"Soon after this first revolution was effected, the fortunes of those concerned in it being made, we had an importation of Nabobs,—a circumstance which only whetted the rapacity of those who were still on the scene of action. There were now new men, a new Council to be satisfied, and the principles of the revolution of 1757 were not forgotten. It was discovered that there was a necessity for another revolution; and accordingly, in 1760, Meer Cossim was placed in the seat of Meer Jaffier. But Cossim was an able tyrant, who was soon found to be too intelligent to serve the purpose of a mere tool, and it became necessary to restore Jaffier. With Cossim, indeed, there was no stipulation for rewards. Mr. Vansittart was then Governor. Twenty lacs of rupees were offered to the Council for their favour and countenance. But no; the Company's servants put by them the proffered treasure, as Cæsar put by the crown. The Nabob was, however, given to understand, that after their masters the Company were satisfied, the servants would have no objection to receive what was offered. It was difficult to treat seriously this mighty difference between taking money before and after a treaty. The consequences are but too obvious, and amount to the same thing.
"In the case of the Nabob Najm-Dowlah which followed, the succession was a regular one, and the deputation which was sent on the occasion, headed by Mr. John Johnstone, acted with fidelity in establishing the proper heir; but they improved a regular accession to the purpose of a revolution, and enriched themselves and the other Members of the Council by presents and donations received in the course of this common discharge of an ordinary duty. "I won't," said he, "colour and conceal the conduct of the Council. They are unjustifiable. They knew of the existence of the covenants prohibiting them from receiving presents, at the very time when they bargained for and received them. I have no acquaintance with any of them. I owe them neither partiality nor grudge. I am, indeed, happy and proud to be esteemed the friend of Governor Johnstone, the relative of one whose name has been mixed in these transactions; but that has no influence on my judgment. At the same time it is not possible to overlook the mode in which evidence was procured in India, on this last subject, under the influence of Lord Clive, by persecution not to be equalled in Portugal. The witnesses were brought up under military guard: little pains were taken to contradict facts, when they were known to be false. The result of these inquiries is embodied in the infamous letter of September, 1765[194], a composition which disgraces the ablest pen by the direction in which it was employed.
"Into the question relating to the money received from the Begum[195] I shall not enter, as the Report is not yet on the table. But from the documents before the House, it will appear that the total amount of the presents and donations received by Lord Clive was 2,000,000 of rupees, exclusive of the jaghire. My object is, that restitution of this sum should be made to the Company and the sufferers. If any man can say that these sums were received according to the correct definition of presents, I shall be exceedingly surprized. Such is not the light in which I hold them.
"Let it be remembered, that the revolution of 1757 was the foundation and the model of all the subsequent revolutions. Our vindictive justice must go back to the origin of the evil. It is in many mouths, the hardship of taking up a subject after such a time, and of wresting from a man a fortune valiantly obtained and generously dispensed. If time is to sanctify such offences, we should bring in a statute of limitation of robbery. Let it not be said, that the magnitude of the offence, and the wealth and dignity of the offender, are to be deemed a sufficient justification.
"No public notice was given to the Company of the receipt of these sums. But it is said that there is no instance of reporting to the Company private donations, though they were always understood to be received; and it is said that Lord Clive's were known to the Court. If so, I shall be glad to hear only a letter saying so.—But they acquiesced when they were known. That I deny. A Court of Proprietors passed, in 1760, a positive order to institute a minute inquiry about these presents. It is said that he had rendered great and important services to the Company and his country. No doubt, services should be duly weighed, and national rewards bestowed on national services, and that amply. I wish to see the names of Lawrence, Draper, Monson, and of many other eminent men, who have rescued us from more than Indian armies, honoured with due estimation; and far be it from me to deny to Lord Clive the meed of praise that is due to him. But in coming to a judgment on the grave and serious charges now before the House, all partiality and all prejudice in a man's favour should be laid aside: an act of national justice is called for; it is not to be influenced by wealth or connections, and will be given if a particle of that vital fire that first invigorated this constitution still remains. Imitate the first example of antiquity, and strike, like Manlius, when the justice of the State requires it.
