Arrestment on a decree in absence, found not looseable on caution.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Archibald Stuart, younger of Blackhall, by petition, complained, John Marshall, apothecary in Glasgow, having stolen out a decreet against him for L. 250, as the price of drugs, holding him confessed, and thereon had arrested his horses; whereof he had obtained suspension; but the charger either delayed to insist, or would offer to prove his libel by witnesses; and seeing the horses were detained, and in a short time would eat up their own heads, he craved the arrestment to be loosed upon sufficient caution.—The Lords finding the arrestment was laid on by virtue of a decreet, and the suspension posterior thereto, they could not loose it upon caution; but they fell on this medium, if he would consign the full sums in the decreet charged on, they would ordain the same to be loosed, especially seeing the suspender would be reponed against the decreet, when the cause came to be discussed. See a singular case recorded by Stair, 16th July 1661, College of St Andrew's, No 128. p. 791.