The session was now within ten days of its close. It was, therefore,

impossible that any progress could be made in the trial till the next

year. Hastings was admitted to bail; and further proceedings were

postponed till the Houses should reassemble.

When Parliament met in the following winter, the Commons proceeded to

elect a committee for managing the impeachment. Burke stood at the head;

and with him were associated most of the leading members of the

Opposition. But when the name of Francis was read a fierce contention

arose. It was said that Francis and Hastings were notoriously on bad

terms, that they had been at feud during many years, that on one

occasion their mutual aversion had impelled them to seek each other's

lives, and that it would be improper and indelicate to select a private

enemy to be a public accuser. It was urged on the other side with great

force, particularly by Mr. Windham, that impartiality, though the first

duty of a judge, had never been reckoned among the qualities of an

advocate; that in the ordinary administration of criminal justice among

the English, the aggrieved party, the very last person who ought to be

admitted into the jury-box, is the prosecutor; that what was wanted in a

manager was, not that he should be free from bias, but that he should be

able, well informed, energetic, and active. The ability and information

of Francis were admitted; and the very animosity with which he was

reproached, whether a virtue or a vice, was at least a pledge for his

energy and activity. It seems difficult to refute these arguments. But

the inveterate hatred borne by Francis to Hastings had excited general

disgust. The House decided that Francis should not be a manager. Pitt

voted with the majority, Dundas with the minority.

In the meantime, the preparations for the trial had proceeded rapidly;

and on the thirteenth of February, 1788, the sittings of the Court

commenced. There have been spectacles more dazzling to the eye, more

gorgeous with jewelry and cloth of gold, more attractive to grown-up

children, than that which was then exhibited at Westminster; but,

perhaps, there never was a spectacle so well calculated to strike a

highly cultivated, a reflecting, an imaginative mind. All the various

kinds of interest which belong to the near and to the distant, to the

present and to the past, were collected on one spot, and in one hour.

All the talents and all the accomplishments which are developed by

liberty and civilization were now displayed, with every advantage that

could be derived both from cooperation and from contrast. Every step in

the proceedings carried the mind either backward, through many troubled

centuries, to the days when the foundations of our Constitution were

laid, or far away, over boundless seas and deserts, to dusky nations

living under strange stars, worshipping strange gods, and writing

strange characters from right to left. The High Court of Parliament was

to sit, according to forms handed down from the days of the

Plantagenets, on an Englishman accused of exercising tyranny over the

lord of the holy city of Benares, and over the ladies of the princely

House of Oude.

