But there was another great reason which should have induced him to do this. One great lawyer, known to many of your Lordships, Mr. Sayer, a very honest, intelligent man, who had long served the Company and well knew their affairs, had given an opinion concerning Mr. Hastings's conduct in stopping these prosecutions. There was an abstract question put to Mr. Sayer, and other great lawyers, separated from many of the circumstances of this business, concerning a point which incidentally arose; and this was, whether Mr. Hastings, as Governor-General, had a power so to dissolve the Council, that, if he declared it dissolved, they could not sit and do any legal and regular act. It was a great question with the lawyers at the time, and there was a difference of opinion on it. Mr. Sayer was one of those who were inclined to be of opinion that the Governor-General had a power of dissolving the Council, and that the Council could not legally sit after such dissolution. But what was his remark upon Mr. Hastings's conduct?--and you must suppose his remark of more weight, because, upon the abstract question, he had given his opinion in favor of Mr. Hastings's judgment. "The meeting of the Council depends on the pleasure of the Governor; and I think the duration of it must do so, too. But it was as great a crime to dissolve the Council upon base and sinister motives as it would be to assume the power of dissolving, if he had it not. I believe he is the first Governor that ever dissolved a Council inquiring into his behavior, when he was innocent. Before he could summon three Councils and dissolve them, he had time fully to consider what would be the result of such conduct, _to convince everybody, beyond a doubt, of his conscious guilt_."