The Works of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke, Vol. 11 (of 12)

Оглавление

Edmund Burke. The Works of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke, Vol. 11 (of 12)

REPORT FROM THE COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, APPOINTED TO INSPECT THE LORDS' JOURNALS IN RELATION TO THEIR PROCEEDINGS ON THE TRIAL OF WARREN HASTINGS, ESQUIRE. WITH AN APPENDIX. ALSO, REMARKS IN VINDICATION OF THE SAME FROM THE ANIMADVERSIONS OF LORD THURLOW. 1794

REPORT

RELATION OF THE JUDGES, ETC., TO THE COURT OF PARLIAMENT

JURISDICTION OF THE LORDS

LAW OF PARLIAMENT

RULE OF PLEADING

CONDUCT OF THE COMMONS IN PLEADING

PUBLICITY OF THE JUDGES' OPINIONS

PUBLICITY GENERAL

MODE OF PUTTING THE QUESTIONS

DEBATES ON EVIDENCE

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, ETC

ORDER AND TIME OF PRODUCING EVIDENCE

PRACTICE BELOW

APPENDIX

No. I

No. II

REMARKS IN VINDICATION OF THE PRECEDING REPORT

SPEECHES IN THE IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS, ESQUIRE, LATE GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF BENGAL

SPEECH IN GENERAL REPLY. MAY AND JUNE, 1794

FIRST DAY: WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 1794

SECOND DAY: FRIDAY, MAY 30, 1794

THIRD DAY: TUESDAY, JUNE 3, 1794

FOURTH DAY: THURSDAY, JUNE 5, 1794

Отрывок из книги

Made on the 30th April, 1794, from the Committee of the House of Commons, appointed to inspect the Lords' Journals, in relation to their proceeding on the trial of Warren Hastings, Esquire, and to report what they find therein to the House (which committee were the managers appointed to make good the articles of impeachment against the said Warren Hastings, Esquire); and who were afterwards instructed to report the several matters which have occurred since the commencement of the said prosecution, and which have, in their opinion, contributed to the duration thereof to the present time, with their observations thereupon.

Your Committee has received two powers from the House:—The first, on the 5th of March, 1794, to inspect the Lords' Journals, in relation to their proceedings on the trial of Warren Hastings, Esquire, and to report what they find therein to the House. The second is an instruction, given on the 17th day of the same month of March, to this effect: That your Committee do report to this House the several matters which have occurred since the commencement of the said prosecution, and which have, in their opinion, contributed to the duration thereof to the present time, with their observations thereupon.

.....

This determined and systematic privacy was the more alarming to your Committee, because the questions did not (except in that case) originate from the Lords for the direction of their own conscience. These questions, in some material instances, were not made or allowed by the parties at the bar, nor settled in open court, but differed materially from what your Managers contended was the true state of the question, as put and argued by them. They were such as the Lords thought proper to state for them. Strong remonstrances produced some alteration in this particular; but even after these remonstrances, several questions were made on statements which the Managers never made nor admitted.

Your Committee does not know of any precedent before this, in which the Peers, on a proposal of the Commons, or of a less weighty person before their court, to have the cases publicly referred to the Judges, and their arguments and resolutions delivered in their presence, absolutely refused. The very few precedents of such private reference on trials have been made, as we have observed already, sub silentio, and without any observation from the parties. In the precedents we produce, the determination is accompanied with its reasons, and the publicity is considered as the clear, undoubted right of the parties.

.....