Manuscripta juridica

Decisiones curiae supremae Scotiae - Practicks 1610-1643 (alphabetical 'Advocati' - 'Uxor') (1610/2/23 - 1643/6/7) - with an addition at the end on 'Warranty'.

Items numbered from 1 to 611, grouped under keyword titles which are loosely alphabetised. The titles are lifted from the Corpus iuris canonici and Corpus iuris civilis. Above each item, a heading indicates the contents. Then follow the date, the name of the court clerk, and the names of the parties.

The vast majority of cases date from the years 1610-1628. Earliest and latest dates which caught my eye: 1610/2/23 (nr. 597), 1635/2 (nr. 377), 1636/3/9 (nr. 375), 1642/12 (nr. 439), 1643/6/7 (nr. 87). I have compared the first items to my notes from MS Edinburgh Signet 36. It appears that the items are arranged in the same order, and under corresponding titles, but the text in the present MS is heavily shortened. The items 1-28 in the present MS fill only thirteen pages whereas in the latter MS (of almost identical measurements) they fill thirty-five pages

---

Author(s):

• Thomas Nicolson of Carnock or of Cockburnspath

No. of pages: Pag. 1-391

Rubric: [{i}Title, on flyleaf ii:{/i}] Sir Thomas Nicolsone of Carnock his Practicks

Incipit:

• Andrew Harby, second son to Andrew Harby of Elrick, pursues Thomas Gordon of Grandhame and George Eweing ... Admitts the alleadgance
• [{i}There precedes a heading:{/i}] De errore advocatorum seu procuratorum concipientium, 8 Martii 1611. Harby contra Gordon. Spuilzie.

  [{i}Second item – I emphasise words which govern the alphabetising:{/i}] 4 Februarii 1623. Hay clerk. Baillie contra Crombie. De advocato fisci. Reduction where the Lords sustained not the proces at the pursuer's advocat's instance ... and not in the conclusion.

  [{i}Third item:{/i}] Plus valere quod agitur quam quod simulate concipitur. 28 Novembris 1626. Vide De novatione et delegatione. Kinghorn contra Wood. If takeing of a gift of escheat upon a rebell's expenses infers per se nullity ex causa simulationis. 2 Februarii 1621. Hay clerk. Melvill contra Melvill. Casus de haered. actionibus, 4. Where ane appearand heir is conveened as charged to enter ... of the reply and triply.

  [{i}Item nr. 481 deals with events of 1599. Item nr. 554, deals with debts incurred in 1602-1603:{/i}] 12. Julii 1611, Home contra Lawder, wrangous intromission. The same pursuer conveens the same defender for certain other years, ut supra, videlicet 1602 et 1603.

  [{i}Last keyword titles:{/i}] De spuriis(pag. 338). De testibus(pag. 339). De transactionibus (pag. 349). De testamantaria tutela (pag. 349). De condictione ob turpem causam (pag. 358). Unde vi (pag. 358). Vi bonorum raptorum (pag. 361). De his quae vi (metusve causa facta sunt) (pag. 369). De usufructu (pag. 371). De usuris et mora (pag. 374). Unde vir et uxor (pag. 379). Ne uxor pro marito, aut maritus pro uxore (pag. 380). Rem salvam fore [{i}= warranty to be given by tutors, etc., see Codex Justinianus 7.75, etc.{/i}] (pag. 384).

  [{i}Sample, nr. 562, p. 358:{/i}] De condictione of turpem causam. 25 Februarii 1624. Dury clerk. Wishart contra Leyes. Casus de ordine judiciorum. Where the Lords find that bonds and assignation made to a person cannot be craved to be reduced as made ob turpem causam adulterii befor them while a cognition of the fact and crime of adultery be taken befor the competent judge, and that the said cognition ought to preceed the civill action of reduction.

  [{i}Penultimate item, nr. 611:{/i}] A wife and a man's oath may both be taken for proveing the abstracting and destroying a discharge, 23 Decembris 1623. Dury clerk. Allan contra Mitchell, suspensione. Suspension of 200 merks, payable by a contract of marriage ... whilk is referred to their oaths.

  [{i}Last item, nr. 612:{/i}] Grants commission to take the wife's oath, and assigns a day to produce the husband to give his oath, with certification pro confesso, and that the reasons so farr as is to be proven by his oath shall be holden as proven. 29 Junii 1625. Dury clerk. Reidhead contra Ladie Towie. Registration against the Lady as executrix to her husband, where ane exception of exhausting by sentences being taken away by a reply of promise of payment by the defender since the defuncts decease, and this referred to her and her new husband their oaths conjunctim

Explicit:

• The Lords declare that her confessing shall not prejudge her husband dureing his lifetime. Finis