[1661/1/221]*[print] [email] [cite] [preceding] [following]
Anent the supplication presented in parliament by John, lord Herries against John Livingston, merchant burgess of Edinburgh, heir to the deceased commissioner William Livingston, showing that the supplicant, being forfeited for his majesty's service in the late times of troubles, and commission granted for uplifting the rents of his lands within the stewartry of Kirkcudbright, which accordingly were uplifted by the said deceased William Livingston, then their commissioner, and the supplicant decreed also to pay £10,000 of composition for rescinding the forfeiture, the committee of estates then sitting in February 1648 did assign and convey to the supplicant all and whatsoever sums of money, casualties and others that had been uplifted (by or under pretence of public warrant) off the supplicant or any of his vassals' lands and estates and not accounted for to the public, as the assignation upon 3 February 1648 bears; and upon 5 July 1648 the committee of estates did grant commission to the lairds [Sir Robert Grierson] of Lag, [David MacBrair of] Almagill, [James Douglas of] Mouswald and to George Maxwell of Munches, or any two of them, to be judges in the said matter, and to take exact trial what has been uplifted and to call for the accounts, and any persons before them and to examine them thereupon, and to call the collectors and examine witnesses and report, conforming whereunto, upon 30 December thereafter, the said lairds of Lag and Almagill and George Maxwell did make their report and, in respect of the interruption of the parliament 1648 by the troubles of that time and the incursions of the English in the year 1650, the supplicant could not get the foresaid report made, and the said commission and assignation advised and sentence pronounced conforming thereto against the said William Livingston in his own lifetime, having died at Perth in the said year 1650, and in respect that the foresaid John Livingston is heir served and retoured to the said William Livingston, and so is liable to make payment to the supplicant of the said sums of money and others above-written; therefore, craving the said estates of parliament to take inspection of the said commission and report with the verifications thereof, and to advise the same and pronounce sentence and decreet against the said John Livingston as heir to the said commissioner William Livingston, according to justice. Which supplication, being read in the presence of the said commissioners of parliament appointed for bills, the said John, lord Herries compearing personally, who produced the foresaid assignation, commission and report with the whole instructions thereof above-mentioned, and the said John Livingston compearing also personally, with James Crichton of St Leonards, who declared that the said John was content to pay to David Boyd, merchant burgess of Edinburgh, in name of the said Lord Herries, the sum of 2,000 merks, (providing the parliament should declare his payment thereof to David Boyd a sufficient exoneration to him anent all arrestments thereof used by whatsoever person or persons in his hands) and to restore and discharge the said Lord Herries of a ticket of 200 merks, with the whole bygone annualrents thereof granted by the said lord to the said deceased William, as also to relieve the said lord of the sum of 1,600 merks allegedly paid by the said William Livingston in name of the said lord [George Seton], earl of Winton, and to recover the said earl and his curators their discharge thereof between then and Martinmas [11 November] next, or else to make payment to the said noble lord at the term of Martinmas next of the said sum of 1,600 merks. And the said John, lord Herries personally present, as said is, declared that he was content to accept, likewise he accepted of the said offers and conditions in place of anything he could crave of the said deceased William or of the said John, as heir to him, his majesty and estates of parliament, having heard, seen and considered the said supplication, assignation, commission and report, with the whole instructions and verifications thereof and declaration and consent of both the said parties given in in the said matter, and being therewith well and ripely advised, his majesty, with advice and consent of the said estates of parliament, and of consent of both the said parties, decrees and ordains the said John Livingston to make payment to the said David Boyd, in name of the said Lord Herries, of the said sum of 2,000 merks, and to restore and discharge the said Lord Herries of a ticket of 200 merks with the whole bygone annualrents thereof granted by the said lord to the said deceased William, and also to relieve the said noble lord of the said sum of 1,600 merks allegedly paid by the said William Livingston in name of the said lord to the earl of Winton, and to recover the said earl and his curators their discharge thereof between now and Martinmas next, or else to make payment to the said noble lord at the said term of the said sum of 1,600 merks, and that in place and full satisfaction of anything he can crave of the said deceased William or of the said John, as heir to him, and decrees and declares that the said John Livingston his making payment to the said David Boyd of the said sum of 2,000 merks is and shall be a sufficient exoneration to the said John, at the hands of whatsoever person or persons creditors to the said Lord Herries arresters thereof in his hands, notwithstanding of their arrestments.
[1661/1/222]*[print] [email] [cite] [preceding] [following]
Anent the supplication given in to his majesty and estates of parliament by Matthew Cumming, merchant burgess of Glasgow, against John and Ninian Anderson, merchants there, showing that the said John and Ninian Anderson, having preferred a bill to the late honourable committee of estates against the supplicant, showing that they had built great houses and tenements within the said burgh near the cross thereof and, being totally burnt by the late burning there, had re-edified the same and thereby expended much of their means, and that the supplicant, having made purchase of some old walls adjacent to their tenements, intended to build up a common close and sidewall thereto, and to obscure their whole lights, and to draw the matter before the dean of guild of Glasgow, whereupon the said committee of estates, by their deliverance written upon the back of the same petition of the date 20 September last, did remit and recommend to the provost, bailies and dean of guild of Glasgow, to call the parties before them and settle them in a friendly way, and ordained a macer to summon the supplicant to compear before them in case they should not agree; and the supplicant, in obedience thereunto, being most willing that the foresaid differences should be settled in a friendly way by the said provost, bailies and dean of guild, yet the said John and Ninian Anderson not only shifted the same, but also never summoned the supplicant by virtue of their said order but only intimated the same to the supplicant's workmen who, having them all gathered together and having provided limestone, timber and all other materials, upon sight thereof, deserted the same, through which the supplicant, being exceedingly prejudiced, declared himself to the lord chancellor, whereupon he was pleased to recommend the amicable decision of the said differences to be decided at home by the said provost, bailies and dean of guild that the committee of estates, having business of greater consequence, might not be troubled any further therewith, as the copy of the letter produced would testify. And seeing the said John and Ninian Anderson would in no way settle the said differences in manner recommended by the said committee of estates and my lord chancellor, nor yet would they insist against the supplicant in a legal way in parliament, but only, upon the intimation of their pretended order, retard the supplicant's work and workmen, he having all materials provided, through which he is exceedingly prejudiced and harmed; and therefore, craving that the supplicant's work and workmen might be ordained to proceed and go on in their said work, notwithstanding of their pretended order, or otherwise to remit the differences between them to be determined by the said dean of guild of Glasgow as being most competent judges thereto. Which action, being called in the presence of the commissioners of parliament appointed for bills, to whom the said matter was referred, the said Matthew Cumming, pursuer, compearing personally with Mr George MacKenzie, his procurator, who produced in their presence his instrument of sasine of his lands and walstead, and the said John and Ninian Anderson, defenders, compearing via Mr Thomas Wallace of Faill, their procurator, the rights, reasons and allegations of either of the said parties, with the said Matthew Cumming, pursuer, his said sasine, with the report of the dean of guild of Glasgow and his council made in the said matter, in manner after-mentioned, with the report of the said commissioners of parliament appointed for bills made thereupon, being all heard, seen and considered by the said estates of parliament and they therewith, being well and ripely advised, his majesty, with advice and consent of the said estates of parliament, have inhibited and discharged and by the tenor hereof inhibits and discharges the said Matthew Cumming to exceed the old marches in building nearer the close than formerly the walls were (without prejudice to him to build the same as high as he pleases), and that in his building higher he does not further cast out his building than it is at the bottom, and ordains the magistrates and dean of guild of Glasgow to put the above-written decreet to due execution, and ordains the like to be done within the said burgh in such cases in all time coming, because at the first calling of the said action the same was remitted to the dean of guild of Glasgow and his council that the work might go on and be no longer retarded, notwithstanding of any former pretended order, which remit being presented to the dean of guild and his council of the said burgh, they made their report to the said commissioners appointed for bills, that they found great contrariety between the said parties and being most willing to have the matter composed, for this end they dealt earnestly with the said Matthew Cumming, but finding him altogether refractory so that they could make no kind of reference for composing thereof, and considering that the like practice had never fallen out before within the said burgh as to any man to take in a whole calsayed close for stopping of their neighbours' lights, and finding the said John Anderson to have above twenty-five lights in his land nearest to the close and no light considerable from any other art, and that the said Matthew intended to build within five inches to the said John Anderson's whole lights, and that the said Matthew's intended procedure could not but be hurtful and prejudicial to his whole neighbours about through taking in of the said calsayed close in case of sudden fire (as formerly), for these and many more the like reasons, thought good not to determine therein, desiring the lord commissioner's grace and estates of parliament to provide a remedy that the like might be prevented hereafter. Which report, with a former report made by the said dean of guild and his council to the said committee of estates thereupon, showing that the said Matthew would not condescend to any amicable decision and that therefrom they were necessitated to remit the same back again to the said committee of estates, together also with the report of the commissioners for bills made thereupon, being all considered by the said estates of parliament they in respect thereof found just ground to infer decreet to be given in the said matter in manner above-written, notwithstanding of the pursuer's infeftment and of all that was alleged for him in the contrary.
