Where a superior by an act of his own court, thirled all the barony, it was found that such feuers as were infeft cum molendinis, &c. prior to the said act, were not thereby bound.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Anent the action pursued be — Hoppringle and Ker his mother against Robert Cairncross of Colmestre, for payment of the thirle multures of the land of C. to the pursuer's miln of ——, as it was thirled thereto, alleging that the Abbot of Melrose and Convent thereof had made acts in their Convents, that the tenants of C. should come as said is with their corns to the said pursuer's miln, and pay their multure thereto, and so had thirled’themselves thereto as said is; and to that effect had set the said miln to the pursuer's predecessors and himself for long tacks with the thirle multure thereof; and before that the tacks were run furth, the pursuer got the said miln and thirle multure thereof in feu and heritage: Be the whilk tacks and feu, the pursuer and his predecessors had been possesion of the miln and multures, and specially of the lands of C. The defender alleged, he should be assoilzied from the petition, because that his predecessors obtained the lands of C. in feu and heritage of the Abb. and Convent of Melrose, with milns and multures in the —— clause of the charter, for the payment of certain sums of money allenarlie for all other things that might be asked or craved, no mention nor restriction being made in the said charter of the said thirle multures set long before the feu or instrument made to the pursuer of the foresaid miln and multure; whilk allegeance of the defender the Lords admitted in respect of the said instrument being as said is.
