1781.

BOOK V. that the Rajah, besides his tribute, and the annual contribution of five lacs of rupees, should be required to furnish to the Bengal Government such part of the cavalry entertained in his service, as he could spare: And the resident was instructed by the Governor-General to make a peremptory demand of 2,000. The Rajah represented that he had only 1,300 cavalry in his service, and that they were all employed in guarding the country, or in collecting the revenues. The Governor-General reduced his demand, first to 1,500, and at last to 1,000. The Rajah collected 500 horse, as he himself, and without contradiction, affirmed, and 500 matchlock men as a substitute for the remainder: He sent word to the Governor-General that this force was ready to receive his commands; but never obtained any answer.

A resolution to relieve the

acting from the Rajah.

The Governor-General had other views. He wanted money, and he was Company's ne- resolved that the plunder of the unhappy Rajah, whom he disliked, should be cessities by ex- the source from which it was to flow. "I was resolved," says the GovernorGeneral," to draw from his guilt the means of relief to the Company's distresses. In a word, I had determined to make him pay largely for his pardon, or to exact a severe vengeance for his past delinquency." The confession has the merit of frankness, be the other virtues belonging to it such as they may. The guilt, as it is called, consisted, exclusively, in a reluctance to submit to the imposition of a very heavy burthen, from which the Rajah considered that he ought to be free.

The Rajah was informed of the hostile designs which were entertained against him, and, in order to mitigate the fury of the storm, sent an offer to the Governor-General of twenty lacs of rupees for the public service. The offer was scornfully rejected. And a sum of not less than fifty lacs, was the peremptory demand. From the Governor-General's information we learn, that he was at this time offered a large sum of money for the dominions of the Rajah, by the Nabob of Oude; that he was resolved to extort the obedience of the Rajah; otherwise to reduce his forts, and seize the treasure which they were supposed to contain; or to conclude a bargain for his dominions with the Nabob Vizir.

It is necessary to be remarked, that Mr. Fowke, who had been replaced in the office of resident at Benares by the express command of the Court of Directors, the Governor-General removed about six months before his journey to Benares, on the sole pretence that "he thought the resident there should be a man of his own nomination and confidence;" though the Court of Directors had

*Governor-General's Narrative, K., ut supra.

1781.

decreed the contrary, and issued to that effect their most peremptory commands. CHAP. VII. It is also requisite to be stated, that though the Governor-General departed for Benares with the intention of inflicting a severe vengeance on the Rajah, a design which he communicated in trust to some of his confidential friends, he entered no intimation of this design in the consultations, or records of the Deliberative Council, but on the contrary a minute, importing nothing beyond an amicable and ordinary adjustment, and desiring powers for nothing but to make such arrangements, and perform such acts, for the improvement of the Zemindary "as he should think fit and consonant to the mutual engagements subsisting between the Company and the Rajah." The aptness of the expression consisted in its having sufficient laxity to stretch around all that the actor had in view, while its more obvious signification led not the mind of the hearer to any but ordinary transactions.

General ar

nares.

Upon the approach of the Governor-General to the boundary of the Rajah's The Governordominions, that Prince went out to meet him, and, to render the compliment rives at Bestill more respectful, with a retinue unusually great. Not contented with a mere interview of form, the Rajah pressed for a more confidential conversation. "He professed," says Mr. Hastings, "much concern to hear that I was displeased with him, and contrition for having given cause for it, assuring me that his Zemindary, and all that he possessed, were at my devotion; and he accompanied his words by an action, either strongly expressive of the agitation of his mind, or his desire to impress on mine a conviction of his sincerity-by laying his turban on my lap." Mr. Hastings, according to his own account, treated the declarations of the Rajah as unworthy of his regard, and dismissed him.

