dissentient opinions might be founded; and since it is also expressly provided by the said Warren Hastings, that the determination of the majority of the Committee should not therefore be stayed, unless it should be so agreed by the majority; that is, that notwithstanding the reference to the Supreme Council, the measure shall be executed without waiting for their decision. That the said Warren Hastings has delivered his opinion, with many arguments to support the same, in favour of long leases of the lands, in preference to annual settlements; that he has particularly declared, “that "the farmer, who holds his farm for one year "only, having no interest in the next, takes what " he can with the hand of rigour, which, even in "the execution of legal claims, is often equivalent ❝ to violence. He is under the necessity of being

66

rigid and even cruel; for what is left in arrear "after the expiration of his power, is at best æ "doubtful debt, if ever recoverable. He will be "tempted to exceed the bounds of right, and to

66

augment his income by irregular exactions, and "by racking the tenants, for which pretences wilh "not be wanting, where the farms pass annually "from one hand to another. That the discou"ragements, which the tenants feel from being ❝ transferred every year to new landlords, are a great objection to such short leases; that they "contribute to injure the cultivation, and dise

people

* people the lands. That, on the contrary, from

"interest in his lands: he will, for his own sake,

lay out money in assisting his tenants in improving lands already cultivated, and in clearing and cultivating waste lands.". That nevertheless the said Warren Hastings, having left it to the discretion of the Committee of Revenue, appointed by him in 1781, to fix the time for which the ensuing settlement should be made; and the said Committee having declared, that, with respect to the period of the leases in general, it appeared to the Committee, that to limit them to one year would be the best period, he, the said Warren Hastings, approved of that limitation, in manifest contradiction to all his own arguments, professions, and declarations, concerning the fatal consequences of annial leases of the lands-that, in so doing, the said Warren Hastings did not hold himself bound or restrained by the orders of the Court of Directors, but acted upon his own discretion; and that he has, for partial and interested purposes, exer→ cised that discretion in particular instances against his own general settlement for one year, by granting perpetual leases of farms and Zemindaries to persons specially favoured by him; and particularly by granting a perpetual lease of the Zemindary of Baharbund to his servant Canto Baboo on very. low terms: that, in all the preceding transactions,

the said Warren Hastings did act contrary to his duty, as Governour of Fort-William, contrary tờ the orders of his employers, and contrary to his own declared senses of expediency, consistency, and justice; and thereby did harass and afflict the inhabitants of the provinces with perpetual changes in the system and execution of the government placed over them, and with continued innovations and exactions against the rights of the said inha bitants; thereby destroying all security to private property, and all confidence in the good faith, principles, and justice of the British Government; and that the said Warren Hastings; having substi tuted his own instruments to be the managers and collectors of the publick revenue, in the manner herein before mentioned, did act in manifest breach and defiance of an Act of the 13th of His pres sent Majesty, by which the ordering and manages ment and government of all the territorial revenues. in the kingdoms of Bengal, Bahar; and Orissa, were vested in the Governor-General and Couneil, without any power of delegating the said trust and duty to any other persons; and that by such unlawful delegation of the powers of the Council to a subordinate Board appointed by himself, hey the said Warren Hastings, did in effect unite and vest in his own person the ordering, government, and management of all the said territorial revei nues and that, for the said illegal act, he, the

V

1

said Warren Hastings, is solely answerable, the same having been proposed and resolved in Council, when the Governour-General and Council consisted but of two persons present; namely, the said Warren Hastings, and the late Edward Wheler, Esquire; and when consequently the GovernourGeneral, by virtue of the casting voice, possessed the whole power of the Government. That in all the changes and innovations hereinbefore des scribed, the pretence used by the said: Warren Hastings to recommend and justify the same to the Court of Directors has been, that such changes and innovations would be attended with increase of revenue, or diminution of expense to the EastIndia Company :-that such pretence, if true; would not have been a justification of such acts; but that such pretence is false and groundless.→→→ That, during the administration of the said War ren Hastings, the territorial revenues have dev clined; that the charges of collecting the same have greatly increased; and that the said Warren Hastings, by his neglect, mismanagement, and by a direct and intended waste of the Company's prov perty, is chargeable with, and answerable for, alt the said decline of revenue, and all the said in crease of expense.

THAT the province of Oude and its dependencies were, before their connexion with and: subordination to the Company, in a flourishing condition with regard to culture, commerce, and population, and their rulers and principal nobility maintained themselves in a state of affluence and splendour; but very shortly after the period aforesaid, the prosperity both of the country and its chiefs began sensibly and rapidly to decline; insomuch that the revenue of the said province, which on the lowest estimation had been found, in the commencement of the British influence, at upwards of three millions sterling annually (and that ample revenue raised without detriment to the country) did not, in the year 1779, exceed the sum of £1,500,000, and in the subsequent years did fall much short of that sum, although the rents were generally advanced, and the country grievously oppressed in order to raise it.

II.

That in the aforesaid year 1779, the demands of the East-India Company on the Nabob of

Oude