Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Subject_1 MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT.

Election of Dumfriesshire

1741, Feb. 3, 10.
Case No. No. 4.

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

The Lords agreed that the Privy-Council had no power to dismember or annex counties; and 2dly, that if they had power it was not properly done, being only interponing their authority to a private contract without any word dismembering or annexing per verba de presenti, and therefore repelled the objection to the titles of the freeholders in the five parishes of Eskdale, as said to be in the shire of Roxburgh in virtue of the said act of Council.—10th February, The Lords refused even of consent to determine objections that had not been made at the Michaelmas meeting notwithstanding their resolution not to revise the roll except as to alterations since last Michaelmas; 2dly, They found that charters by subject superiors in 1611 on which there was a late retour 1737 bearing the old extent, were sufficient evidence. Pro were Drummore, Tinwald, Balmerino, Murkle, and President. Against it were Justice-Clerk, Minto, Leven, et ego. These did not vote, Strichen, Arniston, Kilkerran, Monzie.

3dly, As a consequence of the judgment given the 6th instant in the shire of Sutherland, quoad vide (No. 7.) finding that new votes may be enrolled, they found that persons infeft though not year and day may be enrolled; 4thly, A charter in 1681 and 1631 in church-lands bearing L.4 of old extent, was found no sufficient evidence of the extent, or that these lands were extended. (See No. 17.)