ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

9th July 1831.

No. 517.-ROBERT ORR, Advocator, v. THE HERITORS AND KIRK-SESSION OF GLASSFORD, Respondents. Aliment-Destitute Child-Kirk-Session-Sheriff, Powers of -A Kirk-session having refused to relieve an individual of a destitute child, or to aliment it-Held, that it is thereafter competent to apply to the Sheriff to ordain them to do so.

In 1824, James Torrance, weaver in Westquarter of Glassford, boarded his son Robert, an infant of about a year and a half old, with the advocator. The father of the child shortly thereafter died, and its mother having previously deserted him, the advocator, in September 1824, applied to the Kirk-session of the parish of Glassford, to take the child off his hands, relieve him of its aliment, and remunerate him for what he had already expended in its support since its father's death. The grounds on which the advocator founded were-That it had no relations, and was destitute; and that it was born in the parish of Glassford, where its father had for many years an industrial settlement. No notice was taken of this application; and the advocator presented a petition to the Sheriff of Lanark, of a similar import, and praying his Lordship to ordain the said Kirk-session to relieve him of the child, and failing their doing so, to find them liable in aliment. The Kirk-session objected to the competency of the application to the Sheriff. This was overruled by the Sheriff, and the case brought up by advocation, when Lord Cringletie pronounced this interlocutor, 7th March 1827:

"In respect that the petition in this case to the Sheriff was not at the instance of the pauper himself, but at the instance of the respondent, who, it is admitted on all hands, was not bound to aliment him, and was brought against the parish of Glassford for relief of the burden of maintaining the child; and that the jurisdiction of the Sheriff has always been sustained in such cases of relief, and was acknowledged by the Court in the case of the Abbey parish of Paisley; and also, in respect that the Sheriff has jurisdiction to order the Kirk-session to meet, to consider whether a pauper is entitled to aliment or not, and consequently may take such steps as will enable him to judge whether he should order or not the Kirk-session to meet for that purpose; and in respect that in this instance the Sheriff has done no more than to take such measures when the advocation was brought, remits the cause simpliciter to the Sheriff," &c.

The Kirk-session reclaimed, but the Court, on the 10th July, adhered. The case having gone back to the Sheriff, and various interlocutors having been pronounced, limiting the proof led by Orr-he advocated, and pleaded-I. It being admitted that the child was born in the parish, the Kirk-session are bound to relieve the advocator of it; or, if they entrust him with it, to allow him a suitable aliment.II. The father had an industrial residence for more than three years in the parish. Besides, the Kirksession are prima instantia liable for the support of any child which may have been abandoned in the parish, and is in a state of destitution and starvation. Answered-No Sheriff or inferior Judge can exercise any controlling power over the Heritors and Kirksession, as to the management of the poors' funds, and as to the right of aliment, where that is disputed. It is not a question of relief, but of modification of aliment, which should have been left to the Kirksession. Lord Mackenzie pronounced this interlo

cutor:-

"Having heard parties' procurators upon the closed record, finds, that, in the circumstances of this case, as appearing from the record, it was the duty of the Kirk-session of Glassford to have immediately taken the child libelled, off the hands of the advocator: Finds, that, on their refusal to do so, it was not incompetent for the advocator to apply to the Sheriff to ordain them to do this, and to pay suitable aliment to the advocator during the time they delayed to do it: Therefore advocates the cause, ordains the respondents forthwith to take the said child off the hands of the advocator, and decerns: Finds the advocator entitled to aliment for the said child, at the rate of six pounds Sterling per annum, from and since the 6th day of October 1824, the date of the application to the Sheriff, payable quarterly per advance, and ay and until the child shall be taken off his hands, and decerns in the relief, and against the respondents, the Heritors and Kirk- session of Glassford, for payment of said aliment to the advocator accordingly: Finds the respondents liable to the advocator in expenses of process, and remits the accounts thereof, when lodged, to the Auditor to tax, and to report."

The Kirk-session reclaimed-but the Court adhered.

