Cases which peculiarly regard the particular terms of the late Bankrupt Statutes, from 1772 downwards.
Andrew Scott, v. John Veitch and Others
Date: 9 February 1790 Case No. No 277.
23d Geo. III. c. 18. - The Court considered a person who had carried on the trade of building houses for sale, although a writer by profession, to be entitled to the benefit of the act. They awarded sequestration.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
An agent in the Court of Session, but who had engaged in the business of building houses for sale, presented a petition for sequestration, under the authority of the statute of 1783. On the part of some of his creditors, it was
Objected: That the application was not warranted by the statute, the petitioner being by profession a writer, and not, according to its terms, either a merchant, or a manufacturer, artificer, or mechanic.
The Court, however, considered the petitioner, notwithstanding the different nature of his principal profession, as within the description of the statute; and therefore
The Lords awarded the sequestration; and upon advising a reclaiming petition, with answers, adhered to that judgment. See Sequestration.
For Scott, &c. G. Fergusson.Alt. N. Fergusson.Clerk, Menzies.
Fac. Col. No 110. p. 206.
