Tag Archives: 22 November 1692

Decreet, 22 November 1692, Edinburgh

Posted on by

Edinburgh the Twentie two day of November Jaj vjc nyntie two years

D1692/11/161

Decreet

Decreet absolvitor Hownames Against Irving and Wauch

Anent our Soveraigne Lords letters raised and pursued before the Lords of their majesties privy Councill at the instance of James Irving and John Wauch waitters of Allisone Bank, And Gilbert Eliot also waitter and Sir William Lockhart their majesties Solicitor for their intrest in the matter underwritten Makeing Mentione That quher albeit be the Lawes and constitutiones of all weell governed nationes and by the lawes and acts of Parliament of this natione the assaulting and invadeing of any of their majesties Subjects whill they are goeing peacably without their Lawfull Callings and baitting and wounding of them to the effusion of ther blood Especially wher the same is done by persones in Disguise or be men in womens Cloathes to the effect the actors of these willanies might be keeped undiscovered and wher the same Is done and Comitted upon their majesties publict servants whill they are in execution of their offices, And particularly upon the Collectors Surveyors or waitters when seasing upon or haveing made sezure of unentred and uncustomed goods, And the breaking open the doors of the houses and Chambers wher the seazure Lyes, And the bereating the saids watters and others and violently Carieing away from them of the uncustomed goods after the due and lawfull seazure And secureing therof for their majesties use Be all Crymes of ane high nature and severly punishable, yet nevertheless It is of verity that the saids James Irving and John Wauch waitters at Alison Bank, Haveing got intelligence that John Howname younger merchant in Langholme Haveing stollen ane barrell of Indigoe and other goods by their Majesties custome office, without entering the same and caried them to Longholme They the said waitters with some others their assistance in pursuance of their trust Did upon the fourteinth day of May last Jaj vjc and nyntie two or ane or other of the dayes of the said moneth pass to the toune of Langholme and make search for the saids goods wher they did find and aprehend the said barrell of Indigoe, Which when they ware Carieing a way, ware Immediatly invaded and furiously assaulted by John Houname elder in Langholme Jean Eliot spouse to the said John Howname younger to whom the goods did belong, Anna Eliot daughter to Robert Eliot ther, father in law to the said Robert, John Litle younger ther, Archibald Litle Sone to Jannet Forsyth in Langholme Mary Irving Spouse to William Armstrang ther,2 James Greive tinker disguised womens apperall and brock open the doors after the goods ware secured in ane house George Maxwell in Langtoune in the English syde also in womens apperrall, Bessie Armstrang a Sturdie beggar Jannet Scot daughter to the said Bessie Magdallan Frazer servitrix to the said John Howname younger, Agnes Irving younger Jean Bell in Cruiks bankhead, Mary Wilsone daughter to Francis Wilsone in Langtoune Who with their accomplices to the number of thretie or fourtie more, Did beat strick and wound the saids waitters pursuars to the effusione of their blood and after the said goods ware seized upon and one horss back the same ware throwen off and taken back be them And Detained for the Space of two or thrie dayes till Eight or ten more waitters ware sent to the pursuars assistance, And till they hade the authoritie of the baillie of the regalitie of Langholme and assistance from him in the said matter By the which deeds of Injustice and violence the tacksmen of their majesties customes and the haill waittorr of the office who ware all brought from their severall posts to concurr in makeing this Seizure and recovering of the same, And Specially the saids James Irving and James Wauch have Sustained great damnage And have been brought to great trouble and expences, And Further true it is that the said John Hownam is a man of such villaneous Contrivances and practisses that he off a long tyme bygone And to this very day makes it his constant trade and studie to Imbazle goods and steall them without payment of the dutie Therby Cheating his majestie of his dues and beatts and abusses the waitters and all other publict servants, Which he with his wicked accomplices are able to master and overcome, And particullarly one the moneth of may Jaj vjc nyntie one years upon the like account Did deforce the said James Irving and in september therafter did deforce the said Gilbert Eliot and did wound him to the great effussion of his blood and hazard of his life haveing mutulat him in one hand and gave him severall dangerous wounds