Second Division.-Lord Ordinary, Mackenzie.-Act. Alexander Dunlop & James Miller.-Alt. Ro. Bell.-Robert Boog, S. S. C., & George Mill, S. S. C., Agents.-Mr Ferguson, Clerk. ACT OF SEDERUNT.

8th July 1831.

No. 518.

Act of Sederunt to Amend the Style of the Wills of Summonses, Suspensions and Advocations; also, to Regulate the Time and Mode of Executing the same, and to fix the period for Executing Summonses whereon Arrestments have been used.

The Court, considering that, in the wills of summonses, suspensions and advocations, it is not necessary to specify any precise day of compearance, and that the leaving of blanks for filling up such days of compearance, as well as the erroneous filling up of the same, have been frequent sources of litigation: That, in certain cases the executing of letters of suspension and advocation is unnecessary; and that it was expedient to fix the time allowed to pursuers who shall arrest on unexecuted summonses for executing the same against the defenders, and that it was proper to determine what proceedings should be adopted in the Bill-Chamber when a bill of suspension or adVocation has been allowed to lie over for more than year and day; enacted and declared, That from and after the eleventh day of November next 1831, the following regulations shall take effect:

Wills of sum- I." The wills of summonses shall specify the monses, &c. induciæ legales, according to the nature of the summons and residence of the defender, without mentioning any particular day of compearance, or leaving blanks for filling up days of compearance; and shall direct the messenger to cite the defender to appear in Court on the last day of the legal induciæ applicable to the case, the induciæ in all cases running from the date of the citation: And (excepting summonses or complaints under the small debt statutes) these rules shall apply also to all summonses, precepts, wills, and warrants for service in all Inferior Courts, all conform to the examples of wills hereto subjoined, as nearly as circumstances will permit; and the executions by Messengers, Sheriff-officers, and others, shall be framed accordingly, conform to the example also subjoined."

Deliverance

ance in suspen.

II. "The Clerks to the Bills shall cease to fill and compear up in the deliverance upon a passed bill of suspensions and advo- sion or advocation, either a day of compearance or a day of continuation, but they shall specify therein whether or not appearance has been made for the charger or respondent in the Bill- Chamber; and in expeding the letters, it shall be sufficient to specify in the will the induciæ legales only,

cations.

or number of days, at the expiration of which the charger or respondent is to compear in Court, which in ordinary cases shall be six days, and in cases where the respondent or charger resides in Orkney or Shetland, thirty days; and when he is furth of Scotland, sixty days."

stance, &c.

III. "If the last day of the legal induciæ of any Day of compearance, and Summons, suspension, advocation, or other writ, falling of in shall not be a sederunt-day, then the day of compearance shall be held to be the first sederunt-day thereafter; and the instance, in the case of summonses, shall fall, unless the summons shall be executed within year and day of its signeting, and be called within year and day of the day of compearance; as also, that all letters of suspension or of advocation, not executed within year and day of the date of signeting, or though duly executed within that period, if not called within year and day of the day of compearance, shall as heretofore be held to fall asleep: Providing always, that in citations upon the passive titles, the summons shall not be called in Court till after the expiration of the annus deliberandi, unless the defender, by putting up protestation, shall waive objection to the citation.'

[ocr errors]

Insisting in IV. "In all cases of suspension where the resuspensions & spondent has made appearance in the Bill-Chamadvocations. ber, or where the intimation of the application or sist in the Bill-Chamber has been made to the respondent by a notary or messenger-at-arms, and a regular certificate or execution returned; and in all cases of advocation, whether the defender or pursuer be the advocator, where the respondent shall have made appearance in the Bill-Chamber, or where intimation of the presenting or passing of the bill of advocation shall have been made to the respondent or his agent in the Inferior Court, the suspender or advocator shall be entitled, at the expiration of ten days after the date of passing the bill, to call and insist in the letters of suspension or advocation, without executing the same; and the respondent or charger shall, in all cases, be entitled, at the expiration of six days after the clapse of the period allowed the suspender or advocator to expede his letters, to put up a protestation at the minute-book, to force on the discussion of the expede letters, whether the same shall have been executed or not, and shall also be entitled to obtain a certificate at the Signet Office, in case of not duly expeding and signeting the letters, in terms of the Act of Sederunt, 11th July 1828, sec. 17."