The place was worthy of such a trial. It was the great hall of William

Rufus, the hall which had resounded with acclamations at the

inauguration of thirty kings, the hall which had witnessed the just

sentence of Bacon and the just absolution of Somers, the hall where the

eloquence of Strafford had for a moment awed and melted a victorious

party inflamed with just resentment, the hall where Charles had

confronted the High Court of Justice with the placid courage which has

half redeemed his fame. Neither military nor civil pomp was wanting. The

avenues were lined with grenadiers. The streets were kept clear by

cavalry. The peers, robed in gold and ermine, were marshalled by the

heralds under Garter King-at-arms. The judges in their vestments of

state attended to give advice on points of law. Near a hundred and

seventy lords, three fourths of the Upper House as the Upper House then

was, walked in solemn order from their usual place of assembling to the

tribunal. The junior baron present led the way, George Eliott, Lord

Heathfield, recently ennobled for his memorable defence of Gibraltar

against the fleets and armies of France and Spain. The long procession

was closed by the Duke of Norfolk, Earl Marshal of the realm, by the

great dignitaries, and by the brothers and sons of the King. Last of all

came the Prince of Wales, conspicuous by his fine person and noble

bearing. The gray old walls were hung with scarlet. The long galleries

were crowded by an audience such as has rarely excited the fears or the

emulation of an orator. There were gathered together, from all parts of

a great, free, enlightened, and prosperous empire, grace and female

loveliness, wit and learning, the representatives of every science and

of every art. There were seated round the Queen the fair-haired young

daughters of the House of Brunswick. There the Ambassadors of great

Kings and Commonwealths gazed with admiration on a spectacle which no

other country in the world could present. There Siddons, in the prime of

her majestic beauty, looked with emotion on a scene surpassing all the

imitations of the stage. There the historian of the Roman empire thought

of the days when Cicero pleaded the cause of Sicily against Verres, and

when, before a senate which still retained some show of freedom, Tacitus

thundered against the oppressor of Africa. There were seen, side by

side, the greatest painter and the greatest scholar of the age. The

spectacle had allured Reynolds from that easel which has preserved to us

the thoughtful foreheads of so many writers and statesmen, and the sweet

smiles of so many noble matrons. It had induced Parr to suspend his

labors in that dark and profound mine from which he had extracted a vast

treasure of erudition, a treasure too often buried in the earth, too

often paraded with injudicious and inelegant ostentation, but still

precious, massive, and splendid. There appeared the voluptuous charms of

her to whom the heir of the throne had in secret plighted his faith.

There too was she, the beautiful mother of a beautiful race, the St.

Cecilia whose delicate features, lighted up by love and music, art has

rescued from the common decay. There were the members of that brilliant

society which quoted, criticised, and exchanged repartees, under the

rich peacock hangings of Mrs. Montague. And there the ladies whose lips,

more persuasive than those of Fox himself, had carried the Westminster

election against palace and treasury shone round Georgiana, Duchess of

Devonshire.

The Sergeants made proclamation. Hastings advanced to the bar, and bent

his knee. The culprit was indeed not unworthy of that great presence. He

had ruled an extensive and populous country, had made laws and

treaties, had sent forth armies, had set up and pulled down princes.

And in his high place he had so borne himself that all had feared him,

that most had loved him, and that hatred itself could deny him no title

to glory, except virtue. He looked like a great man, and not like a bad

man. A person small and emaciated, yet deriving dignity from a carriage

which, while it indicated deference to the Court, indicated also

habitual self-possession and self-respect, a high and intellectual

forehead, a brow pensive but not gloomy, a mouth of inflexible decision,

a face pale and worn, but serene, on which was written, as legibly as

under the picture in the council chamber at Calcutta, _Mens aequa in

arduis_; such was the aspect with which the great proconsul presented

himself to his judges.

His counsel accompanied him, men all of whom were afterwards raised by

their talents and learning to the highest posts in their profession, the

bold and strong-minded Law, afterwards Chief Justice of the King's

Bench; the more humane and eloquent Dallas, afterwards Chief Justice of

the Common Pleas: and Plomer who, near twenty years later, successfully

conducted in the same high court the defence of Lord Melville, and

subsequently became Vice-Chancellor and Master of the Rolls.

