: 
102 
from this prosecution ;. and though 
he still proféssed>:to disapprove of 
Jord -Wellesley’s administration, he 
was carcful to add, that he was far 
from recommending an inquiry into 
his-conduct, with the view of found. 
ing wpon it any criminal charge 
against him.) Mr, Paull was, there- 
forey Icit:during a great part of the 
presentsession, without any zealous 
or steady supporter in parliament 
except lord: Folkstone.. insomuch 
that, having imprudently brought 
forward, in the absence of that no- 
bleman, his first charge against lord 
Wellesley, not only without ‘ang 
documents tosupportit, but without 
‘securing any person’ to second ‘his 
motion for taking it into farther con- 
sideration ; the house had actually: 
to wait in suspense for several) mie 
nutes, till sir’ William Geary-rose 
and seconded the motion. déclaring 
at. the same time, that he ‘had no 
decided opinion upon the subject, 
and: that he enly seconded the mo: 
tion, because he thought a question 
‘of that importance should not be alt 
lowed to fall to the ground. But, 
this defenceless unprotected state, 
in’ which’ Mr. Paull stood for- 
eward, alone and insulated, without 
assistance or encouragement, as the 
accuser of a nobleman, whose vie- 
torious administration had reflected 
so much splendor on the British em- 
pire in India, was ultimately most 
favourable. to his cause.. For, it 
encouraged the friends and ad- 
herents of lord Wellesley to attempt 
to browbeat and reduce to silence 
his accuser, in amanner so indecent 
and outrageous, as to rouse against 
them a spirit of resistance in the 
house, which gave to Mr. Paull 
and his accusation adegree of weight 
and consideration, which they seem- 
ed not, at one time, to have any 
chance of ever attaining. The per- 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 
1806. 
sons, who were thus induced latterly _ 
to support Mr, Paull. with! the — 
greatest warmth and steadiness, were — 
Mr. Windham, Dr. Laurence,’ Jord | 
A. Hamilton, the marquis of Doug- 
Jas, Mr, Martini (of Tewkesbury) 
and the solicitor generat, and many 
other members lent him pacts las 
their-assistance, 
As little real progress, however, 
was made in the prosecution against 
lord Wellesley, during the: present 
stssion, though much time was‘em= 
ployed in discussions relating to. it, 
we Shall give a very short: account 
of the proceedings, 
Various motions were made by 
Mr. Paul! and others on the’ one 
hand, and by the friends of marguis 
Wellestey ow the other, for papers 
in crimination or exenlpation ofithat 
nobleman, and all of them weré 
granted, without opposition, by the 
house; except a paper moved for 
by lord «A. Llamilton (April Qtst, 
1806), entituled ‘a dispatch: ap- 
proved by the court of directors, 
dated 3rd of April’ 18055 to’ the 
governor general in council,” which 
atter a long debate was refused by 
the house on a division. ‘Vhis paper 
had been already produced at: the 
India house, and printed and ciret. 
lated. It was not, therefore, want- 
ed for the sake of information; nor 
was it cailed for on account of any 
proceeding then before the house. 
The noble lord, who moved for it, 
disclaimed airy intention of using it 
as a ground of charge or point of 
evidence against lord Wellesley; 
vor could it in justice be used asa 
ground of crimination against that 
nobleman; for it merely contained 
the opinion ofthe court of direc. 
tors, with respect to his adminis- 
tration, and had not even been 
transmitted to him in India, having 
been stopped by the board of con- 
troul 