Wakening V. "When proceedings in a bill of suspension,

cation.

bills of suspen. Or of advocation, shall have lain over for more than sion and advo- year and day, the same shall be held as asleep; but it shall be competent for either party to revive the proceedings (without a summons of wakening), by a written note to the Lord Ordinary on the Bills, duly intimated to the opposite party or his known agent, by a notary-public or messenger-atarms, before witnesses, fifteen days at least previous to laying the note before the Lord Ordinary; the execution or certificate of which intimation shall be produced along with the note."

on which ar.

Executing VI. "If a pursuer, whether in the Court of Sesof summonses, sion or in an Inferior Court, shall use arrestment restments have on an unexecuted summons, he shall, in order to proceeded. preserve such arrestment in force, be bound to execute the summons against the defender, within forty days next af. ter the date of executing any such arrestment; and failing thereof, all such arrestments dated more than forty days prior to the execution of the summons shall fall and be void, and it shall be competent to the defender to apply to the Lord Ordinary on the Bills for letters of loosing arrestment, which shall be granted without caution or consignation, such application, with an order for answers within such time as the Lord Ordinary on the Bills may judge proper, being previously intimated to the pursuer or his known agent, and the Lord Ordinary shall at the same time award such expenses against the pursuer as may seem reasonable; and the Lord Ordinary's judgment shall not be subject to review."

FORMS REFERRED TO.

I. Will of an Ordinary Petitory Summons, in the Court of Session. "Our will is herefore, and we charge you, that, on sight hereof, ye pass, and in our name and authority lawfully summon, warn,

[July

and charge the said defender, personally, or at his dwelling-place, to compear before the said Lords of our Council and Session at Edinburgh, or where it may happen them to be for the time, the twenty-seventh day next after the date of your citation, in the hour of cause, with continuation of days, to answer at the instance of the pursuer in the matter above libelled," &c. &c. II. Will of Lellers of Advocation of an Interlocutory Judgment. “Our will is herefore, and we charge you, that, on sight hereof, ye pass, and in our name and authority lawfully summon, warn, and charge the said Sheriff and his Substitute," (or other Judge) "and his Clerk of Court, and the said B. party, personally, or at their dwelling-places, to compear before the Lords of our Council and Session at Edinburgh, or where they may happen to be for the time, the sixth day," (or thirtieth day if in Zetland or Orkney,) "next after the date of your citation, in the hour of cause, with continuation of days, bringing with them the foresaid process, whole steps and procedure had therein, and grounds and warrants thereof: To be seen and considered by the said Lords, and to hear and see the same advocated from the said Sheriff and his Substitute, and them and all other inferior Judges discharged from further proceeding and determining therein in time coming, for the reasons and causes (if against an interlocutory judgment, say above-mentioned, and others) to be proponed at discussing hereof: And further, we, and the said Lords of our Council and Session, have advocated, and do hereby advocate, the foresaid action and cause from the said Sheriff and his Substitute, and all other inferior Judges, discharging them hereby from all further proceeding or determining therein in time coming, till the verity be known.-According to Justice." "Because Lord A., Ordinary, has passed the bill, appearance having been made for respondent in the Bill-Chamber, and D. has become cautioner for the complainer for payment of the expenses to be incurred in the Court of Session," (or otherwise, as the fact shall be stated in the fiat or deliverance on the passed bill), &c.

