[1568/7/20]*[print] [email] [cite] [preceding] [following]
The which day Oliver Sinclair of Whitekirk desired to be admitted in presence of [James Stewart, earl of Moray], my lord regent, and three estates of parliament, to procure and protest as appropriate for the Laird of Roslin, his chief and kinsman.
The Laird of Hess[ilh]ead, John Fergushill of that Ilk, for themselves, Robert Kerr of Kersland, Adam Montgomery, younger of Braidstone, Andrew Niven of Monkredding, [...] Dunlop of Craig, James Lockhart of Lee, [...] Monsod of that Ilk, [...] Crawford of Bedlam,† [...] Kerr of Trearne, Thomas Marjoribanks of Ratho, protested that the forfeiture of [Hugh Montgomery], earl of Eglinton does not hurt nor prejudice them, nor none of them, concerning the properties of the tenantries which they hold from the said earl.
[Robert Sempill], lord Sempill protested that the forfeiture of the said Earl of Eglinton nor his voting does not prejudice concerning the action of plunder which he has depending before the lords against him.
[Adam Erskine], commendator of Cambuskenneth protested, according to his protestation given in in writing, that the forfeiture of [John Fleming], lord Fleming does not prejudice him.
The lairds [John Kennedy, laird of] Blairquhan, [Thomas Kennedy, laird of] Bargany, Cloncaird and Paul Reid, burgess of Ayr, protested that the forfeiture of [Gilbert Kennedy], earl of Cassilis does not prejudice them, nor none of them.
The Laird of Dunipace protested that the forfeiture of Lord Fleming does not hurt nor prejudice them.
Thomas Cal of St Giles' Grange, Master John Marjoribanks, in name of Thomas Marjoribanks, protested that the forfeiture of [John Maxwell], lord Herries nor his son does not prejudice them.
The vassals of the Laird of Roslin protested likewise, who promised to give in their names.
[Sir John Bellenden of Auchnoull], justice clerk, James MacCartney and John Dickson of Winkston protested that the forfeiture of [William Hay], lord [Hay of] Yester does not prejudice them etc.