a in bind his son to b a merchant be bind in a bind of pound penalty for his  son fidelity the son in embezzle pound of his master cash which a pay but at  the same time by letter desire b to trust his son no more with cash or at  least but equity case abridge very spare however b do trust the son again with  cash and about a year after the apprentice on state the account appear to be  indebt pound but b do not make up the account until near two year after the  expiration of the apprenticeship and during that time get the apprentice to  sign a memorandum whereby he acknowledge he have embezzle pound b s cash the  apprenticeship expire Feb and the memorandum be date Feb but the apprentice  still continue with b and b give no notice of this Imbezilment till July and  then put this pound in suit a the father bring his bill to be relieve and Lord  Chan king decree the father to pay to b what he shall prove to have be  embezzle by the son during the apprenticeship not exceed the pound penalty of  the bind but the pound already pay to be take as part thereof and this be on a  rehear from a decree by his honour July the pound deposit be to be divide the  plaintiff have prevail but in part upon the rehear Trin shepherd and Beecher  will Rep his honour have order that the father shall pay the whole pound if so  much shall prove to be imbeziled without any abatement for the pound pay on  account of the former Imbezilment but Lord Chan king observe that the father  seem to have intend not to make himself liable beyond the pound and that  consider the gross neglect of b in this case and that he thereby be party to  the occasion of this loss it be reasonable that the pound shall be take as  part of the pound penalty but that the father have give this bind though there  be a Imbezilment and though the father send the say letter to b yet he  continue bind and ought not to have satisfy himself with send the letter and  take no far care of the matter but shall have endeavour to have make some end  with b and to have get up the bind wherefore he must continue liable to answer  some Imbezilment unless there shall appear fraud in the master ibidem and for  these reason decree ut above select case in Chan S c cap LXV merger a in what  case maxim equal thing can drown one another