III. Will of Letters of Suspension.

"Our will is herefore, and we charge you, that on sight hereof, ye pass, and in our name and authority lawfully summon, warn, and charge the said B. personally, or at his dwelling-place, to compear before the said Lords of our Council and Session at Edinburgh, or where they may happen to be for the time, the sixth day" (or thirtieth day, if in Zetland or Orkney) "next after the date of your citation, in the hour of cause, with continuation of days, bringing with him the foresaid decree (or bill, &c. as the case may be) and charge thereon, and the grounds and warrants on which the same proceeded: To be seen and considered by the said Lords, and to hear and see the same, whole effect and execution thereof, and all that has followed, or may follow thereon, simpliciter suspended, for the reasons and causes foresaid, and for other reasons to be proponed at discussing hereof: Moreover, we, and the said Lords of our Council and Session have suspended, and hereby suspend, the foresaid decree (or bill, &c.) and charge thereon, whole effect, and execution thereof, and grounds and warrants whereon the same proceeded, with all that has followed or may follow thereon, discharging hereby all Messengers-at-arms, and other officers of the law, from putting the said charge to further execution in the meantime, till the verity be known. According to Justice." cause appearance having been made for the charger in the BillChamber, the bill was passed upon answers," (or 'of consent upon caution,' or without answers,' or as the fact may be specified in the fiat or deliverance on the bill) "and F has become cautioner for the complainer," &c.

IV. Will of a Sheriff Summons.

"Be

"Herefore I command you, that, on sight hereof, ye pass, and lawfully summon, warn, and charge the said defenders, personally, or at their respective dwelling-places, to compear before me or my Substitutes, in the ordinary Court-place at E," (or as the case may be)," upon the seventh day" (or such other day as the case may require) "next after the date of your citation, in the hour of cause, with continuation of days, to answer at the instance of the said pursuer in the matter libelled : That is to say, to hear and see the premises verified and proved, and sen

tence and decreet given and pronounced therein, ut supra, or else to allege a reasonable cause to the contrary. With certification," &c.

If meant to contain a Warrant to Arrest on the Dependence, add

"ATTOUR, That, in the meantime, ye lawfully fence and arrest the said defender's whole goods and gear, debts, and effects, sums of money, and all others whatsoever, within my jurisdiction, in whose hands soever the same may be, all therein to remain under sure fence and arrestment, at the pursuer's instance, aye and until sufficient caution and surety be found acted in my Court-books, that the same shall be made forthcoming to the pursuer, as accords of the law. According to Justice," &c. "Given at -," &c.

V. Form of a Copy of Citation on a Summons before the Court of Session upon the ordinary induciæ.

1

Messenger-at-arms, by virtue of a of which the above and preceding pages are a full double to the will, and signeted the raised at the in

libelled summons dated stance of the before-designed in his Majesty's name and authority, lawfully summon, warn, and charge you, the also before designed

to compear before the Lords of Council and Session, at Edinburgh, upon the twenty-seventh day next after the date of this citation, in the hour of cause, with continuation of days, to answer at the instance of the said pursuer in the matter libelled in the said summons, with certification, conform to the principal summons.-This I do upon the day of one thousand eight hundred and witnesses, K, M, and F, all residenters in

years, before these

N. B.-The execution will of course be made to correspond with the citation; and if upon a separate sheet of paper, the parties must be fully designed.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

(Speeches taken from Mr Gurney's Short-Hand Notes.)
8th July 1831.

No. 519.-ROBERT GRAY & JOHN WOODROP, Appellants, v.
JAMES M'NAIR, Respondent.
Submission-Decreet-Arbitral-Arbiters under a submission ha-
ing, as thereby authorised, pronounced two interim or partiai
decrees, and issued copies of them to the parties, without record-
ing them; and the arbiters having declared the submission ter-
minated, without exhausting the whole points submitted-Held,
that the decrees were null, and the submission terminated.

