Haftings to the houfe of commons, of, and which was competent to in which he stated that Mr. Burke, in fupporting the charges exhibited against him at the bar of the houfe of lords, had accufed him of fundry heinous crimes not laid in the articles of impeachment. He inftanced the charge of having been concerned in a plot for aflaffinating the Shahzada, and in another plot for putting to death the fon of Jaffier Ally Khan; of being acceffary to certain horrible cruelties alleged to have been committed by one Debi Sing; and lastly, of having been guilty of the murder of Nundcomar. He therefore prayed the houfe either to bring forward and profecute thofe charges in fpecific articles, and thereby give him an opportunity of vindicating his innocence, or to grant him fuch other redress as to their justice and wisdom might feem fit. A motion being made, that the petition fhould be brought up, Mr. Fox rofe to warn the houfe of the mifchevious tendency of receiving fuch a petition, and of the difgrace they would incur by acting upon it. The fubject matter of the complaint confifted of words faid to have been ufed by one of their own members in the profecution of a charge preferred by themfelves. Would they fuffer the culprit to come forward, and object to the mode of proceeding against him; the acculed to arraign the conduct of his accufers? Would not this have the ftrongest appearance of prevarication; and that inftead of fupporting and countenancing their own caufe, they were more inclined to cavil as an adverfe party at the condu✪ of their managers? And to whom was the complaint made? Not to the court which heard the offence complained have redressed the complainant at the moment, but to that house, the accufer, for the purpose of making it the inftrument of the refentment and malice of the accufed against ! one of their own managers. He reminded the house, that fome of the expreffions complained of had been uttered above a year before; and he afked, whether they could think it poflible, if the managers were to be fubject to a perpetual litigation with the accused before that houfe, whenever he chofe to bring forward a complaint, that, they could carry on the profecution at all. He stated the many and peculiar difficulties which the managers of the prefent impeachment had to counter, and their ftrong claim to the fair and liberal protection of the house; and he befeeched them, if they were weary, or repented of what they had done, that they would openly retract their refolutions, and not act the double part of being, at the fame time, the accufers and the defenders of Mr. Haftings. He concluded with remarking, that as he could have no doubt that the real drift of this bufinefs was to difguft his right honourable friend by a perfonal infult, fo he was confident that the artifice would be vain and fruitless. Mr. Burke, after declaring that on the prefent occafion he fhould receive the decifion of the house, whatever it might be, without any other emotion than what he should feel for the honour and reputation of the house itfelf, proceeded to explain the argument which had led him, in the courfe of it, to advert to the murder of Nundcomar, and to impute it to Mr. Haflings. The power of profecuting and enforcing the the charges against Mr. Haftings, under an injunction not to ufe one extraneous word, he compared to the giving Shylock the power of taking a pound of flesh, upon condition of his not fpilling one drop of blood; a talk which neither Jew nor Chriftian could perform. He added, that if the houfe was diffatisfied with his conduct, they ought to remove him, and not oblige him, in the midst of his accufation, to turn fhort about at the pleasure of the culprit to defend himself, to-day an accufer, tomorrow a perfon accufed. The drift of fuch an artifice was obvious enough; and if the house should give it their countenance, and make him one day ftand his trial there, and fend him the next to Westminster. Hall as the profecutor of Mr. Haftings, it could not fail to cover them with ridicule and difgrace. Mr. Pulteney, Mr. Marfham, and feveral other members, infifted frongly on the glaring impropriety of receiving the petition, of its being totally unprecedented, and grofsly difrefpectful to the houfe of lords, whofe protection the complainant ought to have fought, and who were alone competent to interfere on the occafion. Mr. Pitt, however, and fome other members, having declared themselves for receiving the petition, on the ground that Mr. Haftings, though the object of their accufation, did not ceale to be the object of their juftice, and therefore ought not to be deprived of the right belonging to every fubject, of preferring a petition, and stating a grievance to that houfe