But neither the culprit nor his advocates attracted so much notice as

the accusers. In the midst of the blaze of red drapery, a space had been

fitted up with green benches and tables for the Commons. The managers,

with Burke at their head, appeared in full dress. The collectors of

gossip did not fail to remark that even Fox, generally so regardless of

his appearance, had paid to the illustrious tribunal the compliment of

wearing a bag and sword. Pitt had refused to be one of the conductors of

the impeachment; and his commanding, copious, and sonorous eloquence was

wanting to that great muster of various talents. Age and blindness had

unfitted Lord North for the duties of a public prosecutor; and his

friends were left without the help of his excellent sense, his tact,

and his urbanity. But, in spite of the absence of these two

distinguished members of the Lower House, the box in which the managers

stood contained an array of speakers such as perhaps had not appeared

together since the great age of Athenian eloquence. There were Fox and

Sheridan, the English Demosthenes and the English Hyperides. There was

Burke, ignorant, indeed, or negligent of the art of adapting his

reasonings and his style to the capacity and taste of his hearers, but

in amplitude of comprehension and richness of imagination superior to

every orator, ancient or modern. There, with eyes reverentially fixed on

Burke, appeared the finest gentleman of the age, his form developed by

every manly exercise, his face beaming with intelligence and spirit, the

ingenious, the chivalrous, the high-souled Windham. Nor, though

surrounded by such men, did the youngest manager pass unnoticed. At an

age when most of those who distinguish themselves in life are still

contending for prizes and fellowships at collage, he had won for himself

a conspicuous place in Parliament. No advantage of fortune or connection

was wanting that could set off to the height his splendid talents and

his unblemished honor. At twenty-three he had been thought worthy to be

ranked with the veteran statesmen who appeared as the delegates of the

British Commons, at the bar of the British nobility. All who stood at

that bar, save him alone, are gone, culprit, advocates, accusers. To the

generation which is now in the vigor of life, he is the sole

representative of a great age which has passed away. But those who,

within the last ten years, have listened with delight, till the morning

sun shone on the tapestries of the House of Lords, to the lofty and

animated eloquence of Charles Earl Grey are able to form some estimate

of the powers of a race of men among whom he was not the foremost.

The charges and the answers of Hastings were first read. The ceremony

occupied two whole days, and was rendered less tedious than it would

otherwise have been by the silver voice and just emphasis of Cowper, the

clerk of the court, a near relation of the amiable poet. On the third

day Burke rose. Four sittings were occupied by his opening speech, which

was intended to be a general introduction to all the charges. With an

exuberance of thought and a splendor of diction which more than

satisfied the highly raised expectation of the audience, he described

the character and institutions of the natives of India, recounted the

circumstances in which the Asiatic empire of Britain had originated, and

set forth the constitution of the Company and of the English

Presidencies. Having thus attempted to communicate to his hearers an

idea of Eastern society, as vivid as that which existed in his own mind,

he proceeded to arraign the administration of Hastings as systematically

conducted in defiance of morality and public law. The energy and pathos

of the great orator extorted expressions of unwonted admiration from the

stern and hostile Chancellor, and, for a moment, seemed to pierce even

the resolute heart of the defendant. The ladies in the galleries,

unaccustomed to such displays of eloquence, excited by the solemnity of

the occasion, and perhaps not unwilling to display their taste and

sensibility, were in a state of uncontrollable emotion. Handkerchiefs

were pulled out; smelling-bottles were handed round; hysterical sobs and

screams were heard; and Mrs. Sheridan was carried out in a fit. At

length the orator concluded. Raising his voice till the old arches of

Irish oak resounded, "Therefore," said he, "hath it with all confidence

been ordered by the Commons of Great Britain, that I impeach Warren

Hastings of high crimes and misdemeanors. I impeach him in the name of

the Commons' House of Parliament, whose trust he has betrayed. I impeach

him in the name of the English nation, whose ancient honor he has

sullied. I impeach him in the name of the people of India, whose rights

he has trodden under foot, and whose country he has turned into a

desert. Lastly, in the name of human nature itself, in the name of both

sexes, in the name of every age, in the name of every rank, I impeach

the common enemy and oppressor of all."

When the deep murmur of various emotions had subsided, Mr. Fox rose to

address the Lords respecting the course of proceeding to be followed.

The wish of the accusers was that the Court would bring to a close the

investigation of the first charge before the second was opened. The wish

of Hastings and of his counsel was that the managers should open all the

charges, and produce all the evidence for the prosecution, before the

defence began. The Lords retired to their own House to consider the

question. The Chancellor took the side of Hastings. Lord Loughborough,

who was now in opposition, supported the demand of the managers. The

division showed which way the inclination of the tribunal leaned. A

majority of near three to one decided in favor of the course for which

Hastings contended.

