last political acts was this.

Your Lordships will remember that Mr. Goodlad was sent up into the
country, whose conduct was terrible indeed: for that he could not be in
place and authority in that country, and be innocent, while such things
were doing, I shall prove. But that is not now my consideration.

The Governor-General's minute, just read, is this. "I entirely acquit
Mr. Goodlad of all the charges: he has disproved them. It was the duty
of the accuser to prove them" (the accuser, namely, the commissioner).
"Whatever crimes may be established against Rajah Debi Sing, it does not
follow that Mr. Goodlad was responsible for them; and I so well know the
character," &c., &c., &c.

Now your Lordships perceive he has acquitted Mr. Goodlad. He is clear.
Be it that he is fairly and conscientiously acquitted. But what is Mr.
Hastings's account of Rajah Debi Sing? He is presented to him in 1781,
by Gunga Govind Sing, as a person against whose character there could be
no exception, and by him accepted in that light. Upon the occasion I
have mentioned, Mr. Hastings's opinion of him is this: "I so well know
the character and abilities of Rajah Debi Sing, that I can easily
conceive that it was in his power both to commit the enormities which
are laid to his charge, and to conceal the grounds of them from Mr.
Goodlad, who had no authority but that of receiving the accounts and
rents of the district from Rajah Debi Sing, and occasionally to be the
channel of communication between him and the Committee."

Thus your Lordships see what Mr. Hastings's opinion of Debi Sing was. We
shall prove it at another time, by abundance of clear and demonstrative
evidence, that, whether he was bad or no, (but we shall prove that bad
he was indeed,) _even he_ could hardly be so bad as he was in the
opinion which Mr. Hastings entertained of him; who, notwithstanding, now
disowns this mock Committee, instituted by himself, but, in reality,
entirely managed by Gunga Govind Sing. This Debi Sing was accepted as an
unexceptionable man; and yet Mr. Hastings knows both his power of doing
mischief and his artifice in concealing it. If, then, Mr. Goodlad is to
be acquitted, does it not show the evil of Mr. Hastings's conduct in
destroying those Provincial Councils which, as I have already stated,
were obliged to book everything, to minute all the circumstances which
came before them, together with all the consultations respecting them?
He strikes at th