Subject_1 PERSONAL and TRANSMISSIBLE. Subject_2 SECT. II.
What Right go against Heirs.
Ld Kinfawns v. Ld Craigie.
1552.
July. Case No. No 17.
Found in conformity with the above.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Anent the action pursued by the Laird of Kinfawns against Drum Craigie, for the spuilzie of his place, it was alleged by the said Laird of C., That the said Laird of K. might not pursue him for the said spuilzie, because the said Ld. of Kinfawns had called for the said spuilzie, the plea dependent. It was answered, That as long as there was no sentence given upon another, he might call them he pleased for the said spuilzie. Which allegeance of the said Laird of Craigie was repelled. And albeit it was alleged by the said Laird of Craigie, That he was called for the spuilzie of certain goods alleged to be spuilzied from the Laird of Kinfawns by the Laird of Craigie his father, and were never intromitted with by the said young Laird, nor came never till his use; therefore he was not obliged to answer for the yearly profits of the said goods disponed by his father. It was answered, That the heir is obliged to answer for spuilzie, and the profits thereof, sicklike as the principal spuilzier. Which allegeance of the said Ld. of Craigie was repelled, in respect of the answer.
Maitland, MS.*** Balfour reports the same case:
The air of ony persoun, committer of ony spuilzie, may not be accusit criminally thairfoir; bot he may be callit and persewit civillie, siclike as the principal spuilziar, his predecessour, micht have been callit, albeit nane of the saidis spuilziet gudis come to his use and profit, bot the samin, all and haill, were disponit be his predecessour.
