Sir James Stephen's Historical Work.
335
jah Nuncomar, to give Hastings the upper from James Mill, whose affectation of dry, hand in the East India Company's resident severe impartiality misled two generations board against Sir Philip Francis and his of popular writers, and who cannot in fact faction, depends the greater ones whether be trusted for a page in either facts or judg Macaulay's " Clive " and " Hastings " are the ments. The case is stronger still : we would sound history which public admiration sup add that having read Impey's oharge to the poses, or worthless misunderstanding and jury that found the verdict (which must con tain the evidence of his corruption and his caricature; whether James Mill was a truth ful historian, or an acrid bigot who garbled determination to hang Nuncomar if there his history without conscience to square was any), we pray Heaven for exactly that with his prejudices, and thought the end (of sort of charge to any jury that may chance blackening a man he hated) justified the to try us for our life. It woujd do honor in means (of libel); whether Burke's speeches its justice and acuteness to any judge that against Hastings are on the right track, or ever lived, but it stretches to the uttermost the furious rhetoric of a hot-headed advocate limit every point that can possibly favor the prisoner. Stephen further examines the "steered " by a vindictive and baffled poli tician, refusing to hear the other side and matters of the Lucknow depositions and the totally wrong; whether Hastings himself was later quarrel with Hastings over jurisdiction : a clean and unselfish as well as a broad- the alleged corruption and illegality of the former utterly vanish under a plain recital of minded statesman, or an unscrupulous adven facts, and the alleged attempt of Impey to turer who stuck at nothing to keep himself set up a despotism for purposes of plunder in power; whether the English judges in India were mere venal adventurers, or the s even ludicrous — for of course he could same honorable lawyers as at home; whether, only act on cases brought before his court, in a word, the heads of civil and military had no initiative or executive power what administration in India acted as members of ever, and was but one of a bench of co-equal a civilized society or as ruthless barbarian judges. He was an honorable and warm freebooters. Sir James Stephen could not hearted man and a honest judge, even if he work out all these problems : but he settles was human enough to want a living for him some of them by proving conclusively that self and family, and Macaulay's savage de Hastings had no more to do with Nuncomar's nunciation of him is pure moonshine. trial or sentence than with the Crucifixion; Hastings's character has been still further that the sentence was both legally and cleared, and James Mill's character as a morally just, that Impey was only one of historian irretrievably damned, by Sir Ed four co-ordinate judges who pronounced ward Strachey, who shows that the atrocious it unanimously, that they had no choice any charge as to the Rohilla war, and the war way after the jury's righteous verdict of itself as described by Mill and Macaulay, guilty; that so far from the Francis party are absolute fiction; and Sir William Hun considering it or the trial a political " move " ter tells us that no English administrator be of Hastings or anybody else, they treated a fore or since was so loved by the natives as letter from Nuncomar after his sentence, Hastings, or his memory so cherished — and asking their interference and complaining of explains why. But Stephen's work is far injustice, as a gross affront, and turned it more readable than Strachey's, and is real over to the judges; and that the matter of literature. A full history of India written Macaulay's essay, though eked out from a with equal penetration, justice, and thorough pamphlet by Sir Philip Francis's brother-in- ness of research, would be worth spending law, is mainly taken in unquestioning faith years to read.
