power the commiffioners of the trea- 
* jury to nominate to the fhares, which 
_ might be vacant when the period of 
nomination to fhares fhould expire, 
which would be in Oétober next, 
and to hold the fame for the public. 
By thefe means gentlemen would 
fee that faith would be kept with the 
perfons whofe lives were already in- 
 terefted, the original fubfcribers 
‘would be refcued from the rifque 
they at prefent ran, in confequence 
of a fpeculation, which, prima facie, 
_ had undoubtedly been a laudable 
- one, and the public itfelf would be 
no fufferer. 
o The propofition of Mr. Pitt, after 
fome oppofition, in which it was 
urged that the fubfcribers might 
conceive themfelves to be injured, 
_ and confequently that their confent 
ought to be obtained, was adopted 
by the committee, and a bill pafied 
_ both houfes for carrying it into ef- 
> fect. : 
The fubject of the flave trade was 
again moved by Mr. Wilberforce 
early in the feflion. The evidence 
“produced by the planters was not 
Sie through till near the clofe, and 
“the remaining time was employed 
on examining fome additional wit- 
neffes in favour of the abolition. 
“The further conjideration cf the 
“fubje& was then adjourned. 
_~ Upon the 16th day of February, 
“the trial of Mr. Haltings re-com- 
“menced in Weitn#intter-hall, being 
‘the fifty-fifth day of the fitting of 
the court. The court fate in this 
feffion but thirteen days, in which 
* the managers of the houfe of com- 
‘mons went through the charge re- 
lative to the, receipt of prefents, 
‘which was opened by Mr. Antftru- 
er, and the evidence fummed up 
obferved upon, ina fpeech which 
d two days, by Mr, Fox. The 
HISTORY OF EUROPE. 
[ror 
court adjourned on Wednefday the 
gth of June, being the fixty-eighth 
day. 
On the 11th day of May, Mr. 
Burke called the attention of the 
houfe to a motion he had to offer 
upon the fubjeét of the protracted 
continuance of the trial. After fome 
obfervations upon the petition pre- 
fented by Mr. Haftings to the houfe 
of Lords, he adverted to what he 
conceived to be the principal caufes 
of its not having been brought to a 
fpeedier conclufion: the firit was, 
the determination of the houfe of 
Lords, obtained at the inftance of 
Mr. Haftings, to proceed upon all 
the articles of charge before they 
came to any decifion; another 
was, that the counfel for Mr. Haf- 
tings had infifted upon reading pa- 
pers at large inftead of extracts: but 
what occalioned, perhaps, the great- 
elt delay, was, that the managers 
were not made acquainted with the 
grounds and extent of the princi- 
pies on which the decifions of the 
houfe of Lords were made refpecting 
the admiffibility of evidence. - This 
made it impotlible for them to 
know how far the next queftions, 
which they intended to put, might, 
or might not, militate againft thofe 
principles. He concluded by mov- 
ing the following refolutions =: 
«“ That this houfe, taking into 
“ confideration the interruptions 
« occafioned by the occupations of 
« the judges and the houfe of Lords, 
«as alfo the impediments which 
« have occurred, or may occur, in 
« the courfe of the trial of the im- 
“ peachment of Warren Haftings, 
« kfg; doth, without meaning to 
« abandon the truth cr importance 
“ of the charges, authorife the ma- 
« nagers of their faid impeachment, 
“to infill only upon fuch and fo 
[G 3} many 
