menced managing the said trade with the west coast of Africa under the direction of the plaintiff, and designated himself in the said trade by the name of Frederick Desnaux and Company, and the plaintiff from time to time purchased goods with his own moneys, and shipped and consigned the same to the said merchant named Scala, and such purchases, shipments, and consignments were made through the instrumentality of the defendant Frederick Desnaux using the said name of Frederick Desnaux and Company, and without in any manner disclosing to the said merchant named Scala that the defendant Frederick Desnaux was merely an agent in the said trading.

5. The said purchase, shipment, and consignment of goods continued for some time, until the plaintiff had invested a sum of upwards of three thousand pounds in such trading, and the plaintiff only had received a small quantity of palm, oil, gun or other produce, from the said west coast of Africa, in exchange for the goods so purchased, shipped and consigned, and the defendant Frederick Desnaux, by the direction of the plaintiff, wrote to urge the said merchant named Scala to send home produce in exchange for the said goods, and the said merchant named Scala was unable, on account of the long credit required by the natives, to send home such produce, and proposed to take the whole of the goods so sent to the west coast of Africa as if invoiced to himself, and to allow interest on the sum of the said invoices, and the plaintiff agreed to such proposal; and the defendant Frederick Desnaux, by the direction of the plaintiff, sent to the said merchant named Scala an account made out in accordance with the said proposal.

6. In the month of January, one thousand eight hundred and fifty-five, there arrived from the said merchant named Scala, a cargo of produce of the west coast of Africa, nearly sufficient to settle the account so made out, and the plaintitl Charles William Gregory then determined to discontinue such trading with the said west coast of Africa, as he had up to that time carried on, and to carry on in lieu thereof, and in the same name and under the same system of management, a common agency business; and with that view, the plaintiff Charles William Gregory caused to be circulated among the small native traders of the west coast of Africa, a circular, soliciting their custom, and signed "Frederick Desnaux and Co," and the plaintiff' obtained a fair amount of such agency business, and

carried on the same in the name of the defendant Frederick Desnaux, designating him by the title of Frederick Desnaux and Company, and such business was managed by the defendant Frederick Desuaux, under the direction of the plaintiff, and as the agent of the plaintiff, at the said salary of one hundred and fifty pounds per annum.

7. In the month of October, one thousand eight hundred and fifty-five, the plaintiff Charles William Gregory estimated that there would be standing at Messieurs Barclay and Company's, bankers, with whom the defendant Frederick Desnaux had an account, in respect of the said trading and agency businesses, a sum of about four thousand pounds, and he required a sum of about three thousand five hundred pounds of ready money, and he determined to withdraw that sum from the said commou agency business, and to leave therein a sum of about one thousand pounds, which the plaintiff deemed sufficient for all the purposes thereof, and after some delay, caused by the defendant, the plaintiff obtained the sum of two thousand pounds from the said bankers; but the remainder of the said account at the bankers is still standing in the name and under the control of the defendant Frederick Desnaux, and the defendant Frederick Desnaux declines to authorise the said bankers to pay the same to the plaintiff.

8. In the month of November, one thousand eight hundred and fifty-five, the plaintiff Charles William Gregory accidentally met the defendant Frederick Desnaux in Fenchurch Street. and the defendant requested the plaintiff to accompany him to the office in East India Chambers aforesaid, and the plaintifi declined to do so till the defendant had furnished the plaintiff' with a proper statement of the accounts of the said business and the defendant resisted any such accounts being furnished, and offered to permit the plaintiff to inspect the books of account of the said business at the said office at East India Chambers aforesaid, and this the plaintiff refused to do, and at last the defendant was induced to bring the books of account of the said business and some warrants for unsold produce, part of the goods to which the plaintiff' was entitled in respect of the business carried on by the plaintiff through the instrumentality of the defendant as his agent, to the oflice of Mr. Sandilands, of Fenchurch Street, solicitor, for the purpose of inspection by the plaintiff.

9. On or about the twenty-ninth day of November, one*

thousand eight hundred and fifty-five, the plaintiff Charles William Gregory caused a verbal communication to be made to the defendant Frederick Desnaux, by Mr. Sandilands aforesaid, giving the defendant notice not to enter into or transact any further business on behalf of the plaintiff from and after the thirtieth day of November, one thousand eight hundred and fifty-five.

10. On inspecting the books of account of the said business at the office of the said Mr. Sandilands, it appeared that the defendant Frederick Desnaux had, in addition to the sum of one hundred and fifty pounds per annum allowed to him as remuneration by the plaintiff, drawn out of the moneys invested by the plaintiff in the said business, a sum of about eight hundred pounds, and converted the same to his own use, and that the defendant had lent part of the same moneys of the plaintiff to various friends of the defendant, without any knowledge on the part of the plaintiff that he had done so, and without any authority from the plaintiff in that behalf, and that he had also, without any authority of the plaintiff, applied part of the same moneys in procuring the release of an African trader, of whom the plaintiff had never before heard, from a gaol at Plymouth.

