A month had been allowed by proclamation for the submission of all persons who had been in rebellion, which submission was to entitle them to indemnity.  But, my Lords, he endeavored to break the public faith with these women, by inciting the soldiers to make no capitulation with them, and thus depriving them of the benefit of the proclamation, by preventing their voluntary surrender.

     [Mr. Burke here read the proclamation.]

From the date of this proclamation it appears that the surrender of the fort was clearly within the time given to those who had been guilty of the most atrocious acts of rebellion to repair to their homes and enjoy an indemnity.  These women had never quitted their homes, nor had they been charged with rebellion, and yet they were cruelly excluded from the general indemnity; and after the army had taken unconditional possession of the fort, they were turned out of it, and ordered to the quarters of the commanding officer, Major Popham.  This officer had received from Mr. Hastings a power to rob them, a power to plunder them, a power to distribute the plunder, but no power to give them any allowance, nor any authority even to receive them.

In this disgraceful affair the soldiers showed a generosity which Mr. Hastings neither showed nor would have suffered, if he could have prevented it.  They agreed amongst themselves to give to these women three lacs of rupees, and some trifle more; and the rest was divided as a prey among the army.  The sum found in the fort was about 238,000_l._, not the smallest part of which was in any way proved to be Cheyt Sing’s property, or the property of any person but the unfortunate women who were found in the possession of it.

The plunder of the fort being thus given to the soldiers, what does Mr. Hastings next do?  He is astonished and stupefied to find so much unprofitable violence, so much tyranny, and so little pecuniary advantage,—­so much bloodshed, without any profit to the Company.  He therefore breaks his faith with the soldiers; declares, that, having no right to the money, they must refund it to the Company; and on their refusal, he instituted a suit against them.  With respect to the three lacs of rupees, or 30,000_l._, which was to be given to these women, have we a scrap of paper to prove its payment? is there a single receipt or voucher to verify their having received one sixpence of it?  I am rather inclined to think that they did receive it, or some part of it; but I don’t know a greater crime in public officers than to have no kind of vouchers for the disposal of any large sums of money which pass through their hands:  but this, my Lords, is the great vice of Mr. Hastings’s government.