After the appointment of the Secret Committee, the attendance of the members of the Select Committee began to relax. Some became tired of the business, and others stayed away, disliking the personal and inquisitorial turn latterly given to their proceedings. Nearly a year, accordingly, intervenes between the dates of their second and third reports. It seems that Colonel Burgoyne, Governor Johnstone, Mr. Ongley, and Mr. Strachey, continued regular in their attendance; but it was with much difficulty, even during the sitting of Parliament, that seven members could be collected, without which the Committee could not sit. Still, however, the Chairman persevered; and various reports, several of them containing matter of great importance, were finally prepared. The Secret Committee had been chiefly named by the Ministry. It had in its number several men of business, who, not being prompted by any personal resentments, and desirous of avoiding the reproaches thrown upon the first Committee, proceeded to scrutinise the actual state of the Company's concerns, so as to afford to the House data, so much required for coming to a conclusion regarding the real condition and solvency of the Company, and the general management of its affairs at home and abroad. The Minister was anxious, from the labours of the two, to be able to discover some principles for the guidance of the Company's affairs, and to enable the Government to satisfy the country. The questions had become very complicated, and numerous individuals were implicated. The Attorney-General, Thurlow, undertook to peruse the papers during the Easter holidays, and to lay before the Minister the propositions that might result from them. A consultation, to which were called the chief ministerial members who had taken an active part in India affairs, was afterwards held at the Minister's house. The Solicitor-General, Wedderburn, who was known to be Lord Clive's personal friend, was not invited. The proposition made by the Attorney-General, after considering the papers, is said to have been, that Parliament should confiscate to the public all the sums acquired by English public servants in the East Indies, under the denomination of presents from the Indian Princes, as having been obtained by the military force of this country, and, therefore, belonging to the State. This sweeping proposition, which confounded different times and circumstances, startled the meeting. Some of them observed, that no distinction was made between presents received before and after they were prohibited; that some had been received as the reward of signal meritorious services, and enjoyed for a long series of years, without any claim having been made upon them either by the State or the Company; and that, even as to those for whom such favourable distinctions could not be made, to deprive them, to their ruin, of property that had been long and quietly enjoyed, would be considered as harsh and revolting.