The Lady Craigforth, and her Husband, v. Patrick Murray of Deuchar
Date: 13 June 1710 Case No. No 49.
A pursuer allowed to controvert the relevancy of a defence, after requiring and getting the defenders oath of calumny, upon the verity thereof.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In a pursuit at the instance of the Lady Craigforth, and her husband, against Patrick Murray of Deuchar, as representing his father (who was the Lady's former husband) for payment of her jointure, the defender having craved compensation for the value of some silver-plate intromitted with by the Lady after his father's death; the pursuers were allowed to impugn the relevancy of the compensation, by alleging, That it was not liquid, after they had required and got the defender's oath of calumny upon the verity of the allegeance; albeit the defender contended, That the relevancy was not to be controverted by the pursuers, after they had homologated the same, by obliging him to depone de calumnia; since oaths are not to be given in vain, and even an oath of calumny is a probation in suo genere; and frustra probatur, quod probatum non relevat: For a party may crave the other's oath of calumny, which is designed to obviate the plea, without entering into the dispute of relevancy.
