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 >>
Muirhead of Braidsholme v The Feuars of Uddincston. [1697] Mor 10873 (5 February 1697)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1697/Mor2610873-132.html Cite as:
[1697] Mor 10873
What Title requisite in the Positive Prescription.
Subject_3 SECT. VII.
What Title requisite for Thirlage?
Muirhead of Braidsholme v. The Feuars of Uddincston
Date: 5 February 1697 Case No. No 132.
Found in conformity to Forbes against Magistrates of Inverness, No 121. 10858.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Mersington reported Muirhead of Braidsholme against the Feuars of Uddingston, for abstracting their multures from his mill of Calder. Alleged, By their feu charters they are only astricted to a peck of each load of meal, whereas he exacts much more by his multure-dish. Answered, His measure is indeed somewhat more than the Linlithgow peck, but it is conform to the Glasgow measure, which is the rule and standard not only in his mill, but in all the mills round the country, and that by which the heritors receive their farms. Replied, the Linlithgow measure is the general authorised rule by the acts of Parliament. The Lords considering that every mill had its own customs, they found it relevant to augment the quantity, if they proved 40 years peaceable possession, in exacting no less. Then, 2do, The feuars craved to be free, unless they got the preference to all out-town sucken in grinding their corns, especially seeing they were infeft in the mill as well as Braidsholme quoad the great multures, and he had only the power of inputting a miller, and uplifting the small duties of the look, knaveship and bannock; and yet his miller preferred those who were not thirled, at least served them according as they came to the mill, whereby they suffered prejudice both in the time of drought and frost. Answered, By the disposition none had a preference but the Earl of Angus, who was their superior; and it was the most equal method to serve them as they came. The Lords, before answer, allowed a conjunct probation, anent the custom of the mill, as to this privilege. There was also a deduction craved for the seed, horsecorn, and teind, that they might be free of the multure, and that nothing might pay but what they grinded for their own use and consumption within their own houses. But it was remitted to the Ordinary to try if omnia grana crescentia were astricted by their infeftments; for there be many various decisions of the Lords upon this point.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 108. Fountainhall, v. 1. p. 764.
