Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR DAVID DALRYMPLE, LORD HAILES.
Subject_2 BILL OF EXCHANGE.
Subject_3 Although, on account of circumstances, the dishonour of a promissory note was not intimated by one indorser to another till the 19th day; the court found recourse was not lost, there being no negligence or unnecessary delay.

Robert Carrick
v.
Henry William Harper

Date: 23 June 1790

Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy

[Fac. Coll. X. 259; Dict. 1614.]

Justice-Clerk. Proposed to alter his own interlocutor.

Prsideent. Recourse is still open. This is a promissory note to the effect of being an inland bill. The rule as to three posts, mentioned by Mr Erskine, seems erroneous: the rule is, that there be no delay. Lord Mansfield, in the case of Hodgson and Donaldson, said that there was no such rule as that of three posts. As to the 14 days, the clause in the Act 1772 is not carefully drawn. Fourteen days may be too much, or it may be too little; and the clause ought to have been in the words of the English statute of William and Mary. The present case, however, goes upon different principles. There was no delay in the indorsers. The plea of the defender is ungracious. [Soon after, Harper applied for a sequestration, and the President observed that that accounted for the defence which he made.]

On the 23d June 1790, “The Lords found recourse due;” altering the interlocutor of the Lord Justice Clerk.

Act. R. Blair. Alt. A. Wight.