Diligence prestable by tutors. Found not liable for the insolvency of bankers, in credit when money was lodged with them.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
A tutor, who took up an heritable bond belonging to his pupil, upon account of the irregular payment of the interest, and put the money into the hands of bankers, who were in good credit at the time, but suddenly stopped payment a few months-after the transaction, and, after the expiry, of the tutory, was pursued to make up the loss.
The pursuer referred to many authorities, for proving, that the exactest diligence was prestable by tutors; as, § 1. Inst. De. Oblig. quæ quasi ex contract. L. 21. C. Mandati,,L. 37. §. 1. D. De. Neg. gest. Voet. ad Tit. De Administr. tut. num. 6.
On the other hand, the defender contended, that the authorities did not apply, and that tutors were not liable for the unexpected failure of debtors who had been in good credit. In proof of this proposition, he referred to L. 50. De. Admin. et per; tut. et cur. L. III. D. De. Cond. et dem. Sande dec. Fris. Lib. 2. Tit 9. D. 13. Bruce's Tutor's Guide, Part 3. Tit. 3. $ 37.
“The Lords found, that, as the bankers were carrying on business, and in good credit when the defender put the pupil's money into their hands, in February 1766, on their bill, payable one day after date, that their failing afterwards, and stopping payment in November thereafter, does not make the defender liable to the pursuer for the said money.”
Act. Lockhart.Alt. Maclaurin.
Fac. Coll. No 83. p. 332.
