1788-03-13 (static/transcriptions/1788/03/053.jpg)

natives were or were not designed to be and were or were not actually taken on the account of the said James Inglish Keighly nor on whose account.
Twenty Fourth
For that the said Defendant William Barton hath not Setforth whether the said Dattaram Ghose was or was not a native Sircar or Banyan of inconsiderable or what property and who had been for a long time employed at the said Factory of Bauleah under Mr. Pattle the immediate predecessor of the said James Inglish KEighly nor whether the said Dattaram Ghose had not been taken into the Service of the said James Inglish Keighly upon his Suceeding the said Mr. Pattle or at Some other and what time nor whether he was or was not in the actual Service of the said James Inglish Keighly or in Some office or Employment in the Factory under him at the time he made the said proposals in the letter of the fourth of April in the said Bill mentioned nor whether the said Annunderam Sircar was or was not the father or Some other and what relations of the said Dattaram Ghose not whether he was or was not a man of
property