I never had a paper sent to me officially, of course I could not be officially informed of the circumstances mentioned by the honourable gentleman. It is necessary I should explain that I was privy to the measure the honourable gentleman mention but it was by personal communication with the governorgeneral. A month or two before I left Bengal, the governor-general did me the honour to invite me to a garden house he set apart for my accommodation; I was in constant communication with him from that time till my departure, and I perfectly recollect that, in a confidential communication which passed between us a few days before I left India for England, he particularly, in desiring me to make communication to persons high in office in this country, included that subject. I also had frequent communications with him upon it at other times, at merely occasional meetings, when I saw him at breakfast, or at other times. I had no official information of it whatever. I should add, that I was not responsible under the act, for any acts done by the council when my attendance was not regular.

You mean distinctly to state, that, from 1798 until within a month or two before your departure, you were entirely ignorant, as a member of the council, of his lordship's intentions of retaining the whole of Oude for the company, or failing in that, one-half ? By no means; there was an application, I be lieve, about the month of November, 1799, or nearly about that period, a proposition from the nabob to the governorgeneral to abdicate his throne; all the correspondence that passed on that occasion I was privy to; that was previous to the period I have before-mentioned, of my being obliged to retire from the council from indisposition. I also perfectly recollect my great anxiety that that negotiation should not fail; and nothing gave me greater uneasiness, conceiving it of the greatest importance to the interests of the British empire, than to find that it finally had failed."

Did you not approve of the treaty made in 1798, by Sir John Shore ? Entirely.

State how long you have been in India. -I was in India from May 1769 till February, 1801..

Be so good as to state whether you had constant communication, and the fallest information from the governor

general, as a member of the council, in every transaction of his government, during the time lord Wellesley was governor-general?-I firmly believe I had; it is impossible to conceive that any two people, situated as myself and the noble marquis were relatively, could have, at all times, on the business of government, more unreserved and fuil communications. It was impossible any body could be treated with greater marks of attention, or receive greater proofs of his confidence than I did, as a membet of the council, during the whole of my residence in India after the arrival of the noble marquis.

You have been in Oude ?- I have, but it is a very long time since.

Will you state your opinion of the state of the administration of the nabob of Oude during the time you were there ?It is impossible to conceive a state of greater anarchy, or misrule, that has prevailed in the dominions of Oude; as far back certainly as I can recollect, there has been neither law, nor justice, nor subordination of any kind.

As far as you had the knowledge, did the resources of the country decline during your knowledge of them ?They continued to decline from the first acquaintance I had with the dominions of Oude, till the last hour of my staying in India.

Were they in a progressive state of decline during the whole of that time? -Yes.

To what cause do you suppose that decline of the revenues is to be attri buted ?-To the total want of all govern ment in that country.

What was the state of the police of the country ?-There was none that I ever heard of.

Were robberies frequent ?-Very so, as far as I am informed; but I beg it to be understood, that I am speaking of the time I myself was there; they.ertainly were, when I was there, very frequent; every possible act of outrage the subjects of Oude were exposed to.

State during what period you were in Oude, from what time to what time?— I arrived in Oude in January, or Febru ary, 1783, and left it in the month of February, 1784; I was only a year

there.

While you were a member of the supreme council in Bengal, what did you understand to be the opinion of the

court

court of directors respecting the reduction of the troops in the service of the nabob of Oude ?- From all the communications and directions received from the court of directors on that subject, as far as I recollect them through the Eve hundred volumes I have been a party to, I cannot be expected to refer to dates particularly; their uniform opinion was, that nothing could be more ruinous to the state and the affairs of Oude than the existence of those troops, and the most earnest recommendations to their council were to prevail on the nabob to reduce them as much as possible, as much as was consistent with the safety of the country, and the collection of the

revenues.

You belonged to the council when the nabob's troops were disbanded, in the years 1799 and 1800?-I did belong to the council at that time.

You approved of that measure?— Entirely.

Did you consider that the council were at that time acting in conformity with the orders and instructions of the court of directors? Most undoubtedly; on that subject I beg leave to refer to a letter, of the court of directors, of the 15th of May, 1799, paragraph 40, page 30, of No. 1.- The large, useless,

and expensive, military establishment "within the Oude dominions, appears "to us to be one of the principal objects "of economical reform; and we have "much satisfaction in finding that the “subject has already come under your "consideration."

Did you consider that, in the relative situation of the nabob towards the company, the reduction of his troops was any attack on what was called his independence?-Certainly not.

