When the teinds are valued in money, an augmentation cannot be modified in grain.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The Reverend John Gordon, Minister of the parish of Strathdon, obtained, without opposition, an augmentation to his stipend, which was modified in grain.
The heritors, having afterwards discovered that almost the whose teinds were valued in money, in a reclaiming petition,
Pleaded: The Clergy were parties in the submission to Charles I. By his decreetarbitral, and by the various statutes made for enforcing it, it is declared, that valuations made under its authority, in which the Minister of the parish, and, in case of a vacancy, the Presbytery are necessarily defenders, shall never afterwards be called in question.
The teinds, in this case, have been valued in money; and to oblige the heritors to pay them in grain, would be to alter both the nature and extent of their payment.
Answered: Valuations in money are exceedingly unfavourable to the Minister, who, though nominally a party in the action, from the temporary nature of his right, seldom thinks it worth while to appear. The Court, however, will not suffer the interest of the benefice to suffer from his inattention; 30th November, 1791, Minister of Glenluce against the Earl of Galloway, (not reported; see Appendix).
Observed on the Bench: In later cases, the point has been settled in favour of the Heritors.
The Court altered the former interlocutor, and modified the stipend in money.
Act. W. Robertson.Alt. W. Murray.
Fol. Dic. v. 4. p. 300. Fac. Coll. No. 39. p. 79.