in the head and he haveing procured a warrand from the Earle of Cassills when he was lately in the Countrey of […] wher this Ryot was Comitted for bringing the said John Howname prisoner to Edinburgh And quherof he haveing gott notice he has taken so much boldnes as to ryde at least with Six of Seven Shott upon him in ordinary, By all which it 3 evidently appears That the said John Houname and remanent persones above Complained upone are guilty of high and manifast Ryots injuries and oppressiones, and ought and should not only be Decerned to make payment to the said James Irving and John Wauch of the soume of […] as the value and worth of the forsaid seazure violently robed and taken back againe from the pursuars, Bot Likewayes to make payment to them of the Soume of […] for the trouble and expences they have sustained and been put to in this matter, And Further ought and should be severely punished in their persones and goods to the terror of others to comitt the like in tyme comeing And Anent the charge given to the saids defenders To have Compeired personally before the saids Lords of ther majesties privy Councill at ane certaine day now bygone To have answered to the grounds of the abovementioned Complaint, And to have heard and seen such ane order and Course taken theranent as appertained As in the principall letters revised in the said matter and executiones therof at more leanth is contained, The said Lybell being upon the twentie Eight day of Jully Last by past Called before the saids Lords of privy Councill And the said John Wauch and Gilbert Eliott two of the saids pursuars Compeiring personally and the haill defenders being Called and not Compeiring The Saids Lords Granted Certificatione against them And Ordained to be denunced And the same being upon the Eight day of November instant againe called in presence of the saids Lords and the pursuar Comparing personally with Mr John Meinzies their advocat, And the saids John Hownames elder and younger Compeiring also personally with Sir Robert Colt and Mr John Frank their advocats and the rest of the defenders being Called and not Compeiring The saids Lords haveing Concidered the above Lybell with the answers made therto for thee defenders both which was this day againe read in their presence, They heirby of new grant Certificatione against the haill absent defenders (4except Jean Eliot Spouse to the said John Howname for whom the said John Sists himself, And ordaines letters of Denunciatione to be direct to messengers at armes Commanding them to pass to the marcat cross of […] their in their majesties name and authoritie duely Lawfullie and orderly denunce the said haill absent defenders except as above excepted their majesties rebells and put them to their highnes horne, And ordaine all their moveable goods and geir to be escheat and inbrought to their highnes horne, And ordaine all their moveable goods and geir to be escheat and inbrought to their majesties use for their contemptione and Disobedience Then the saids Lords haveing heard both parties and Considered the writtes produced for either partie And the witnesses cited in the said process by vertue of a dilligence at the pursuars instance Haveing all Compeired personally and made faith at the barr except Alexander Ross in Enthorne William Brown in Rowanburnefoot and Gilbert Eliot in Ritarfoord They ordaine the said […] pursuar to give his oath of Calumnie whither or not he heas Just reason to deny that it consisted in his knowledge that ther was ane Transire granted to the saids Hownams or their servants for the barrell of Indigoe, And the Same was the indigoe seased upon by the pursuars, And ordaines the witneses Cited and Compeiring and makeing faith to be examined upon the points of the Lybell notwithstanding of the pursuars giveing his oath of Calumnie And Recomends to Sir Robert Sinclar of Stivensone and Sir Patrick Murray of Saltcoats to take the pursuars oath of Calumney and to examine these witnesses, And Reserves all objectiones which may be made against the witnesses to be proponed and Discussed before the Comittie, And the Saids Lords Haveing this day Considered the forsaid Lybell with the oath of Calumnie of John Wauch one of the pursuars and the oathes and Depositiones of the witnesses adduced for proveing of the Lybell, They Find the Lybell not proven, And Therfore Have assoylzied and heirby assoylzies the said John Hownam elder and younger and Jean Eliot from the points and articles of the same And appoints the soume of Threttie Eight pund Eight shilling scots formerly Consigned be the said John Hownames elder and younger in the hands of the Clerks of privy Councill, To remaine in their hands untill furder order.