[1661/1/223]*[print] [email] [cite] [preceding] [following]
Anent the supplication given in to the commissioners of parliament appointed for bills by John Lamb, merchant in Elgin, against David, Alexander and William Muir, lawful sons to the deceased Quentin Muir, lieutenant to the deceiving troop under command of the English usurpers, who or one or other of them are heirs to their deceased father, and David Knight in Kirriemuir, their grandfather, and tutor Agnes Jenkin, widow of the said deceased Quentin and Alexander Auchinleck, brother german to Gilbert Auchinleck of that ilk, now her spouse for his interest, showing that in the year 1654 the supplicant, out of his real and loyal affection to his majesty's service, did engage himself with all the force and power he had or might command with the lord commissioner his grace, then general to his majesty's army within this kingdom, at which time the supplicant, being taken by the said Quentin Muir who did take from him the sum of 3,000 merks Scots money with three horses loaded with tobacco, for the use of the army, and afterwards the said Quentin did carry the supplicant prisoner to Dundee and delivered him up to Colonel Cobbet, governor there for the time, where the supplicant lay five weeks prisoner and after that shipped to go for Barbados, from whence he was necessitated to relieve himself by payment of £27 sterling of fine to Colonel Cobbet, to the supplicant's utter ruin and detriment; and the supplicant now understanding that there are certain great sums of money due and resting owed to the said Quentin Muir by diverse and sundry persons within the shire of Angus, wherewith the supplicant cannot meddle nor intromit unless a warrant is granted for that effect, and without the which the supplicant, his wife and children will starve and die for want; and therefore, craving the heirs of the said Quentin Muir and their tutors for their interests might be decreed to make payment to him of his losses and damage above-written, as at more length is contained in the said supplication. Which petition being read in the presence of the said commissioners, the said John Lamb, supplicant, compearing with Mr John Cunningham, his procurator, and the said defenders compearing via Mr George MacKenzie, their procurator, all the rights, reasons and allegations of either of the said parties, together with the depositions of diverse witnesses received, sworn and examined in the said matter, used for the part of the said pursuer for proving of the said libel, and the said pursuer's oath and deposition taken thereupon in manner underwritten, with the report of the commissioners for bills thereupon, being all heard, seen and considered by the said estates of parliament and they therewith, being well and ripely advised, his majesty, with advice and consent of the said estates of parliament, decrees and ordains the said David, Alexander and William Muir, and the said David Knight, their tutor for his interest, and also the said Agnes Jenkin and her said spouse, for his interest, equally and proportionally between them, to content and pay to the said John Lamb, pursuer, the sum of 1,000 merks Scots money presently modified by the said estates in satisfaction to him of the whole sums of money, losses and others foresaid as follows, namely the sum of 500 merks by the said bairns of the said Quentin Muir and their said tutor for his interest, and the other 500 merks in complete payment of the said sum by the said Agnes Jenkin and her said spouse, for his interest, because after that the said estates had heard the whole defences in the cause proposed for the defenders, the first thereof founded upon the act of indemnity, the second against the passive titles and the third on behalf of the tutor, with the replies made by the pursuer thereto, and had rejected the foresaid first two allegations in respect of the replies made thereto, they ordained the said David Knight's oath to be taken anent his tutory who, being solemnly sworn thereupon, testified that he was named tutor and that he used and behaved himself as tutor in so far as he meddled with the houses in Kirriemuir, and having considered the said oath they found the foresaid libel relevant, notwithstanding of what was argued for the part of the said defenders, and admitted the same to the said pursuer's probation and a term being assigned to him for proving thereof, at the which term he proved the same sufficiently by the deposition of diverse reputable witnesses, received and sworn in the said matter, and the said John Lamb, pursuer, his own oath and the judgement in the lawsuit protested for sustained and taken in the said matter in supplement thereof, which damage did extend to 3,306 merks, and the said estates having thereafter considered the merits and circumstances of the cause, they modified the said sums and losses libelled to the sum aforesaid decreed, as said is, and therefore gave their decreet in manner above-mentioned, and ordains letters etc.