The appellant and respondent were proprietors of conterminous fields of coal; and some disputes having occurred between them, a submission was entered into, whereby "all disputes, differences, debates, and debateable matters, being and subsisting between them, and all debts, claims and demands, due and competent to the parties, or either of them," relative to their collieries, were referred to two arbiters, to whom power was given "to pronounce decree, or decrees, partial or total, interim or final." The parties bound themselves to fulfil and perform "whatever decree, or decrees, partial or total, interim or final, the said arbiters in one voice shall give forth and pronounce;" declaring, that in case of the arbiters differing in opinion, they should have no power to name an oversman, but that "this submission shall fall and expire, but only as to those points on which they dif fer, and shall subsist and remain in full force as to any point or points in which they may agree in opinion." On 18th August 1824, the arbiters pronounced an interim-decree, finding, that M'Nair had no right to work his coal, in a certain way; prohibiting

him from so doing, and reserving the consideration of other points. On 5th January thereafter, a second interim-decree was pronounced, in which the former one was confirmed, and some other points were decided against M'Nair, reserving further points to be determined. Both decrees, which contained clauses of registration, were duly tested, and copies were sent to the parties, but the originals remained in the possession of the clerk. Recently after this, the arbiters appear to have differed in opinion; and Gray having called upon the clerk to put the decreets upon record, he presented a memorial to the arbiters on the subject, when they subscribed a minute, finding the parties liable in the expenses due to the clerk, and declaring the submission terminated. The clerk then raised an action of multiplepoinding, to ascertain who had right to the decrees remaining in his hands; and M'Nair raised an action to have them declared null and void, in respect that the arbiters had not exhausted the submission, and that the decrees had not been delivered. These actions were conjoined, and cases ordered; on considering which, the Court, on 31st May 1827, pronounced this interlocutor:

"In the reduction and declarator, in respect that the interim decrees-arbitral were neither put on record nor delivered to the parties, Find it unnecessary to reduce the said interim-decrees, the same never having been complete or valid decrees-arbitral; but, in terms of the declaratory conclusions, Find the same to be null and void, and declare the submission terminated, and the parties released therefrom; and in the multiplepoinding, Find it unnecessary, in respect of the above findings, to give any further judgment," &c.

Gray and Woodrop appealed, pleading, inter alia,That the recording or delivery of the principal decree was not essential to its delivery, seeing it was the joint decision of the arbiters: That the decrees were never recalled: That it was incompetent to prove, by parole proof, any change in the arbiters' opinion: That sending copies of the decrees was, in truth, an issuing of them; and that the terms of this submission had provided for the case which had occurred. The respon dent answered,―That the refusal to record was virtually a recal of the decrees; and that the recording of them was essential to their validity: That one of the arbiters and the clerk were prepared to prove, that, after the decrees were pronounced, one of the arbiters had changed his opinion, being convinced that the judgment was erroneous; and that the decrees were null, the submission not having been exhausted.

Lord Lyndhurst.-My Lords, there is a case of Gray and M Nair, which was argued a considerable time since at your Lordships' Bar, and I think it is probable that your Lordships should wish to dispose of it now. The question was a technical question of Scotch law, arising out of the execution of a certain decreet-arbitral. There was a reference to certain arbitrators; and by the terms of the reference, the arbitrators had authority to pronounce interim or partial decrees. They had no authority, in case they differed in opinion, to call in any umpire, and therefore, if they differed in opinion on any point, that point would have to remain unsettled between the parties; but, when they concurred in opinion, they had authority to pronounce interim or partial decrees. In the month, I think, of August 1824, they pronounced what is stated to be their first interim-decree, and in the month of January following (January 1825,) they pronounced what is stated to be their second interim-decree. Those supposed or alleged deerees were drawn up and were signed by the respective arbitrators, in the presence of their clerk, whom