Edinburgh the Twentie two day of November Jaj vjc nyntie two years

D1692/11/161

Decreet

Decreet absolvitor Hownames Against Irving and Wauch

Anent our Soveraigne Lords letters raised and pursued before the Lords of their majesties privy Councill at the instance of James Irving and John Wauch waitters of Allisone Bank, And Gilbert Eliot also waitter and Sir William Lockhart their majesties Solicitor for their intrest in the matter underwritten Makeing Mentione That quher albeit be the Lawes and constitutiones of all weell governed nationes and by the lawes and acts of Parliament of this natione the assaulting and invadeing of any of their majesties Subjects whill they are goeing peacably without their Lawfull Callings and baitting and wounding of them to the effusion of ther blood Especially wher the same is done by persones in Disguise or be men in womens Cloathes to the effect the actors of these willanies might be keeped undiscovered and wher the same Is done and Comitted upon their majesties publict servants whill they are in execution of their offices, And particularly upon the Collectors Surveyors or waitters when seasing upon or haveing made sezure of unentred and uncustomed goods, And the breaking open the doors of the houses and Chambers wher the seazure Lyes, And the bereating the saids watters and others and violently Carieing away from them of the uncustomed goods after the due and lawfull seazure And secureing therof for their majesties use Be all Crymes of ane high nature and severly punishable, yet nevertheless It is of verity that the saids James Irving and John Wauch waitters at Alison Bank, Haveing got intelligence that John Howname younger merchant in Langholme Haveing stollen ane barrell of Indigoe and other goods by their Majesties custome office, without entering the same and caried them to Longholme They the said waitters with some others their assistance in pursuance of their trust Did upon the fourteinth day of May last Jaj vjc and nyntie two or ane or other of the dayes of the said moneth pass to the toune of Langholme and make search for the saids goods wher they did find and aprehend the said barrell of Indigoe, Which when they ware Carieing a way, ware Immediatly invaded and furiously assaulted by John Houname elder in Langholme Jean Eliot spouse to the said John Howname younger to whom the goods did belong, Anna Eliot daughter to Robert Eliot ther, father in law to the said Robert, John Litle younger ther, Archibald Litle Sone to Jannet Forsyth in Langholme Mary Irving Spouse to William Armstrang ther,2 James Greive tinker disguised womens apperall and brock open the doors after the goods ware secured in ane house George Maxwell in Langtoune in the English syde also in womens apperrall, Bessie Armstrang a Sturdie beggar Jannet Scot daughter to the said Bessie Magdallan Frazer servitrix to the said John Howname younger, Agnes Irving younger Jean Bell in Cruiks bankhead, Mary Wilsone daughter to Francis Wilsone in Langtoune Who with their accomplices to the number of thretie or fourtie more, Did beat strick and wound the saids waitters pursuars to the effusione of their blood and after the said goods ware seized upon and one horss back the same ware throwen off and taken back be them And Detained for the Space of two or thrie dayes till Eight or ten more waitters ware sent to the pursuars assistance, And till they hade the authoritie of the baillie of the regalitie of Langholme and assistance from him in the said matter By the which deeds of Injustice and violence the tacksmen of their majesties customes and the haill waittorr of the office who ware all brought from their severall posts to concurr in makeing this Seizure and recovering of the same, And Specially the saids James Irving and James Wauch have Sustained great damnage And have been brought to great trouble and expences, And Further true it is that the said John Hownam is a man of such villaneous Contrivances and practisses that he off a long tyme bygone And to this very day makes it his constant trade and studie to Imbazle goods and steall them without payment of the dutie Therby Cheating his majestie of his dues and beatts and abusses the waitters and all other publict servants, Which he with his wicked accomplices are able to master and overcome, And particullarly one the moneth of may Jaj vjc nyntie one years upon the like account Did deforce the said James Irving and in september therafter did deforce the said Gilbert Eliot and did wound him to the great effussion of his blood and hazard of his life haveing mutulat him in one hand and gave him severall dangerous wounds in the head and he haveing procured a