Power, - Duty, - Liability of Magistrates relative to Prisoners.
Ross v. Robertson
Date: 23 June 1629 Case No. No 25.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The said James Robertson being pursued for not taking a rebel at the instance of one Ross; it was alleged by the defender, That all parties having interest were not summoned, viz. the rebel, who, if he had been called, might have alleged, that he made payment to the pursuer. The Lords found it not necessary to summon the rebel.
Auchinleck, MS. p. 23.
*** Durie's report of this case is No 34. p. 2193., voce Citation.
*** Spottiswood reports this case:
1629. June 25.—N. Ross pursued James Robertson Bailie of Inverness, to hear and see him decerned to pay to the pursuer L. 1000 for not apprehending a rebel, being charged with letters of caption for that effect. Alleged, No process, because all parties having interest were not summoned, viz. the rebel, who being called might allege payment or transaction. The Lords repelled this allegeance.
The like found between Douglas and Dunbar Bailie of Tain, 26th March 1634, for when one is convened ex proprio delicto, there needeth no other to be summoned thereto.