When the Court sat again, Mr. Fox, assisted by Mr. Grey, opened the

charge respecting Cheyte Sing, and several days were spent in reading

papers and hearing witnesses. The next article was that relating to the

Princesses of Oude. The conduct of this part of the case was entrusted

to Sheridan. The curiosity of the public to hear him was unbounded. His

sparkling and highly finished declamation lasted two days; but the hall

was crowded to suffocation during the whole time. It was said that fifty

guineas had been paid for a single ticket. Sheridan, when he concluded,

contrived, with a knowledge of stage effect which his father might have

envied, to sink back, as if exhausted, into the arms of Burke, who

hugged him with the energy of generous admiration.

June was now far advanced. The session could not last much longer; and

the progress which had been made in the impeachment was not very

satisfactory. There were twenty charges. On two only of these had even

the case for the prosecution been heard; and it was now a year since

Hastings had been admitted to bail.

The interest taken by the public in the trial was great when the Court

began to sit, and rose to the height when Sheridan spoke on the charge

relating to the Begums. From that time the excitement went down fast.

The spectacle had lost the attraction of novelty. The great displays of

rhetoric were over. What was behind was not of a nature to entice men of

letters from their books in the morning, or to tempt ladies who had left

the masquerade at two to be out of bed before eight. There remained

examinations and cross-examinations. There remained statements of

accounts. There remained the reading of papers, filled with words

unintelligible to English ears, with lacs and crores, zemindars and

aumils, sunnuds and perwannahs, jaghires and nuzzurs. There remained

bickerings, not always carried on with the best taste or with the best

temper, between the managers of the impeachment and the counsel for the

defence, particularly between Mr. Burke and Mr. Law. There remained the

endless marches and countermarches of the Peers between their House and

the hall: for as often as a point of law was to be discussed, their

Lordships retired to discuss it apart; and the consequence was, as a

Peer wittily said, that the Judges walked and the trial stood still.

It is to be added that, in the spring of 1788, when the trial commenced,

no important question, either of domestic or foreign policy, occupied

the public mind. The proceeding in Westminster Hall, therefore,

naturally attracted most of the attention of Parliament and of the

public. It was the one great event of that season. But in the following

year the King's illness, the debates on the Regency, the expectation of

a change of Ministry, completely diverted public attention from Indian

affairs; and within a fortnight after George the Third had returned

thanks in St. Paul's for his recovery, the States-General of France met

at Versailles. In the midst of the agitation produced by these events,

the impeachment was for a time almost forgotten.

The trial in the hall went on languidly. In the session of 1788, when

the proceedings had the interest of novelty, and when the Peers had

little other business before them, only thirty-five days were given to

the impeachment. In 1789 the Regency Bill occupied the Upper House till

the session was far advanced. When the King recovered the circuits were

beginning. The Judges left town; the Lords waited for the return of the

oracles of jurisprudence; and the consequence was that during the whole

year only seventeen days were given to the case of Hastings. It was

clear that the matter would be protracted to a length unprecedented in

the annals of criminal law.

In truth, it is impossible to deny that impeachment, though it is a fine

ceremony, and though it may have been useful in the seventeenth century,

is not a proceeding from which much good can now be expected. Whatever

confidence may be placed in the decision of the Peers on an appeal

arising out of ordinary litigation, it is certain that no man has the

least confidence in their impartiality when a great public functionary,

charged with a great state crime, is brought to their bar. They are all

politicians. There is hardly one among them whose vote on an impeachment

may not be confidently predicted before a witness has been examined;

and, even if it were possible to rely on their justice, they would still

be quite unfit to try such a cause as that of Hastings. They sit only

during half the year. They have to transact much legislative and much

judicial business. The law lords, whose advice is required to guide the

unlearned majority, are employed daily in administering justice

elsewhere. It is impossible, therefore, that during a busy session, the

Upper House should give more than a few days to an impeachment. To

expect that their Lordships would give up partridge-shooting, in order

to bring the greatest delinquent to speedy justice, or to relieve

accused innocence by speedy acquittal, would be unreasonable indeed. A

well-constituted tribunal, sitting regularly six days in the week, and

nine hours in the day, would have brought the trial of Hastings to a

close in less than three months. The Lords had not finished their work

in seven years.

