The Procurator-Fiscal of the Sheriffdom of Roxburgh v. John Ker
Date: 28 November 1672 Case No. No 229.
Where march stones were set upon an alleged verbal submission, it was sustained to be proved by witnesses, that the party was de facto present when the stones were set.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
John Ker being decerned by the Sheriff to pay 1000 merks for removing of the march-stone, which he himself had consented and submitted to be placed by Patrick Don and Robert Pringle, did suspend and intent reduction of that decree, upon this reason, That his consent and submission was not probable by witnesses, but scripto vel juramento; which was not sustained by the Sheriff. It was replied, That the submission being verbal, and the actual putting in of march-stones having immediately followed thereupon, the same was probable by witnesses, it not being usual to put such consents in writ.
The Lords did find the reason relevant, unless it were offered to be proved by the suspender's oath, that he did not consent to the arbiters' power of placing the march-stones, or that it were offered to be proved by witnesses, that he was not actually upon the place.
