John Grant, Tacksman of the Mill of Ruthven, v. James Milne of Bottarie
Date: 28 November 1755 Case No. No. 98.
No multure is due by a tenant, if his whole farm be kept in grass, and neither he nor his family reside on the grounds astricted.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
James Milne was astricted by his tack to the mill of Ruthven, and bound to pay certain multures for all corn, either produced from his farm or brought in for the use of his family.
The representative of Milne being pursued for abstracted multures, objected, That Milne had, during his possession, kept his whole grounds in grass; and that neither he nor any of his family had resided on the farm, and consequently that no multure could, in terms of his tack, be due.
The Lord Ordinary “ assoilzied the defender,” and the Lords adhered, although it was pleaded for the tacksman of the mill, That multures, when ascertained by custom, and known to the tenant of lands subjected to thirlage, are to be considered as part of the rent; that a tenant is, from the nature of his tack, supposed to reside on the lands let to him; and consequently, that such tenant may not diminish this rent, or elude the purposes of his tack, either by converting the whole of his corn-grounds into grass-grounds, or by residing elsewhere thank on the lands let to him.
