bufinefs ended for that time. It was neceffary to obferve, that Mr. Haftings was then, and had been for months before in a minority. On the 20th of January, 1784. Major Brown's letter arrived. The Beard had, in fact, determined upon the fubftance of it in Q&tober. Mr. Haftings a few days after left Calcutta, and nothing was done by the Council upon that letter; Mr. Haftings went to Lucknow on exprefs points, to affift the Vizier to fettle his country, and to recover the debt due to the Company. There had been long and violent difputes about Owde in the Council, but the three Members (Mr. Wheeler, Mr. Macpherson, and Mr. Stables) who had oppofed Mr. Haftings for months, at length confented to his going to Lucknow, he being refponfible for the Vizier's punctual difcharge of his engagements. On thefe conditions Mr. Haftings accepted the trutt, and to this point was he reftricted. After his arrival at Lucknow, the Prince fled from Delhi. Major Scott faid, he had the affurances of Mr. Haftings, and the Gentlemen with him, that he knew nothing of his flight; that he vehemently oppofed his coming to Lucknow; but when the Prince declared he would throw himfelf at the door of his tent, he determined to receive him with the honours due to his rank. When Major Brown was deputed in June to defire the Prince to return to his father's court, and brought the fecret letter alluded to, from the King, Mr. Haftings thought he could ferve his Majefty, and relieve him from his difficulties by the credit of the English name, without rifking their arms or their treafure, and he wrote preffingly to the Council for fuch powers. They were of a different opinion, and refufed to grant them, and here this fecond bufinefs ended; for Mr. Haftings declared from the firft, he had not the powers requifite to affift the King. He left Lucknow in Auguft, arrived in Calcutta in November, and refigned the government the firft of February. Major Scott faid, the Right Hon. Gentleman had quoted two refolutions to prove Mr. Haftings had acted contrary to the orders of that Houfe, and he defired the Clerk to read a third, to prove that Mr. Hastings had acted in conformity to its order when he propofed to affift him, and that he had used this as an argument to the Board, to prove their concurrence. He then faid, that Major Brown was appointed the Minister of the Governor General and Council, and not of Mr. Hastings. That he had no other POL. MAG. VOL. X. JUNE 1786. inftructions but his publick ones, which were recorded. That from April 1783, to the day of Mr. Haftings's departure from Calcutta, in Pebruary 1784, he was in a minority; that he left Calcutta ten days after Major Brown's letter of the 30th of December, 1783, was delivered to the Board, and that it refted with them to recal Major Brown, if they thoughthe merited recal, for expreffing himself more warmly than his inftructions authorised him to do. The Major added, that he expected, in ten or twenty days, Major Brown would be in England himself, when the whole of the correfpondence would be produced. Major Scott begged just to mention one fubject more, the letter of the 30th of April, 1783, which was print. ed, and he declared, upon his honour, Mr. Haftings had fent him no copy of the letter; he had heard of it, and withed very much to get at it, and for this purpofe it was moved to have it read in a General Court. This the Chairman opposed, but he was over-ruled, and he would tell the Houfe why :-Every gentleman recollected, that when a Right Hon. Gentleman moved his bill, he pronounced all the Nabob of Owde's debts to be abfolutely irrecoverable, amounting to 750,000l. now it fo happened, that this letter contained an account of a great part of this debt being actually paid off, and ample fecurity given for the remainder. There was a fort of party triumph in proclaiming this to the world, a weakness they all gave into fometimes, and as every Proprietor had a right to a copy of every letter read in a General Court, he got a copy, and fent it to Mr. Debrett, to be printed; but on being spoke to by feveral of the Directors, he stopped the publication, till Mr. Debrett told him he had got a copy elfewhere; and then, as his impreffion was worked off, he thought it might as wel go forth as any other. Lord North rofe, not to tire the Houf with a long speech, but merely to make a few obfervations on fome of the new matter that had been fuggefted that day: and, firft, his Lordship took notice of Major Scott's having declared, that the Supreme Council at Calcutta had refused to affift the