for its confideration and difpofal; the motion was agreed to without a divifion. VOL. XXXI. against the managers of his im "peachment, and the name of the " right honourable Edmund Burke "being mentioned in the faid peti"tion, notice is given to that gen"tleman, now being in his place, "that the houfe will to-morrow "take the matter of the faid peti"tion into confideration." On that day Mr. Montague having read, as a part of his fpeech, a letter written to him by Mr. Burke (fee Appendix to the Chronicle) the first difficulty that occurred relative to the mode of proceeding was, whether they fhould go into proof of the truth or falfehood of the particulars which were complained of by Mr. Haftings as being falfe as well as irrelevant. The affirmative was contended for by the managers, as the petition contained a charge upon them of having afferted direct falfehoods. But the mafter of the rolls having given his opinion, that the averment of the fallehood was no more than a protestation or formal plea of not guilty, on the part of the petitioner, and that therefore it was not neceffary to go into the proof, the houfe acquiefced in his opinion. The next difficulty that occurred, was the mode of afcertaining the words fpoken. The notes of the fhort-hand writers, who attended the trial, being contended for by feveral members, Mr. Fox and fir Grey Cooper objected to their being produced, as contrary to the uniform practice The next queftion was, whether all the particulars complained of by the petitioner fhould be inquired into, or whether the houfe might felect what part they pleafed. Mr. Pitt and others were of opinion, that the house ought to pay no attention to the words laid to have been (poken in the former year, as the complaint had been fo long deferred; and they should confine themselves to the words relative to Nundcomar. This was alfo objected to by the managers, as an arbitrary proceeding, but finally agreed to by the house. practice of parliament. There did not exift in the proceedings of that houfe an inftance of any words, delivered by a member, being ever permitted by that houfe to be noticed by any but a member of the houfe, and that too at the moment when the words were uttered; nay, the cuftom of parliament obferved a ftill stricter rule, for the words muft not only be noticed at the moment by a member of the house, but they muft alfo be taken down at the moment, and the objection must then be ftated, for the purpose of allowing to the perfon uttering the words Another debate then took place an opportunity of explaining his upon the extent of the examination, meaning; and this the honourable as reftricted to the cafe of Nundcobaronet illuftrated by inftances, mar. The managers contended that where the house had been verycareful the whole of that part of Mr. in feeing that no furprife fhould ever Burke's fpeech ought to be pro- 1 enfnare into an unintentional offence. duced, as neceffary to elucidate the They were now, for the first time, nature of the words complained of; about to call in third perfons as wit- the other fide were of opinion, that neffes of words fpoken in their own it was only neceffary to ask the witprefence; a precedent that, though nefs if Mr. Burke had made ufe of innoxious in the prefent inftance, thofe exprefs words. After much might lead to the moft ferious con- altercation, in which Mr. Fox comfequences.-These objections ap- plained in ftrong and pointed terms peared of fo much importance to of the indignity and injuftice with the house, that a committee was ap- which the managers were treated, it pointed to fearch for precedents. was agreed that fome part of the The committee reported, fpeech preceding the words should May 4. that there were no prece- be read; which being done, and dents of any complaint of words the offenfive words alcertained, fpoken by managers in Westminster the marquis of Graham rofe, and hall to be found.-The managers moved, "that the faid words were again urged their objections to the "not authorized by any proceedexamination of any fhort-hand wri-ings of that houfe." Mr. Fox ter; but the favourers of the petition, infifting upon the duty of the houfe to govern itself in fuch cafes by what fhould appear moft likely to promote the ends of fubftantial jul ice, prevailed; and, after a divifion of 115 to 66, the fhort-hand writer was called in. declared, that he could have no objection to this motion, as it conveyed no cenfure; it being undoubtedly true, that the words read were not authorized by the house, any more than the speeches or expreffions fed by any other manager, in fubftantiating the charges committed 1 committed to them by the houfe. On the other fide it was faid, that though no direct cenfure was meant