Legal Subject: Bill of Exchange

Case	Date	Legal Subject	Abstract
Alexander Pagan and James Hunter v. Alexander Wylie	1792	Debt, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Suspension, Aliment, Fraud	Alexander Pagan and James Hunter, as suspenders, resisted Alexander Wylie’s claim upon a bill of exchange that had been altered from £8 to £84 after execution. Wylie, agent for the Paisley Union Bank, had discounted the bill for the higher amount and argued that the suspenders remained liable for the altered sum, while Pagan and Hunter maintained that such a material change precluded any charge against the original acceptor and indorser. The litigation centered on whether parties to a bill could be held responsible for a sum materially increased after the instrument had been signed.
Attorney of Thomas Cullen & Co v. David Philp	1792	Debt, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Contract, Employment, Pactum Illicitum	The attorney of Thomas Cullen and Company opposed David Philp, merchant in Boarhills, who as suspender pleaded that no action could lie upon bills alleged to have arisen from a smuggling transaction in which the pursuers were principals or accessories. The attorney replied that this plea of non-action for smuggled goods was unjust and unsupported by law or fact.
Baines v. Turnbull	1794	Debt, Bill of Exchange, Creditor, Bankruptcy, Interest, Factor	Baines, the suspender, argued against Turnbull that he was not liable for bills dishonoured through no fault of his own. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Belch [Belsh] v. Wilson and Son	1788	Arrestment, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Forgery, Debt, Sequestration	Peter Belsh, a merchant in Stirling, charged William Wilson and Son, merchants in Bannockburn, over a discounted bill involving indorsers. Wilson and Son suspended the charge and subsequently submitted an information contending that their subscription to the promissory note was a forgery and therefore void.
Campbell v. Laidlaw	1796	Debt, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Sequestration, Partnership, Interlocutor	Robert Campbell, as pursuer, petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor suspending his charge for a bill of exchange he had accepted without value in the action against Laidlaw, the defender. Robert Corbet thereafter informed the Court that the bill had been accepted for the accommodation of Archibald M'Ausland rather than Milligan and Co.
Craig and Hyslop v. Spence, et al	1793	Insurance, Ships, Jurisdiction, Bill of Exchange, Evidence, Jettison	James Craig and William Hyslop pursued John Spence and other Edinburgh underwriters for a partial loss on a cargo of wheat, petitioning the Court to address an interlocutor that had found the underwriters liable. The defenders answered, denying that the vessel had stranded and contending that the damage did not constitute general average. Hislop subsequently petitioned the Court regarding the policy’s exclusion of average loss for perishable goods and the applicability of the stranding exception to the loss.
Creditors of Currie v. Geddes	1793	Debt, Creditor, Prescription, Bill of Exchange, Trustee, Trustees	The creditors of Currie, represented by their common agent in the sale and ranking of the Estate of Newlaw, petitioned the Court to alter Lord Swinton’s interlocutor. The respondents contested the creditors’ attempt to rank debts against Currie’s estate, citing partial payments and post-prescription markings as evidence of debt continuity.
Creditors of Hay v. Fleming	1793	Debt, Creditor, Adjudication, Bill of Exchange, Interlocutor, Bankruptcy	James Fleming, defender in the action by the creditors of Hay, petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor that had excluded him from an adjudication upon the debtor’s Scottish property, maintaining that his claim was liquidated by bill and sufficiently authenticated by protest and affidavit notwithstanding the original instrument’s absence abroad. He sought to overturn the Inner-House ruling and obtain remit to the Lord Ordinary to lead further proof of his debt’s verity.
Creditors of Newlands v. Mackenzie	1792	Creditor, Debt, Proof, Arrestment, Reduction, Bill of Exchange	Andrew Mackenzie petitioned the Court to alter the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor requiring him to produce title-deeds before receiving payment of his account. The creditors of Newlands answered that Mackenzie ought to be paid without producing the writings.
