Edmund Burk

1]Warren Hastings Warren Hastings was the first Governor-General of British India, serving from 1773 to 1785. He is regarded as one of the principal architects of British rule in India because he strengthened the administrative and political authority of the East India Company after the Regulating Act of 1773. During his administration, the Company gradually changed from a commercial organization into a territorial and political power. Hastings introduced several administrative and judicial reforms to improve the Company’s government. He reorganized the revenue system, established civil and criminal courts, and attempted to govern India through a combination of British administration and Indian laws and customs. He also encouraged Oriental learning by supporting the study of Sanskrit and Persian, founding the Calcutta Madrasa (1781), and patronizing the Asiatic Society of Bengal, founded by Sir William Jones in 1784. For these reasons, many historians regard him as an able and energetic administrator. However, Hastings remains one of the most controversial figures in British colonial history. He was accused of abusing political power for the benefit of the East India Company. His involvement in the Rohilla War, his harsh treatment of Raja Chait Singh of Benares, the confiscation of the wealth of the Begums of Oudh, and the controversial case of Rajah Nundcomar severely damaged his reputation. These incidents led to his impeachment before the British Parliament in 1788. The impeachment, led by Edmund Burke, lasted nearly seven years. Although Hastings was finally acquitted in 1795, the long trial ruined him financially and left a lasting stain on his public image.In Burke’s Speech on the East India Bill, Warren Hastings is portrayed as the chief representative of the East India Company’s corruption, tyranny, and abuse of power. Burke argues that Hastings transformed government into an instrument of commercial greed, violated treaties, oppressed Indian rulers, and sacrificed justice for political and financial gain. Thus, Hastings becomes, in Burke’s view, not merely an individual governor but the symbol of colonial exploitation and moral failure.In conclusion, Warren Hastings occupies a complex position in history. He was an efficient administrator who helped establish British rule in India and encouraged the study of Indian culture, yet his aggressive policies and alleged misuse of power made him one of the most controversial figures of the British Empire. His administration became the central target of Edmund Burke’s powerful criticism of imperial corruption and unethical government. 1]Warren Hastings ওয়ারেন হেস্টিংস (১৭৩২–১৮১৮) ছিলেন ব্রিটিশ ভারতের প্রথম গভর্নর-জেনারেল, যিনি ১৭৭৩ থেকে ১৭৮৫ সাল পর্যন্ত দায়িত্ব পালন করেন। ১৭৭৩ সালের Regulating Act-এর পর তিনি ইস্ট ইন্ডিয়া কোম্পানির প্রশাসনিক ও রাজনৈতিক ক্ষমতা সুদৃঢ় করেন। এ কারণে তাঁকে ভারতে ব্রিটিশ শাসনের অন্যতম প্রধান স্থপতি হিসেবে গণ্য করা হয়। তাঁর শাসনামলে ইস্ট ইন্ডিয়া কোম্পানি ধীরে ধীরে একটি বাণিজ্যিক প্রতিষ্ঠান থেকে একটি আঞ্চলিক ও রাজনৈতিক শক্তিতে পরিণত হয়।হেস্টিংস কোম্পানির প্রশাসনকে আরও কার্যকর করার জন্য বিভিন্ন প্রশাসনিক ও বিচার বিভাগীয় সংস্কার প্রবর্তন করেন। তিনি রাজস্ব ব্যবস্থার পুনর্গঠন করেন, দেওয়ানি ও ফৌজদারি আদালত প্রতিষ্ঠা করেন এবং ব্রিটিশ প্রশাসনিক নীতির সঙ্গে ভারতীয় আইন ও প্রথার সমন্বয় ঘটিয়ে শাসন পরিচালনার চেষ্টা করেন। তিনি প্রাচ্য শিক্ষা ও সংস্কৃতিরও পৃষ্ঠপোষক ছিলেন। সংস্কৃত ও ফারসি ভাষার অধ্যয়নকে উৎসাহিত করেন, ১৭৮১ সালে কলকাতা মাদ্রাসা প্রতিষ্ঠা করেন এবং স্যার উইলিয়াম জোন্স প্রতিষ্ঠিত এশিয়াটিক সোসাইটি অব বেঙ্গল (১৭৮৪)-কে পৃষ্ঠপোষকতা প্রদান করেন। এসব কারণে অনেক ইতিহাসবিদ তাঁকে একজন দক্ষ, কর্মঠ ও দূরদর্শী প্রশাসক হিসেবে মূল্যায়ন করেছেন।তবে হেস্টিংস ব্রিটিশ ঔপনিবেশিক ইতিহাসের অন্যতম বিতর্কিত ব্যক্তিত্বও বটে। তাঁর বিরুদ্ধে ইস্ট ইন্ডিয়া কোম্পানির স্বার্থে রাজনৈতিক ক্ষমতার অপব্যবহারের অভিযোগ ওঠে। রোহিলা যুদ্ধে তাঁর ভূমিকা, বেনারসের রাজা চৈত সিংহের প্রতি কঠোর আচরণ, আওধের বেগমদের সম্পদ বাজেয়াপ্ত করা এবং রাজা নন্দকুমারের বিতর্কিত মামলার মতো ঘটনাগুলো তাঁর সুনামকে মারাত্মকভাবে ক্ষতিগ্রস্ত করে। এসব ঘটনার কারণে ১৭৮৮ সালে ব্রিটিশ পার্লামেন্টে তাঁর বিরুদ্ধে অভিশংসন (Impeachment) শুরু হয়। এডমন্ড বার্কের নেতৃত্বে পরিচালিত এই বিচারপ্রক্রিয়া প্রায় সাত বছর ধরে চলে। যদিও ১৭৯৫ সালে হেস্টিংস সব অভিযোগ থেকে খালাস পান, তবুও দীর্ঘ বিচারপ্রক্রিয়া তাঁকে আর্থিকভাবে বিপর্যস্ত করে এবং তাঁর জনসম্মুখের ভাবমূর্তিকে স্থায়ীভাবে ক্ষুণ্ণ করে।এডমন্ড বার্ক তাঁর Speech on the East India Bill-এ ওয়ারেন হেস্টিংসকে ইস্ট ইন্ডিয়া কোম্পানির দুর্নীতি, স্বৈরাচার এবং ক্ষমতার অপব্যবহারের প্রধান প্রতিনিধি হিসেবে উপস্থাপন করেছেন। বার্কের মতে, হেস্টিংস সরকারকে বাণিজ্যিক লোভের হাতিয়ারে পরিণত করেছিলেন। তিনি বিভিন্ন চুক্তি ভঙ্গ করেন, ভারতীয় শাসকদের ওপর অত্যাচার চালান এবং রাজনৈতিক ও আর্থিক লাভের জন্য ন্যায়বিচারকে বিসর্জন দেন। ফলে বার্কের দৃষ্টিতে হেস্টিংস কেবল একজন গভর্নর-জেনারেল নন; তিনি ঔপনিবেশিক শোষণ, দুর্নীতি এবং নৈতিক অবক্ষয়ের প্রতীক।উপসংহারে, বলা যায় যে ওয়ারেন হেস্টিংস ইতিহাসে এক জটিল ও বহুমাত্রিক ব্যক্তিত্ব। একদিকে তিনি একজন দক্ষ প্রশাসক হিসেবে ভারতে ব্রিটিশ শাসনের ভিত্তি সুদৃঢ় করেন এবং ভারতীয় শিক্ষা ও সংস্কৃতির বিকাশে গুরুত্বপূর্ণ ভূমিকা রাখেন। অন্যদিকে, তাঁর আক্রমণাত্মক নীতি এবং ক্ষমতার অপব্যবহারের অভিযোগ তাঁকে ব্রিটিশ সাম্রাজ্যের অন্যতম বিতর্কিত শাসকে পরিণত করে। তাঁর প্রশাসনই এডমন্ড বার্কের ঔপনিবেশিক দুর্নীতি, অন্যায় এবং অনৈতিক শাসনের বিরুদ্ধে তীব্র সমালোচনার প্রধান লক্ষ্যবস্তু হয়ে ওঠে। 