"I wish not to plunder or impoverish Lord Clive, or the subjects of this motion. I am willing they should remain in possession of such rewards as a generous State would give. What I ask is, a Bill for the satisfaction of sufferers out of the private estates of persons who received sums of money unwarrantably. Such satisfaction ought to be made to the Company, and applied to the discharge of their debts. Leave something to them of their overgrown fortunes, but let it be upon European principles; let it be arranged on the principles of the better times of our history. Where were jaghires and private donations in the time of King William, to whom our liberties owe so much? In the Act to be passed, let the monies go, as they should originally have done, to the State. I have no desire, no wish, that after satisfaction has been made, any odium should remain against the accused. I have offered them an opportunity of bringing their characters from under the cloud which has surrounded them, and of justifying themselves to the world." He concluded by moving, "That it appears to this House, that the Right Hon. Robert Lord Clive, Baron of Plassey in the kingdom of Ireland, about the time of the deposition of Suraj-u-Dowlah, and the establishment of Meer Jaffier on the musmud, through the influence of the powers with which he was entrusted as a member of the Select Committee and Commander-in-chief of the British forces, did obtain and possess himself of 2 lacs of rupees as Commander-in-chief, a farther sum of 2 lacs and 80,000 rupees as member of the Select Committee, and a farther sum of 16 lacs or more under the denomination of a private donation; which sums, amounting together to 20 lacs and 80,000 rupees, were of the value, in English money, of 234,000l.; and that, in so doing, the said Robert Lord Clive abused the power with which he was entrusted, to the evil example of the servants of the public, and to the dishonour and detriment of the State."[196]
These resolutions were seconded by Sir Wm. Meredith, who combated the notion of the supposed hardship of bringing up such charges, after a period of sixteen years, and contended that length of time could not improve the title to wealth so acquired. As to presents, he denied that covenants alone made the receiving of them a crime, or that where there were no covenants they were legal: that it had been found, indeed, that presents had been taken, after the receipt of the covenants, by Mr. Johnstone and others, in circumstances which had been investigated and published by Lord Clive; but that it did not appear that the ill-blood excited by such disclosure had had the slightest influence on the conduct of his brother, the Governor, who had carried on the investigation before the Committee with perfect exactness: that it could not be overlooked, that the evidence against that gentleman had been taken in a most illegal manner, the witnesses being under restraint: that Lord Clive's supposed generosity in not plundering Moorshedabad was nugatory; that he entered it not as a conqueror, but as an ally: nor would the assertion, that there was no criminal intention in receiving the presents, acquit him; that would only affect the extent of the consequences. Colonel Burgoyne's original motion was to be kept in mind, and that he was content to leave him all that his merit deserved. Others had fought against European enemies, he against wretched Indians,—a circumstance not to be forgotten in estimating the comparative merit of officers.
Mr. Wedderburn (then Solicitor-General) strenuously opposed the motion. He said that the House was in danger of being led blindly and inconsiderately, from misdirected feelings, to commit a grand injustice towards one of the most illustrious men of his country. With respect to presents, on which the burthen of the accusation lay, he argued, that there were some, indeed many, situations, wherein the receipt of presents was justifiable upon every principle of disinterested integrity: and such, he contended, they were in the present instance, where a great capital had been saved from the horrors of pillage, or military contribution; and where signal services had been rendered to a sovereign Prince, who had adopted only the ordinary means of showing his gratitude: they were justifiable both from the extraordinary circumstances of the case, and from the known customs and usages of the country. He largely expatiated on the deep obligations under which the nation lay to Lord Clive; and affirmed, that for the Parliament to accuse a man of delinquency, upon the necessarily partial report of a Select Committee, would be to accuse him without competent evidence, and to be guilty of an act of flagrant injustice.
Mr. Richard Fuller, one of the Committee, took a similar view of the case; and while he doubted the competency of the kind of evidence, declared that the latter part of the Committee's report was undoubtedly not true.