Mr. Hastings arrived in the capital of the Rajah on the 14th of August; earlier by some hours than the Rajah himself. The Rajah communicated his intention of waiting upon him in the evening. But the Governor-General sent his prohibition; and at the same time directed him to forbear his visits, till permission should be received. The resident was next morning sent to the Rajah with a paper of complaints and demands. The Rajah in reply transmitted, in the course of the day, a paper in which he endeavoured to make it appear that his conduct was not liable to so much blame as the Governor-General imputed; nor deserved the severity of treatment which was bestowed. The Governor- Puts the Rajah under an General, without any further communication, put him under arrest the following arrest. morning; and imprisoned him in his own house with a military guard.

This is the point, at which the reader should pause, to examine, by the rules of justice, the conduct of the parties; since to this time their actions were

Book V. the offspring of choice; afterwards, they became more the result of necessity on both sides.

1781. An examination of the

point.

Suppose the justice of the demand to have been ever so clear and certain; conduct of the suppose that the Rajah had procrastinated, and endeavoured to evade the payparties up to ment of his defined and established tribute, which on the contrary he always this particular paid with singular exactness; suppose that importunity on each occasion had been requisite, and the delay of a few months incurred; even in this case, where blame, if inability hindered not, might without dispute have been due, it will be acknowledged, that the behaviour of the Governor-General would have been harsh, precipitate, and cruel. Even the fines, and the soldiers, would have been too hastily and vindictively applied to an offence, so common in India, and to which any consequences of importance are so little attached. The arrest, which to a man of rank is the deepest disgrace and injury, would have been an excess of punishment to a very considerable degree beyond the line of justice and humanity. If so, how much must be supposed to be added to that excess, when it is considered that the demand itself was extraordinary, irregular, and liable to the imputation of injustice; that some even of Mr. Hastings' colleagues disputed the right of the Company to enforce any such demand; and that Mr. Hastings, though he declared that his opinion was in favour of the right, dared not to decide upon it, but in express terms left the question doubtful, and reserved the decision for his superiors?

Mr. Hastings imposes a heavy burthen upon a native Prince: His right, in point of law or justice, is a matter of doubt: The Prince shows reluctance to submit to what he very naturally regards as oppression; and by some little and ordinary artifices he endeavours to elude the demand: To this reluctance and these little artifices, Mr. Hastings attaches the name of guilt: Having sufficiently attached to them the name of guilt, he holds it requisite that guilt should meet with punishment: And as it is the dignity of the state against which the offence has been committed, the dignity of the state, which is infinite, requires that the punishment should be adequately severe. If this be justice, a way may be found for inflicting any punishment justly, at any time, upon any human being.

There are considerations, on the opposite side, which must not be forgotten. Mr. Hastings, in his present exigency, might naturally expect assistance from the Rajah. It was common for the tributary Princes of the country to be compelled to assist their superiors in war. And it is probable that Mr. Hastings counted upon that assistance, when, in 1775, the agreement with the Rajah was formed. It is, however, not a matter of doubt, that by the terms of that solemn com

1781.

pact, the Governor-General and his colleagues, whether they so intended or not, CHAP. VII. did surrender and renounce all right to make any demand upon the Rajah of such assistance, or of any emolument or service whatsoever beyond the amount of his annual tribute.

Mr. Hastings, in contest with his accusers, endeavoured to lay the burthen of his defence upon the duties which in India a dependant ruler owes to the authority on which he depends. But if these duties, whatever they may be, are solemnly remitted by him to whom they are due, and the right to exact them is formally given up, the obligation is destroyed, and becomes as if it never had existed. That the words of the grant to the Rajah Cheyte Sing barred every demand beyond that of his tribute, and by consequence that which was now made, Hastings no where directly controverts.* He meets not the argument,

