BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
Scottish Court of Session Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Alexander Troup v David Craighead. [1683] 2 Brn 35 (00 December 1682) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1683/Brn020035-0099.html |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR ROGER HOG OF HARCARSE.
Alexander Troup
v.
David Craighead
1682 ,December ;and1683 ,March .Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Margaret and Helen Wishearts, as heirs-portioners served to John Craighead,
their cousin-german by the mother's side, having disponed to Alexander Troup, some tenements of land in Aberdeen; who pursued reduction of David Craighead's service of heir to the said John Craighead, his uncle by the father; David Craighead pursued likewise a reduction, against Troup, of his author's service: in which mutual reductions both parties pretended to the right of nearest of kin to the defunct. It was Alleged against the first retour, That the witnesses adduced for the contingency of blood were neither sworn nor subscribing, though they could write. Answered, Esto the depositions do not bear the witnesses to have been sworn, yet they were, de facto, sworn; and, though they had not been sworn, the inquest might have proceeded on their proper knowledge, being both judges and witnesses. The Lords ordained the parties to be heard upon the objections against the propinquity of blood hinc inde.—December 1682. It was afterwards alleged for the first service, That the inquest having found the party served nearest agnate to the defunct, the same cannot be quarrelled, seeing that would infer perjury in the witnesses, and that the assizers were temere jurantes. Answered, That the witnesses adduced in the last service were more pregnant than these in the first; and the depositions in either service are to be considered as depositions made before answer. The Lords, before answer, ordained a probation to be led by commission to the commissary of Aberdeen, which of the two parties served was nearest agnate so the defunct; and afterwards, upon advising the depositions in the report, found the party last served to be the next agnate; and reduced the first service.—March 1683.
Page 148, No. 533.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
