The fallacy of his [Justice William Best’s] argument is, that he supposes the objection to the plaintiff’s recovery to be, that his contract with the defendant is usurious; whereas the objection really arises from the circumstance that these notes are deposited to enforce another contract, which was usurious, and the defence rests on this — not that more than 5 per cent. is reserved by these bills, but that they are destined to enforce a contract which is usurious.
Who after Archimagoes fowle defeat / Led her away into a foreſt wilde, / And turning wrathfull fyre to luſtfull heat, / With beaſtly ſin though her to haue defilde, / And made the vaſſal of his pleaſures vilde.
Firm we ſubſiſt, yet poſſible to ſwerve / Since Reaſon not impoſſibly may meet / Some ſpecious object by the Foe ſubornd, / And fall into deception unaware, / Not keeping ſtricteſt watch, as ſhe was warnd.