The result ceased to be matter of doubt, from the time when the Lords

resolved that they would be guided by the rules of evidence which are

received in the inferior courts of the realm. Those rules, it is well

known, exclude much information which would be quite sufficient to

determine the conduct of any reasonable man, in the most important

transactions of private life. These rules, at every assizes, save scores

of culprits whom judges, jury, and spectators, firmly believe to be

guilty. But when those rules were rigidly applied to offences committed

many years before, at the distance of many thousands of miles,

conviction was, of course, out of the question. We do not blame the

accused and his counsel for availing themselves of every legal advantage

in order to obtain an acquittal. But it is clear that an acquittal so

obtained cannot be pleaded in bar of the judgment of history.

Several attempts were made by the friends of Hastings to put a stop to

the trial. In 1789 they proposed a vote of censure upon Burke, for some

violent language which he had used respecting the death of Nuncomar and

the connection between Hastings and Impey. Burke was then unpopular in

the last degree both with the House and with the country. The asperity

and indecency of some expressions which he had used during the debates

on the Regency had annoyed even his warmest friends. The vote of censure

was carried; and those who had moved it hoped that the managers would

resign in disgust. Burke was deeply hurt. But his zeal for what he

considered as the cause of justice and mercy triumphed over his personal

feelings. He received the censure of the House with dignity and

meekness, and declared that no personal mortification or humiliation

should induce him to flinch from the sacred duty which he had

undertaken.

In the following year the Parliament was dissolved, and the friends of

Hastings entertained a hope that the new House of Commons might not be

disposed to go on with the impeachment. They began by maintaining that

the whole proceeding was terminated by the dissolution. Defeated on this

point, they made a direct motion that the impeachment should be dropped;

but they were defeated by the combined forces of the Government and the

Opposition. It was, however, resolved that, for the sake of expedition,

many of the articles should be withdrawn. In truth, had not some such

measure been adopted, the trial would have lasted till the defendant was

in his grave.

At length, in the spring of 1795, the decision was pronounced, near

eight years after Hastings had been brought by the Sergeant-at-arms of

the Commons to the bar of the Lords. On the last day of this great

procedure the public curiosity, long suspended, seemed to be revived.

Anxiety about the judgment there could be none; for it had been fully

ascertained that there was a great majority for the defendant.

Nevertheless, many wished to see the pageant, and the hall was as much

crowded as on the first day. But those who, having been present on the

first day, now bore a part in the proceedings of the last, were few; and

most of those few were altered men.

As Hastings himself said, the arraignment had taken place before one

generation, and the judgment was pronounced by another. The spectator

could not look at the woolsack, or at the red benches of the Peers, or

at the green benches of the Commons, without seeing something that

reminded him of the instability of all human things, of the instability

of power and fame and life, of the more lamentable instability of

friendship. The Great Seal was borne before Lord Loughborough who, when

the trial commenced, was a fierce opponent of Mr. Pitt's government, and

who was now a member of that government, while Thurlow, who presided in

the Court when it first sat, estranged from all his old allies, sat

scowling among the junior barons. Of about a hundred and sixty nobles

who walked in the procession on the first day, sixty had been laid in

their family vaults. Still more affecting must have been the sight of

the managers' box. What had become of that fair fellowship, so closely

bound together by public and private ties, so resplendent with every

talent and accomplishment? It had been scattered by calamities more

bitter than the bitterness of death. The great chiefs were still living,

and still in the full vigor of their genius. But their friendship was at

an end. It had been violently and publicly dissolved, with tears and

stormy reproaches. If those men, once so dear to each other, were now

compelled to meet for the purpose of managing the impeachment, they met

as strangers whom public business had brought together, and behaved to

each other with cold and distant civility. Burke had in his vortex

whirled away Windham. Fox had been followed by Sheridan and Grey.

Critical and Historical Essays, Volume III (of 3) · 第 18 / 60 段