to be conveyed, yet it implied, that the manager had exceeded the powers with which he had been intrufted by the house. Upon this feveral of the managers rofe, and entreated the houfe to deal with them with more opennefs and candour. If they meant to cenfure their conduct, they ought alfo to remove them. The houfe could not, confiftently with its own honour, continue them in the management of the impeachment; nor were they fo loft to all fenfe of honour and dignity, as to remain in a fituation, however elevated, under an imputed cenfure of their conduct. On the other hand, if the motion meant nothing more than the words conveyed, they fhould feel no hesitation in purfuing, upon any fimilar occafion, precifely the fame mode of conduct. In confequence of these declarations lord Graham moved, that the words" and ought not to have been "ufed," should be added to his former motion. This produced another long debate in which Mr. Fox endeavoured to prove both the relevancy of Mr. Burke's words, and the impropriety and injuftice of the interference of the house; and was answered by Mr. Pitt and col. Phipps. The house at length divided; when there appeared for lord Graham's motion 135, against it 66. In confequence of this vote fome difference of opinion is laid to have arifen in the committee of managers, relative to their continuance in that fituation.-It was, however, refolved to proceed; and accordingly, the next day of trial, Mr. Burke began his fpeech by commenting on the relative fituations of himfelf and of the prifoner at the bar, and on the decifion of the com mons with respect to their proceedings. It was his duty, he obferved, as a manager on the part of the commons, to illuftrate and enforce, by every proper means, the guilt of Mr. Haftings. He had, in the purfuit of juftice, laboured to the best of his power and judgement; but in confequence of a recent proceeding of thofe by whom he had been delegated, he was to inform their lordships that certain expreffions of his, charging Mr. Haftings with the murder of Nundcomar, through the agency of fir Elijah Impey, had been difavowed by the commons as unauthorised by them. He did not mean to arraign the juftice of this decifion-he would not even complain that it wore not the complexion of fupport to the managers whom they had appointed. The decifion went of course to narrow the line of their proceeding, yet fhould not restrain their efforts to ufe their remaining powers with the utmost vigour and effect. But till fome explanation was due from him to their lordships, to members of the houfe of commons, and to fo refpectable an auditory.He had undoubtedly charged Mr. Haftings with the deftruction of a witnels whofe evidence was neceffary to the prefent charge; and which the prifoner had, of course, endeavoured to in alidate. In ftating this, however, he had faid no more than what he really believed, and what, if neceflary, he trufted he fhould be able to prove. He had ufed the word murder, not, perhaps, in the ftrictly legal, but in its [L] 2 moral moral and popular fenfe, to denote a crime, which ftood, according to his conception, on the fame line of enormity, but which the poverty of language did not afford him another word to exprefs. - Soon after the conclufion of this bufinefs, a complaint was made to the house, by Mr. Martham, of a paragraph in a public news-paper, in which it was faid, "that the "trial of Mr. Haftings was to be "put off to another feffions, unless "the house of lords had fpirit "enough to put an end to fo "fhameful a bufinefs." - After fome obfervations upon the fcandalous licentioufnefs of the prefs, a motion was made, and carried unanimoufly, for profecuting the printer of the paper. In the course of the converfation which this motion gave rife to, Mr. Burke read, from one of the public prints, a curious paper, purporting to be a bill of charges made by the editor upon major Scott, for fundry articles inferted in the paper on his account. They chiefly confifted of fpeeches, letters, paragraphs compofed by him, and amongst the rest was this fingular article, "For attack "ing the veracity of Mr. Burke, "3s. 6d." A fhort time before the conclufion of the feffion, an application had heen made by the French government to permit 20,000 facks of wheat flour to be exported from England, for the relief of the inhabitants of their northern provinces. As the price of corn, at this time, in Great Britain, exceeded the exportation price, the matter was necessarily brought into parliament. A committee was appointed to inquire into the cafe; who reported, that from a comparative view of the prices of wheat flour in France and in England, they were of opinion, that 20,000 facks of flour ought not to be exported. |