Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JOHN LAUDER OF FOUNTAINHALL.
John Muir v. William Cunningham
Date: 19 February 1695
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In a case between John Muir and William Cunningham, late provosts of Ayr, a holograph bond was alleged to be prescribed, being past twenty years, unless they also referred to the debtor's oath that he was resting owing. Answered, —The Act of Parliament 1669 bears only that the verity of the subscription be referred to the signer's oath, but not the debt. The Lords, calling to mind that there were frequent decisions otherwise since the date of that act; therefore they forbore to determine till the same were maturely considered. For, if the prescription were only anent proving the subscription, it would be of little importance.
The Lords at last, advising this, adhered to the letter of the act; and found the contrary decisions were in the case of heirs, where the subscribers were dead.
