not connived at, that the India Company could not exist.  Whether that be a truth or not I cannot tell; but this I know, that it is the most horrible picture that ever was made of any country.  It might be said that these were excuses for omissions,—­sins of omission he calls them.  I will show that they were systematic, that Mr. Hastings did uniformly profess that he would connive at abuses, and contend that abuses ought to be connived at.  When the whole mystery of the iniquity, in which he himself was deeply concerned, came to light,—­when it appeared that all the Company’s orders were contravened,—­that contracts were given directly contrary to their orders, and upon principles subversive of their government, leading to all manner of oppression and ruin to the country,—­what was Mr. Hastings’s answer?  “I must here remark, that the majority ...  I had not the power of establishing it."[5] Then he goes on and states other cases of corruption, at every one of which he winks.  Here he states another reason for his connivance.  “Suppose again,” (for he puts another supposition, and these suppositions are not hypotheses laid down for argument, but real facts then existing before the Council examining into grievances,)—­“suppose again, that any person had benefited himself ... unprofitable discussion."[6]

Here is a direct avowal of his refusing to examine into the conduct of persons in the Council, even in the highest departments of government, and the best paid, for fear he should dissatisfy them, and should lose their votes, by discovering those peculations and corruptions, though he perfectly knew them.  Was there ever, since the world began, any man who would dare to avow such sentiments, until driven to the wall?  If he could show that he himself abhorred bribes, and kept at a distance from them, then he might say, “I connive at the bribes of others”; but when he acknowledges that he takes bribes, how can you doubt that he buys a corrupt confederacy, and puts an end to any hope through him of reformation of the abuses at Bengal?  But your Lordships will see that he not only connived at abuse, but patronized it and supported it for his own political purposes; since he here confesses, that, if inquiry into it created him ill-humor, and produced him an opposition in Council, he sacrificed it to the power of the Company, and the constitution of their government.  Did he so?  The Company ordered him to prosecute those people, and their constitution required that they should be prosecuted.  “No,” says Mr. Hastings, “the conniving at it procures a majority of votes.”  The very thing that he bought was not worth half the price he paid for it.  He was