Mogul with any troops. This his Lordship compared with Major Brown's recommending to Mr. Haftings, in earnest terms, that in compliance with the treaty, which he spoke of in his letter in thefe words-We offered to treat, he accepted; we annexed conditions, he approved of them. This, his Lordship observed, was 3 0 written written in the plural number. It was we, and not I. It appeared therefore that the Council at Calcuta had faid no to Major Brown, meaning that Major Brown fhould fay yes at Delhi. His Lordship played with great force of ridicule on the grots and palpable contradictoriness and dupliity of the whole tranfaction, and repeated his declaration in a former debate, that the French had nothing to do at Delhi. He applied a part of his fpeech to Mr. Dundas, and faid, his Right Hon. Furel had done himself honour by moving ite refolutions; in his opinion he would her done himfeif more honour had he maItained them. Major Scott faid a few words in rep to Lord North. Mr. Fox alio fpoke to explain for a fer minutes; and at ten o'clock the frangen were defired to withdraw. The Hoult afterwards divided, Ayes 739 Noes 140. A fort View of the Evidence, before a Committee of the House of Commons, upon the Charge brought against Mr. Heflings, on the Subject of the Rohilla War. I Read in a Newspaper, an extract from the evidence given by Sir Robert Barker in the Houfe of Commons, which, as far as it goes, confirms what Mr. Burke has mentioned in his printed fpeech, or pamphlet, of the first of December, 1773, namely, that we attacked the Rohillas without a pretence of quarrel: but how different the real fact is, will be feen from the whole of Sir Robert Barker's evidence; and the impreffion which his evidence, and the truths told by Colonel Champion, made upon every gentleman who heard them, are too notorious to need any remarks from me. Sir Robert was asked, if he knew any thing of a defign formed by Sujah Dowlah to conquer the Rohllas? Not, he faid, till after the forfeiture of the engagement they made in 1772 with Sujah Dowlah; the ground of jealoufy between them arofe in his father's time, upon fome territories being taken from him, and poffeffed by the Rohillas, (as he had heard) which Sujah Dowlah ever kept in remembrance. Sir Robert faid, he was privy to the treaty between Sujab Dowlah ard the Rohillas that he figned it as a witnefs; that he did not conceive he bound the Company to a guarantee of that treaty by war, in cafe either party broke the treaty; but he figned it, and his reafons were thefe: ft, It was requested of him by the Mr. Hattings, in his anfwer to the third Charge brought again him, (and inferted in this Month's Magazine) fays, "Both trea"ties were executed in the prefence of Sir "Robert Parker, and figned by him as a wit"nets; which in every instance of the kind "that has ever paffed in the Company's annals, is equivalent to a guarantee." Vizier, Sujah Dowlah, ard the Robles, the two parties; and, adiy, That he kar there would be no treaty urless be ? witness it, the Rohilias not having fath enough in the Vizier to take his firs only: That the Vizier charged the Ro las with an infraction of the treaty, in t paying the 400,000l. That he does t know whether there was any other way m recover the money but by a conques f the country, as he left India previous the war: That he believes they wond have given part of the r wealth, and pas of their county, to have preserved the remainder: That the Matattas were driven and expelled the Rohilla country by the British troops and those of the Vizier. He was alked what grounds he had fer writing to Mr. Haftings and the Counci on the 6th of April, 1773, “ It is me known, that neither promifes nor cathr have been able to bind this treacherous fect of people to their engagements," (fpeaking of the Rohillas) and Sir Robert replied, "It was very evident that cat's did not bind them, by their evafions to pav the 40 lacks, as agreed upon, to Stat Dowlsh; and their general character was that of a treacherous fect of people." He faid, while he was with Sujah Dowiah, demands for the payment of the 40 lacks were frequently made by Sujah Dowlany and reprefentations made from hamielf That he does not know that they pad the money in confequence of thefe reprefenta tions: That he deputed Captain Harper to Haffez Rhamet, the Rohilla Chief, a May, 1772, at the Vizier's particular and earnest request, previous to the treaty That Hafez Rhamet met them in critquence gentlemen of this country: That they were the fame defcription of men with whom Sujah Dowlah