“Are you acquainted with the situation of the zemindary of Baharbund?—­It lies to the eastward of Dinagepore and Rungpore.  I was stationed in that neighborhood.—­To whom did it originally belong?—­I believe, to the zemindary of Radshi, belonging to Ranny Bhowanny.—­For what reason was it taken from the Ranny of Radshi and given to Cantoo Baboo?—­I do not exactly recollect:  I believe, on some plea of incapacity or insufficiency in her to manage it, or some pretended decline in the revenue, owing to mismanagement.—­On what terms was it granted to Cantoo Baboo or his son?—­I believe it was a grant in perpetuity, at the revenue of Rupees 82,000 or 83,000 per annum.—­What amount did he collect from the country?—­I cannot tell.  The year I was in that neighborhood, the settlement with his under-tenants was something above 3,53,000 rupees.  The inhabitants of the country objected to it.  They assembled in a body of about five thousand, and were proceeding to Calcutta to make known their grievances to the Committee of Revenue.  They were stopped at Cossimbazar by Noor Sing Baboo, the brother of Cantoo Baboo, and there the matter was compromised,—­in what manner I cannot say.”

Your Lordships see, Mr. Hastings’s banian got this zemindary belonging to this venerable lady; unable to protect herself; that it was granted to him without right, title, or purchase.  To show you that Mr. Hastings had been in a constant course of such proceeding, here is a petition from a person called ——­ for some favor from government which it is not necessary now to state.  In order to make good his claim, he states what nobody denied, but which is universally known in fact.  Says he, “I have never entertained any such intention or idea,” that is, of seizing upon other people’s zemindaries; “neither am I at all desirous of acquiring any other person’s zemindary in this country,” &c....

    [The document read here is wanting, ending] “as several Calcutta
    banians have done,” &c.

He states it as a kind of constant practice, by which the country had been robbed under Mr. Hastings, known and acknowledged to be so, to seize upon the inheritance of the widow and the fatherless.  In this manner did Gunga Govind Sing govern himself, upon the direct precedent of Cantoo Baboo, the banian of Mr. Hastings; and this other instrument of his in like manner calls upon government for favor of some kind or other, upon the same principle and the same precedent.

Your Lordships now see how necessary it was to say something about arbitrary power.  For, first, the wicked people of that country (Mr. Hastings’s instruments, I mean) pretend right, title, purchase, grant; and when their frauds in all these legal means are discovered, then they fly off, and have recourse to arbitrary power, and say, “It is true I can make out no right, title, grant, or purchase; the parties are minors; I am bound to take care of their right:  but you have arbitrary power; you have exercised it upon other occasions; exercise it upon this; give me the rights of other people.”  This was the last act, and I hope will be the last act, of Mr. Hastings’s wicked power, done by the wickedest man in favor of the wickedest man, and by the wickedest means, which failed upon his own testimony.