2]The Magna Carta The Magna Carta (Latin for “Great Charter”) is one of the most significant constitutional documents in English history. It was sealed by King John of England on 15 June 1215 at Runnymede, near Windsor, after a rebellion by the English barons. The charter was created to curb the king’s arbitrary rule, excessive taxation, and abuse of feudal authority. Although it was originally intended to settle a political conflict between the king and his nobles, it later became a symbol of liberty, justice, and the rule of law.The Magna Carta originally contained 63 clauses dealing with legal, political, and feudal matters. Among its most important provisions were the protection of the rights and privileges of the Church, the guarantee that no free man could be imprisoned, punished, or deprived of property except by the lawful judgment of his peers or according to the law of the land, and the principle that justice should neither be sold, delayed, nor denied. It also regulated feudal payments, protected the rights of landowners and tenants, and granted merchants greater freedom of trade.The greatest importance of the Magna Carta lies in its limitation of the king’s absolute power. It established the revolutionary principle that the monarch was subject to the law rather than above it. It also strengthened the idea that taxation required the consent of the kingdom’s representatives, a

Answer: Edmund Burke was one of the greatest British parliamentarians, political philosophers, and prose writers of the eighteenth century. His Speech on the East India Bill (1783) is one of the most powerful political speeches in English literature. In this speech, Burke demonstrates an extraordinary knowledge of India and strongly condemns the East India Company for its corruption, oppression, and misuse of political authority. Although Burke never visited India, he carefully studied official records, parliamentary reports, historical documents, and eyewitness accounts. As a result, his speech combines historical accuracy with moral passion. He presents the East India Company not as a civilizing force but as an institution that sacrificed justice and humanity for commercial profit. Burke’s Knowledge of India One of the most remarkable features of Burke’s speech is his deep knowledge of Indian affairs. He was familiar with the political condition of Bengal, Awadh (Oude), Rohilkhand, and the Mughal Empire. He knew the history of Indian rulers, the Company’s treaties, and the administrative system established after the Battle of Plassey.Burke possessed detailed information about important historical figures such as the Mughal Emperor Shah Alam II, Sujah-ud-Daulah, Mir Jafar, Mir Kasim, Warren Hastings, Rajah Nundcomar, and the Begums of Oude. His references to places like Corah, Allahabad, Bengal, and Rohilkhand show that he had thoroughly investigated the Company’s activities in India.Unlike many British politicians of his age, Burke respected India’s ancient civilization. He believed that Indians were entitled to the same justice and protection as British subjects. Therefore, his criticism was based not on prejudice against India but on sympathy for its people. The Company as a Commercial Body Turned Political Tyrant Burke argues that the East India Company was created for trade, not for government. However, after acquiring political power, it began exercising sovereign authority over millions of Indians. According to Burke, a commercial corporation governed by profit could never become a just political authority.Instead of protecting the people, the Company used its political power to increase its wealth. Burke therefore regarded its administration as fundamentally immoral and dangerous. Abuse of Political Power Burke summarizes the Company’s administration in his famous description:“An oppressive, irregular, capricious, unsteady, rapacious, and peculating despotism.”This sentence expresses his complete condemnation of Company rule. He believed its government was oppressive because it burdened the people, irregular because it ignored justice, capricious because it acted according to personal interest, rapacious because of its greed, and peculating because corruption existed throughout the administration.In Burke’s opinion, the Company betrayed the trust placed in it by Parliament and transformed government into organized exploitation. Exploitation of the Mughal Emperor Burke illustrates the Company’s injustice through its treatment of the Mughal Emperor. Once the supreme ruler of India, the Emperor was stripped of both authority and revenue. His provinces of Corah and Allahabad were transferred to Sujah-ud-Daulah, and he was left almost powerless.Burke expresses deep sympathy for the Emperor, remarking that the descendant of the great Tamerlane was deprived even of the necessities of life. This incident symbolizes the Company’s betrayal of those whom it had promised to protect. The Rohilla War Burke presents the Rohilla War as one of the most disgraceful examples of the Company’s cruelty. The Rohillas were virtually sold to Sujah-ud-Daulah for four hundred thousand pounds, and