1778-03-23 (static/transcriptions/1778/03/034.jpg)

1778. 2 Term. [Monday] March 23.

charged in the accounts he had deliver’d in to Mr. Richardson, but he had fraudulently received back again from those Daroga’s a considerable part of the Sums he had paid to them, and to recover those Sums so fraudulently received back, this action was brought.
The Plaintiff proved the actual payment at different times of eighteen thousand, five hundred and fifty three Sicca Rupees, and that evidence being entirely unanswer’d by evidence on the part of the Defendant, the Plaintiff admitted the Receipt of so much as reduced the balance to Five Thousand Six Hundred Sicca Rupees, and Judgment for that Sum was given.
The defendant stated by his Councel, the Defence to be, that he was not employ’d directly by Mr. Richardson, but was employ’d under Mr. Richardson’s Banyan, and was accountable only to the Banyan, and had accounted to him. But the Banyan being call’d denied both parts of the defence; he said he was not Banyan to Mr. Richardson, nor was the Defendant accountable to him, but Mr. Richardson being a Writer employ’d by Mr. Price who was One of the Gentlemen
/ who