Horning found null, where the warrant of charge want ed a consent requisite to give it autherity.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
A declarator being pursued at the Viscount of Stormont's instance, against one of his vassals, for the vassal's liferent of certain lands, holding of him; the Lords found, that that summons should not abide continuation, neither was it necessary that the pursuer should prove, that the defender held the lands of the pursuer; but that it was sufficient to sustain the action, that the pursuer produced his own sasine, bearing him to be infeft in the lands specially, whereof he craved declarator. Which the Lords found enough against the defender, who, if he were not the pursuer's vassal, he might disclaim him to be his superior, and thereby might free himself of this declarator. In this same process, the Lords found letters of horning null, whereby a person was charged to pay a particular stent, imposed by the minister and elders, and session of the kirk, upon the parishioners, for entertaining of a reader, and for not payment whereof, the person foresaid being one of the parishioners stented, was denounced, because the act of the stenting, which was the warrant of the charge and denunciation, was not subscribed by the parishioners, and by this person charged particularly, without whose consent and subscription, the minister, elders, and session had no power to impose any such burden, upon any of the parishioners, to burden either themselves, or their lands, and therefore found the horning null, ope exceptionis.
Act. Hope.Alt. Oliphant.Clerk, Hay.
Durie, p. 165.
