Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In suspensions of double-poinding, sometimes one of the parties compears, and propones reasons to exclude the other party, and yet will not crave to be answered and obeyed of the duty in question; which the Lords sustained in the suspension of double-poinding received by M'Culloch of Ardwall against the Earl of Morton, principal tacksman of the teind of Ardwall, to the Earl of Galloway, who had let the suspender a sub-tack, with consent of the said Earl on the one part, and the Earl of Galloway on the other part; which of them had best right to the duty of the suspender's sub-tack: It was alleged by the Earl of Galloway, that the duty could not belong to Morton, because Morton's was reduced, and so per consequentiam the debtor's sub-tack; but at this time he would not dispute farther but to exclude Morton.