concluded the treaty, and from whom the payment of the fum of money was demanded. This is the material part of Sir Robert's evidence; the whole is very important, and well worth perufal: Colonel Champion's is equally fo. He commanded an army in the Rohilla war, and he was strictly queftioned from every quarter of the Houfe. He faid that 1900 imen were killed in battle; none were flaughtered: That the peace was concluded in October, 1774, feven months after the invafion of Rohilcund: That 20,000 men were directed to crofs the Ganges, and 45,000 men re never been difported to this day: That of thofe who croifed the Ganges, there was the proportion of three men to cach foldier in arms -So that, in fact, the extirpation of a whole nation is now proved to be, ordering 5000 men in arms, and 15.000 domefticks and fervants, to cross the Ganges to their countrymen, whom they had left when they conquered Robilcut. This important fact is at length fixed beyond difpute. And now let me recommend it to every impartial man, to real the fpeeches of Mr. Fox and Mr. Burke on the fubje&t of the Rohilla war. quence: That he had great faith in the English, and that his vilt to Sujah Dowlah was in confequence of that faith:That no compulfion was used by hi felf, or any other English gentleman, to induce Hafez Rhamet to fign the treaty: That he wrote to the Board in Calcutta, that the Nabob offered 50 lacks of rupces, (upon a failure of the Rohillas to the engagement) to put him in poffeffion of their Country: That Sujah Dowlah and the English completely performed every part of their engagements. And, on being afked if he did not recollect that he inclofed a fecond copy of the treaty, with words to this off.ft," to show how liverally it had been performed, notwith ftanding the ev ton of their chiefs;" Sir_mained with Fizzoolah Cawn, and have, Robert faid, he thought it very probable he did, but at this ditance of time he did not recollect the letter. That in feveral letters to the Bond he mentioned the duplicity of the conduct of the RohillasThat they were carrying on conterences both with the Mahrattas and Sujah Dow. la: That the army under his command forded the Ganges, recroffed it, and remained in the Rohilla country till the Rohillas were freed from all danger of future invasion: That on the return of the British army, after having completely effected the fervice on which they were fent, he remained a few days behind the army, for the profeffed purpose of inducing Haffez Rhamet to comply with his engagements: That he believes an armed force, or the appearance of an armed force, would have been neceffary to comp4 the Rohillas to a performance of their engagements; and that it could not have been obtained by an amicable interpofition of the English Governor That the British arms prevented the Mahrattas from over running the Rohilla country: That they were driven out by the terror of the British arms only: That the Rohillas were a free and independent nation, competent to make treaties with other states: That the Rohillas were not h: cultivators of the foil: The Hindoos compofe the greatest part the people of India very large propor tion-they compofe the hutbandmen, mechanicks, and the lower orders of the people: That it never was propofed to expel, exterminate, or extirpate the cultvators of the foil and the mechanicks, but to remove the governors of it: That he does not know how to draw a parallel between them and the nobility and landed Sir John Jervis, Mr. Burton, and several other Members, queftioned Colonel Champion as to the cruelties practifed on the wives and children of Ilaffez Rhamet : he declared that he received his information from Captain Macpherfon, his aidde camp, who had charge of the fpies employed to obtain intelligence in Sujah Dowlah's camp: That he was twice or dered by the Governor, Mr. Haftings, and Council, to fend particular accounts to them; that what he did is contained in his letters, and there the hardships and diftreffes which the prifoners fuffered are mentioned.That Mr. Haftings did alfo order Mr. Middleton to remonftrate to the Vizier; but Colonel Champion did of not think it produced the defired effect. Here, then, is all the evidence of the cruel and inhuman mode of carrying on the war, nor can infpiration itfelf throw a further light on the fubject: and every thing advanced by Mr. Haftings in his defence, is moft fully confirmed by Sir Robert Barker and Colonel Champion, who were called to fupport the profecution. ASIATICUS. An Enquiry into the Influence which Enclosures have upon