A wife craved inhibition against her husband on her contract of marriage, on account of his extravagance. The Court remitted to the Ordinary to take a summary trial of the husband's circumstances, and if he was found extravagant, to grant inhibition.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Jean Wishart, wife to James Guidshire in Kennoway, gives in a petition, shewing, that her husband had deserted her; and, being wrong in the head, run up and down the country, contracting debts, and left her and five poor children destitute of all subsistence; and, if he were not restrained, would in a short time render them miserable; and she had craved from the clerk of the bills an inhibition on her contract of marriage, (which bore no persons at whose instance execution should pass), which he declined to do without a special warrant; and she requested the Lords to pass it. It being appointed to be seen, and no answer made for the husband, the Lords desired some farther information of the matter of fact ere they would pass the inhibition; whereon she produced an interdiction granted by him in 1701, whereby he obliged himself to grant no bonds without her consent; which the Lords thought contrary to the principles of nature, to subject a man to his wife, who was to be directed and ruled by him, conform to the divine laws; and thought it might be a remedy out of time if they remitted her to pursue it by way of process; therefore they referred it to the Ordinary on the bills to take a summary trial and cognition of the husband's circumstances, and if he found them extravagant, then to pass her inhibition, as had been lately done to Campbell of Carrick's daughter, and Maclure's*. See Stair, Tit. Conjugal Obligations, and Durie, 13th July 1638, Lady Glenbervy, No 261. p. 6053.
Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 472. Fountainhall, v. 2. p. 325.
