Scottish Court of Session Decisions

The defender moved that the pursuer should be ordained to sist a mandatory. It was objected that the pursuer was not bound to do so, he being a domiciled Scotchman, at present stationed at Dover as a private soldier, and liable any day to be ordered to proceed to Scotland. In support of this objection, Scott v. Gillespie, 29th January 1823, 2 S. 165, and Barclay's M'Glashan, p. 123, were cited. In Scott's case, a sailor born in Jamaica, but who had resided the greater part of bis life in this country, and whose family resided in Greenock, was held not bound to sist a mandatory when away on a voyage. Mr M'Glashan says this rule applies to officers in the army and all others having their domicile in this country who are necessarily obliged to be occasionally absent. It was answered that in this case the pursuer had already, without objection, sisted a mandatory, who had become bankrupt; and that the authorities cited were not applicable to the case of this pursuer, who had no home in this country, and had been absent for 15 or 16 years.