A tack with either ish or duty ineffectual against singular successors.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Margaret Stevenson having apprised from James Stevenson nine acres of land in Dalkeith, pursues James Dobie for the mails and duties thereof. It was alleged for the defender Dobie, that he having lent to the said James Stevenson 340 merks, he bruiks the said acres by virtue of a tack set by the said James Stevenson to him of the same during the not payment of the said sum, and produces the tack. To which it was answered, that the said tack is null, because it hath no ish, neither hath it any tack-duty, and so is but a personal right, and cannot prejudge a compriser; but, 2do, The tack is expired, being only for five years, albeit it bear in the beginning thereof to be set during the not payment of the money. The Lords found the tack null, and decerned Dobie to make payment.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 423. Newbyth MS. p. 29.*** Stair and Gilmour's reports of this case are No. 11. p. 1283. voce Base Infeftment.*** A similar case is reported by Durie, 5th March, 1629, Ley against Kirkwood, No. 26. p. 7195. voce Irritancy. See Appendix.
