Witnesses were admitted to explain a minute, although they might not have been admitted if the deed had been formally extended.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Mr James Cheap charges Mr John Philip to fulfil a minute of alienation of lands of Ormiston, sold by Mr James to Mr John, whereby Mr John was obliged to pay 25,500 merks, as the price, or to assign sufficient bonds therefor: He suspends, and offers to consign bonds, and, among the rest, a bond of 8000 merks due by the Town of Edinburgh. The charger alleged, That he was not obliged to accept that bond, because at the time of the agreement, and subscription of the minute, the charger particularly excepted the Town of Edinburgh's debt, and the suspender declared that it should be no part of the price, which he offered to prove by the writer and witnesses insert in the minute. The suspender answered, That witnesses were not competent in this case, where the words of the minute are not dubious, but clear and general of any sufficient debt, for if this were sustained, the alteration of the price, as well as the manner of payment, might be proved by witnesses. It was answered, That it was no way alike, nothing being here in question but the manner of payment, and not the quantity of the price.
The Lords ordained the writer and witnesses to be examined before answer.
1667. January 5.—The Lords having considered the testimonies of the witnesses adduced, before answer, betwixt Mr James Cheap and Mr John Philip, upon the debate mentioned the 19th of December last, found the same to prove and to qualify the minute, they being the witnesses inserted above exception, and it but a minute, wherein particulars are not at all, nor fully set down, which will not be drawn in example as to any full and extended writs, either for altering any clause therein expressed, or for adding thereunto any omitted.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 219. Stair, v. 1. p. 416 & 426.