Company troops assisted in their destruction.Their brave leader, Hafiz Rahmat Khan, was killed, his family was reduced to poverty, and their prosperous country became desolate. Burke uses this example to demonstrate that the Company valued money more than justice or human life. Betrayal of Indian Princes Burke repeatedly accuses the Company of betraying Indian rulers whenever it became profitable to do so. Siraj-ud-Daulah was overthrown; Mir Jafar was installed; Mir Kasim replaced him; and finally Mir Jafar was restored.These constant changes were motivated not by justice or good government but by financial advantage. Burke concludes that there was scarcely an Indian prince who had not suffered from British deception. Oppression of the Begums of Oude Another striking example is the treatment of the Begums of Oude. Burke argues that they were falsely accused of rebellion merely to justify confiscating their immense wealth.Their humiliation and financial ruin reveal how greed had replaced justice under Company rule. Burke regarded this incident as one of the greatest disgraces of British administration in India. The Case of Rajah Nundcomar Burke also refers to the execution of Rajah Nundcomar, who accused Warren Hastings of accepting bribes. Soon afterward, he was convicted of forgery and publicly hanged.Although the trial appeared legal, Burke believed that it was politically motivated and intended to silence a man who exposed corruption. The incident became, in Burke’s view, another example of the Company’s abuse of judicial power. Economic Exploitation Burke argues that the Company’s principal aim was commercial profit rather than public welfare. Excessive taxation, confiscation of property, monopolistic trade, and systematic exploitation transferred India’s wealth to Britain while leaving millions of Indians in poverty.According to Burke, government exists for the benefit of the people, not for the enrichment of private individuals. The East India Company completely violated this principle. Burke’s Demand for Reform Burke did not merely criticize; he proposed reform. He supported the East India Bill because it sought to place Indian administration under parliamentary control. He believed that political authority should be separated from commercial interests and exercised with justice, honesty, responsibility, and accountability.Only such reforms, he argued, could protect the rights of the Indian people and preserve Britain’s moral reputation. To sum up, Burke’s Speech on the East India Bill demonstrates both his remarkable knowledge of India and his uncompromising opposition to the East India Company’s abuse of power. Through detailed historical examples, he exposes the Company’s corruption, political manipulation, economic exploitation, and moral failure. His sympathy for the Mughal Emperor, the Rohillas, the Begums of Oude, Rajah Nundcomar, and other victims shows that he viewed imperial power as a moral responsibility rather than a means of private profit. Ultimately, Burke’s speech remains one of the greatest denunciations of colonial oppression and a timeless defence of

BY EDMUND BURKE main text: These are some of my reasons, grounded on the abuse of the external political trust of that body, for thinking myself not only justified but bound to declare against those chartered rights which produce so many wrongs. I should deem myself the wickedest of men, if any vote of mine could contribute to the continuance of so great an evil.Now, Sir, according to the plan I proposed, I shall take notice of the Company’s internal government, as it is exercised first on the dependent provinces, and then as it affects those under the direct and immediate authority of that body. And here, Sir, before I enter into the spirit of their interior government, permit me to observe to you, upon a few of the many lines of difference which are to be found between the vices of the Company’s government, and those of the conquerors who preceded us in India; that we may be enabled a little the better to see our way in an attempt to the necessary reformation. The several irruptions of Arabs, Tartars, and Persians into India were, for the greater part, ferocious, bloody, and wasteful in the extreme: our entrance into the dominion of that country was, as generally, with small comparative effusion of blood; being introduced by various frauds and delusions, and by taking advantage of the incurable, blind, and senseless animosity, which the several country powers bear towards each other, rather than by open force. But the difference in favor of the first conquerors is this; the Asiatic conquerors very soon abated of their ferocity, because they made the conquered country their own. They rose or fell with the rise or fall of the territory they lived in. Fathers there deposited the hopes of their posterity; and children there beheld the monuments of their fathers. Here their lot was finally cast; and it is the natural wish of all, that their lot should not be cast in a bad land. Poverty, sterility, and desolation, are not a recreating prospect to the eye of man; and there are very few who can bear to grow old among the curses of a whole people. If their passion or their avarice drove the