warrand from the Earle of Cassills when he was lately in the Countrey of […] wher this Ryot was Comitted for bringing the said John Howname prisoner to Edinburgh And quherof he haveing gott notice he has taken so much boldnes as to ryde at least with Six of Seven Shott upon him in ordinary, By all which it 3 evidently appears That the said John Houname and remanent persones above Complained upone are guilty of high and manifast Ryots injuries and oppressiones, and ought and should not only be Decerned to make payment to the said James Irving and John Wauch of the soume of […] as the value and worth of the forsaid seazure violently robed and taken back againe from the pursuars, Bot Likewayes to make payment to them of the Soume of […] for the trouble and expences they have sustained and been put to in this matter, And Further ought and should be severely punished in their persones and goods to the terror of others to comitt the like in tyme comeing And Anent the charge given to the saids defenders To have Compeired personally before the saids Lords of ther majesties privy Councill at ane certaine day now bygone To have answered to the grounds of the abovementioned Complaint, And to have heard and seen such ane order and Course taken theranent as appertained As in the principall letters revised in the said matter and executiones therof at more leanth is contained, The said Lybell being upon the twentie Eight day of Jully Last by past Called before the saids Lords of privy Councill And the said John Wauch and Gilbert Eliott two of the saids pursuars Compeiring personally and the haill defenders being Called and not Compeiring The Saids Lords Granted Certificatione against them And Ordained to be denunced And the same being upon the Eight day of November instant againe called in presence of the saids Lords and the pursuar Comparing personally with Mr John Meinzies their advocat, And the saids John Hownames elder and younger Compeiring also personally with Sir Robert Colt and Mr John Frank their advocats and the rest of the defenders being Called and not Compeiring The saids Lords haveing Concidered the above Lybell with the answers made therto for thee defenders both which was this day againe read in their presence, They heirby of new grant Certificatione against the haill absent defenders (4except Jean Eliot Spouse to the said John Howname for whom the said John Sists himself, And ordaines letters of Denunciatione to be direct to messengers at armes Commanding them to pass to the marcat cross of […] their in their majesties name and authoritie duely Lawfullie and orderly denunce the said haill absent defenders except as above excepted their majesties rebells and put them to their highnes horne, And ordaine all their moveable goods and geir to be escheat and inbrought to their highnes horne, And ordaine all their moveable goods and geir to be escheat and inbrought to their majesties use for their contemptione and Disobedience Then the saids Lords haveing heard both parties and Considered the writtes produced for either partie And the witnesses cited in the said process by vertue of a dilligence at the pursuars instance Haveing all Compeired personally and made faith at the barr except Alexander Ross in Enthorne William Brown in Rowanburnefoot and Gilbert Eliot in Ritarfoord They ordaine the said […] pursuar to give his oath of Calumnie whither or not he heas Just reason to deny that it consisted in his knowledge that ther was ane Transire granted to the saids Hownams or their servants for the barrell of Indigoe, And the Same was the indigoe seased upon by the pursuars, And ordaines the witneses Cited and Compeiring and makeing faith to be examined upon the points of the Lybell notwithstanding of the pursuars giveing his oath of Calumnie And Recomends to Sir Robert Sinclar of Stivensone and Sir Patrick Murray of Saltcoats to take the pursuars oath of Calumney and to examine these witnesses, And Reserves all objectiones which may be made against the witnesses to be proponed and Discussed before the Comittie, And the Saids Lords Haveing this day Considered the forsaid Lybell with the oath of Calumnie of John Wauch one of the pursuars and the oathes and Depositiones of the witnesses adduced for proveing of the Lybell, They Find the Lybell not proven, And Therfore Have assoylzied and heirby assoylzies the said John Hownam elder and younger and Jean Eliot from the points and articles of the same And appoints the soume of Threttie Eight pund Eight shilling scots formerly Consigned be the said John Hownames elder and younger in the hands of the Clerks of privy Councill, To remaine in their hands untill furder order.

