case lucas executor of sir Robert Adam against Adam the obligor on payment of  l to the obligee procure a bind and note for money to be deliver up to he upon  pretence that he be poor and near relate to the obligee but that not be prove  he be order to account for the bind and note S c Eq ab this be a bill bring by  the executor of sir Robert Adam to have a account of three hundred pound  borrow of he by the defendant Adam for the payment of which say sum with  interest the defendant enter into a bind to the say sir Robert Adam of the  penalty of four hundred pound condition for the payment of two hundred pound  and at the same time give he two note under his hand of fifty pound each note  but afterward by unfair mean prevail on the obligee who be superannuated and  not in his sense to give he the defendant a release of all demand on the  payment of twenty pound and on pretence of be his near relation the defendant  by his answer say that he be near relate to sir Robert Adam do borrow the  money of he as mention in the bill but be poor he the obligee when he be in  his perfect sense videlicet in the year promise to forgive he this debt which  in the year follow videlicet in the year he do accord forgive therefore insist  that he be not liable to account for it to the plaintiff modern report the  counsel for the defendant admit that there be a inquisition take by which sir  Robert Adam be find to be out of his sense which inquisition be take in the  year but go no far back than three year videlicet to the year and this debt be  discharge in the year the defendant be Willing to try whether the obligee be  then in his sense or not the counsel for the plaintiff say that if the court  shall make the least difficulty to decree for the plaintiff upon read his  proof in this cause that he will then be Willing to try it at law whether the  obligee be in his sense at the time he execute this release but if upon the  proof it shall appear that he be not in his sense then the plaintiff ought not  to be send to a trial of that matter at law it be true the defendant swear in  his answer that he do believe that the obligee have not forget either the bind  or the note at the time of his seal this release which he obtain as his near  relation but give no manner of proof how or how modern report er p near he be  relate which he ought to have do because it be the pretend consideration of  this release therefore if that fail as it do the rest must fall of course as  where the testator devise one hundred pound to t S by the name of his cousin t  S when in truth he be not relate to the testator in such case the legatee  shall never have this legacy beside there be no manner of proof that any such  consideration of nearness of relation be mention at the time the release be  execute but that the defendant bring twenty pound and tell the obligee that he  have a bind which he come to pay and immediate on payment of the say money he  get up the bind and obtain this release but after all the payment of the say  twenty pound be inconsistent with the pretend consideration of nearness of  relation which the defendant have set forth in his answer the court here be a  bind get by the obligor from a weak person the obligee and a release of all  demand upon pretence of nearness of relation and of be poor but neither of  these consideration be prove in the cause but it plain appear that the obligor  pay twenty pound as a consideration of this release and there be no notice  take at that time of what sum be due either on the bind or note this seem to  induce a suspicion that the payment of that money be the only consideration of  deliver modern report they up and execute this release and that the obligee do  not know at that time that anything more be due to he be very weak and  forgetful and incapable of transact any business so it be decree that he shall  account both for the bind and note