Tartar lords to acts of rapacity or tyranny, Traslation in Bangla These are some of my reasons, = এগুলো আমার কিছু কারণ, grounded on the abuse = ভিত্তি করে অপব্যবহারের ওপর of the external political trust = বহিরাগত রাজনৈতিক অর্পিত দায়িত্বের of that body, = সেই প্রতিষ্ঠানের, for thinking myself = নিজেকে মনে করার জন্য not only justified = শুধু ন্যায়সঙ্গতই নয়, but bound = বরং বাধ্যও to declare against = বিরোধিতা ঘোষণা করতে those chartered rights = সেই সনদপ্রাপ্ত অধিকারগুলোর which produce = যা সৃষ্টি করে so many wrongs. = এত অন্যায়। I should deem myself = আমি নিজেকে মনে করব the wickedest of men, = মানুষের মধ্যে সবচেয়ে দুষ্ট ব্যক্তি, if any vote of mine = যদি আমার কোনো ভোট could contribute = অবদান রাখতে পারে to the continuance = অব্যাহত রাখার ক্ষেত্রে of so great an evil. = এত বড় একটি অনিষ্টকে। Now, Sir, = এখন, মহাশয়, according to the plan = পরিকল্পনা অনুযায়ী I proposed, = যা আমি প্রস্তাব করেছিলাম, I shall take notice = আমি আলোচনা করব of the Company’s internal government, = কোম্পানির অভ্যন্তরীণ শাসনব্যবস্থা সম্পর্কে, as it is exercised = যেভাবে তা পরিচালিত হয় first on the dependent provinces, = প্রথমে অধীনস্থ প্রদেশগুলোতে, and then = এবং তারপর as it affects = যেভাবে তা প্রভাব ফেলে those under = তাদের ওপর, the direct and immediate authority = যারা প্রত্যক্ষ ও তাৎক্ষণিক কর্তৃত্বের অধীনে of that body. = সেই প্রতিষ্ঠানের। And here, Sir, = এবং এখানে, মহাশয়, before I enter into = আমি প্রবেশ করার আগে the spirit = মূল স্বরূপে of their interior government, = তাদের অভ্যন্তরীণ শাসনব্যবস্থার, permit me = আমাকে অনুমতি দিন to observe to you, = আপনাকে উল্লেখ করার, upon a few = কয়েকটি বিষয়ে of the many lines of difference = বহু পার্থক্যের মধ্যে which are to be found = যা দেখা যায় between the vices = দোষত্রুটির মধ্যে of the Company’s government, = কোম্পানির শাসনব্যবস্থার, and those = এবং সেগুলোর of the conquerors = বিজেতাদের who preceded us = যারা আমাদের আগে এসেছিল in India; = ভারতে; that we may be enabled = যাতে আমরা সক্ষম হই a little the better = কিছুটা আরও ভালোভাবে to see our way = আমাদের পথ বুঝতে in an attempt = একটি প্রচেষ্টায় to the necessary reformation. = প্রয়োজনীয় সংস্কার সাধনের। The several irruptions = বিভিন্ন আক্রমণ of Arabs, Tartars, and Persians = আরব, তাতার ও পারসিকদের into India = ভারতে were, for the greater part, = অধিকাংশ ক্ষেত্রেই ছিল ferocious, bloody, = হিংস্র, রক্তাক্ত, and wasteful = এবং ধ্বংসাত্মক in the extreme: = চরম মাত্রায়; our entrance = আমাদের প্রবেশ into the dominion = শাসনক্ষমতার মধ্যে of that country = সেই দেশের was, as generally, = সাধারণভাবে ছিল with small comparative effusion of blood; = তুলনামূলকভাবে অল্প রক্তপাতের মাধ্যমে; being introduced = সংঘটিত হয়েছিল by various frauds and delusions, = নানা প্রতারণা ও বিভ্রান্তির মাধ্যমে, and by taking advantage = এবং সুযোগ গ্রহণ করে of the incurable, blind, = নিরাময়-অযোগ্য, অন্ধ, and senseless animosity, = এবং অযৌক্তিক বিদ্বেষের, which the several country powers = যা বিভিন্ন দেশীয় শক্তি bear towards each other, = একে অপরের প্রতি পোষণ করত, rather than = খোলাখুলি শক্তি প্রয়োগের পরিবর্তে by open force. = প্রকাশ্য বলপ্রয়োগের মাধ্যমে।But the difference = কিন্তু পার্থক্যটি in favor of = প্রথম বিজেতাদের পক্ষে the first conquerors = ছিল এই যে, is this; = তা হলো;the Asiatic conquerors = এশীয় বিজেতারা very soon abated = খুব শিগগিরই কমিয়ে দিয়েছিল of their ferocity, = তাদের নিষ্ঠুরতা, because they made = কারণ তারা বানিয়েছিল the conquered country = বিজিত দেশটিকে their own. = নিজেদের দেশ। the Asiatic conquerors = এশীয় বিজেতারা very soon abated = খুব শিগগিরই কমিয়ে দিয়েছিল of their ferocity, = তাদের নিষ্ঠুরতা, because they made = কারণ তারা বানিয়েছিল the conquered country = বিজিত দেশটিকে their own. =

BY EDMUND BURKE main text: was As to the first, the unhappy abdicated Peshwa, and pretender to the Maratta throne, Ragonaut Row, was delivered up to his people, with an article for safety, and some provision. 65 This man, knowing how little vague the hatred of his countrymen was towards him, and well apprised of what black crimes he stood accused (among which our invasion of his country would not appear the least) took a mortal alarm at the security we had provided for him. He thunderstruck at the article in his favor, by which he was surrendered to his enemies. He never had the least notice of the treaty; and it was apprehended that he would fly to the protection of Hyder Ali, or some other, disposed or able to protect him. He was therefore not left without comfort; for Mr. Anderson did him the favor to send a special messenger, desiring him to be of good cheer and to fear nothing. And his old enemy, Scindia, at our request, sent him a message equally well calculated to quiet his apprehensions.By the same treaty the Guickwar was to come again, with no better security, under the dominion of the Maratta state. As to the Rana of Gohud, a long negotiation depended for giving him up. At first this was refused by Mr. Hastings with great indignation; at another stage it was admitted as proper, because he had shewn himself a most perfidious person. But at length a method of reconciling these extremes was found out, by contriving one of the usual articles in his favor. What I believe will appear beyond all belief, Mr. Anderson exchanged the final ratifications of that treaty by which the Rana was nominally