1. NRS, PC2/24, 135r-137v.

2. The words ‘Archibald Litle Sone to Jannet Forsyth in Langhome’ scored out here.

3. The word ‘ordainry’ scored out here.

4. Closing bracket missing.

1. NRS, PC2/24, 135r-137v.

2. The words ‘Archibald Litle Sone to Jannet Forsyth in Langhome’ scored out here.

3. The word ‘ordainry’ scored out here.

4. Closing bracket missing.

Act, 22 November 1692, Edinburgh

Posted on by

Edinburgh the Twentie two day of November Jaj vjc nyntie two years

D1692/11/151

Act

Act Robison and Davidson

Anent a Petition given in to the Lords of their Majesties privy Councill be William Robisone and Alexander Davidsone seamen now prisoners in the Cannogat Tolbooth Shewing That wher the Suppliements haveing continued prisoners in the forsaid tolbooth this six weeks bygone in great miserie haveing nothing earthlie to mantaine themselves in prison Bot what the goodman bestowed upon them and other gentlmen in prison and now the petitioners have nothing neither to Satisfie the goodman for aliementing them nor to pay their house dues So that they might Lye in prisone and Sterve Unles the saids Lords of their Innat goodnes Comisserat their sadd and deplorable Condition They being in a Strange place and have no body to oun nor sucour them although they should even parish for want of bread, This their Suplication would be attested be the goodman and all the servants belonging to the prison And seing the petitioners are ordered to Libertie, And yet detained for what is due to the Master of the Tolbooth And Therfore Humbly Craveing the saids Lords of their Matchless bountie to Consider the premisses and their miserable Condition in this2 noysome prisone and Recomend the litle aliement which the goodman allowed upon them with their house dues to the thesaury as the petition bears. The Lords of their majesties privy Councill Haveing Considered this petition given in be them to the above William Robertson and Alexander Davidsone They heirby Recomend to the Lords Commissioners of their majesties thesaurie To Cause make payment to James Hamiltone keeper of the Tolbooth of the Canogate the Soume of Fourtie Shillings Sterling upon the accompt of what is resting be the petitioners to him And appoints the petitioners to be instantly sett at libertie.

Edinburgh the Twentie two day of November Jaj vjc nyntie two years

D1692/11/151

Act

Act Robison and Davidson

Anent a Petition given in to the Lords of their Majesties privy Councill be William Robisone and Alexander Davidsone seamen now prisoners in the Cannogat Tolbooth Shewing That wher the Suppliements haveing continued prisoners in the forsaid tolbooth this six weeks bygone in great miserie haveing nothing earthlie to mantaine themselves in prison Bot what the goodman bestowed upon them and other gentlmen in prison and now the petitioners have nothing neither to Satisfie the goodman for aliementing them nor to pay their house dues So that they might Lye in prisone and Sterve Unles the saids Lords of their Innat goodnes Comisserat their sadd and deplorable Condition They being in a Strange place and have no body to oun nor sucour them although they should even parish for want of bread, This their Suplication would be attested be the goodman and all the servants belonging to the prison And seing the petitioners are ordered to Libertie, And yet detained for what is due to the Master of the Tolbooth And Therfore Humbly Craveing the saids Lords of their Matchless bountie to Consider the premisses and their miserable Condition in this2 noysome prisone and Recomend the litle aliement which the goodman allowed upon them with their house dues to the thesaury as the petition bears. The Lords of their majesties privy Councill Haveing Considered this petition given in be them to the above William Robertson and Alexander Davidsone They heirby Recomend to the Lords Commissioners of their majesties thesaurie To Cause make payment to James Hamiltone keeper of the Tolbooth of the Canogate the Soume of Fourtie Shillings Sterling upon the accompt of what is resting be the petitioners to him And appoints the petitioners to be instantly sett at libertie.