* The form of the words was affirmative and negative; the first clause defining that which he was to pay; the latter clause excluding by express declaration whatever was not defined and specified in the former. Ambiguity could not more effectually be excluded. The first clause included his tribute, and nothing else; the latter negatived whatever was not in the first clause, that is, whatever was not his tribute. The words to which reference is always made, are the words of the resolution of the Council. It is true, that the words of the sunnud, which was afterwards actually granted, and which ought to have been exactly correspondent to the words of the resolution, were too indefinite to fix any thing whatsoever in favour of the Rajah. But this is one of the injuries which the Rajah sustained; and cannot be employed to justify the oppression which was grounded upon it: it is on the contrary a heinous fraud, for which the authors were justly accountable. And the words of the resolution ought to be the explanation and the standard of what is left undefined in the sunnud. It is remarkable, that there was a great deal of irregularity, and some suspicious circumstances, in the mode of making out the deeds, and performing the investment. The Rajah objected to the first forms. They were altered. Other forms were adopted. And in the charges against Mr. Hastings, voted by the House of Commons, it is stated, that neither the first set of deeds, nor the second set of deeds, were entered in the records, or transmitted to the Court of Directors. In fact, there is so much the appearance of improper design in these proceedings, that Mr. Burke scruples not to say, they "give, by that complicated, artificial, and fraudulent management, as well as by his (Mr. Hastings) omitting to record that material document, strong reason to presume that he did even then meditate to make some evil use of the deeds, which he thus withheld from the Company, and which he did afterwards in reality make, when he found means and opportunity to effect his evil purpose." The design was, however, probably, no worse than to leave himself a latitude of power with regard to the Rajah. But the indefiniteness of the sunnud very ill agreed with the solicitude expressed in Council by the Governor-General, in 1775, to exempt the Rajah from dependance, and all chance of encroachment on his power. It is also necessary to state, that Mr. Hastings avers he had no concern in making out the sunnuds, or omitting to record them; that these practical operations belonged to the Secretary of the Board, under the superintendence of the majority, of which at this time he VOL. II, 4 H

BOOK V. because it could not be answered; he endeavours to defeat it by other means; by hiding it from observation, while he sedulously directs the attention to dif ferent points.

1781.

We must also be allowed to examine the rights which the custom of India gave, to the Prince who received, over the Prince who afforded the tribute. Far were they, indeed, from being of such a nature, as Mr. Hastings, for the benefit of his own exculpation, affirmed. By whose construction? By the habitual construction, by the public acts, of Mr. Hastings himself. The East India Company were the dependants of the Emperor Shah Aulum, and paid him a tribute. Did the East India Company hold themselves bound to obey every demand which the Emperor might choose to make upon them for assistance in his wars? Did they not treat him as a person to whose commands, or most urgent supplications, not the smallest attention was necessary? Did they not even treat him as a person toward whom they had no occasion to fulfil even the most solemn engagements? Did they not, as soon as they pleased, refuse to pay him even his tribute for that part of his dominions which they continued to hold in his name? Did not their ally, the Nabob of Oude, in like manner depend upon the Emperor, and owe him tribute, which he never paid? Was he not even his Viziri in other words, his chief minister and servant, and therefore bound by a double duty to obey, to aid, and to protect him? Did he, on these accounts, perform towards him the smallest act of service, or obedience? No one, than Mr. Hastings, better knew, that in India the obligation of the person who pays tribute to the person who receives it is deemed so very slight, as scarcely to be felt or regarded; and no man was more ready to act upon that principle, when it suited his purposes, than Mr. Hastings. The law of the strongest, indeed, was in perfect force; and whenever any party had the power to enforce obedience, it had no limit but that of his will.

66

The relation in which the Company stood to the Rajah, the one as sovereign, the other as subject, Mr. Hastings represented as conferring an inherent right to impose such assessments as the Company thought expedient." But, in that case, the compact into which the Company entered with the Rajah, that on no pretence whatsoever should any demand whatsoever be made upon him, beyond the amount of his tribute, were a form of words totally destitute of meaning, or rather a solemn mockery, by which the Company gave security and assurance to

was not a part; and that if there was any misconduct, that majority are to answer for it. See his Defence on the Third Charge.