secured in his possessions, in the camp of the Maratta chief, Scindia, whilst he was (really, and not nominally) battering the castle of Gwalior, which we had given, agreeably to treaty, to this deluded ally. Scindia had already reduced the town; and was at the very time, by various detachments, reducing, one after another, the fortresses of our protected ally, as well as in the act of chastising all the Rajahs who had assisted Colonel Camac66 in his invasion. I have seen in a letter from Calcutta, in-hand with the protecting treaty) to Mr. Hastings; but he was not admitted to his presence. In this manner the Company has acted with their allies in the Maratta war. But they did not rest here: the Marattas were fearful lest the persons delivered to them by that treaty should attempt to escape into the British territories, and thus might elude the punishment intended for them, and by reclaiming the treaty, might stir up new disturbances. To prevent this, they desired an article to be inserted in the supplemental treaty, to which they had the ready consent of Mr. Hastings and the rest of the Company’s representatives in Bengal. It was this, “That the English and Maratta governments mutually agree not to afford refuge to any chiefs, merchants, or other persons, flying for protection to the territories of the other.” This was readily assented to, and assented to without any exception whatever, in favor of our surrendered allies. On their part a reciprocity was stipulated which was not unnatural for a government like the Company’s to ask; a government conscious that many subjects had been, and would in future, be driven to fly from its jurisdiction.To complete the system of pacific intention and public faith, which predominate in those treaties, Mr. Hastings fairly resolved to put all peace, except on the terms of absolute conquest, wholly out of his own power. For, by an article in this second treaty with Burke’s Speech on East India Bill Scindia,67 he binds the Company not to make any peace with Tippoo Sahib without the consent of the Peshwa of the Marattas, and binds Scindia to him by a reciprocal engagement. The treaty between France and England 68 obliges us mutually to withdraw our forces, if our allies in India do not accede to the peace within four months; Mr. Hastings’s treaty obliges us to continue the war as long as the Peishwa thinks fit. We are now in that happy situation, that the breach of the treaty with France, or the violation of that with the Marattas, is inevitable; and we have only to take our choice. My third assertion, relative to the abuse made of the right of war and peace is, that there are none who have ever confided in us who have not been utterly ruined. The examples I have given of Ragonaut Row, of Guickwar, of the Rana of Gohud, are recent. There is proof more than enough in the condition of the Mogul; in the slavery and indigence of the Nabob of Oude; the exile of the Rajah of Benares; the beggary of the Nabob of Bengal, the undone and captive condition of the Rajah and kingdom of Tanjore; the destruction of the Polygars; and lastly, in the destruction of the Nabob of Arcot himself, who when his dominions were invaded was found entirely destitute of troops, provisions, stores, and (as hethat the Rana of Gohud’s agent would have represented these hostilities (which went hand  of money, being a million in debt to the Company, and four millions to others: the many millions which he had extorted from so many extirpated princes and their desolated countries having (as he has frequently hinted) been expended for the ground-rent of his mansion-house in an alley in the suburbs of Madras. 69 Compare the condition of all these princes with the power and authority of all the Maratta states; with the independence and dignity of the Subah of the Deccan; and the mighty strength, the resources, and the manly struggle of Hyder Ali; and then the House will discover the effects, on every power in India, of an easy confidence, or of a rooted distrust in the faith of the Company. Translation in Bangla:

EDMUND BURKE It is very remarkable, that the late controversy between the several presidencies, and between them and the Court of Directors, with relation to these wars and treaties, has not been, which of the parties might be defended for his share in them; but on which of the parties the guilt of all this load of perfidy should be fixed. But I am content to admit all these proceedings to be perfectly regular, to be full of honor and good faith; and wish to fix your attention solely to that single transaction which the advocates of this system select for so transcendent a merit as to cancel the guilt of all the rest of their proceedings; I mean the late treaties with the Marattas. I make no observation on the total cession of territory, by which they surrendered all they had obtained by their unhappy successes in war, and almost all they had obtained under the treaty of Poorunder. The restitution was proper, if it had been voluntary and seasonable. I attach on the spirit of the treaty, the dispositions it shewed, the provisions it made for a general peace, and the faith kept with allies and confederates; in order that the House may form a judgment, from