Star.
London, England, 1828-10-23 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, GomorraLt, Oct
Before Lord TISITMIDEIt and Special heirs.
THE EAST INDIA COMPANY D. LEWIS.
Thig was an action against the late sub-treasnrei of
the East India Company at Demo/sten, to recover a
balance claimed to be due from hint on an alleged de-
ficieocy of his treasury accounts.
When the ease was called on only nine Special Jurors
answered to their names. The summoning officers were
then sworn. and deposed to the summoning of the ab-
sentees, some of whom, it appeared, were out of town,
some were over age, and others were excused on various
statements made by this friends. James Simpson, of
Fenclnch-street, merchant, and John Taylor. of Pin-
net's-hall, merchant. were ordered to be fined. The
Counsel for the plaintiffs then prayed a tales, and three
common Jurors were sworn.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL, Mr. Sergeant BOSAMIITET,
Sir JAMES SCARLET; Mr. Sergeant SPANK'S, Mr.
CAMPBELL, and Mr. Dorn), were engaged for the
plaintiffs; Mr. G UMW, Mr. BROUGHAM, Mr. CHITTY,
and Mr. KELLY, appeared for the defendant.
The Sotactron•Gmaute 1., in opening the case, stated
that the defendant, Henry Robert Lewis, who was for-
merly second servant in the employment of the Eut
India Company, was, in the early part of the year 1816,
appointed sub-tteasurer at Beaconlen, a settlement
,which ler a great number of treats belonged to the East
India Company. but which in 1824 was given up to
the Dutch. Government. Dawn to the year 1818 no
Governor .was resident at Bencoolen, but a person who
was called a resident superintended the affairs of the .
East India Company in that place. The defendant held
his situation as sub-treasurer from 1316 to the Ist of
April 1818. His predecessors were Mr. Joseph Little. •
dale and Mr. Siddons. The treasure of which the de-
fendant and his predecessors had had charge was kept
in a part of the fortress called the Bomb-proof, which
was guarded by a sentinel; and therenaainder of it was ,
deposited at the sub-treasurer's house. In 1818 Sr
Stamford Raffles was appointed Lieutenant-Governor
of the fort, and that Gentleman having appointed a Mr.
Jennings subtreasuter, notice was given to the defendant
to make up his accounts, and to attend with the Go•
vernment's agent to count up the treasure, For the pur-
pose of its being delivered over to his successor, Mr.
Jennings. Accordingly, on the 27th March. 1818, the
defendant, attended by one of his own money counters,
met Captain Travers, who attended as the agent on tl.e
part of sire Government. Ott beginning to count the
money at the fortress, the defendant stated to Captain
Travers that it would occupy twelve or fourteen days ,
to count the whole of the bags and box s, which con-
tained
a great number of Spanish, Portuguese, and ,
English coins of different denominations, and that it
would be quite unnecessary to do so, as he (the
defendant) was alone answerable for the money, no
risk attaching to the Government ; that he knew
the amount of the money deposited in each bag . •
and box, and would state it to Captain Travers.
That Gentleman accordingly trek down the amount of
what the defendant stated the bags and boxes to con.
tain. The aggregate amount was 419,000 dollars.
The parties then proceeded to the defendant's house,
and the amount of the dollars deposited with the de-
tendant there was stated to be 32,005. The same
amounts were also stated in the accounts which the de•
fendant had afterwards furnished to Mr. Jennings, who
succeeded the deendant as 'sub.treituurer on the Ist of
April, 1818. It however came to the ears of Sir Stant.
ford ItAlles;•thit there had been no actual counting of •
the money, and that Gentleman expressed his disappro-
bation of the proceedings. By his directions notice was
given to the defendant to attend, and make a proper
counting, and the 10th of July was appointed for that
purpose. On thit °cation Captain Trams with two
money-counters, attended as before on the part of the
Government; and a Mr. Baskett, a friend of the de.
fendant's, attended on his part with two native money.
counters. This business of the counting occupied about
twelve days. At the conclusion Of it, on casting up '•
the different amounts of countingt, the total was found
to be 0n1y'272,300 dollars; being a deficiency since the
preceding March, when the amounts were tint stated
by the defendant, of 146,700 dollars, which sum was
equal to 35,0001- or 36,0001. English currency. Mr.
Jennings had succeeded the defendant in April, 1818, • .•
and that Gentleman bad been examind upon intertoga•
tories en the. subject of the deficiency; but it appeared
from his depositions that none of the money had been
taken by him; and indeed it was quite impossible that
so large a quantity of dollars could have been abstracted
from the Bomb-proof without observation by the
Officers, whose duty it was to guard the fortress. Under
these circumstances, the East India Company bad called
upon the defendant to make good! the armunt (the de-
falcation, the present action was brought to recover it.
The depoSitions of Mr. Jenning., taken upon inter-
rogatosies under a Commission, wese then put in and
read, in suppoi t of the statement ofthe Solicitor General.
Captain Travers examined—l was appointed by Sir
S. Raffles as the second assistant to the Resident -at
Bencoolen. In March, 1815, the defendant was the
sub-treasurer, and Mr. Jennings was the Resident. The
principal part of the treasure was kept in a part cf the
fort called the Bomb-proof. A Committee had been
appointed to inquire as to the amount of the urea: tire.
We went to the fortress to count the different coins
there. We found some in boxes and some in bags. so
that it was impossible to count the money in a short
time. The defendant stated, that he should be able id
fitcilitate the object of the elimination by giving us the
-amount of each bag and box. I told him I was sure that
Sir Stamford Rallies would not grant a receipt for the
alone, unless it was counted. He said the counting
would be quite unnecessary, as no risk would attach to
the Government; a casein point having been JeciJed .
by. the Supreme Government. making the sub-treasurer
answerable: We then proceeded with the examination,
.rind took from the defendant and his native money-
counters the amount of each bag and box, some of which .
were broken. The total amounted to 419,000 dollars.
This was on the 27th and 28th of March, 1818. We
'afterwards proceeded to the defendant's house, to _
take an account of further' money which was there.
We found thirty-two thousand and five dollars, two
alarms and 32 cash. We added the sums together, and .
the total of them the defendant acknowledged to be the
'balance of the treasury hooks. 1 afterwards left Ben..
cooler, and returned in July. Mr. Jennings was at .
that time the sub-treasurer. I was then desired to count
the money and receive charge front the defendant's
agent, Mr. Baskett, for the purpose of Landing over
the balance to Mr. Jennings. Mr. Baskett accordingly
met me in the fort on the 10th of July, 1818. We were
'engaged in the counting about twelve days. Mr. 13as- .
kett, who had the keys, opened the bomb-proof, And
• cook out the dollars and counted them, 100 at a rime ; .
1. checked the countin.T. When we had tilled the bags,
we tied and sealed, ti..c.44. „and noted the amour.(; ti,ey
each contained abt:A 1,500 or 2,000 dollar's; the paper .
now produced to we cuptaius the antouat.ot.etch day .

