hall never go out of ours, that his covenant did not allow
him to take above four hundred pounds as a present, upon any pretence
whatsoever.

Your Lordships will observe we contend, that, if there was a custom,
this covenant puts an end to that custom. It was declared and intended
so to do. The fact is, that, if such custom existed at all, it was a
custom applicable only to an ambassador or public minister sent on a
necessary complimentary visit to a sovereign prince. We deny,
positively, that there is any such general custom. We say, that he never
was any such minister or that he ever went upon any such complimentary
visit. We affirm, that, when he took this money, he was doing an act of
quite another nature, and came upon that business only to Moorshedabad,
the residence of the prince of the country. Now do you call a man who is
going to execute a commission, a commission more severe than those
issued against bankrupts, a commission to take away half a man's income,
and to starve a whole body of people dependent upon that income,--do you
call this a complimentary visit? Is this a visit for which a man is to
have great entertainments given him? No, the pretence for taking this
money is worse than the act itself. When a man is going to execute upon
another such harsh cruelty, when he is going upon a service at which he
himself says his mind must revolt, is that precisely the time when he is
to take from his undone host a present, as if he was upon a visit of
compliment, or about to confer some honor or benefit upon him,--to
augment his revenues, to add to his territories, or to conclude some
valuable treaty with him? Was this a proper time to take at all from an
helpless minor so large a sum of money?

And here I shall leave this matter for your Lordships' consideration,
after reminding you that this poor Nabob is still at Moorshedabad, and
at the mercy of any English gentleman who may choose to take 18,000_l._,
or any other given sum of money from him, after the example of the
prisoner at your bar, if it should be sanctioned by your connivance. Far
different was the example set him by General Clavering. In page 1269
your Lordships will find the most honorable testimony to the uprightness
and fidelity of this meritorious servant of the Company. It runs thus:
"Conceiving it to be the intention of the legislature that the
Governor-General and members of the Council should receive no presents,
either from the Indian power