Writs defective in Solemnities, Whether capable of Support, so as to furnish Action?
David Young v. James Ritchie
Date: 2 February 1761 Case No. No. 327.
Subscription of party after subscription of instrumentary witnesses, and not in their presence, not valid.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
James Ritchie having pursued David Young for payment of a bond for £261 granted to him by David Young and Archibald Campbell, Young defended himself by bringing a reduction of the bond as forged quoad his subscription.
In these processes the instrumentary witnesses to the bond agreed in swearing, that when they signed witnesses to the bond, David Young was not present, neither was his subscription at the bond.
But as there were circumstances in the case which created a strong suspicion that Young had, at an after-period, though not before the instrumentary witnesses, signed the bond, Ritchie contended, That a proof of Young's subscription, though after the date of the bond, and not in presence of the instrumentary witnesses, would validate the bond. Young, on the other hand, contended, That the bond was null and void.
“The Lords found the bond not probative.”
For Ritchie, Lockhart, Advocatus et Garden.For Young, Ferguson, et Jo. Dalrymple.Clerk, Justice.
Fac. Coll. No. 13. p. 24.
