There being a decreet recovered against the relict, as vitious intromitter with her husband's goods, in so far as she had received the sum of £60 Scots, due to her husband by the Earl of Wintoun; she did suspend, and intent reduction upon this reason,—That the decreet was before an inferior court; and she, being an ignorant woman, her procurator did omit to propone several defences upon writs, which she now produced. viz. an assignation by her husband to that sum, and that she was decerned executrix-creditrix upon her contract of marriage.
It was answered, That the decreet was in foro contradictorio, wherein litiscontestation was made, and, after probation, sentence pronounced.
The Lords did repone the suspender, notwithstanding, in respect of her condition, and that the reasons were instantly verified; and that decreet against her, as vitious intromitter, made her liable to her husband's whole debts; but ordained her to pay the whole expenses. This was done, me reclamante and several others of the Lords, as being law and form of process; and the case being different from reponing against decreets, where the parties are holden as confessed, because of not compearance to depone; against which the Lords do often repone, when the parties have lawful defences.
Page 74.
