equer was brought by Everett against a certain Williams,
setting forth that the complainant was skilled in dealing in certain
commodities, "such as plate, rings, watches, &c.," and that the
defendant desired to enter into partnership with him. They entered into
partnership accordingly, and it was agreed that they should provide the
necessary plant for the business of the firm--such as horses, saddles,
bridles, &c. (pistols not mentioned)--and should participate in the
expenses of the road. The declaration then proceeds, "And your orator
and the said Joseph Williams proceeded jointly with good success in the
said business on Hounslow Heath, where they dealt with a gentleman for a
gold watch; and afterwards the said Joseph Williams told your orator
that Finchley, in the county of Middlesex, was a good and convenient
place to deal in, and that commodities were very plenty at Finchley
aforesaid, and it would be almost all clear gain to them; that they went
accordingly, and dealt with several gentlemen for divers watches, rings,
swords, canes, hats, cloaks, horses, bridles, saddles, and other
things; that about a month afterwards the said Joseph Williams informed
your orator that there was a gentleman at Blackheath who had a good
horse, saddle, bridle, watch, sword, cane, and other things to dispose
of, which, he believed, might be had for little or no money; that they
accordingly went, and met with the said gentleman, and, after some small
discourse, they dealt for the said horse, &c. That your orator and the
said Joseph Williams continued their joint dealings together in several
places--viz., at Bagshot, in Surrey; Salisbury, in Wiltshire; Hampstead,
in Middlesex; and elsewhere, to the amount of L2000 and upwards."[44]

[Footnote 44: This case has been often referred to in law-books, but I
have never met with so full a statement of the contents of the
declaration as in the Retrospective Review (vol. v. p. 81).]

Here follows a brief extract from a law-paper, for the full
understanding of which it has to be kept in view that the pleader, being
an officer of the law who has been prevented from executing his warrant
by threats, requires, as a matter of form, to swear that he was really
afraid that the threats would be carried into execution.

"Farther depones, that the said A.B. said that if deponent did not
immediately take himself off he would pitch him (the deponent) down
stairs--which the deponent verily believes he woul