.."

the total was 272,300 doll" making a deficiency of
146,700 dollars. The bags and bases appeared to be
in the same state as when the examination took place in
March ; the fort was regularly guarded every day, and
some of the artillery were stationed there; no person
could have access to the Bomb-proof without being
seen by some person in the fort, and no large quantity
of coin could have been abstracted at one time witbou' .
observation; 146,700 41ollars could not, I think, have
been taken away without making a difference in the v.
pearance of the bags.
Mr. Joseph Littledate—l was at Bencoolen, in the
service of the East India Company as soh-treasurer in
1812. 1 received from my predecessor charge of the
money, which was kept in bags and strong boxes. 1
counted the contents of most of them. I was succeeded
by Mr. Siddons, to whom I accounted for the money.
The amount was 65,172 dollars, S succoos, and 76 cash.
This was in August, 1812.
Mr. GURNEY now put in. with a view to a nnnsuit,
the action being in assumpsit, an indenture, dated the
28th February, 1816, showing the defendant to have
been a covenanted servant of the East India Company.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, he should show that
no counterpart of the indenture had been executed by
the• defendant, who at the time in question was acting
as Secretary to the Company at Bencoolen.
The Keeper of Indentures executed between the East
India Company and their servants proved that he had
amide search for the counterpart in question, and could
nut find it. The usual course was to send the Com-
pany's part of the indenture to the resident abroad, to
be delivered over to the person appointed,in exchange
for the counterpart which was executed by him, which
sa as sent to England to be deposited.in witness's office.
A letter, dated the lit of March, 1816, was put in,
showing that the defendant was at that time the acting
secretary at B4ncoolen.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL submitted that this evi-
dence was sufficient to rebut the presumption that a
counterpart of the deed had been executed.
Lord TENTEADIN thought not.
The plaintiffs were then nonsuited.
LEVI •. BASET'.

This was an action on a policy of insnrance, which
the defendant had subscribed for 1001. The insurance
was effected on a schooner called the Industry, on a
voyage from St. Vincent's to. Liverpool. She 'Ailed on
the 15th of May, 1823, and, as alleged on the part of
the plaintiff, was destroyed by bad weather. The de-
fend Ant, however, contended that she was not sea-wor•
thy at the time she 'sailed ; and that was the principal
point to which the evidence was directed. It was, to a
certain extent; conflicting; but the defendant's evidence
preponderated, and, without a minute's deliberation,
the Jury found for the defendant.

I'