this chosen piece, of the use which has been made (and is likely to be made, if things continue in the same hands) of the trust of the federal powers of this country. It was the wish of almost every Englishman, that the Maratta peace might lead to a general one; because the Maratta war was only a part of a general confederacy formed against us on account of the universal abhorrence of our conduct which prevailed in every state and almost in every house in India. Mr. Hastings was obliged to pretend some sort of acquiescence in this general and rational desire. He therefore consented, in order to satisfy the point of honor of the Marattas, that an article should be inserted to admit Hyder Ali to accede to the pacification. But observe, Sir, the spirit of this man, (which if it were not made manifest by a thousand things, and particularly by his proceedings with regard to Lord Macartney)57 would be sufficiently manifest by this. What sort of article think you does he require this essential head of a solemn treaty of general pacification to be? In his instruction to Mr. Anderson, 58 he desires him to admit “a vague article in favor of Hyder. Evasion and fraud were the declared basis of the treaty. These vague articles, intended for a more vague performance, are the things which have damned our reputation in India Hardly was this vague article inserted, than, without waiting for any act on the part of Hyder, Mr. Hastings enters into a negotiation with the Maratta chief, Scindia, for a partition of the territories of the prince who was one of the objects to be secured by the treaty. He was to be parcelled out in three parts one to Scindia; one to the Peishwa of the Marattas; and the third to the East India Company, or to (the old dealer and chapman) Mahomet Ali. 59During the formation of this project, Hyder dies; and before his son60 could take any one step, either to conform to the tenor of the article, or to contravene it, the treaty of partition is renewed on the old footing and an instruction is sent to Mr. Anderson to conclude it in form. A circumstance intervened, during the pendency of this negotiation, to set off the good faith of the Company with an additional brilliancy, and to make it sparkle and glow with a variety of splendid faces. General Matthews61 had reduced that most valuable part of Hyder’s dominions called the country of Biddanore. 62 When the news reached Mr. Hastings, he instructed Mr. Anderson to contend for an alteration in the treaty of partition, and to take the Biddanore country out of the common stock which was to be divided, and to keep it for the Company.The first ground for this variation was its being a separate conquest made before the treaty had actually taken place. Here was a new proof given of the fairness, equity, and moderation of the Company. But the second of Mr. Hastings’s reasons for retaining the Biddanore as a separate portion, and his conduct on that second ground, is still more remarkable. He asserted that that country could not be put into the partition stock, because General Matthews had received it on the terms of some convention which might be incompatible with the partition proposed. This was a reason in itself both honorable and solid; and it showed a regard to faith somewhere, and with some persons. But in order to demonstrate his utter contempt of the plighted faith which was alleged on one part as a reason for departing from it on another, and to prove his impetuous desire for sowing a new Speech on East India Bill a general war even in the prepared soil of pacification, he directs Mr. Anderson, if he should find strong difficulties impeding the partition, on the score of the subtraction of Biddanore, wholly to abandon that claim, and to conclude the treaty on the original terms. General Matthews’s convention was just brought forward sufficiently to demonstrate to the Marattas the slippery hold which they had on their new confederate; on the other hand, that convention being instantly abandoned, the people of India were taught, that no terms on which they can surrender to the Company are to be regarded, when farther conquests are in view. Next, Sir, let me bring before you the pious care that was taken of our allies under that treaty which is the subject of the Company’s applauses. These allies were Ragonaut Row, for whom we had engaged to find a throne; the Guickwar, 63 (one of the Guzerat princes) who was to be emancipated from the Maratta authority, and to grow