Curtis, et al. v. Chippendale	1794	Bankruptcy, Debt, Sequestration, Creditor, Compensation, Bill of Exchange	William Curtis, Ebenezer Maitland, and John Newman Caussmaker petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor regarding Edward Chippendale's claim as trustee on the sequestrated estate of William Macalpin and Company. The parties disputed whether Scottish law on compensation ought to be altered to conform to English practice, with the respondent defending the established Scottish doctrine and the petitioners arguing that Chippendale's claim was not well founded under that law.
Davies, Jones, & Co. v. William Young	1786	Debt, Aliment, Oath, Interlocutor, Action, Bill of Exchange	William Young petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Monboddo, claiming expenses, and Davies, Jones, & Co. answered the petition. The merchants defended against Young's claim for expenses and asserted that he had commissioned and received the six hats in dispute.
Dewar v. Howieson	1788	Aliment, Succession, Debt, Bill of Exchange, Assignation, Creditor	Mrs Nisbet and her husband petitioned the Court of Session to alter the Lord Justice-Clerk's interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Dunmore and Company v. Allan, et al	1786	Ships, Insurance, Warranty, Adjudication, Bill of Exchange, Contract	Robert Dunmore and Company, merchants in Glasgow, raised an action against Richard Allan and other insurers in Glasgow and Archibald Campbell and other insurers in Greenock regarding a maritime insurance contract and questions of convoy obligations and warranty terms. The merchants petitioned the Court to overturn an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Braxfield, and the insurers answered the petition.
Elliot v. Romanis	1790	Bill of Exchange, Execution, Debt, Prescription, Creditor, Diligence	Helen Elliot pursued Robert Romanis, a Lauder writer, for loss resulting from an officer’s conduct and the negligence of others. Romanis petitioned to alter the court’s interlocutor to deny liability, and subsequently raised an action against John GrahamsLie. GrahamsLie petitioned to be assoilzied from that action, and Romanis answered that his own liability arose from his own omission rather than GrahamsLie’s conduct, noting that the execution had been obtained by others.
Forbes, Hunter, and Company v. Edinburgh Life Assurance Company	1829	Insurance, Contract, Debt, Bill of Exchange, Representation, Aliment	Sir William Forbes, James Hunter, and Company, bankers, raised an action against the Edinburgh Life Assurance Company to recover £3000 sterling payable under a policy of assurance. The defenders resisted payment, asserting that the policy was void due to misrepresentation and the non-statement of material facts at the time of effecting the insurance. The cause subsequently proceeded to a Bill of Exceptions for the defenders.
Fraser, Reid and Sons v. Lancaster and Jamieson	1793	Arrestment, Bill of Exchange, Diligence, Citation, Horning, Statute	Fraser, Reid and Sons claimed preferential rights to goods held in Coats’s custody, asserting priority based on protested bills for specific cargoes and challenging arrestments later laid by Lancaster and Jamieson. The defenders lodged duplies disputing the validity of the arrestments and the question of preference, responding to the pursuers’ replies.
Gentle and Gentle v. Belch	1787	Debt, Creditor, Aliment, Bill of Exchange, Forgery, Reduction	Robert Gentle and William Gentle, as pursuers, argued against defender Belch that thirteen bills of exchange bearing their names were forged and void. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
George v. Christie	1788	Sequestration, Creditor, Bankruptcy, Debt, Bill of Exchange, Aliment	George sought restitution of barley he had delivered to Alexander Dewar, an insolvent debtor who was actively seeking sequestration, alleging that Dewar had acted in mala fide. William Christie, a Stirling merchant, petitioned to alter the court’s interlocutor, asserting that his bill for the barley equated to cash and that he stood as a common creditor. The creditors of Dewar’s sequestrated estate answered Christie’s condescendence, contending that the grain had been fraudulently delivered to the bankrupt.
