who studied, as it was their interest, though contrary to their duty, to conceal the criminality of their conduct, and consequently to disguise the truth.

But though, my lords, I dwell on the difficulties which the managers have to encounter with respect to the evidence in this impeachment, I do not solicit indulgence, or even mean to hint, that what we have adduced is in any material degree defective. Weak no doubt it is in some parts, and deplorable, as undistinguished by any compunctious visitings of repenting accomplices; but there is enough and enough in sure validity, notwithstanding every disadvantage and impediment, to abash the front of guilt no longer hid, and to flash those convictions on the minds of your lordships, which should be produced.

I now proceed, my lords, to review the evidence. The first article which I shall notice must, I think, be considered as pretty strong. It is the defence or rather the defences of the prisoner before the house of commons. For, he has already made four; three of which he has since abandoned and endeavoured to discredit. I believe, it is a novelty in the history of criminal jurisprudence, that a person accused should first set up a defence, and afterwards strive to invalidate it. But this certainly has been the course adopted by the prisoner; and I am the more surprised at it, as he has had the full benefit of the ablest counsel. Rescued from his own devious guidance, I could hardly have imagined that he would have acted so unwisely or indecently, as to evince his contempt of one house of parliament by confessing the impositions which he had practised on the other. But by this extraordinary proceeding he has given unwarily, to your lordships a pledge of his past truth, in the acknowledged falsehood of his present conduct.

In every court of law in England, the confession of a criminal, when not obtained by any promise of favour, or lenity, or by violent threats, is always admitted as conclusive evidence against himself. And

if such confession were made before a grave and respectable assembly of persons competent to take cognizance of crimes, there is no doubt but that it would have due weight, because, it is fair to presume that it must be voluntary, and not procured by any undue, or improper means. The prisoner has, in his defence, admitted many facts, and it is the intention of the managers accordingly to urge in support of the charges, his admission of them. For, when he did it, he was speaking the language not of inconsiderate rashness and haste, but of deliberate consideration and reflection, as will appear to your lordships by a passage which I shall cite from the introduction to the defence read by Mr. Hastings himself at the bar of the house of commons. He employs the following words "of the discouragement to which I allude, I shall mention but two points, and these it is incumbent upon me to mention, because, they relate to effects which the justice of this honourable house may, and I trust will, avert. The first is an obligation to my being at all committed in my defence, since, in so wide a field for discussion, it would be impossible not to admit some things, of which an advantage might be taken to turn them into evidence against myself, whereas another might as well use as I could, or better, the same materials of my defence, without involving me in the same consequences. But, I am sure the honourable house will yield me its protection against the cavils of unwarranted inference, and if the truth can tend to convict me, I am content to be myself the channel to convey it. The other objection lies in my own breast. It was not till Monday last that I formed the resolution, and I knew not then whether I might not, in consequence be laid under the obligation of preparing and completing in five days (and in effect so it proved) the refutation of charges which it has been the labour of my accuser, armed with all the powers of parliament, to compile, during as many years of almost undisturbed leisure,"

Here then, my lords, the prisoner has upon deliberation committed his defence to paper, and after having five days to consider whether he should present it, or not, he actually delivers it himself to the house of commons as one founded in truth, and triumphantly remarks, that "if truth could tend to convict him, he was willing to be himself the channel to convey it."

But what is his language now that he has the advice of counsel? Why, that there is not a word of truth in what he delivered to the house of commons as truth; that he has no knowledge of the facts; no recollection of the circumstances; that he has put his memory in trust, and duly nominated and appointed commissioners to take charge of it. Even his defences he commits to the same persons. For the fabrication of them he establishes a sort of manufactory, and like a master workman distributes around him the raw materials to all hands awaiting. To one he allots words to string, to another the spinning of arguments, and to a third the weaving of the web of the discourse. This arrangement is indeed convenient. By it, all the speed, and facility, and perfection is acquired which division of labour gives to art. To major Scott, he says, take care of my consistency. Mr. Middleton, you have my memory in commission! Prove me a financier, Mr. Shore. Answer for me Mr. Holt. And to you, Impey, I consign my humanity! Help, help, one and all of you, to bear me up under the pressure of my laurels, the burthen of my glory! Refresh and preserve me from the calentures of my state!