Did you consider the nabob to be at all in the light of an independent sovereign, in respect of the company's government? -Certainly not.

What were the circumstances in his situation which, in your opinion, differed from the situation of an indepens dent sovereign?-They are so various it would be very difficult to recite them; perhaps one or two circumstances will sufficiently shew: he could not be possibly considered as an independent prince, certainly he cannot, with any reference to the interpretation of the writers on the law of nations in Europe. I take the liberty to refer to a note I made in looking over Monsieur de Vattal; speaking

of the allies, and the friends, of the Romans, he says, “Most of these, though called friends and allies of the Romans, no longer formed states; within themselves they were governed by their own laws and magistrates, but without, they were obliged to follow the orders of Rome; they dared not themselves make war nor alliance, nor could they treat with nations." I take the liberty of quoting that passage to the house, for the purpose of applying it to the 13h article of the treaty of 1798, made between the East India company and the nabob vizier, Saadut Ali Khan.-"As the political interests of the nabob Saadut Ali Khan and the English company are the same, it is expedient, and agreed, that all correspondence between the nabob Saadut Ali Khan and any foreign power, or state, shall be carried on with the knowledge and concurrence of the company; and the nabob Saadut Ali Khan agrees, and promises, that no correspondence contrary to the tenor of this arucle shall be carried on by him." On that, and a variety of other circumstances that I could adduce, though not immediately in my recollection while I stand at this bar, I found my opinion, that the nabob cannot be considered as an independent prince.

Do you recollect any instance of the governor-general having required him to appoint particular persons as his ministers ?—I do; lord Cornwallis did during his government, and, as I recollect, the records will shew there was an interference of that kind by the governor and council, and, I believe also, that the ministers appointed afterwards, during the reign of vizier Ali, were appointed at the recommendation of the company; however, of this last fact I am not quite certain; but I beg to refer to the records on that subject; it is a very long time since those occur rences happened, and I certainly did not expect, after my return to Europe, I should be called upon to speak to them, and, therefore, it is possible I may be, in some instances, inaccurate.

Do you recollect any instance in which Sir John Shore requested the nabob to appoint two persons as his ministers ?I think I do, when Sir John Shore went up to Lucknow, for the purpose of making arrangements at Oude with the nabob of Oude, but I cannot real y refer to dates.

Did you know colonel Scott ?-I had the honour of knowing colonel Scott, and a better man, a man more beloved, or more respected, than colonel Scott, I am sure, never went to India, nor died in India; perhaps, on the subject of colonel Scott's character, I can mention a circumstance which will be of much more importance to it than any thing I could say on the subject, and it is this: on an occasion of the mention of that gentleman in the presence of lord Cornwallis, then governor - general, at the time, I believe, major Scott, as he was then, was in a high military office under government, his lordship expressed to me the highest respect and esteem for that gentleman's character.

Did not the ministers of Oude consider themselves, and were not they considered as responsible, not only to the nabob of Oude, but to the British government also, for their conduct P Completely so; I believe the records will shew that in the fullest and clearest manner; and it certainly was the opinion of all the subjects of Oude, that they existed only under the protection of the British government; they could not have held their places an hour without that protection.

Do you know of any act of extortion, injustice, or violence, of the late governor lord Wellesley, while he was in India?Certainly not.

What was the general opinion enter tained in India, both amongst Europeans and Natives, of the late governor-general, as far as you had opportunities of being acquainted with them ?- My communication with the Europeans and Natives was confined to those at Calcutta ; as far as that communication gave me an opportunity of knowing their sentiments, nothing could be more favourable to the late governor-general in every respect.

How do you think the imputation of rapine, injustice, oppression, hypocrisy, and murder, against the late governorgeneral, would be received in India, either by the Europeans or the natives? -Certainly with great surprize, and I should think with great indignation also.

Had you any opportunity of being acquainted with the conduct of Mr. Henry Wellesley during his mission into Oude? I had not; his deputation to Oude took place after my return to England.

Had you any knowledge of the general character Mr. Henry Wellesley bore ?→→ I believe a most excellent one, as far as I have had opportunities of knowing it whilst I was in India.

Does your opinion, that the company had a right to disband the troops of the nabob, arise from any knowledge you had of an agreement that the company should do so; do you find it in any treaty, or do you only judge generally from his situation ?-1 judge generally from his situation, and the whole prac tice of the company, with respect to the government of that country relatively to their own.

At the time the treaty of 1798 was entered into, which guaranteed to him that country, had he any troops or any forces of his own?-He certainly had an armed rabble.

