The Sun.
London, England, 1868-10-31 00:00:00

THE " AFFAIRE DOULTON."

The following is the judgment given in the Doulton
case :

" Whereas the accused, Frederick Doulton, although
duly cited, has not put in an appearance : whereas from the
investigation it has appeared that Doulton, at Brussels,
on the 9th December, did cause to be delivered by Mention
and Son-1. A sub-contract for the works for the purifica-
tion of the river Senne, to be completed for the sum of
14,950,000 f. 2. Through the intervention of Smith, a pro-
mise by which Mention and Sons covenanted to hand over
the sum of 2,500,000 f. to he deducted from the price of the
sub-contract : whereas the accused has causedthe sub-con-
tract to be transferred to him at an advanced rate, for the
purpose of increasing his profit in a company which
he was about to form in London—in fact, a company
was formed in London by Doulton on the 19th September,
1866, under the name of the Belgian Public Works
Company : whereas it has been proved by the investiga-
tion, and especially from the letter dated April 2, 1866, from
the board of directors of that company, that towards
the end of Docember, 1866, the company was formed
to acquire the concession of the 15th June, and amongst
other objects that they were to acquire it has been
stated by Doulton that some Belgian contractor, per-
fectly solvent, had entered into a provisional contract
to carry out the works for the purification of the
Senne for £598,000 (14,950,0001.) or in other words,
the agreement of the subcontractor, entered into
between Doulton and Mention : whereas it has been
besides proved from this said letter of the 2nd April
that Doulton, in order to induce the company to accept
the contract of 14,950,000 francs, gave the co-contractors
to understand that he was in treaty with the
most celebrated English contractors, and that they
had been convinced that it was impossible to obtain more
favourable terms : whereas, when the company had been
formed, Doulton, in his character of managing director.
in order to carry out with the English board the sub-
contractoa,'s contract at the price of 14,950,000 f., did
renew this contract in London on the 13th January,
1857, the name of the said company : whereas in so doing
Doulton appropriated subsequently at Brussels a portion
of the profits granted to him by Mention and Son
to the prejudice of the Public Works Company:
whereas it is proved from the foregoing that
Doulton did, by fraudulent means, influence the
London company to undertake on their own
account the sub-contract of Mention and Sons, thereby
committing an act of swindling, as laid down in Art. 490
of the Belgian Penal Code, in a foreign country—in fact,
in so doing, the company has become liable to Mention
and Sons, and it is this liability contracted in a fraudulent
manner by Doulton from which he would have received
the ' illegal profits stipulated for by him ; that if
Doulton had remitted to Brussels by Mention and
Sons the sum of 14,807,537 f., that remittance
which chews the persistency of his intent would
only be in Belgium regarded as a misdemeanour committed
in foreign countries : whereas it is of no moment that,
since the formation of the Belgian Public Works Company,
of which all the founders are foreigners, Belgian share-
holders have subsequently become interested in this
company, and as it has not been proved that fraudulent
means had been adopted by the accused, so far as they
were concerned, to induce them to take shares : whereas
the acts imputed to Frederick Doulton, and of
• he is accused at Brussels, do not come under the new
an Penal Code. Therefore the court quashes the in•
,lictment against the accused."
The Public Prosecutor has appealed against this judg-
ment,