Gloag v. Thomson and Others	1793	Debt, Usury, Bill of Exchange, Interest, Aliment, Creditor	Gloag petitioned the Court of Session to alter the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor, which had assoilzied Thomson and the other defenders from an action for repayment of a £50 counter-bill. He subsequently petitioned again to alter the Court's subsequent interlocutor in the same cause. The representatives of James Thomson argued that the £50 bill was valid and that a prior bill for £107 10s had been paid.
Graham v. Gillespie and Company	1794	Debt, Fraud, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Suspension, Onerous Indorsation	Archibald Graham, cashier to the Thistle Bank, pursued William Gillespie and Company for payment of bills of exchange that had been materially altered after acceptance. Graham contended that the defenders remained liable for the raised amounts, while Gillespie and Company maintained that the bills, originally accepted for £58 10s. and £50, had been fraudulently raised to £458 10s. and £450 by William Robb without their knowledge or authority. The case turned on whether acceptors are bound to pay increased sums when bills have been fraudulently altered without their consent.
Haig v. Lord Swinton's Interlocutor	1786	Debt, Creditor, Succession, Arrestment, Passive Title, Bill of Exchange	James Haig petitioned against Lord Swinton's interlocutor, asserting that he had incurred no universal passive title as a vitious intromitter. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Hamilton v. MacTaggart	1793	Debt, Bankruptcy, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Sequestration, Deed	William M'Taggart answered the petition of Messrs. Hamilton and Co. and James Provan and Co., who claimed that a sale of goods was void under the 1696 Act. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Harrisons v. Chippendale	1794	Bankruptcy, Debt, Sequestration, Trustee, Creditor, Bill of Exchange	The trustee argued that the Harrisons' claims were invalid for lack of indorsement and because they were founded upon post-bankruptcy acknowledgments. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Harrisons v. Chippendale, Trustee	1792	Bankruptcy, Compensation, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Assignation, Debt	Harrisons, as assignees of Gibson and Johnson, claimed entitlement to rank on the estate of William M'Alpine and Company for the full amount of bills held as security for advances made to the firm. Edward Chippendale, trustee of the estate, argued that this claim was compensated by the value of bills which Gibson and Johnson had accepted and indorsed to M'Alpine and Company. The dispute thus turned on whether the assignees could recover the full amount of their secured debt or whether it was subject to compensation by the firm's separate claims against them.
Hart v. Lord Eskgrove's Interlocutor	1787	Debt, Creditor, Cautioner, Bill of Exchange, Bankruptcy, Diligence	James Hart, as pursuer, petitioned the Court of Session to alter an interlocutor issued by Lord Eskgrove. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Hog and Others v. Creditors of John Stewart &c	1792	Debt, Copartnership, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Contract, Dissolution	James Hog, Cashier of the Paisley Banking Company, and others petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Gardenston at the instance of the creditors of John Stewart and Company. The creditors answered that the bills in question had been drawn after the dissolution of the copartnership, thereby contesting the grounds for the petition.
Home, et al v. Macknight	1797	Debt, Arrestment, Creditor, Jurisdiction, Bill of Exchange, Fraud	The Common Agent in the Locality of Roxburgh filed answers on behalf of Macknight, defender, responding to objections by James Home of Carlfide and other pursuers to interlocutors concerning teind valuation and victual allocation. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Huggan v. Gray	1794	Bill of Exchange, Diligence, Interlocutor, Bankruptcy, Arrestment, Debt	Huggan petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor against the suspender George Jardine and to find the letters orderly proceeded. Gray responded, arguing that Huggan lacked proper title to proceed in diligence and that no due notification of dishonour had been made to him.
Hunter v. Monboddo's Interlocutor	1794	Debt, Arrestment, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Caution, Oath	James Hunter petitioned the Court to alter the Sheriff's warrant for his incarceration issued on grounds of meditatio fugæ. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Jack and Others v. Murdoch, Fearns and Company	1795	Insurance, Bill of Exchange, Adjudication, Debt, Sequestration, Oath	Digitization and description in progress.
James Donaldson and James Pinkerton v. The Manchester Insurance Company	1831	Insurance, Debt, Insurance Claim, Bill of Exchange, Interest, Assignment	James Donaldson and James Pinkerton raised an action against the Manchester Insurance Company to recover payment under a fire insurance policy for wheat destroyed in 1829, claiming £408 1s. 11d. plus interest and costs. The defenders denied the competence of the action and asserted that the claim was void and barred. The parties thereafter joined issue on whether the defenders were liable for the loss of wheat and whether the policy had been discharged.
James Russel v. James Fairie	1791	Debt, Prescription, Bill of Exchange, Interlocutor, Statute of limitations, Oath	Documents uploaded. Full description in progress.
Kincaid v. Lord Justic Clerk's Interlocutor	1808	Sequestration, Bill of Exchange, Diligence, Oath, Cautioner, Fraud	Kincaid sought suspension of a charge brought against him upon a bill, alleging that the drawer had already paid the debt and that the charger and drawer had fraudulently attempted to extort double payment. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
MacHutcheon v. Welsh	1793	Bankruptcy, Debt, Arrestment, Creditor, Sequestration, Bill of Exchange	Hugh M'Hutcheon, trustee upon the sequestrated estate of John Tait, pursued Robert Welsh and Thomas Copland regarding payments received from Tait, disputing whether these transactions were void under the statute of 1696. Welsh and Copland argued that the remittances were made before sequestration and thus not void, while M'Hutcheon contended that the bills fell under the act as they were received after Tait's notour bankruptcy. After the Court pronounced an interlocutor against the defenders, they petitioned for its alteration, which M'Hutcheon opposed by asserting that Tait had been bankrupt and the bills were covered by the 1696 statute.
Manderson v Dickson	1793	Debt, Arrestment, Creditor, Sequestration, Bill of Exchange, Assignation	George Manderson reclaimed against Lord Abercromby's interlocutor in his action against Dickson for wrongful imprisonment and damages. The respondents denied liability, attributing the litigation to vexatious conduct by the Manderson brothers and contending that the calculations of damages were frivolous.
McFarlane v. Meadowbank's Interlocutor	1796	Debt, Creditor, Aliment, Bill of Exchange, Assignation, Oath	The suspender McFarlane petitioned against an interlocutor of Lord Meadowbank, which had found the charger entitled to expenses and appointed an account thereof to be given in. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Nairne v. Cranstoun	1795	Debt, Bankruptcy, Sequestration, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Promissory note	Alexander Nairne, trustee for the sequestrated estate of Peter and Francis Forrester, opposed Thomas Cranstoun’s petition to alter Lord Methven’s interlocutor and rank A. Laidlaw’s undiscounted bills in the estate. Nairne contended that Laidlaw’s failure to discount the bills forfeited double-ranking rights, while Cranstoun sought the alteration to allow the ranking. The respondent argued that the transaction between Forrester and Laidlaw constituted an equal exchange of obligations and that the interlocutor should not be altered.
Orrs v . Batchin and Birkmyre	1793	Bill of Exchange, Bankruptcy, Promissory note, Creditor, Arrestment, Debt	William Orr pursued an action against the Paisley merchants Batchin and Birkmyre regarding the negotiation of a promissory note and petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor. The respondents opposed the motion, arguing that the pursuer's clerk had negligently delayed transmitting the dishonoured note, while maintaining that they themselves had exercised due diligence in recovering payment.