they had appointed for the purpose, and, I believe, were attested by him. If those decrees were to be viewed according to the law of England, and the transaction had taken place in this country, they would have been operative and binding awards. But this question is not to be decided by English, but to be decided exclusively by the rules and law of Scotland; and standing here as I do (or, rather, as I did when this case was argued before your Lordships, at your Lordships' Bar), rather as an English than a Scotch lawyer, certainly all my feeling was in favour of the validity of those decrees; and I have considered the subject frequently since, and been anxious to sustain them, but in the result, I am compelled to say, that, according to the law of Scotland, those decrees are not binding decrees. According to the law of Scotland, as I find it laid down, in order to render a decreet-arbitral binding, it is not sufficient that it should be drawn up in form, and signed by the arbitrators, and retained in their possession, or in the possession of their clerk; but it must go farther, it must either be delivered or entered on record, or some authority, at least, must be given for the purpose. It may be assimulated to the execution of a deed in England, which is also a technical instrument, and which requires technical forms to be complied with. In the execution of a deed, it is not sufficient that it should be signed by the party to be bound by it-that it should be sealed by the party to be bound by it, and that it should be attested; another circumstance is necessary-it must be delivered; and unless it be delivered, it is not binding. Now, my Lords, this being according to my apprehension and understanding of the law of Scotland, we must apply it to the facts of this case. The first decree was made in the month of August 1824, as I have stated-an interim or partial decree. It was signed by the arbitrators, and, I believe, attested by their clerk, and left in his possession. It never was out of his possession. But it is stated, that there is a fact in this case which is equivalent to a delivery. I consider the decreet-arbitral, under the circumstances I have stated, not as a decreet-arbitral, but as a decreet-arbitral intended to be a decreet-arbitral, when completed by a delivery, or by being entered on record. In this case the arbitrators authorised their clerk to deliver out a copy of the decreet-arbitral intended to the parties. It was delivered; and it is said that a copy being so delivered, is equivalent to the formal delivery of the award. I think it has not that effect. I think I cannot recommend your Lordships to go the length of saying it has that effect. Before the decreet-arbitral is delivered, it is merely a decreet-arbitral intended to be delivered-intended to be a decreet-arbitral-intended to be a judgment pronounced; and therefore, the copy, before it was delivered, is nothing but a copy before it was delivered-is nothing but a copy of a judgment intended to be delivered-and I think that does not vary the case. But then, there is another circumstance that was also suggested, and which struck me at the time as being entitled to very considerable weight. The second decreet-arbitral recites the first,

and in reciting the first, it states it is a deereet-arbitral that had been issued, and it appeared (as it was contended) that this amounted to a declaration by the arbitrators themselves, that the first decreet-arbitral was a complete decreet arbitral. But I think, on consideration, it has not that effect. If there were

any thing in it certain or positive as to the first, it might admit of this construction, but the circumstance of its being stated in the second decreet-arbitral to have been used, must be considered with reference to the evidence and state of facts, and cannot be considered in itself as amounting to making a complete delivery-a complete decreet-arbitral of the first-when, in point of evidence and fact, the first was never delivered at all. Upon this ground, therefore, and from the explanation given by one of the Judges below, that it is an expression constantly used where notes only are issued, it does not appear to me to conclude this question. This further observation also arises with respect to this view of the case-that the second decreetarbitral, which states the first decreet-arbitral to have been issued, never was a complete decreet-arbitral itself, but simply was a decreet-arbitral intended to be complete, therefore, there is the less reason to give to the first the character of a complete decreet-arbitral, merely from being recited in the second, which itself was not a complete decreet-arbitral. I therefore, my Lords, am bound to come to the conclusion, according to my judgment, that, according to the law of Scotland, what has taken place in this case, does not amount to a delivery of a decreet-arbitral. They continued, up to the time when the arbitration was dissolved, in the possession of the clerk of the arbitrators. application was made to them-a memorial was presented to the arbitrators by him, to know what was to be done with respect to those decreet-arbitrals. In answer to that, the arbitrators stated, that they could give him no instructions. He never, therefore, was directed to deliver those decreet-arbitrals-he never was directed to put them on record;-the arbitrators never agreed that they should be delivered out;-they never agreed that they should be put on the record;-they never agreed, therefore, that they should be complete decreet-arbitrals. I am of opinion, therefore, as far as my judgment is concerned, that they cannot be considered complete decreet-arbitrals; and under such circumstances, I should recommend your Lordships to affirm the judgment of the Court below.

Judgment affirmed.

