Found that the King's advocate might pursue improbation of a charter under the great seal, without any informer, although the same lands were disponed under that seal to another.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In an action of reduction and improbation, pursued by the King's Advocate against my Lord Thirlestane for reduction and improbation of his infeftment of the lands of Merkle and Trafrayne, granted by the King to my Lord Chancellor by forfeiture of the Earl Bothwell, or by the said Earl, before his forfeiture, and confirmed by the King, it was alleged by Mr James Durham, admitted for his interest to defend, That the said infeftments could not be reduced nor decerned to make no faith for non-production at the Advocate's instance, because the said lands being disponed by his Majesty upon the Earl Bothwell's forfeiture to the Duke and Laird of Buccleugh, his Advocate had no interest to quarrel the said Lord Thirlestane's infeftments, seeing his Highness could report no commodity by the annulling thereof; and so could have no process, unless one of the said parties that was infeft upon the Earl Bothwell's forfeiture, were informers of the advocate. It was answered by the advocate, That the reduction and improbation was of infeftments granted originally by the King, and past his Highness' Great Seal, and so his Advocate had interest to pursue without an informer. In respect of which reply, found relevant by the Lords, the exception was repelled.
