[1671] Mor 11148
Subject_1 PRESCRIPTION.
Subject_2 DIVISION XII. Who Privileged against Prescription?
Date: Beadmen of the Magdalen Chapel
v.
Gavin Drysdale
30 June 1671
Case No.No 347.
Prescription runs against the poor and things mortified for pious uses.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Janet Rud having mortified an yearly annualrent of a merk Scots, out of a tenement of hers to the poor Beadmen of the Magdalen Chapel, they pursue Gavin Drysdale, now heritor of the tenement, for poinding of the ground; who alleged absolvitor, because he has bruiked the tenement free of that annualrent for more than 40 years, so that the right thereof is prescribed. It was answered, That prescription runs not against the poor and things mortified for pious uses. 2dly, They are in the same condition with minors, having overseers chosen yearly. 3dly, The years of prescription must be accounted, abating the times of pestilence and war, when there was no session. It was answered, That prescription was the great security of the leiges, and hath no exception by the act of Parliament, but only minority, and neither by the civil law or our custom, is the time of prescription counted per tempus utile, but per tempus continuum, in regard of the length of the long prescription.
The Lords sustained the defence of prescription, and repelled the replies.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting