[1785] Hailes 978
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR DAVID DALRYMPLE, LORD HAILES.
Subject_2 BILL OF EXCHANGE.
Subject_3 Fraud on the part of the acceptor.
Date: John Goodfellow
v.
Andrew Madder
21 July 1785 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
[Faculty Collection, IX. 353; Dictionary, 1483.]
Justice-Clerk. In the case of Tenant, there was a specific condescendence of fraud to be proved by unexceptionable witnesses; but here the suspender does not offer to prove the fraud by witnesses,—he desires first to have his party examined, that, in consequence of such examination, he may be enabled to condescend on witnesses. The same objection might be made to payment of every bill in the circle.
Braxfield. I agree in the principles: but the pursuer is not an onerous indorsee. Besides, it is admitted that the debt is not fairly set furth, as to its nature, in the bill.
President. Condescend on fraud, and I will admit every sort of proof: but that is not the case here; it is only said that, if the party be examined, something may be discovered.
On the 21st July 1785, “The Lords found the letters orderly proceeded;” adhering to the interlocutor of Lord Monboddo.
Act. H. Erskine. Alt. Ro. Dalzell.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting