Where resting owing is referred, are payment, or satisfaction, or payment to a third party, at the pursuer's desire, intrinsic?
Gilchrist v. Murray
Date: 26 June 1675 Case No. No 17.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In a process for payment of a sum by the defender, the libel being referred to his oath, and he having declared with a quality, viz. that as he was debtor so he had made payment, partly in money, and partly in commodities and ware;
The Lords, upon advising of the oath, found, that the same not being special, as to the quality of payment, viz. how much was paid in money, and how much in goods, nor being special, as to the quantity of the several goods, did not admit the same; but, if it were made special, as to money paid by him, it would be sustained pro tanto; and, as to the delivery of goods, in satisfaction of the debt, it resolved in an exception, and ought to be proved.
Clerk, Hamilton.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 297. Dirleton, No 280. p. 136.
