Subject_1 FRAUD.
Ross of Pitcalny
v.
Ross of Balnagowan
1740 ,Feb .5, 22 .
Case No.No. 9.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The Lords found the qualifications condescended on not sufficient, and therefore remitted to the Ordinary to hear further. I own I had a good deal of difficulty in the ease. I thought much would depend on the last Balnagowan's capacity or degree of his weakness, and as no challenge was brought for near 30 years after his death, I thought it dangerous to allow a vague proof at large of his weakness without condescending on some particular instances of his weakness, and therefore voted for the interlocutor.—28th February, The Lords adhered and refused a bill without answers.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting