In this week’s poser, from the court book of Cunninghame bailliary court (National Archives of Scotland, RH11/19/1 page 65), we asked what reason was given by the defenders in the case for withholding payment for a barque, built by the pursuer, and what was the decision of the judge?

Answer

The defenders claimed that the payment was conditional on the barque having as great a burden as John Robisoun’s barque. The judge required the pursuer to bring proof and all parties to be present in court on 18 December.

Transcription
Anent the precept and action persewed be Robert Boyd carpentar Burgess
of Irwin against Robert Brown in Saltcoats and Johen Chalmers ther for pay-
ment of the sum lybald The said persewer co[m]peiring w[i]t[h] James Rosse his pro-
curator the said defenders compeiring w[i]t[h] Johen Brown nottar ther procurator
Wha aledges the promiss maid be the defenders to the persewer for the sum
lybald was but [con]ditional iff ther bark q[uhi]ch the persewer buildet wer of as
great burden as John Robisouns q[uhi]lk was three tund more The pers[e]wers
procurator offers him to prow his lybald and that the promise was absolute
ut libellatur The judg prefers the persewer and admitts the lybald to his
probation and for prowing therof assigns the 18 of decem[ber] nixt to com q[uai]r[u]nto
the pairties ar warned apud acta

The two Latin terms are ut libellatur (as libelled) and apud acta (to appear at court).


Last week’s poser