The Court of Directors appear, from their general letters sent by Lord Clive, and those of subsequent date, to have been very anxious to put an end to the internal trade carried on by their servants and their native agents, which they considered as being alike oppressive to the inhabitants of the country, and injurious to the native governments. It constituted a great source of profit to individuals, but was, they stated, directly opposed to the interests of the Company, and from the mode in which it was carried on brought disgrace upon the English name. In the general letter of April 26th, 1765, the Court observes, with reference to the conduct of the civil servants who had charge of the government before the arrival of Lord Clive, and who pretended that their right to engage in the internal trade, and to have their goods passed free of duty, was founded on the Emperor's firman to the Company;— "Treaties of commerce are understood to be for the mutual benefit of the contracting parties. Is it then possible to suppose that the court of Delhi, by conferring the privilege of trading free of customs, could mean an inland trade in the commodities of their own country, at that period unpractised and unthought of by the English, to the detriment of their revenues and the ruin of their own merchants? We do not find such a construction was ever heard of, until our own servants first invented it, and afterwards supported it by violence. Neither could it be claimed by the subsequent treaties with Meer Jaffier, or Cossim Ali, which were never understood to give one additional privilege of trade beyond what the firman expressed. In short, the specious arguments used by those who pretended to set up a right to it convince us they did not want judgment, but virtue to withstand the temptation of suddenly amassing a great fortune, although acquired by means incompatible with the peace of the country, and their duty to the Company. "Equally blamable were they who, acknowledging they had no right to it, and sensible of the ill consequences resulting from assuming it, have, nevertheless, carried on this trade, and used the authority of the Company to obtain, by a treaty exacted by violence, a sanction for a trade to enrich themselves, without the least regard or advantage to the Company, whose forces they employed to protect them in it. "Had this short question been put, which their duty ought first to have suggested, 'Is it for the interest of our employers?' they would not have hesitated one moment about it; but this criterion seems never once to have occurred.