EDMUND BURKE In Bengal, Seraja Dowla was sold to Mir Jaffier; 29 Mir Jaffier was sold to Mir Cossim;30 and Mir Cossim was sold to Mir Jaffier again. 31 The succession to Mir Jaffier was sold to his eldest son;32 another son of Mir Jaffier, Mobarech ul Dowlah, was sold to his step-sold to mother. 33 The Mahratta Empire was Ragobah;34 and Ragobah was sold and delivered to the Peishwa of the Mahrattas. 35 Both Ragobah and the Peishwa of the Mahrattas were offered to sale to the Rajah of Berar. 36 Scindia, 37 the chief of Malwa, was offered to sale to the same Rajah; and the Subah of the Deccan38 was sold to the great trader, Mahomet Ali, Nabob of Arcot. To the same Nabob of Arcot they sold Hyder Ali and the kingdom of Mysore. 39 To Mahomet Ali they twice sold the kingdom of Tanjore. 40 To the same Mahomet Ali they sold at least twelve sovereign princes, called the Polygars.41 But to keep things even, the territory of Tinnevelly, belonging to their Nabob, they would have sold to the Dutch;42 and to conclude the account of sales, their great customer, the Nabob of Arcot himself, and his lawful succession, has been sold to his second son, Amir ul Omrah, whose character, views, and conduct, are in the accounts upon your table. It remains with you whether they shall finally perfect this last bargain. All these bargains and sales were regularly attended with the waste and havoc of the country; always by the buyer, and sometimes by the object of the sale. This was explained to you by the honorable mover, when he stated the mode of paying debts due from the country powers to the Company.44 An honorable gentleman, who is not now in his place.objected to his jumping near two thousand miles for an example. 45 But the southern example is perfectly applicable to the northern claim, as the northern is to the southern; for, throughout the whole space of these two thousand miles, take your stand where you will, the proceeding is perfectly uniform, and what is done in one part will apply exactly to the other. My second assertion is, that the Company never has made a treaty which they have not broken. This position is so connected with that of the sales of provinces and kingdoms, with the negotiation of universal distraction in every part of India, that a very minute detail may well be spared on this point. It has not yet been contended, by any enemy to the reform, that they have observed any public agreement. When I hear that they have done so in any one instance, (which hitherto, I confess, I never heard alleged) I shall speak to the particular treaty. The governor general has even amused himself and the Court of Directors in a very singular letter to that board, in which he admits he has not been very delicate with regard to public faith; and he goes so far as to state a regular estimate of the sums which the Company would have lost, or never acquired, if the rigid ideas of public faith entertained by his colleagues had been observed. 46 The learned gentleman over against me has, indeed, saved me much trouble. On a former occasion he obtained no small credit, for the clear and forcible manner in which he stated, what we have not forgot, and I hope he has not forgot, that universal, systematic breach of treaties which had made the British faith proverbial in the East. It only remains, Sir, for me just to recapitulate some heads. The treaty with the Mogul, by which we stipulated to pay him £ 260,000 annually, was broken. This treaty they have broken, and not paid him a shilling. They broke their treaty with him, in which they stipulated to pay £ 400,000 a year to the Subah of Bengal.48 They agreed with the Mogul, for services admitted to have been performed, to pay Nudjif Cawn a pension. 49 They broke this article with the rest, and stopped also this small pension. They broke their treaties with the Nizam, 50 and with Hyder Ali.51 As to the Marattas, they had so many cross treaties with the States General of that nation, and with each of the chiefs, that it was notorious, that no one of these agreements could be kept without grossly violating the rest. It was observed, that if the terms of these several treaties had been kept, two British armies would at one and the same time have met in the field to cut each other’s throats. The wars that desolate India originated from a most atrocious violation of public faith on our part. In the midst of profound peace, the Company’s troops invaded the Maratta territories, and surprised the island and fortress of Salsette. 52 The Marattas nevertheless yielded to a treaty of peace, by which solid advantages were procured to the Company. 53 But this treaty, like every other treaty, was soon violated by the Company. Again the Company invaded the Maratha dominions. The disaster that ensued gave occasion to a new treaty. The whole army of the Company was obliged, in effect, to surrender to these injured, betrayed, and insulted people. Justly irritated, however, as they were, the terms which they prescribed were reasonable and moderate; 54 and their treatment of their captive invaders of the most distinguished humanity. But the humanity of the Marattas was of no power whatsoever to prevail on the Company to attend to the observance of the terms dictated by their moderation. The war was renewed with greater vigor than ever; and such was their insatiable lust of plunder that they never would have given ear to any terms of peace, if Hyder Ali had not broke through the Gauts, and rushing like a torrent into the Carnatic, swept away everything in his career. This was in consequence of that confederacy which by