Petition of Robert Gibbon	1787	Debt, Assignation, Creditor, Ranking of Creditors, Bill of Exchange, Sequestration	Robert Gibbon, merchant in Aberdeen, petitioned the Court of Session to alter its recent interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Petrie v. Lord Ankerville's Interlocutor	1789	Debt, Prescription, Bill of Exchange, Creditor, Rent, Security	Pursuer Joseph Petrie petitioned the Court of Session to alter its recent interlocutor in his dispute with defender Lord Ankerville. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Pringle v. Hamilton	1793	Prescription, Bill of Exchange, Debt, Oath, Action, Assignation	Pringle pursued Hamilton for payment of a bill of exchange drawn by David Cathcart in 1762, while Hamilton defended on the grounds that the instrument had not been duly negotiated and that the debt was prescribed. Pringle argued that Hamilton remained liable notwithstanding the alleged defect in negotiation and that the defense of prescription was inapplicable, but Cathcart answered that the debt had been discharged by payment made by his father. Hamilton subsequently petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor.
Quirk v. Buchanan	1793	Debt, Bill of Exchange, Creditor, Agent, Interest, Arrestment	Pursuer Matthew Quirk petitioned the Court to remit the interlocutor of Lord Dreghorn refusing a bill of suspension against defender Buchanan. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Ralston v. Dreghorn's Interlocuters	1793	Debt, Creditor, Compensation, Bill of Exchange, Assignation, Interlocutor	Robert Ralston, as pursuer, petitioned the court against an interlocutor issued by Lord Dreghorn. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Rankine and Son v. Belch	1790	Creditor, Debt, Bill of Exchange, Forgery, Reduction, Promissory note	Defender Peter Belch argued that the indorsement by Rankine and Son was genuine and that he held no material interest in the matter, as he would recover value from David Mitchell, who had received full value. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Rossel, et al v. Fraser	1787	Debt, Creditor, Promissory note, Bill of Exchange, Prescription, Succession	Patrick Fraser, merchant in Edinburgh, petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Eskgrove regarding his claim of debt. James Russel, William Cooper, and others, upholsterers in Edinburgh and trustees for Isobel Boog, answered the petition, contesting Fraser’s entitlement to the alteration. The dispute centered on whether the court should modify the prior interlocutor in favor of Fraser’s debt claim against the trust estate.
Simpson v. Morison, and Glass and Son	1786	Debt, Creditor, Reduction, Bill of Exchange, Diligence, Aliment	Elisabeth Simpson, spouse of James Davidson, petitioned the Court to remit an interlocutor of Lord Alva that had allowed the reduction of her husband's land disposition. William Morison, late maltman in Stirling, and John Glass and Son, merchants there and Morison's assignees, answered the petition on behalf of themselves and Davidson for his interest.
Simpson v. Sinton's Interlocutor	1793	Bankruptcy, Debt, Trustee, Creditor, Prescription, Bill of Exchange	Alexander Simpson, vintner at Bridge-end of Ayr, and other creditors of James Hunter, carrier in Ayr, a bankrupt, presented a reclaiming petition asking the Court to alter Lord Swinton's interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Sym v. King	1796	Debt, Prescription, Statute of limitations, Bill of Exchange, Trustees, Creditor	Sym pursued King to compel production of vouchers for payments the defender claimed to have made to creditors of his deceased son James King. King resisted by pleading prescription to bar action on a 1782 bill, citing a thirteen-year lapse and the debtor’s post-due assurances.
Thomsons v. Campbell	1789	Sequestration, Bill of Exchange, Reduction, Multiple-Poinding, Interdict, Arrestment	Andrew, George, and Andrew Thomsons petitioned the Court to alter Lord Monboddo's interlocutor. Neil Campbell of Inverliver answered, arguing that the petitioners had misstated the grounds of suspension and the nature of his plea.
Tod v. McLintock	1780	Debt, Prescription, Bill of Exchange, Aliment, Evidence, Arrestment	Robert M'Lintock, defender, petitioned the Court to alter a recent interlocutor finding him liable to Tod. He subsequently petitioned to overturn the specific finding that he was liable for £20 11s. 11d. plus interest.