In contradiction, then, to this charge of oppression and of an attempt to ruin his fortune, your Lordships will see that at the time when he made this charge he had not been, in fact, nor was for a long time after, one shilling out of pocket.  But some other person had become security to his attorney for him.  What, then, are we to think of these men of business, of these friends of Mr. Hastings, who, when he is possessed of nothing, are contented to become responsible for thirty thousand pounds, (was it thirty thousand pounds out of the bullock contracts?)—­responsible, I say, for this sum, in order to maintain this suit previous to its actual commencement, and who consequently must be so engaged for every article of expense that has followed from that time to this?

Thus much we have thought it necessary to say upon this part of the recriminatory charge of delay.  With respect to the delay in general, we are at present under an account to our constituents upon that subject.  To them we shall give it.  We shall not give any further account of it to your Lordships.  The means belong to us as well as to you of removing these charges.  Your Lordships may inquire upon oath, as we have done in our committee, into all the circumstances of these allegations.  I hope your Lordships will do so, and will give the Commons an opportunity of attending and assisting at this most momentous and important inquiry.

* * * * *

The next recriminatory charge made upon us by the prisoner is, that, merely to throw an odium upon him, we have brought forward a great deal of irrelevant matter, which could not be proved regularly in the course of examination at your bar, and particularly in the opening speech, which I had the honor of making on the subject.

Your Lordships know very well that we stated in our charge that great abuses had prevailed in India, that the Company had entered into covenants with their servants respecting those abuses, that an act of Parliament was made to prevent their recurrence, and that Mr. Hastings still continued in their practice.  Now, my Lords, having stated this, nothing could be more regular, more proper, and more pertinent, than for us to justify both the covenants required by the Company and the act made to prevent the abuses which existed in India.  We therefore went through those abuses; we stated them, and were ready to prove every material word and article in them.  Whether they were personally relevant or irrelevant to the prisoner we cared nothing.  We were to make out from the records of the House (which records I can produce, whenever I am called upon for them) all these articles of abuse and grievance; and we have stated these abuses as the grounds of the Company’s provisional covenants with its servants, and of the act of Parliament.  We have stated them under two heads, violence and corruption:  for these crimes will be found, my Lords, in almost every transaction with the native powers; and the