A person was pursued for the delivery of a deposit. It was not sustained in defence, that he had delivered it to a third party for safety.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Buchanane ane of the dochteris and airs of umquhile M. Th. Buchanane, and Buchanane hir spouse, for his entres, persewit ane uther Buchanane to exhibit and delyver to hir his father's evidentis, whilk he had, or fraudfully had put away. It was allegit be the defender, That his houss being brunt be the hielandmen, he had delyverit the saids evidentis to James Carbraith of ——, to the effect they micht be the mare saiflie preservit; and sua thay beand out of his handis lang befoir the intenting of this caus, thir persewers could have na action, bot behovit to seik the evidentis fra the said Carbraith. It wes ansrit, That sieing this defender had grantit that he anes had the evidentis, he behovit to redelyver thame to thir persewars, wha had na action agains the said Carbraith, bot the said defendar micht persew him as he thocht expedient, alwayes thare action was verie competent agains this defendar, and na uther.——The Lords repellit the allegeance, and ordenit this same defendar to exhibit and deliver.
Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 234. Haddington, MS. v. 1. No 320.
