2 Introduction. Graham of Bur J wan, but who, at the time of the trial, had attached himself to Mr. Bar well (1200). I shall also show that this* man, Kamaladdin, was one whose word could not be believed, and that he was correctly described by General Clavering as an infamous crea- ture, and by Mr. Fowke as the scum of the earth. 5. That the trial was unfairly conducted, and that, in parti- cular, the Chief Justice's manner was bad throughout. 6. That the jury was prejudiced and incompetent. 7. That the prosecution entirely failed to prove that the bond was a forgery. 8. That the execution was iniquitous, even on the supposi- tion of Nanda Kumar's guilt, and that it was the result of a plot to stifle inquiry into bribery and cor- ruption. 9. That Sir J. Stephen has, in his recent book, " The Story of Nuncomar and the impeachment of Sir Elijah Impey," partly from the zeal of advocacy and partly from his having approached his subject with- out adequate preparation, without knowledge of Indian history or of the peculiarities of an Indian record, made grave mistakes in his account of the trial and in his observations thereon. The Nanda Kumar charge was one of six preferred against Sir E. Impey. Sir J. Stephen has discussed them one by one, but I do not propose to take up the remaining five or to follow Sir Elijah through the rest of his Indian career. I confess I do not see how his subsequent acts can be defended. I cannot admire his conduct in the Patna and Kasijora causes, nor can I see any justification or excuse for his strange jour- ney to Lakh nan* and his there hounding on the Resident to
- See Appendix C. " The Lakhuau Affidavits," In 178G, Francis wrote
to Sir Robert Chambers, that, in his opinion, Impey's " going to Lucknow to take those depositions against the Begums is the blackest and basest trans- action, except one, that has yet dishonoured the British administration in India." If Chambers' reply is in the Francis MS., it might be interesting reading.
