so long ago as the 19th of September, 1781; and in these instances the
king's ministers performed their duty, in withholding their countenance
from a proceeding so exceptionable and of so dangerous an example.

Your Committee, from a full view of the situation and duties of the
Court of Directors, are of opinion that effectual means ought to be
taken for regulating that court in such a manner as to prevent either
rivalship with or subserviency to their servants. It might, therefore,
be proper for the House to consider whether it is fit that those who
are, or have been within some given time, Directors of the Company,
should be capable of an appointment to any offices in India. Directors
can never properly govern those for whose employments they are or may be
themselves candidates; they can neither protect nor coerce them with due
impartiality or due authority.

If such rules as are stated by your Committee under this head were
observed in the regular service at home and abroad, the necessity of
superseding the regular service by strangers would be more rare; and
whenever the servants were so superseded, those who put forward other
candidates would be obliged to produce a strong plea of merit and
ability, which, in the judgment of mankind, ought to overpower
pretensions so authentically established, and so rigorously guarded from
abuse.

[Sidenote: Deficiency of powers to ministers of government.]

The second object, in this part of the plan, of the act of 1773, namely,
that of inspection by the ministers of the crown, appears not to have
been provided for, so as to draw the timely and productive attention of
the state on the grievances of the people of India, and on the abuses of