[1661/1/224]*[print] [email] [cite] [preceding] [following]
Our sovereign lord and estates of parliament, taking to their consideration a petition presented to them in name and behalf of the provost, bailies, council and community of the burgh of Aberdeen mentioning that James, viscount of Frendraught, being incarcerated within the tolbooth of the said burgh, by virtue of letters of caption raised and executed against him at the instance of Patrick Crichton for the sum of 6,000 merks Scots money now assigned to Andrew Crichton, merchant burgess of Edinburgh, his brother, in respect the said Patrick is fugitive as an intelligencer to the late usurper and, thereafter, the said viscount, being arrested in ward at the instance of diverse other persons his creditors for considerable sums, all which captions (by virtue whereof he was apprehended and arrested in ward) were granted upon his pretended rebellion against the late usurpers who, in regard thereof, did make his escape out of the said tolbooth in the year 1656,† and there being no patent law whereby the magistrates of the said burgh might have compelled him to have re-entered his person in ward, they did, therefore, supplicate the late committee of estates for a warrant and order to have been directed to messengers of arms to have apprehended his person to the effect foresaid, which was altogether refused upon consideration that the said viscount was only incarcerated as a rebel to the late usurpers, which the said committee of estates accounted and esteemed as no rebellion at all. Likewise, it had pleased his majesty's commissioner and remaining lords and members of this parliament, notwithstanding of the said rebellion, to receive and admit him to sit and voice as a free member of this present parliament; and therefore, craving that upon consideration of the circumstances and of the said burgh of Aberdeen their diligence in using all ordinary means for having the said viscount incarcerated again, the magistrates of the said burgh council and community thereof, present and to come, might be freed and liberated from payment of the sums of money for which the said viscount was so incarcerated and arrested, and that they might be declared free of all pursuits that might be competent against them at the instance of his creditors for the said sums in all time coming, as the said supplication in itself more fully purports. And having also considered the report made by the lords of articles anent the said matter, they found the desire of the said petition just and reasonable, therefore our sovereign lord, with advice and consent of the said estates of parliament, have absolved, freed and liberated and, by this act, absolve, free and liberate the provost, bailies, council and community of the said burgh of Aberdeen, present and to come, from any payment of the sums of money for which the said viscount of Frendraught was incarcerated, and arrested in ward within their said tolbooth, and declare them free from any legal pursuit that may be competent at the instance of the said creditors against them for payment of the same sums in time coming.
[1661/1/225]*[print] [email] [cite] [preceding] [following]
Our sovereign lord, with advice and consent of his estates of parliament, taking to consideration a supplication given in by [William Douglas], duke and [Anne Hamilton], duchess of Hamilton for themselves, and in name and behalf of the burgh of Strathaven, bearing the inconvenience that the said burgh sustains through their having a fair yearly upon 15 October, and of the necessity of changing the same from the said day to another day of the said month, as also for the appointing more fairs to the said burgh, and in like manner for appointing a sheep market to be held weekly in the month of May, for the reasons and causes contained in the said supplication; and therefore, craving that the said old fair may be changed from the said 15 October to 12 October, and also that there may be two new fairs appointed to the said burgh, the one upon 1 March and the other upon 16 June yearly, and likewise a market for sheep upon each Friday of May yearly. Therefore, our sovereign lord, with advice and consent foresaid, have recommended and hereby recommends to the lords of his majesty's exchequer to pass a signature in favour of the said burgh of Strathaven, not only for changing the old fair from 15 October to 12 October, but also for appointing two new fairs to the same burgh, the one to be held upon 1 March and the other upon 16 June yearly, and also for appointing a public market to be held within the said burgh for sheep upon each Friday of May yearly, with all usual privileges.