BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

Scottish Court of Session Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Captain Young v Colonel Wauchop's nearest of Kin. [1695] 4 Brn 259 (5 February 1695)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1695/Brn040259-0581.html
Cite as: [1695] 4 Brn 259

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


[1695] 4 Brn 259      

Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JOHN LAUDER OF FOUNTAINHALL.

Captain Young
v.
Colonel Wauchop's nearest of Kin

Date: 5 February 1695

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

Halcraig reported Captain Young against the nearest of kin of Colonel Wauchop. This was a competition for the sum of 6000 merks, between the Captain, as executor to his wife, who was the Colonel's sister and assignee, and the Colonel's other sisters. The first point was, Whether he, as being executor decerned, and having found caution, ought to have up the money; or, if they might not crave more sufficient caution. Severals thought he was in titulo, having the office decerned to him; and they could not hinder. Others considered how slightly the commissaries bestowed it upon any who sought it, and were not exact in their caution, for which the clerks were answerable.

The Lords proceeded, therefore, to determine the case, and thought this assignation given by the Colonel, reserving a power to alter, needed no delivery; and that Captain Young's letter to my Lord Edmonston implied a trust left him by the Colonel, in keeping the assignation, but no depositation, these two being very different; and that he could not prejudge his child's right; and, therefore, Edmonston's oath could not be taken as to the terms and conditions of the depositation; and found, the Colonel's letter did not import a revocation or alteration of the assignation; and so preferred the Captain.

Vol. I. Page 665.

The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting     


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1695/Brn040259-0581.html