[1670] Mor 12630
Subject_1 PROOF.
Subject_2 DIVISION IV. Private Deed, how far probative.
Subject_3 SECT. VI. Extrajudicial Declarations, Certificates, &c.
Date: Alexander Wishart
v.
Sir William Davidson
28 January 1670
Case No.No 528.
Certificates & declarations prove nothing unless where they are taken in process and by commission.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Alexander Wishart being employed by Sir William Davidson to be director of his mineral works in Norway, and for alleged malversations having caused imprison him in the town of Drontown, and by a transaction before the Magistrates of the town they having made an agreement, whereby Wishart was discharged of the damage and other things Sir William could lay to his charge; the said Alexander did likewise discharge him of all action or suit whereby he could trouble or molest him, reserving only that he might
have an extract of such articles of the count-books of the minerals wherein he had an interest as a partner. The said Alexander did intent action against Sir William for exhibition of the count-books here, and did produce a certificate under the hands of some of the Magistrates, bearing, That he was wrongously imprisoned, and that he could not have been compelled in law to have made that transaction to which he was forced to agree for fear of Sir William, being there a man of great power, and copartner with the King of Denmark in the public works. The Loros would not find themselves judges to reduce that transaction made in Norway so as to repone the pursuer, the certificate produced being impetrated without hearing of parties, and not being a judicial sentence; neither could they ordain Sir William to produce the count-books here, seeing they were necessary to remain with the manager of the public works; but they did ordain the said Sir William to give his oath upon commission to be direct what count-books he had by him, or what books were in Norway, and who had the keeping thereof, and to consent that the pursuer might have inspection thereof, and might have the extracts of such articles wherein he was concerned. Notwithstanding it was alleged for the pursuer, That both parties being Scotsmen, and Sir William having an estate here, he should be liable to do all personal actions founded upon any writ, albeit made in a foreign country, according to the law of Scotland. *** Stair reports a similar case, 4th February 1662, Skene against Lumsden, No 513. p. 12618.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting