an accession to his own glory. This has been so constant a practice, that it is to repeat the
histories of all politic conquerors in all nations and in all times; and I will not so much
distrust your Lordships' enlightened and discriminating studies and correct memories as to
allude to one of them. I will only show you that the Court of Directors, under whom he
served, has adopted that idea,—that they constantly inculcated it to him, and to all the
servants,—that they run a parallel between their own and the native government, and,
supposing it to be very evil, did not hold it up as an example to be followed, but as an abuse
to be corrected,—that they never made it a question, whether India is to be improved by
English law and liberty, or English law and liberty vitiated by Indian corruption.
No, my Lords, this arbitrary power is not to be had by conquest. Nor can any sovereign
have it by succession; for no man can succeed to fraud, rapine, and violence. Neither by
compact, covenant, or submission,—for men cannot covenant themselves out of their rights
and their duties,—nor by any other means, can arbitrary power be conveyed to any man.
Those who give to others such rights perform acts that are void as they are given,—good
indeed and valid only as tending to subject themselves, and those who act with them, to the
Divine displeasure; because morally there can be no such power. Those who give and those
who receive arbitrary power are alike criminal; and there is no man but is bound to resist it
to the best of his power, wherever it shall show its face to the world. It is a crime to bear it,
when it can be rationally shaken off. Nothing but absolute impotence can justify men in not
resisting it to the utmost of their ability.
Law and arbitrary power are in eternal enmity. Name me a magistrate, and I will name
property; name me power, and I will name protection. It is a contradiction in terms, it is
blasphemy in religion, it is wickedness in politics, to say that any man can have arbitrary