An

Appellants' Authorities.-4 Ersk. 333-39. Lord Lovat, 22d June 1738. Glover v. Glover, 1802, affirmed 1805, not reported. Robertson, 20th June 1785. Simpson, 10th December 1736. Wardrop, 4th February 1794.

Respondent's Authorities.-Robertson, 20th June 1783, and Lord Braxfield's opinion; (2 Hailes, 912.) Mortonhall v. Ross; Carse, A. S. December 17, 1783, affirmed. Second Division.-Lord Mackenzie, Ordinary.

ERRATA.

Page 17, line 12 from top, 1st column, for " that he was liable," read " that he was not liable."

17, line 13. from the bottom, 2d column, for "found the suspender entitled to expenses," read "found neither party entitled to expenses.'

[ocr errors]

29, line 22 from the top, 2d column, for " respondent" read appellant."

36, line 25 from the top, 2d column, for "award" read “submission."

44, bottom line, 1st column, for "them" read "him."

137, line 30 from the bottom, 2d column, delete the words " on premonition."

159, line 29 from the bottom, 2d column, for "inconsistent" read "consistent."

271, line 17 from the top, 2d column, for " defenders" read "pursuers."

366, Robertson v. Allardyce, line 26 from the top, 2d column, read " applied for the expenses" instead of "obtained the expenses.'

INDEX.

INDEX,

A ACCOUNT-Bill Count and Reckoning-Circumstances in which, held impossible to suspend a charge on a decree for the balance of accounts settled by bills, on grounds entering into the investigation of the accounts, p. 473.

Vouchers of Expenses-A party having, after the death of the alleged debtor, raised action on an account extending over a period of years, and comprehending an immense variety of articles, for which he produced no vouchers; and having deponed that he kept no books, the Court refused, 1st, To sustain even the part of the account found due by the Sheriff, in terms of an accountant's report. 2d, To find the advocator, who had been assoilzied, entitled to expenses, in respect of her ancestor being to blame for not leaving some document explanatory of matters between him and the pursuer, p. 188.

See Prescription.

ACCOUNT STATED-See Diligence.

ACCOUNTANT'S FEES-See Agent and Client.
ACCUMULATION-See Trust.

ACQUIESCENCE-Homologation-Servitude- Circumstances in which a party having right, by his title-deeds, to take water from a stream in a certain way, not found barred from exercising his original right by an acquiescence of 13 years in a different arrangement, said to have been verbally agreed to by his predecessors, and on the faith of which considerable sums had been expended by the other party, p. 443.

See Proof. Tule.

ACT OF SEDERUNT-Interim Act for regulating the proceedings in depending Jury causes, p. 13.

Act remitting causes, p. 13.

Act regulating the rotation and business of the six permanent Lords Ordinary in the Outer House, p. 29.

Act to amend the style of the Wills of Summonses, Suspensions and Advocations; also, to regulate the time and mode of executing the same, and to fix the period for executing Summonses whereon arrestments have been used, p. 605. ACTIO QUANTI MINORIS-See Sale. ADJUDICATION-See Process. ADMIRALTY CAUSE-See Process. ADVERTISEMENT-See Sale. ADVOCATION-See Process.

AGENT-See Bankrupt.

AGENT AND CLIENT-Liability-Accountant's Fees-1. An agent who employs an accountant extrajudicially, is personally liable for the accountant's charges. 2. Circumstances in which an accountant held to have been employed by the agent, and not by the party, p. 326.

Employment of-Expenses-Liability for-The purchaser of a house having handed his titles to the sellers thereof, who were bound to defend him from eviction; and they having transmitted the titles to country agents, who again sent them to an Edinburgh agent, who defended the cause-Held, that the purchaser was not liable to the town agent in the expenses incurred in defending said action, p. 426.

Expenses-Held, that an agent, who has failed, tempestivé, to execute, and attentively to follow out the instructions of his client, in raising an action for recovery of a debt, so that the debt is ultimately lost, and has incurred great expense by a want of professional skill, is not entitled to recover his expenses from the client, p. 83.