lation of England. By the Rev. Mr. Howlett. SCARCELY any thing at all connected with the improvements of modern agriculture, has been more eagerly contested, or more amply discussed, than the advantages or difadvantages of Enclosures with refpect to their influence on Population. Dr. Price has uniformly maintained their immediate and powerful tendency to depopulate, and has printed and reprinted accounts to confirm and establish this idea, without feeming to have at all attended to the accounts, of equal authenticity, repeatedly given on the other fide of the question. Such partial reprefentations are only calculated to mislead. In his late edition of Reverfionary Payments, after a difmal detail of the pernicious confequences of Enclofures, he obferves, that he can scarcely think of any thing that fhould be more alarming, and exclaims, "How aftonishing is it, that our "Parliament, instead of applying any "remedy to thefe evils, fhould chufe to "promote them, by paffing, every year, "bills almoft without number for new "Enclosures!" If the accounts he had given were not only true, but stated in all their attendant circumstances and effects, and the fame were strictly applicable to all, or only the greater part of the Enclofures which have taken place during the last thirty years, there would, indeed, be fome foundation for fuch complaints and exclamations; and we could not form any very favourable conception of the judgment or patriotifm of our fucceffive reprefentatives. But before we admit conclufions fo very difhonourable to any part of our legiflature, let us fairly examine the feveral articles of the Doctor's information, as well as that given by others of a different and oppofite tenour. And first, as to the Doctor's communications; he tells us, Vol. II. p. 267, that "he had lately received an account of 46 a large common-field in Leicestershire, "which used to produce 800 quarters "of corn, befides maintaining 200 cattle, which now, in confequence of being inclofed and getting into fewer hands, "produces little or no corn, and main"tains no more cattle than before, though "the rents are confiderably advanced." This account feems to carry its own refutation along with it. It had also been the Popu printed before, and, in my apprehenfion, fatisfactorily antwered by Mr. Arthur Young, in his Political Arithmetick, p. 146, "If the Doctor," fays he, “had formed his tables on no better authority than this, they would not have been very famous. Rents raifed,-corn difappeared, cattle not increased! What are we to think of fuch facts? I travelled through Leicestershire and Northamptonfhire, and not, I think, without attentios. I faw great tracts of country enclosed and laid from arable to grafs; but I faw in the graziers fields fuch herds of fat sheep and oxen, as delighted the eye.-The generality of thefe lands are flocked at the rate of a large ox, and 24fheep to every two acres; and the foil does fo well in grafs, that they fat large fheep the winter through. Before the enclosure, thofe lands were managed in the courfe of fallow, wheat, and fpring-corn. How, in the name of wonder, were fat fheep and oxen than kept-Upon the fallows;or upon straw? That corn disappears is most certain, but that it is amply made up by beef and mutton is equally certain." This is furely, to fay the leaft of it, as good and fatisfactory information as the Doctor's. But the Doctor further informs us, from the Reverend Mr. Addington's Exquiry into the Reafons for and against enclosing open Fields, published in 1772, "that the new enclofed lordships are "turned into pafturage; in confequence "of which, many lordships have not 50 "acres ploughed yearly, in which 1500, "or at least 1000, were ploughed for"merly; and scarce an ear of corn is now How to be feen in fome that bore hundreds "of quarters." Granting all this to be true, it naturally occurs, how many more sheep and oxen are now fed and fattened than before? How much more beef and mutton produced? What greater quantities of wool, hides, tallow, &c. many hands employed in manufacturing these? How many perfons, in different places, cloathed, fed, and fupported?This we are not informed; and yet, without this, all the reft, as far as population is concerned, and indeed even tillage, in other quarters, conveys very little intruction. "But," continues Mr. Ad dington dington, the effects of thefe Enclosures "are fo feverely felt, that worfe wheat "has lately been fold in thefe counties "of Leicester and Northampton, on an "average at 78. or 7s. 6d. the Winchef❝ter bufhel, for many months together, "than used to be fold for 38. 