1778–1786
BankruptcyCreditorDebtAlimentFraudArrestmentCreditors of the bankrupt William Hunter, joined by His Majesty’s Advocate, pursued David Armstrong, advocate, and William Johnstone, writer to the signet, as art and part guilty of Hunter’s fraudulent bankruptcy and the concealment of his effects following Hunter’s flight from Scotland in 1777. The pursuers alleged that the defenders had assisted in secret transactions and the hiding of assets to the prejudice of creditors, while Armstrong and Johnston denied complicity, maintaining they had acted on counsel and in good faith. The litigation proceeded through mutual condescendences, answers denying fraud, and repeated petitions and reclaiming petitions concerning the relevancy of proof and the Court’s interlocutors.AI-generated
Documents in this case (20)
- His Majesty's Advocate v. David Armstrong and William Johnston — Petition and ComplaintPetition and Complaint by His Majesty's Advocate against Mr David Armstrong and William Johnston
- Creditors for William Hunter v. David Armstrong and William Johnstone — petition, 28 Jan 1778January 28, 1778 Petition of Alexander Allan asking the Court to ordain William Hunter to undergo judicial examination concerning his late transactions in the North Country
- Ilay Campbell v. David Armstrong and William Johnston — Proof, 1783Mrs Hunter says her husband dealt with defenders and counsel, including secret fund transfers and advice to flee Scotland; Mr Armstrong denies forwarding goods or managing finances.
- Creditors of William Hunter v. William Johnston — Information, 17 Feb 1784Creditors of bankrupt William Hunter seek recovery of concealed assets from William Johnston, writer to the signet, after Hunter fled Scotland in 1777, with evidence implicating Johnston in secret transactions.
- Alexander Allan v. William Johnstone — Information, 17 Feb 1786February 17, 1786 Information of William Johnstone, arguing that he was not accessory to William Hunter's concealment of effects from creditors, and that his actions were guided by counsel and good faith.
- Creditors for William Hunter v. David Armstrong and William Johnstone — Petition, 10 Mar 1784March 10, 1784 Petition of Ilay Campbell, his Majesty's Advocate, asking the Court to find William Hunter, David Armstrong, and William Johnston guilty of fraudulent bankruptcy and to impose legal punishment as per stat…
- Ilay Campbell v. David Armstrong — Answers, 12 Jun 1784June 12, 1784 Answers by David Armstrong to the petition and complaint of Ilay Campbell, Esq; his Majesty's Advocate, for his Majesty's interest.
- Ilay Campbell v. William Johnston — Answers, 24 Jun 1784June 24, 1784 Answers by William Johnston Writer to the Signet, responding to the petition and complaint of Ilay Campbell, Esq; his Majesty's Advocate for his Majesty's Interest.
- His Majesty's Advocate v. David Armstrong and William Johnston — Condescendence, 29 Jun 1784June 29, 1784 Condescendence for His Majesty's Advocate against Mr David Armstrong and William Johnston, alleging fraud in concealing William Hunter's assets during bankruptcy.
- Mr David Armstrong v. His Majesty's Advocate — Condescendence, 2 Jul 1784July 2, 1784 Condescendence of Mr David Armstrong, Advocate, against His Majesty's Advocate, for his Majesty's interest, complainer;
- Creditors for William Hunter v. David Armstrong and William Johnstone — Petition, 3 Jul 1784July 3, 1784 Petition of His Majesty's Advocate asking the Court to find William Hunter a fraudulent bankrupt and grant warrant for letters of horning
- Creditors for William Hunter v. David Armstrong and William Johnstone — Additional, 6 Jul 1784July 6, 1784 Petition of His Majesty's Advocate asking the Court to find David Armstrong and William Johnston art and part guilty of William Hunter's fraudulent bankruptcy and concealing his effects from creditors
- Creditors for William Hunter v. David Armstrong and William Johnstone — Petition, 30 Nov 1784November 30, 1784 Petition of His Majesty's Advocate asking the Court to resume consideration of petitions against Messrs Armstrong and Johnston, and their mutual condescendences
- His Majesty's Advocate v. David Armstrong; William Johnston — circa1785 Letters ArmstrongWilliam Hunter seeks to avoid sequestration by negotiating with creditors to retain trade and secure his family’s survival, while letters reveal his financial ruin and creditors’ demands.
- Creditors for William Hunter v. David Armstrong and William Johnstone — Petition, 22 Jun 1785June 22, 1785 Petition of Ilay Campbell, Esq; his Majesty's Advocate, asking the Court to permit transmission of prior proceedings against William Johnstone to this process
- Creditors for William Hunter v. David Armstrong and William Johnstone — Petition, 19 Nov 1785November 19, 1785 Reclaiming Petition of Mr David Armstrong, asking the Court to permit proof of facts concerning William Hunter's concealment and financial dealings
- His Majesty's Advocate v. David Armstrong — Answers, 29 Nov 1785November 29, 1785 Answers by his Majesty's Advocate for his Majesty's interest to the petition of Mr David Armstrong, responding to the relevancy of facts offered for proof
- Creditors for William Hunter v. David Armstrong and William Johnstone — Petition, 22 Dec 1785December 22, 1785 Reclaiming Petition of David Armstrong asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor
- Creditors for William Hunter v. David Armstrong and William Johnstone — Petition, 15 Apr 1786April 15, 1786 Petition of David Armstrong asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor
- Ilay Campbell v. David Armstrong — Answers, 11 Jul 1786July 11, 1786: His Majesty's Advocate responds to Mr. David Armstrong's petition, defending his Majesty's interest and asserting Armstrong's complicity in concealing Hunter's assets despite lack of direct fraud proof.
People & places in this case
People involved
- Alexander Allan — Party
- David Armstrong, of Kirtleton — Party
- John Flockhart — Party
- Robert MacQueen, Lord Braxfield — Party
- Joseph Williamson — Party
- Sir Ilay Campbell, Lord Succoth, 1st Baronet of Succoth — Party
- William Hay Jr., W.S. — Party
- Patrick Brown, of Barharrow — Party
- George Home, W.S., of Wedderburn and Paxton — Party
- William Bogle — Party
- George Fergusson, of Hermand, Lord Hermand — Party
- William Johnston — Advocate for Party
- Mr. James Smith, of Balharry — Advocate for Party
- Alexander Wight — Advocate for Party
- Robert Dundas, of Arniston — Advocate for Party
- Captain Robert Irving — Advocate for Party
- Alexander Ferguson, of Craigdarroch — Advocate for Party
- Neil Fergusson, of Pitcullo — Advocate for Party
- Henry Erskine — Advocate for Party
- William Johnstone, W.S. — Advocate for Party
- Andrew Crosbie, Esq., of Holm — Advocate for Party
- John Davidson, of Stewartfield and Haltree — Advocate for Party
- William Carlyle, of Drumgans — Advocate for Party
- Edward Armstrong — Advocate for Party
- David Syme , of Cartmore and Warrock — Advocate for Party
- Sir William Pulteney, Baronet — Advocate for Party
- James Veitch, Lord Elliock — Lord Ordinary
- John Campbell, Lord Stonefield — Lord Ordinary
- Alexander Murray, Lord Henderland — Lord Ordinary
- William Robertson, Lord Robertson — Lord Ordinary
- William King — Named in case documents
- Henry Jardine — Named in case documents
- John Home — Named in case documents
- John Dickson, of Kilbucho — Named in case documents
- William Elliot Lockhart, of Borthwickbrae — Named in case documents
- Alexander Crichton — Named in case documents
- Robert Johnston — Named in case documents
- Thomas Moffat — Named in case documents
