DEC. 11. TEE KING V. ALEK XNDEft DA.VISON, ESQ. This was an Inforniation filed by the At; :iruey-General against the Def..iiilat:t, charging him with fraud in his character of _Agent to the Barrack Master-General, in forni-hing supplies.for tier depaitteent of the p. blic :et vier. The information, in bp , e l f in the precise nature of the fraud, set forth, that the Defoodatil, al, a,,reemen t ptilatefl to t purcliti into se.stores for the wa•li :eiteral DBarrack elaney, iii the ye. 1795, sii to see t -rn packed and tufo arded to tlieir pi ~ je o f 6.,.,i 0 ;,.6011; he helag allowed for his agency two and a half lief cent. upon the charges and expences so incurred ;.that he 0,0 ...Lied to act in the character of Agent, consistent with • s,iptilatt-,1 in the agreement, till the year 1398, when, poreici , i.:4 the supplies from the mt•rehants as he had a•custouied to cl:i, he furnished them from his own. stores, tu himself tile double character of seller as well as er; ant', ha:. Mg caused tictitious bills of parcels to be made out in the e lines of two of his clerks (Watson and Allen), and taken from them receipts, as if they had been dealt with on their own account. These accounts were returtiett to the . Barrack- Office, and the commission charged and allowed upon the trans actions, the same as if the Defendant had actually been the purchaser on the part of Government, and not the seller. By ttic se fabricated hills and receipts, the Barrack 'Master General was deceived, and the Government defrauded, and the Defend ant obtained a columission which he was not entitled to under hi agreement, in addition to his profits on the supplies fur- The Attornev-General, Mr. Garrow, and Messrs. Abbott and Richardson, who were employed on the part of the prosecat'l , m, snbstamiated this charge in evidence. The original agreement between General Delimey aed Mr. Davison was proved, by which thc latter was expressly prohibited from supplying the Btu - rick Department on his own account, and a compensation of two and a half per cent. allowed him for his skill and agency in making the requisite purchases on account of Government, as applicable to the Barrack Departmept. It . was also proved, that this agreement was expressly abided by till the year 1798, when the Defendant first began to furnish the supplies of beds ding, &c. from his own warehouse in Bedford-street, the busi ness of which was conducted by dr. Mingo Shedden, and the accounts rendered to the Barrack Office, with the accompanying bills of sale and receipts, as vouchers, led to a conclusion, that tire stores so supplied were purchased or two individuals, of the names of White and Allen, and not furnished by the i;eft-tulant on his own account; by which means he was enabled, to addi tion to his profits as a seller, to charge his commission ilr‘ an agent. This course of proceeding continued till ISOi, when the practice was discontinued, in consequepee of some investiga tion into the accounts of that Department, and ultimately brought to light by the Military Conenission, appointed by the liotre of Commons to inquire into the abuses of the several Public Departments under Government. The particular in stance of fraud imputed, amounted to somewhere about Irteoe being the commission charged upon 13,000'. together with some other minor items. Mr. Dallas made a most eloquent appeal to the Jury in be half of the Defendant. Ile said, the charge imputed to his client was a fraud, committed frmn a mean and sordid desire to put into his pocket a small sum in breach of his contract, and in defiance of every principle of honour or honesty. It was im possible, he said, not to feet that such a charge involved every thing that was dear to the Defendant, and the nutAnitude of the stake must. impress the Court and the Jars , with the greatest an .iety. Mr. Dallas having; t bus introduced the subject, ad verted to the way in which General Delaney became acquainted with the Defendant, and his motives for app.rintine him. tie found him in the Otlices of Governevait, and understanding that be wasa gentleman of approved skill and conlideire, he pitched upon him as the fittest person to he entre-al with the agency of the Barrack Department. lie (Ntr. Dallas) thought proper 10 mention that fact, as most injurious a n d calumnious state- Leans had gone forth to the pubiic respecting that ztppointment, asel he would repeat, that Cicoeral Delano finding Mr. Davi son cie;aged in extensive business, gevorally knowu to the mer o,ants of the coantrv, and recentl . , befote empluved in situations of gr ea t trust and confidence by Government, Inott,ght him the re,t person to be entru-a,,il with the agency in supplying Lie barrack Department with stores, 6.c. Till then rte was unacquainted with him. lie accordiuglv wrote t a him, and the befeudasit's answtsr of toe 10th of January, MA, was the ba• .. ~ ~f ".icr .. ~ `. _._,,,, •- Aa• 'TIDE NATIONAL REGISTER. . , sic of that agreement, with the fraudulent breach of whirl , he t , :as now charged. Be would admit, by that agreement, he wasemplosed merely as an agent, at a stipulated commission, and that he was bound to. deliver in hills of parcels from the parties he dealt with, as vouchers for the purcha::: .. he wade o n the Barrack account; and he would ask if it was !i -ly , ttficr four s - ears of honourable conduct, diligent and fuitlifol in the discharge of his duty, and accurate and punctual in his accounts he should' all at once deviate front that line of propriety, and be guilty of a fraudulent breach in the execution of his roii tract. Mr. Dallas again remarked on the shameful preju dices that bud been raised agaiii4 the. Defendant. and the calumnies circulated to prevent him obtaiiiine a fair trial ; which, instead of being diminished, he said had been in creased, as the hour of trial approached. Ale did tint al lude to the Reports of the commissioners• w Itich had found their way to the Public, but the unauthorised calumnies and abuse daily and hourly vented in publications, calculated to injure the defendant in the public estimation: and as they were false and scandalous, he hoped the .1 cry, should they have seen them, would dismiss them from their consideration. Af ter a variety of • other topics, the Learned Counsel came more immediately to his client's defence, which he said would prove a complete answer to the charge preferred against hint I—Be tween the years 1795 and 98, Gen. Delaney found considera ble difficulty to obtain supplies from the merchants, and know ing that, by the first agreement, Mr. Davison was prohibited from fruuishing supplies - from his own stores, entered into a fresh agreement with him, and, to benefit the public service, agreed that that stipulation should he done away, and that he should be allowed to furnish the supplies himself. The second agreement was therefore let in upon the first, the restrictive clause was done away, and the defendant was authorised to become a .seller, as well asan agent, so that as soon as he should prove the fart, there would be an end to the allegation of the defen dant's having clandestinely furnished supplies from his ow n stores. As to the circumstance of making the hills of parcels out in the names of his two clerks, it was a mere formality to do aa ay the singularity that would otherwise have happened, namely, that of appearing as the seller to, and the purchaser for. the Bar rack Department upon the same instrument. As to the ciao mission, it was charged inadvertently, and when he discovered the error, had endeavoured all in his power to get hack the accounts from the office to correct them, but they were pa-ve!, and the thing impracticable. General Delaney was then called, who admitted th;:t he at,:,ree i to the defendant's furnishing the supplies from his is w a store,, but not to his charging commision upon them. Had he done so. lie should have considered himselfas guilty dun:ay.:lit breach of his duty to the public. He never knew the commission was charged, though he bad no doubt Mr. Davison might have laid a case on that head before the Barrack Board, that would have called cor consideration. Mr. Bow ring proved that the defendant wished to correct some inaccuracies in his accounts delivered into the Ilarrack Board, bat they were passed, and he was recominendeel to do it in a so p • plemental account. lie also accounted for the substitution of the names of Watson and Allen in a manner s , iinilar to that which Mr. Dallas stated in his speech. Mr. Stainhatick, of the Barrack Office, also proved that an• application was made by the defendant to get back his accounts to correct some inaccuracies, and th.it he was told he must do it by a supplemental acct ttttt t. The Attorney-General made an able reply, insisting that the defence had rontritalied to substantiate the fraud. The nowt o racles the Defendant vs i.hed to correct were not relative to the commission, they respected other eiTors in his accounts. Lord Ellenborotigh summed up with great accuracy arid pre ei-ion ; lie observed with strong emphasis upon the fain icaia..; of th , .- bills of parcels and the receipts, and said it seldom ti:: • pelled that deceit was necessary to produce ao houourable or honest put posz. The Jury, after consulting for some time, found the defeedarit Guilty. The trial lasted from 9in the moroieg till 7at night. DIED. At Edinhorgii, on the 23d ult. Gilbert Meaion, EN. of Nom dun, aged S 3. Uu tbe Sit init. at Bcdgebury, Kent, the Right Ilex. Lally Forrester. At Edinburh, on tile ?.:1 inst. Mr.:. 7./ onypcnoy, wee of David Mouypenny, Of Pitioilly, advocate. Lately, at nuodee, rd toe ad v....uicett age of ye:m,, ' Dick, Collect , ir ot* the Window and iluttie Duty. • .~ . • .. LAW REPORT. I e-nn ZrO r it ea