Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Mr William Cochran of Kilmaronock, by petition, represents to the Lords, that he being heir to his brother Polkelly, his sasine is amissing, but the notary being on life has given a new extract of it out of his protocol book; but Sir John Fowlis, Keeper of the Register of Sasines, scruples to mark it of the old date, without the Lords' warrant. The Lords having appointed one of their number to compare the protocol book, with the extract now craved to be marked, it appeared to be but a minute, wanting the clauses of stile which the notary had now inserted and engrossed; and there being preferable rights on the land, who were concerned this sasine should not be made up, (though they declined formally to appear), the Lords first considered, whether this could be done summarily per modum quærelæ on a bill, or if it required a process; and if the last, then 2do, Whether it behoved to be done by a proving of the tenor, or a summons of extention, calling the notary and others? There was one instance where the like had been granted on a bill to Sir Andrew Ramsay, 2d January 1678, No 32. p. 13553.; but the Lords doubted they could allow it any otherways hoc ordine but in the precise terms as it stood in the notary's protocol, and even then periculo petentis, and reserving the right of third parties, and that Sir John Fowlis behoved to narrate his warrant; and therefore superseded to give answer unless they would take it on their peril.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 333. Fountainhall, v. 2. p. 56.
