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.