6d. or 4s." How extremely little is all this to the pur pofe! Who does not know that in the best corn counties in the kingdom, where there has been neither recent enclosures, nor converfion of tillage into pafture, wheat has been fold, for months together, not only at 75. the bufhel, but even 8 or 9s. of an inferior quality likewife to what was purchafed the year before, or perhaps the year after, not merely for 3 or 4s. but half a crown? But fuppofe the above extravagant price of grain to be the permanent effect of the Enciofures, and of the confequent exchange of tillage for pafture, the evil would very foon cure itself. The farmer, confident of the vast advantage of growing cord, would fell off his theep and exen, break up his meadows, fow them with wheat, and, in the room of 50 acres, you would foon again have 1500 and a 1000 bushels of corn for a fingle car. But what immediately follows in the fame writer, is more directly to the prefent purpofe. "The decrease of inhabi"tants in almoft all the enclofed villages," fays he, in which they have no con"fiderable manufacture, is obvious to be “remarked by every one who knew their "ftate 20 or 30 years ago, and fees them now. The ruin of former dwelling"houses, barns, ftables, &c. fhews every "one who paffes through them that they "were once better inhabited. A hun"dred houses and families, have dwindled "into eight or ten. The landholders are 46 very few in moft parishes that have been "enclofed only 15 or 20 years, in com"pariton of the numbers which occupied "them in their open field ftate. It is no "uncommon thing to fee four or five "wealthy graziers engroffing a large ea"clofed jordfhip, which was before in the "hands of 20 or 30 farmers, and as many "fmaller tenants and proprietors; all "these are hereby thrown out of their livings, with their families, that were employed or fupported by them." All this may be very true; and the following account, which I myself received from a correfpondent in Leicestershire, of fimilar purport, is ftill more pointed and determinate. As to Enclosures," fays he, "I can mention two villages in this coun"ty within two miles of each other, "Wiftow and Fofton, which formerly "contained 34 or 35 dwellings; but by "enclosure, Fofton is reduced to three habitations; the parfonage-house ac"commodates one family, and the two "other buildings are occupied by thep"herds, who manage the flock for their "diftant renters, as the whole lordship "belongs to one perion. And as to "Wiftow, the 34 manfions have vanish"ed in a very few years, and nodwelling "remains but the late Sir Charles Hal"ford's hall-houfe, who owned the lord"hip; and thefe are called improve"ments; for double and treble rents en"fue, and double or treble the old value "of land and house rents, and so of pro"vifions." What became, it is natural to afk, of thefe vanifhed inhabitants, and who took off these increased provifions — My correfpondent has clearly fuggefted the aufwer in another part of his letter, and which is, indeed, equally applicable to the preceding account, given by Dr. Price from Mr. Addington. "Manufacture," fays he, " has over-peopled Leicestershire. "Almost every village, unenclosed, is "chiefly inhabited by woolcombers and frame work knitters; and though we "poffefs a rich foil, Rutland and Northampton corn arrives in vaft quantities, "and is ufually very reasonable, as well as butter. But cheefe, notwithstand"ing a vaft produce of our own, is fwept away at our fairs by factors, and is ra "ther dear." This needs no comment; the conclufions are obvious; diminution of tillage and inhabitants in one place; the confequent incrcafe of them in another, the multiplication of fheep and oxen in the county of Leicester, brings corn in abundance from thofe of Northampton and Rutland, and no article remains dear, but that produced on the fpot, which is fent off to fill the multiplied mouths in other quarters. Similar intelligence to the above I could produce, from letters now lying before me with regard to enclofures in the Counties of Bucks, Bedford, Derby, Wilts, Hants, &c. but the detail would be tedious, and I must beg leave to obferve, that for one account of this difadvantageous kind, I have, I believe, two or three of a directiv oppotite tenour, in which the increase of inhabitants froin inclofures is afferted and proved. From a candid review of the above oppofite reprefentations and reasonings, it appeared to me undeniable that Enclosures, according to particular circumstances, are |