burrow MORISSET versus king Friday d Nov bind in a penalty condition for  performance of article of partnership hold not such a contract as can be  adjudge by the court to be usurious this be a action of debt on bind in the  penalty of l condition for the due performance of certain article which  article recite that mary Morisset have lend Daniel king the sum of l to be  repay to her at the end of four year without interest but in consideration  that the say Daniel king his executor and administrator shall find and provide  for mary dubois daughter of the say mary Morisset the obligee meat and drink  in the house where he dwell or shall dwell for four year if the say mary  dubois shall so long live and that she shall during the say term board with he  and that she shall be copartner with mary king wife of the say Daniel king in  the business of a milliner and shall all that time bear one moiety of the loss  charge except housekeeping shoprent and material necessary for carry on the  trade which the say Daniel king do agree to provide and they shall be partner  and each do their utmost to carry on the trade and shall equal divide the  profit and also that the say Daniel king shall lodge the say mary Morisset she  pay he a year and at the end of the four year Daniel king be to repay the and  in case of the death of the say mary dubois to pay the principal together with  lawful interest for the l to the say mary Morisset the defendant after have  demand and have oyer of the condition of this bind and of the article therein  recite plead that this be a corrupt agreement with a averment that the board  of mary Morisset the mother be worth a year and the board of mary dubois the  daughter be worth a year to this plea the plaintiff demurrer the only question  be whether this be a usurious contract within the statute of Ann stat c which  make void all bind contract and assurance where more than per cent per annum  be direct or indirect take for any loan Mr aspinall argue as counsel for the  plaintiff and Mr Wedderburn for the defendant the court be extreme clear that  this case can be within the statute of usury burrow Lord Mansfield observe  that it be impossible to say that king may not receive so much advantage by  this partnership as to be worth the consideration it may be a very  advantageous bargain to king here may be recommendation skill labour or other  benefit arise to he from it he mention the case of Mr Hubert who enter into a  private secret partnership with Nelson who draw he into a bankruptcy thereby  so here the plaintiff daughter may have be draw into a bankruptcy by mean of  this agreement which will have be more severe to her perhaps than the penalty  of this statute of usury will be Mr just foster and Mr just Wilmot concur with  the chief justice they say it do not explicit appear whether this be a prudent  agreement or not but it seem it shall be board Mr just denison be absent  burrow er p it may be beneficial to king upon the whole at least it be not  such a contract as can be adjudge by the court to be usurious within the  statute judgement for the plaintiff