A patty pursued on the passive titles, not allowed to allege prescription of the debt, denying the passive titles.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In a pursuit by Mr James Stuart of Chreswal, Advocate, against the Laird of Lamont, and others, it came to be debated, if an apparent heir can propone the defence of prescription, and yet deny the passive titles.—It was alleged, It was only exceptio impeditiva litis ingressus, and not properly a peremptor.— Answered, Prescription is as much inter modos tollendi obligationem, as either payment or compensation; and after you have kept me a year in proving interruption, it were unreasonable to permit him to recur to a denial of the passive titles.—The Lords found prescription such a peremptor as inferred, by proponing thereof, an acknowledgment of the passive titles.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 187. Fountainhall, v. 1. p. 777.