He had such an army as might be called an armed rabble?- Certainly, such as could not be considered as military troops.

Do you not think that, if the nabob had imagined, when the country was guaranteed to him by that treaty, any claim would be made by the company to disband his troops, he would have had an article inserted to secure to him the right of keeping up his army?I cannot give any opinion upon that question.

Does not the treaty guarantee to him the full dominion over his household affairs, his troops, and his subjects?— Yes, there is that clause in the treaty.

He had an army at that time?—Yes, which the company recommended should be removed as soon as possible.

You were only one year in Oude?— No, that was a very eventful period.

Do you not know that Mr. Hastings received addresses from the inhabitants of Calcutta, and India, in general, after his return to England ?--I do recollect there was some address to Mr. Hastings at the time of his departure from the inhabitants of Calcutta.

Have you no recollection of an address to Mr. Hastings after his departure? There was one on his trial, I believe.

Have you any recollection of an address from the inhabitants of the hills to Mr. Hastings, when they heard he was accused?-No, I have so little knowledge of the trial of Mr. Hastings, I cannot speak upon that.

Was not Mr. Hastings extremely popular

popular at Calcutta?—I cannot say as to that.

Was there not a general address to Mr. Hastings when he left Calcutta?Yes, of the British inhabitants.

With your ideas, that the revenue was on the decline from the first hour of your acquaintance with Oude to the last, if the whole or nearly the whole of the Bengal army had been drawn to the frontiers for mutual defence, do you conceive that the nabob ought to be required to pay the whole of the expence ?-I think the company would have had a right to make such a demand upon him, but I do not say that any government would have thought it politic to exact it from him.

Had you any opportunity of knowing the actual state of the finances of Oude in 1784, when you were in Qude?-I certainly at that time did know them, but it is impossible for me, standing at this bar, to state them; it is a matter of account which passed many years ago; they were then in a very bad state, and have been since on the decline.

Have you any recollection, within a few lacks of rupees, of the amount ?—I really cannot state it, I might appear to be very inaccurate, and state perhaps within the amount of fifty lacks, but I really cannot answer the question.

In 1792-3, had you an opportunity of knowing the revenues of Oude ?—I certainly had opportunities, because I could have referred to the Accountant's Office, where a statement of them would be found.

In 1792-3, had you any opportunity of knowing the revenues of Oude ?—I had no other opportunity than that offorded to every member of the Bengal government to consult the records; of course there were accounts to be found in the Accountant-General's office.

Did you ever see a statement of that kind? Of course I must.

Have you any faint recollection of the state of the revenues in 1793?-No, I have not, as referable to any other period.

In 1797-8, towards the close of the year 1797, and the beginning of 1798, had you any opportunity of seeing an account of the revenues of Oude?Whilst I continued a member of the council, I had always the same opportunities of consulting the accounts of the revenues of Oude, as well as those of Bengal.

You have stated, that you consider the

revenues to be on the decline from the first year you were acquainted with them to the last ?-I have.

In the treaty of 1798, was there not an engagement on the part of the nabob, pledging himself, in concert with the British government, to the reduction of his troops and expences?-I believe there

was.

Have you any knowledge of the nabob having reduced his troops and expences, according to the engagements therein contained?-I certainly have not: on the contrary, that was the complaint of the government of Bengal against the nabob, that no entreaty, no application whatever, had the smallest tendency in producing that effect.

Repeated remonstrances were made to him upon that subject, which were ineffectual?-Certainly; the records will be found to abound with them.

From your knowledge of the situation Oude, you state, that there were several outrages committed in that country? -Yes.

Also that the police of the country was very bad ?-Yes,

Can you state to the committee, whether outrages and enormities, and the bad state of the police, were peculiar to Oude, and did not exist in any other part of India?-Exclusively of the company's dominions, I believe that the same anarchy prevails throughout India.

As a member of the supreme council of Bengal, was it your opinion, that it was your duty, whenever you found the police of any government in India, a dependent govern.nent, or any other, to be miserably bad, and defective, according to your opinion of governments, to interfere in the internal regulation of that government so found defective ?-Certainly not, except those that were under particular circumstances of connection with the British government.

You did not feel it your duty ?-Certainly not; if my situation had been at Madras, I should have thought it neces sary to have advised an interference, under the same circumstances of misrule, in the provinces belonging to the nabob of Arcot.

You did not conceive it your duty, however you might be convinced of the defective state of any government in India, not immediately properly so called, attached to the British possessions in India as a member of the council, though convinced of the very defective system

pursued