Colonel Robert Skene of Hallyards v. James Reddie and Others
Date: 20 December 1775 Case No. No. 113.
Astriction to a kiln, though resorted to by the sucken, is not a part of the thirlage.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In a declarator of thirlage at the instance of Colonel Skene, as proprietor of the lands and mill of Burngrange, against Reddie and others, besides deciding other points in the cause, the Lord Ordinary gave judgment upon one as follows:
“And as the defenders neither deny the immemorial practice, nor the extent of dues exacted for kilning their grain, as condescended on by Colonel Skene, finds, That this is also part of the thirlage, and that they are liable for the said dues.”
The defenders having reclaimed, the Lord Ordinary explained the ground of his judgment, viz. That he considered it as an incident to the thirlage itself: But the Court altered, and
“Found the defenders are not thirled to the pursuer's kiln.”