EDMUND BURKE main text :part-o3 It is a charter of this latter description (that is to say a charter of power and monopoly) which is affected by the bill before you. The bill, Sir, does without question, affect it; it does affect it essentially and substantially. But, having stated to you of what description the chartered rights are which this bill touches, I feel no difficulty at all in acknowledging the existence of those chartered rights in their fullest extent. They belong to the Company in the surest manner; and they are secured to that body by every sort of public sanction. They are stamped by the faith of the king; they are stamped by the faith of Parliament; they have been bought for money, for money honestly and fairly paid; they have been bought for valuable consideration, over and over again. I therefore freely admit to the East India Company their claim to exclude their fellow-subjects from the commerce of half the globe. I admit their claim to administer an annual territorial revenue of seven millions sterling; to command an army of sixty thousand men; and to dispose (under the control of a sovereign imperial discretion, and with the due observance of the natural and local law) of the lives and fortunes of thirty millions of their fellow-creatures. All this they possess by charter and by acts of parliament, (in my opinion) without a shadow of controversy.Those who carry the rights and claims of the Company the furthest do not contend for more than this; and all this I freely grant. But granting all this, they must grant to me in my turn, that all political power which is set over men, and that all privilege claimed or exercised in exclusion of them, being wholly artificial, and for so much, a derogation from the natural equality of mankind at large, ought to be some way or other exercised ultimately for their benefit. If this is true with regard to every species of political dominion, and every description of commercial privilege, none of which can be original self-derived rights, or grants for the mere private benefit of the holders, then such rights, or privileges, or whatever else you choose to call them, are all in the strictest sense a trust: and it is of the very essence of every trust to be rendered accountable; and even totally to cease, when it substantially varies from the purposes for which alone it could have a lawful existence.This I conceive, Sir, to be true of trusts of power vested in the highest hands, and of such as seem to hold of no human creature. But about the application of this principle to subordinate derivative trusts, I do not see how a controversy can be maintained. To whom then would I make the East India Company accountable? Why, to Parliament to be sure; to Parliament, from whom their trust was derived to Parliament, which alone is capable of comprehending the magnitude of its object, and its abuse and alone capable of an effectual legislative remedy. The very charter, which is held out to exclude Parliament from correcting malversation with regard to the high trust vested in the Company, is the very thing which at once gives a title and imposes a duty on us to interfere with effect, wherever power and authority originating from ourselves are perverted from their purposes, and become instruments of wrong and violence. If Parliament, Sir, had nothing to do with this charter, we might have some sort of Epicurean excuse to stand aloof, indifferent spectators of what passes in the Company\’s name in India and in London. But if we are the very cause of the evil, we are in a special manner engaged to the redress; and for us passively to bear with oppressions committed under the sanction of our own authority is in truth and reason for this House to be an active accomplice in the abuse. 91 That the power, notoriously, grossly, abused has been bought from us is very certain. But this circumstance, which is urged against the bill, becomes an additional motive for our interference, lest we should be thought to have sold the blood of millions of men for the base consideration of money. We sold, I admit, all that we had to sell; that is our authority, not our control. We had not a right to make a market of our duties. I ground myself therefore on this principle- that if the abuse is proved, the contract is broken; and we re-enter into all our rights; that is, into the exercise of all our duties. Our own authority is indeed as much a trust originally, as the Company\’s authority is a trust derivatively; and it is the use we make of the resumed power that must justify or condemn us in the resumption of it. When we have perfected the plan laid before us by the Right Honorable mover,world will then see what it is we destroy, and what it is we create. By that test we stand or fall; and by that test I trust that it will be found, in the issue, that we are going to supersede a charter abused to the full extent of all the powers which it could abuse, and exercised in the plenitude of despotism, tyranny, and corruption, and that in one and the same plan we provide a real chartered security for the rights of men cruelly violated under that charter. traslation in bangla :Burke’s Speech on East India Bill It is a charter of this latter description = এটি এই দ্বিতীয় ধরনের একটি চার্টার (that is to say a charter of power and monopoly) = (অর্থাৎ ক্ষমতা ও একচেটিয়া অধিকারের চার্টার) which is affected by the bill before you. = যা আপনাদের সামনে উপস্থাপিত বিলের দ্বারা প্রভাবিত হচ্ছে।The bill, Sir, = মহাশয়, এই বিলটি does without question affect it; = নিঃসন্দেহে এটিকে প্রভাবিত করছে; it does affect it = এটি সত্যিই এটিকে প্রভাবিত