The escheat of a rebel residing in a regality, although denounced at the cross of the head burgh of the shire, falls to the Lord of regality, and reaches his moveables wherever found.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Murray of Lochland, as donatar to the escheat of Mr Alexander Malloch, pursues Margaret Arnot his relict for delivery of certain of the escheat-goods, who alleged absolvitor, because she had right to the goods by a gift from the Earl of Tullibardine; and the defunct when he was denounced did live within the regality of Tullibardine, whereby the escheat-goods did belong to the Lord of regality, and not to the King who granted the pursuers gift. It was answered, That the denunciation whereupon both gifts followed, was not within the regality, but at the head burgh of the shire. It was replied, That where there is a head-burgh of regality known and accustomed, denunciation of these within the regality must be used thereat; but in many places there are none, but the denunciations are accustomed to be at the market cross of the shire; which custom hath been always allowed as at the cross of the regality.
The Lords found the defender's allegeance relevant, that Tullibardine was a regality, and the denunciations were accustomed to be against those in the regality at the cross of the shire; and found thereby that the Lord of regality and the defender his donatar had right to the escheat.
