In what case proprietor of a superior tenement may divert water from his neighbour's mill on the inferior tenement.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
A variety of questions were stirred between these parties on occasion of Sir James Stirling's having built a lint-mill, and rested his dam-dyke upon Kincaid's ground without Kincaid's consent; and Sir James's having diverted a burn or rivulet, at least, pretended a right so to do, from running into the water of Glassart, which Kincaid alleged might render the said water not sufficient for the use of a mill which he had thereon, and which produced mutual processes. Vide supra January 12. 1750, No 13. p. 8403. voce Locus PoenitentiÆ.
The last point between the parties was this day determined, viz. That Sir James had right to divert the said burn.
In this there was a little ground of doubt, as the fact was, that the burn had originally run into the water of Glassart below Kincaid's dam, but that Sir James predecessors had diverted the course of it within his own ground, for the use of a corn-mill by them built, whereby it came to run into the water of Glassart above Kincaid's dam.