11. The defendant Frederick Desnaux has placed in the hands of the said Mr. Sandilands divers dock and wharf warrants, evidencing the title to property of the value of between one thousand five hundred pounds and two thousand pounds belonging to the plaintiff in respect of the business carried on by the plaintiff through the instrumentality of the defendant as his agent, and which warrants came to the hands of the defendant as the agent of the plaintiff, and the defendant Frederick Desnaux has in his possession or power bills of lading of produce of the value of about seven hundred pounds, now discharging or recently discharged at Plymouth, out of a ship called the Retriever, and which is now being sent to the London Docks, and which belongs to the plaintiff in respect of the said business, and which bills of lading also came to the hands of the defendant as the agent of the plaintiff; and the defendant has also in his possession or power bills of lading of produce of the value of about two thousand pounds, now shortly expected to arrive by a ship named the Token, from the west coast of Africa, and which also belongs to the plaintiff in respect of the said business, and which said bills of lading also came into the hands of the defendant as the agent of the plaintiff, and the

holder of the said bills of lading is entitled at law to enforce the delivery of the said produce sent by the Retriever and the Token to himself, and is able by indorsement on the said bills of lading and by other means to assign and create liens or incumbrances upon the said produce, and the defendant refuses to deliver up or procure to be delivered up to or to the order of the plaintiff the said dock and wharf warrants now in the hands of the said Mr. Sandilands, and the said bills of lading of the produce sent by the said ships called the Retriever and the Token, and to authorise the bankers with whom the said account of the trading business stood, to pay the balance of the said account now standing in the name of the defendant, and to which the defendant became entitled, as the agent of the plaintiff, to or to the order of the plaintiff, and to deliver up to the plaintiff, or to some person authorised by him, the possession of the office at which the said business has been carried on, and the furniture, chattels, effects, account books and papers therein, in the possession of which the defendant was placed, as agent of the plaintiff.

12. The plaintiff has obtained possession of part of the property belonging to the plaintiff, in respect of the said business carried on by the plaintiff, through the instrumentality of the defendant as his agent, the delivery of which, to himself, the defendant was entitled at law to enforce, and some persons or corporations are liable to be vexed by actions brought by the defendant in respect of such matters.

13. The defendant pretends that he was not an agent of the plaintiff in the said business, but that he was a partner with the plaintiff therein, and has an equal right with the plaintiff in respect of the matters complained of by this bill, whereas the plaintiff charges that the defendant was not such a partner, and that he was a merely salaried agent in such a business, and the plaintiff charges that the defendant has included in the said accounts inspected by the plaintiff yearly sums of one hundred and fifty pounds under the head of services, meaning thereby his said salary of one hundred and fifty pounds per annum.

14. The defendant pretends that he is under liabilities in respect of transactions entered into by him as an agent of the plaintiff, without any disclosure to the third parties engaged in such transactions, that the defendant was acting as an agent of the plaintiff, but the plaintiff charges that no such liabilities really exist, and that he has always been ready and willing, and

he hereby offers to indemnify the defendant in the most ample manner against any such alleged liabilities.

15. The plaintiff charges that the defendant Frederick Desnaux ought to be restrained by the order and injunction of this Honourable Court, in the manner herein prayed, and that if necessary such receiver as herein prayed should be appointed. 16. The defendant has in his possession divers books of account. papers, documents, and writings, relating to the matters complained of by this bill.

[PRAYER.]

THE PLAINTIFF PRAYS AS FOLLOWS:

1. That an account may be taken of all sums paid or advanced by the defendant Frederick Desnaux to or for the use or on account of the plaintiff Charles William Gregory, and of all sums of money received by or come to the hands of the defendant Frederick Desnaux to or for the use of plaintiff, and of all dealings and transactions of the defendant Frederick Desnaux as the agent of the plaintiff. 2. That the defendant Frederick Desnaux may be ordered to pay to the plaintiff Charles William Gregory what, upon taking the above account, shall be found to be due from him, the plaintiff hereby offering to give to the defendant such indemnity as shall seem fit to this Honourable Court against any liabilities incurred by the defendant in respect of the matters complained of by this bill.

3. That the defendant Frederick Desnaux may be ordered to deliver up or to procure to be delivered up to the plaintiff Charles William Gregory the said dock and wharf warrants and the said bills of lading of produce sent by the ships Retriever and Token, and the possession of the said office and furniture, chattels, effects, books of account and papers, and to authorise the said bankers to pay to the plaintiff the balance now standing in his name in their books.

4. That the defendant Frederick Desnaux, his agents and servants, may be restrained by the interference of this Honourable Court from entering into any contract, aud from accepting, drawing, endorsing or negotiating any bill of exchange, note, warrant, bill of lading or written security, as the agent of the plaintiff, in the name of