Expenses-Circumstances in which a party found liable for the expense of certain law proceedings carried on when she was a minor, but which she was held to have sanctioned after majority, p. 331.

Expenses-Submission- A landlord and tenant having referred certain actions between them, and the expenses thereof, to arbitration; and the tenant having in his claim, and by a minute, requested the arbiters to give decree for any expenses found due to him, directly in name of his agent, the disburser thereof; but the arbiters having ordained the expenses awarded to the tenant to be given credit for, out of the counter-claims of the landlord: Held, that the agent-disburser has no direct action against the landlord for the expenses so awarded, p. 534.

nati

AGENT AND CLIENT-Liability-Expenses-Adjudication Liferent and Fee-A country agent (employed by a creditor to re cover a debt) having instructed a town agent to lead an adjudication against the entailed estate of the debtor; and the town agent having Ineptly adjudged the debtor's liferent only, and having then employ ed another agent to complete a feudal title on the decree of adjudi cation; and the charter and sasine (which were conform to the decree of adjudication) being found insufficient to convey a feudal tile: Held, 1, That the town agent first employed was liable in repetition (to the creditor) of the expense of the charter and sasine, but not in consequential damages; and 2. That the country agent and the other town agent were not liable in repetition or damages, p. 97.

Trustees Liability-Trustees authorised by the trust-deed to lend out money on good heritable or personal security, for behoof of a married woman, excluding her husband's jus mariti, having agreed to lend the money to the husband on an heritable security, over as many farms of an estate belonging to him as would afford a sufficient rental to cover the interest; and having instructed one of their number, who acted as agent, to select the farms, and prepare the necessary deeds; and he having done so, but not having procured a search of incumbrances; and it afterwards appearing that the whole estate had been previously burdened to nearly its full value: Held, 1. That the pursuer is en.. titled to sue in her own name, and for her own interest. 2. That the trustees (who were declared by the trust-deed not liable for omissions) are not accountable for the loss sustained. 3. That the agent is directly liable to the wife for the principal sum lent, and Bank interest from the date at which the money was advanced, p. 350.

See Partnership. Process, Party. AGREEMENT-See Patent. ALIMENT allowed a mother out of her husband's heritable property, p. 364.

Circumstances in which a widow found entitled to £120 of aliment, for the three months inervening between her husband's death and the commencement of her legal provisions, p. 565.

Destitute Child - Kirk-Session - Sheriff, Powers of-A Kirk-session having refused to relieve an individual of a destitute child, or to aliment it: Held, that it is thereafter competent to apply to the Sheriff to ordain them to do so, p. 605,

Foreign-Arrestment Jurisdictionis Fundanda Causa-Circumstances in which a wife, who had gone with her husband to America, and afterwards left him, as she alleged, on account of maltreatment, having used arrestments jurisdictionis fundanda causa, and raised a summons of aliment: Found entitled to £50 per annum, p. 569.

Husband and Wife-A married woman having succeeded to about £17,000 of moveables, the whole of which, as well as the rents of heritable subjects, worth about £1500, to which she had also succeeded, fell to the husband jure mariti; and the wife having brought an action for aliment against the husband, who lived separate from her, the Court ordered a condescendence of the funds, and modified an interim aliment to the pursuer of £150 per annum, p. 299.

See Process.

ALLOA, AUGMENTATION, p. 525.
AMBIGUITY-See Sasine.

AMENDMENT OF SUMMONS-See Process, Summons. AMENDMENT OF THE LIBEL-See Process, Amendment and Title.

APPEAL-See Bankrupt. Nobile Officium. Process. APPROBATE AND REPROBATE-Collating-ElectionHeld, affirming judgment of the Court of Session, that a settlement having been executed in the Scottish form, but specially con. veying an English estate to the testator's trustees, the heir. at-law was not entitled to take advantage of the insufficiency of the deed for conveying the English property, and take that property, ab intestato, and at the same time to claim an equal share of the trust property along with the younger children, without collating the English estate, p. 221. ARRESTMENT-See Diligence.

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »