What understood to be a Spuilzie. - What Damages allowed.
More v. M'Phaderick
Date: 29 November 1678 Case No. No. 11.
Spuilzie not elided by the defender alleging, that the pursuer had taken as much from him.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
More pursues M'Phaderick for spuilzieing of certain cows; who alleged, Absolvitor, because he offered him to prove, that the pursuer had stole as many from him, or stole or reset his; and therefore he might lawfully take as many of the pursuer's by the Act 112. Parl. 7. & Act. 16. Parl. 10. K. Ja. VI.
The Lords found the defence not relevant, unless it were proponed in the terms of these acts, viz. “That the pursuer was a broken man, and a notorious thief, of any clan or combination that could not be reached by the ordinary course of law.
