[1742] 1 Elchies 59
Subject_1 BILL OF EXCHANGE.
Dickson
v.
Warrander
1742 ,Nov .12 .
Case No.No. 28.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The only question was, Whether Warrander the drawer (and whose name as creditor was expressly mentioned in the bill) not having signed the draught when he got the bill, nor till near a year after, when Hume, one of the acceptors, broke,—that was a nullity in the bill? I thought the bill imperfect till signed by the drawer, as we had found 6th December 1738, (No. 19.) and could not have been supplied if it had been so produced in judgment, but might be supplied any time before producing in judgment. Arniston thought it a total nullity and in strict law not at all suppliable, but at any rate not after Hume's bankruptcy. But all the rest voted for repelling the objeetion;—and adhered.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting