1791-11-24 (static/transcriptions/1791/11/283.jpg)

(325

For Deft – No 2. Defendant’s Answer.
Person were or had been a Person of rank or fortune that this Defendant must have heard or discovered his place of residence, or his Situation in life. And this Defendant believes that it would, for many years after the said Bill of Indictment was so found as aforesaid, have been easy and practicable for the prosecutors to have produced the said Witnesses, at any time that the said Indictment might have been tried. And this Defendant believes that the Prosecutors Wilfully relinquished such prosecution, because they could not Justly entertain any prospect of getting any of the Several Defendants thereto convicted thereon. And this Defendant further answering admits that, on or about the third day of April in the year of our Lord one thousand Seven hundred and Eighty nine, at the Court of Windsor such order was so made, by his Majesty in his most Honourable Privy Council, that the appeal of the Complainants Behader Beg, Mufty Golam Muckdoom and Mufty Burkuttullah from the aforesaid Judgment of this Honourable Court, of the third day of Febraury one thousand seven hundred and Seventy nine, should be dismissed for want of Prosecution, without Costs, and that such order was so produced and filed of record in this Honourable Court on the Eighth day of March one thousand Seven hundred and ninety, as in the said Bill