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!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

Scottish Court of Session Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Robert Cleland's Case. - Linlithgowshire. [1746] 1 Elchies 268 (4 June 1746)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1746/Elchies010268-044.html

[New search] [Contents list] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


[1746] 1 Elchies 268      

Subject_1 MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT.

Robert Cleland's Case - Linlithgowshire.

1746, June 4, 14.
Case No. No. 44.

Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy

Cleland produced a retour in 1662, septem bovatarum terrarum de Wester Kincavill, bearing that valent L.7. 6s. 8d. nunc, et tantum valuerunt tempore pacis, and that they hold of the Crown free for payment of L.7 of feu duty, as a proportion of L.26, payable for the whole lands of Kincavill by the ancient infeftments, with 6s. 8d. in augmentationem rentalis pro prædictis 7 bovatis terrarum. The question was, Whether this was evidence of L.7. 6s. 8d. of old extent? which resolved in two questions, 1st, Whether the clause in the act 1681 (distinct from the feu-duties) is repealed by the last act in 1743? 2dly, Whether this appeared to be old extent, distinct from the feu-duty? for which last, the chief argument was, that the retour bore the feu-duty originally to have been only L.7, and the 6s. 8d. was an augmentation, whereas the old extent was always L.7. 6s. 8d. Arniston argued long for the vote, particularly that the act 1743 implied that every person producing a retour, bearing the lands to be 40 shillings, must have a vote. The Lords repelled the objection; and sustained the vote. Pro were, Drummore, Haining, Arniston, Dun, Balmerino, Murkle. Con. were, Justice-Clerk, Minto, Tinwald, et ego. Strichen non liquet—4th June 1745. Altered, 4th June 1746, and sustained the objection. 14th June, Adhered.

*** The case of M'Cara, 24th June 1747, here referred to, is mentioned as follows:

M'Cara's grandfather was infeft in 1648 on a retour in Johnston's fourth part of the lands of Drimmie, valen. nunc per annum 51s. 10d. eum mortis debitis et consuetis, et tempore pacis tantum, cum duplicatione dictæ summæ primo anno introitus, et quod tenetur de S.D.N. pro annua solutione dictarum summarum,—and in 1666-7 he was infeft in Henry's quarter, bearing quod valent 53s. 8d. et tempore pacis tantum, and that the feu-duty was 53s. 8d. cum parte martis et devoriis debitis et consuetis, una cum duabus solidts in novam augmentationem rentatis cum duplicatione, &c. and this respondent stood enrolled as apparent-heir to his grandfather, so that the questions were the same as in Cleland's case, 4th June 1745, and 4th and 14th June 1746, (No. 44.) and we found, as we did ultimately in that case, that M'Cara had no vote.

The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting     


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1746/Elchies010268-044.html