India. Burke violently opposed this and every
step by which the territorial power of the company was brought into
subjection to parliament. It was, indeed, with some justice that he
urged that the violation of the royal charter held by the company was a
dangerous precedent, that the claim to the territorial revenue was
arbitrary, and that parliament had increased the company's distress by
extorting from it the payment of L400,000 a year, and had done nothing
for it in return. The case for the company was supported in both houses
by the Rockingham party generally.

North was supreme in both houses, and, in June 1773, carried his
regulating bill. The company received from government a loan of
L1,400,000 at 4 per cent., its annual payment of L400,000 was remitted
until the loan was repaid; its future dividends were restricted in
amount, and its authority in accepting bills from India curtailed; it
was to submit its accounts to the treasury, and to export British goods
to a certain yearly value. In order to assist the company which had a
large stock of tea on hand, it was agreed that it might export this tea
direct and duty free to America, a decision which proved of momentous
import. A court of supreme jurisdiction was created, consisting of a
chief justice and three puisne judges, appointed by the crown and with
fixed salaries. The governor of Bengal was made governor-general of
British India and was to act with a council of four. The first
governor-general, Warren Hastings, then governor of Bengal, and his
council were appointed by the act; their successors were to be appointed
by the directors and approved by the crown. All military and civil
matters which came before the directors were to be submitted to the
crown. No officer of the crown or of the company was to accept any
presents. The act transferred the government of India from a trading
company to the crown. Constitutionally, its weakest point was the
appointment of executive officers in parliament; for all officers should
be appointed by the crown, and its action should be subject to
parliamentary check. As regards the arrangement of government, the act
should have defined the relations between the supreme court and the
council, and between the governor-general, the directors, and the crown,
and should not have left the governor-general in a position to be
overruled by his council.

During the debates on these measures the publication of the report of
the sele