Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1885-08-22
INDICATED AT LAST.

parable essay on haIIeH AAdSlAu60' ~
has been the delight and the despair OF
essavists since. In this majestic piece OF /
rhetoric Macaulay has painted the char
acter of him who was to play an import
ant part in Indian affairs; he has painted !
it in shades of blacklist dye; with not a
single pleasant light to relieve 1t. lie
who Macaulay has so painted is the
Chief Justice OF India, Sir Elijah lmpey
The first mention of his name is such as
to prejudice the fairest minded reader.
These are the words with which he intro
duces him:
with the three new Councillors came out
: ~ Judges Of the Supreme Court. The chief
Justice was Sir Elijah Impey. He was an
old acquaintance of Hastings; and 1t is
probable that the Governor-General, II he
had searched through all the inns OF court,
could not have found an equally serviceable
tool"
Words were never penned which had
greater tendency to raise an imsurmount-
able prejudice in mans mind than these
words OF Macaulay concerning Impey.
All the world is@familiar with the story
of Hastings in India, and OF that incl
dental story of the forgery of Nuncomar;
the charge against him his defence; his
condemnation and his death. 1t is on
account of Sir Elijah's connection with
the trial and execution of Nuncomar that
Macaulay is so severe in his denuncia-
ton of him. Somewhat further on in
this famous essay, Impey is spoken of in
these terms:
"Of Impey'G conduct it is impossible to
speak too severely. We have already SAID
that in our opinion, he acted unJustly In
refusing to respite Nuncomar. No rational
man can doubt that he took this course IN
order to crafty the Governor-General.
Hastings, three or four years later, described
Impey as the man to whose support he was
at one time indebted for the safety of his
fortune, honor, and reputation These
strong words can refer only to the case of
Nunoomar; and they must mean that lmpey
hanged Nuncomar in order to support Hast
ings. 1t is, therefore, our deliberate opinion
that Impey, sitting as judge, put man un-
Justly to death in order to serve a political
purpose"
No graver charge can be made against
man than this charge against Impey;
and for near half a century the world has
accepted that charge as true. The name
of Impey has been synonymous with all
that is treacherous in politics, all that
is corrupt on the bench. Had such
Judgment been pronounced upon lmpey
by some less famous and fascinating
writer than Macaulay, mankind would
not have so remem bered it; but wherever
the English language is read, there
Macaulay's essays are known, and read
as never were books read before.
But writer in the Quarterly ReUieU
for July comes to the rescue of Sir Elijah
Impey, who completely refutes the charge
of Macaulay and vindicates the character
of Impey He bases his refutation and
vindication upon three important works
which have recently appeared. These
works are: I. The Story of NmcOmar
and the Impeachment of Sir Elijah I'm
pey BY Sir-James Fitejames Stephens,
X. C. S. /. etc. 2 Echoes from old Cal
c,tta, bejag chiefly "reminiscences of the
days of Warren Hastings, Francis, and
Impey. BY II. E. Busteed 8. Memoirs
Of SIR Ehjah Impey, etc. /. HoneH's
State Trials VOL XX
The most important of these works is
that of Sir James Fitzjames Stephens.
The reviewer says that Sir James
Stephens in the Preface to his work saysit it
was consideration of the historical i'm
portance of the administration of criminal
Justice which led him to examine, with a
lawyers eye, some of the more remark
able trials in which our history abounds" 4"
At first he contemplated an investigation
of the Impeachment of Warren Hastings;
but he found this would be almost too
great a task, so he decided to in
vestigate the story OF Nuncomar.
No one is better qualified to make
thorough and impartial investigation into
this matter OF Impey, Nuncomar and
Macaulay than Sir James Stephens. The
study and profession OF whole life have
specially fitted him for it, and we shall
make one or two extracts from his work,
as found in the Quarterly.
The court which tried Nuncomar was
composed Of Sir Elijah Impey and the
three Puisne Judges, Hyde, Chambers
and LIE Maistre, and of all these judges
Except Sir Robert Chambers, questions
were put by "Sir Elijah Impey least of
ALL"
Sir James Stephens sums up the case
of Nuncomar in these words:
'AIy own opinion is, that no man ever
had, or could have, a fairer trial than Nun
oomar, and that lmpey in particular behaved
with absolute fairness and as much indul-
Qence as was compatible with his duty. In
his defense at the bar of the House of Com
mons, he said, Conscious as | am how much
it was my intention to favor the prisoner in
everything that was consistent with Justice; |
wishing as l did that the facts might turn
out favorable for acquittal; 1t has appeared |
most wonderful to me that the execution |
of my purpose has so far differed from /
my intentions that any ingenuity could form |
an objection TO my personal conduct as bear /
inc hard upon the prisoner NV own earnest /
study of the trial has led me to the convic- /
ton that every word of this is absolutely I
true and just Indeed, the first matter which /
directed my attention to the subject was the I
qlarinq contrast between Impeys conduct as Z
described in the State Trials, and his char I
acteristics described by Lord Macaulay. |
There is not word in his summing-up of /
which should have been ashamed had !
said it myself, and all my study of the case
has not suggested a single observation in |
Nuncomar's favor which is not noticed by |
hnpey. As to the verdict, think there was /
ample evidence to support it."
We shall make but one more extract |
from Sir James Stephens work. 1t refers
TO Macaulay, and is as follows:
lord Macaulay,s account supplies a /