Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JOHN LAUDER OF FOUNTAINHALL.
William Denholm of Westshiels, v. The Earl of Balcarras
1693.
January13,and
February16.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
1693. January 13.—The Lords found he behoved to deliver up the bonds as they were at the time of the decreet ordaining him to denude of them, and seeing they were then unregistrate, and that lite pendente nihil est innovandum, he ought not to have put them into the register, and that the offering of extracts was not an implement in obedience to the decreet; and, therefore, ordained him to take the principal out of the register, and deliver them to Westshiells, if they were not booked, and so could not be gotten back; for the Lords thought it humour on both sides, and malitiis non est indulgendum. Vid. act 18th Parl. 1689, in fine.
Vol. I. page 545.
1693. February 16—At examining the witnesses about taking out the extracts of these bonds which the Earl of Balcarras was decerned to deliver up to Denholm of Westsheills, mentioned 13th January last; Mr. Charles Gray, advocate, refusing to answer this interrogatory, whether he was present at any consultations where the Earl was advised to take out no extracts;
The Lords found he was not bound to answer this, being to cause him detect his client's secrets, and against his fidelity; though on the other hand it was more against the duty of a Christian advocate to give fraudulent advice to their clients, how they may frustrate or defraud their creditors.
