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 >>
The Freeholders of Inverness-shire v The Vassals of the Estate of Ross. [1745] Mor 8687 (30 July 1745)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1745/Mor218687-101.html
Subject_1 MEMBER of PARLIAMENT. Subject_2 DIVISION IV.
Decisions common to qualifications upon the old extent and valuation.
Subject_3 SECT. I.
Vassals in lands forfeited by the superior. - Fishings may be joined to lands to complete a qualification. - Proprietor pro indiviso. - Feu-duties payable out of church-lands. - Mortified lands sold. - To give a qualification there must be a feudal vassal in the lands. - Bodies corporate. - Minors. - Exchange of pieces of land. - Infeftment in virtue of a clause of union, and dispensation in a Crown charter. - Burgage lands sold by the burgh. - Where the superior is unentered. - Person divested by a trust-deed. - The claim must describe the title for enrolment. - Eldest sons of Peers. - Charter granted by a factor loco tutoris. - Roman Catholics. - Officers of the Revenue.
The Freeholders of Inverness-shire v. The Vassals of the Estate of Ross
Date: 30 July 1745 Case No. No 101.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
An objection was made to the titles of these gentlemen to stand on the roll of electors for the county of Inverness; that, by act 71st, Parl. 9. Ja. III. the Earldom of Ross, which had been forfeited, was appointed to be a provision for the King's second son, which was confirmed by act 30th, Parl. 11. Ja. VI.
Answered; The first act only statuted, “That, notwithstanding the annexation thereby made, it should be in the Kings power to give the estate of Ross to any of their second sons.” And the second act, which was more indistinct, referred to the first.
The Earldom of Ross was accordingly given to the second son of James III. with a clause of return failing his issue, in virtue whereof it had returned; but, according to the sense put upon the statutes by the objectors, this estate behoved, on the death of a King, to shift out of the person of his second son into that of the second son of the Prince then succeeding to be King.
Replied; By the style of our acts of Parliament, when it is statuted to be lawful or leisom to the King to grant any right, this gives a right to the party to have such a grant. By the act 1592, concerning mines and metals, it is statuted to be leisom to the King to make grants thereof, and it has been found, that, by this statute, the heritors have right.
The Lords repelled the objection.
Act. R. Craigie.Alt. Lockhart.
Fol. Dic. v. 3. p. 413. D. Falconer, v. 1. p. 126.