But, this journeyman's work after all is found to be defective. It is good enough for the house of commons, but not for your lordships. The prisoner presents himself at your bar, and his only apprehension seems to arise from what had been thus done for him. He exclaims, "I am careless of what the managers say or do. Some of them have high passions, and others have bitter words, but these I heed not. Save me from the peril of my own panegyrick;

snatch me from my own friends. Do not believe a syllable of what I said before. I cannot submit now to be tried, as I imprudently challenged, by the account which I have myself given of my own transactions." Such is the language of the prisoner, by which it appears that truth is not natural to him; but that falsehood comes at his beck. Truth, indeed, it is said, lies deep, and requires time and labour to gain, but falsehood swims on the surface, and is always at hand.

It is in this way, my lords, that the prisoner shows you how he sports with the dignity and feelings of the house by asserting that to be false, and not entitled to credit this day, which, on a former he had averred to be truth itself. Indeed, from this avowal and disavowal of defences, and from the present defence, differing from all the former, which have been delivered to your lordships, it does seem that Mr. Hastings thinks he may pursue this course just as far as best suits his convenience or advantage. It is not at all improbable, if he should deem it expedient, that he will hereafter abandon the one now submitted to you, and excuse himself by saying, "It was not made by me, but by my counsel, and I hope, therefore, your lordships will give no credit to it." But if he will abide by this, his last revised, and amended defence, I will join issue with him upon it, and prove it to be in numerous places void of truth, and in almost every part of it unfounded in argument as well as fact.

I am now to advert more particularly to the evidence in support of the allegations of the charge on which the prisoner is arraigned. We have already shown, most satisfactorily, that the Begums of Oude were of high birth and distinguished rank; the elder, or grandmother of the reigning prince being the daughter of a person of ancient and illustrious lineage, and the younger, or Prince's mother, of descent scarcely less noble. We have also shown, with equal clearness, by the testimony of several witnesses, how sacred is the residence of women in

India. To menace, therefore, the dwelling of these princesses with violation, as the prisoner did, was a species of torture, the cruelty of which, can only be conceived by those who are conversant with the peculiar customs and notions of the inhabitants of Hindostan.

We have nothing in Europe, my lords, which can give us an idea of the manners of the East. The Mahometans have some features of the character, but the Indians drew from their Persian ancestry a purer style of prejudices, and a loftier superstition. There is nothing gross in their taste, nothing debasing in their enjoyments. The custom of their seclusion bears little resemblance to the same practice in Turkey. With the women of the latter country it arises from compulsion, but with those of the former it is a voluntary sequestration. Their seclusion does not flow from any grovelling jealousy on the part of the men as in Turkey, but from a nice delicacy in the female breast, a jealousy of their own, which makes them shrink from common view in the chaste idea, that to be gazed upon and publickly admired is a species of pollution. They are denied liberty, it is true, but liberty so far from having charms to them, is shocking to their sensibility, and repugnant to their sacred habits. They are inshrined, rather than immured. They are placed in these retreats as saints to be worshipped, and to which no passion has access which is not softened and elevated by a holy superstition. Their sanctuaries are guarded and protected by national piety and national reverence.

What now, my lords, do you think of the tyranny and savage apathy of a man, who could act in open defiance of those prejudices which are so interwoven with the very existence of the females of the East, that they can be removed only by death? What do your lordships think of the atrocity of a man, who could threaten to prophane and violate the sanctuary of the princesses of Oude, by declaring that he would storm it with his troops, and expel the inhabitants from it by force? There is, my lords, displayed in