Richardson, pursuer, and Fenwick, defender, both seek to collect on payments originally from John Bedford and Son, an English firm. Due to financial trouble, checks endorsed by John Bedford and Son cannot be cashed. Instead, Richardson and Fenwick seek to collect from several Scottish firms that owed money to John Bedford and Son, such as Gibson and Balfour, Colin Mclaren and Samuel Patron. Under a "letter of arrestment ad jurisdictionem fundandam," a creditor can bring a foreign debtor's property under the jurisdiction of the Scottish court. In this case the foreign debtor's property is debt. On one hand Fenwick used two arrestments in the hands of Gibson and Balfour, as debtors to Bedford and Son, jurisdictionis fundandæ causa. He afterwards obtained decree against Bedford and Son for payment and recourse. On the other hand, Richardson, upon the registered protest of his bill and taken out letters of arrestment executed one arrestment against Gibson and Balfour, and M'Laren and others, as debtors to Bedford and Son. Richardson and Fenwick dispute who has priority to these debts. Fenwick alleges that Richardson's procedure for authorizing letters of arrestment was irregular and therefore ineffective. Richardson disputes Fenwick's claim, and further argues that Fenwick incorrectly identified the debtor as Bedford and Son instead of John Bedford and Son.