The Earl of Leven v. John Scot of Gilmerseleugh, and Francis Armstrong of Whitehaugh
Date: 15 March 1707 Case No. No 20.
The Lords sustained a blank bond, though it was not delivered till after the act of Parliament, because it was subscribed before it.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The Earl of Leven having charged Gilmerscleugh and Whitehaugh upon their bond for L. 6000 Scots, with annualrents and penalty; they suspended upon this reason, that the bond was blank in the creditor's name, and so null by the act 25th Parl. 1696.
Answered for the charger: That the act annuls only bonds thereafter to be subscribed blank, and this bond was subscribed before the act.
Replied for the suspenders: Albeit the bond was subscribed before, it was not delivered till after the act; and bonds in the sense of law are to be understood cum effectu; an undelivered bond not being vinculum juris. Nor does the act of Parliament discharge only the signing of a blank bond, but requires, that at least at delivery, it be filled up before the same witnesses; which shews that law regards not the time of signing, but delivery.
Duplied: There is no place left in this act to conjecture about the meaning of the words; for it reprobates only bonds thereafter to be subscribed blank, unless some cautions be observed, and makes no mention of blank bonds subscribed before.
The Lords sustained the bond charged upon, in respect it was of a date anterior to the act of Parliament anent blank bonds.
