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!
You are here:BAILII >>
Databases >>
Scottish Court of Session Decisions >>
Humbie v Hume. [1634] Mor 5933 (19 July 1634)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1634/Mor1405933-137.html Cite as:
[1634] Mor 5933
Subject_1 HUSBAND and WIFE. Subject_2 DIVISION IV.
The Husband's powers with regard to the management of the common stock, and of the Children.
Humbie v. Hume
Date: 19 July 1634 Case No. No 137.
A bond bore, that it should not be lawful for the husband of the creditor to uplift the principal sum. Altho' the lady consented, the debtor found not obliged to pay.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Humbie being charged to pay to Helen Cockburn, sometime good-wife of Humbie, and to Laurence Hume, her spouse, the sum of 2000 merks, contained in a bond granted by him to them thereupon, at a certain term mentioned in the bond, and to pay annualrent therefor, so long as he retained the sum after the term of payment; and their being one clause subjoined to the end of the bond, whereby it was provided, that it should not be leisum to Laurence Hume, the husband, to seek the principal sum, nor uplift the same during his wife's lifetime, but only the annualrent thereof; in respect of the which provision, the said debtor suspended the said charges execute at the husband's instance, for the said principal sum; whereto the husband answered, that that clause was conceived in his wife's favours, and not in favours of the debtor; likeas his wife consented to the charge, and uplifting of the money, and offered to compear judicially, and consent most solemnly thereto.— The Lords nevertheless suspended the charge for the principal sum, in respect of the said clause; for they found, that the debtor could not be compelled to pay the same, albeit the wife consented, except that he pleased himself to pay it, so long as the wife lived; for it was found, that the clause was in the debtor's favours, if he liked to make use of it.
