Not to be prejudiced by the neglect of his Officers.
The Earl of Leven v. The Countess of Wemyss and her Tenants
Date: 25 January 1694 Case No. No 20.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Philiphaugh reported the Earl of Leven against the Countess of Wemyss and her tenants, for their teinds, whereof he has procured a tack from the King as fallen into his hands, through the abolition of episcopacy. Alleged, She had a prior right by a charter from King Charles, bearing cum decimis, and though the King had not then any right to them, yet now it devolving in his person, must accresce to validate and fortify her charter. Answered, That the teinds have been cast in without adverting, and the negligence of the King's Officers cannot prejudge him; Neither knew he what he was then giving away, nor had he right to them; and the jus accrescendi cannot take place here, against a formal right given on knowledge, and after the teinds were legally returned to him. The Lords preferred the Earl of Leven's right.
Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 524. Fountainhall, v. 1. p. 598.
