Found, that a gift of single escheat could extend no farther than to the moveables belonging to the rebel at the time of the gift, and a year thereafter.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Mr Roger Mowat, and one Keith of ——, son-in-law to Jean Guthrie, having either of them arrested the prices of some victual, addebted to the Laird of Ludquhairn, and contending for preference, Mr Roger craves to be preferred, because he was both creditor to Ludquhairn, and donatar to his escheat.—The Lords found, he could not crave preference as donatar, because he was donatar only to his simple escheat, under which they found that nothing could be comprehended but moveables, which then, at the time of the gift, and a year thereafter, only should pertain to the rebel; and the victual now controverted was of a crop five or six years subsequent after the gift, and so that it could not pertain to the donatar of the rebel's simple escheat; and they respected not the tenor of the gift, which disponed expressly all the rebel's goods, which he should acquire at any time thereafter during his rebellion, and that he was still rebel, which was not respected.
Act. present.Alt. Gilmore.
Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 347. Durie, p. 892.
