The arrival soon after of Sir Eyre Coote giving another opportunity of trial, the question for obedience to the Company's orders was again[13] brought on by Mr. Francis, and again received a negative. Sir Eyre Coote, though present, and declaring, that, had he been at the original consultation, he should have voted for the immediate execution of the Company's orders, yet he was resolved to avoid what he called _any kind of retrospect_. His neutrality gained the question in favor of this, the third resolution for disobedience to orders. The resolution in Bengal being thus decisively taken, it came to the turn of the Court of Directors to act their part. They did act their part exactly in their old manner: they had recourse to their old remedy of repeating orders which had been disobeyed. The Directors declare to Mr. Hastings and Mr. Barwell, though without any apparent reason, that "they have read _with astonishment their formal resolution_ to suspend the execution of their orders; that they shall take such measures as appear necessary for _preserving the authority of the Court of Directors_, and for preventing _such instances of direct and wilful_ disobedience in their servants in time to come." They then renew their directions concerning Mr. Fowke. The event of this _sole_ measure taken to preserve their authority, and to prevent instances of direct and wilful disobedience, your Committee will state in its proper place,--taking into consideration, for the present, the proceedings relative to Mr. Bristow, and to Mahomed Reza Khan, which were altogether in the same spirit; but as they were diversified in the circumstances of disobedience, as well from the case of Mr. Fowke as from one another, and as these circumstances tend to discover other dangerous principles of abuse, and the general prostrate condition of the authority of Parliament in Bengal, your Committee proceed first to make some observations upon them.