1. NRS, PC2/24, 134v-135r.

2. One illegible word scored out here.

1. NRS, PC2/24, 134v-135r.

2. One illegible word scored out here.

Sederunt, 22 November 1692, Edinburgh

Posted on by

Edinburgh the Twentie two day of November Jaj vjc nyntie two years1

D1692/11/142

Sederunt

Lord Chancelor; Earl of Drumlanrig; Earl of Linlithgow; Earl of Lothian; Earl of Forfar; Viscount Stair; Lord Raith; Lord Beilhaven; Lord Hatton; Lord Fountonhall; Lord Enstruther; Mr Fr: Montgomrie; Laird of Stivenson; Sir William Lockhart; Sir Patrick Murray

Edinburgh the Twentie two day of November Jaj vjc nyntie two years1

D1692/11/142

Sederunt

Lord Chancelor; Earl of Drumlanrig; Earl of Linlithgow; Earl of Lothian; Earl of Forfar; Viscount Stair; Lord Raith; Lord Beilhaven; Lord Hatton; Lord Fountonhall; Lord Enstruther; Mr Fr: Montgomrie; Laird of Stivenson; Sir William Lockhart; Sir Patrick Murray

1. NRS, PC2/24, 134v.

2. NRS, PC2/24, 134v.

1. NRS, PC2/24, 134v.

2. NRS, PC2/24, 134v.

Decreet, 22 November 1692, Edinburgh

Posted on by

Att Edinburgh the Tuenty second day of November Jaj vjc and nyntie tuo years

A1692/11/401

Decreet

Decreet absolvitor Inhabitants of St Andrews against the Sollicitor

Anent the Lybell persued befor the Lords of there Majesties privy Councill at the Instance of Sir William Lockhart there majesties sollicitor Mentioneing That whereas by severall Lawes and acts of parliament And particularly by the act Eightie parliament sixt King James the fourth And act tuenty sixt parliament fourth King James the fyfth It is statute and ordained That no man be chosen proveist Bailzies or magistrats of burghs but these that are honest and substantious burgesses merchands and Induellers in the burgh under the pain of tinsell of there freedome who does in the contrarie And act eight parliament tuentyeth King James the sixth It is statute That no man shall be Capable of Proveistrie or other magistracie within any burgh of this Realme or to be elected to any of the saids offices within a burgh but merchands and actuall traffiquers Inhabitants within the said burgh allennarly and no others And the Electing or Choyseing of Magistrats2 or Councillours within burgh Contrair to Law and the sett and Constitutione of the burgh and the Contemptuous dissobeying of the acts and orders of there majesties privie Councill are Crymes of ane high nature and severely punisheable And it being of verity that be the sett and constitution of the burgh of St Andrews It being provyded that befor they choose there magistrats They should present to the Arch Bishop ane Leitt of the persones to be chosen magistrats viz Tuo persones with the old proveist and tuo persones with the old dean of gild and Eight persones with the Four present bailzies and tuo persons with the old Theasurer who are or have been Councillors within the Citie actuall traders and residenters therein To the effect That out of these Leitts The Arch Bishop should Elect the magistrats at michaelmes yearly And prelacie being now abolished And the King and Queens majesties haveing Come In place of the Bishops as to all there rights and priviledges And the Lords of privie Councill conforme to there right Haveing by there act of the sixteenth of september Last ordained the toun Councill of the said burgh to send there Lists to the Lord Chancellor who thereby wes authorized to nominate the magistrats And which Lists were appoynted to be sent in such a Competent tyme befor the day of electione as wes accustomed to be done to the ArchBishop And albeit the said act of the privie Councill wes duely Intimate to the saids maigstrats and toun Councill who served for the Last year Yet the saids magistrats viz The Earle of Crawfurd proveist of St Andrews Andrew Clerk maltman and Late dean of gild now Thomas Orrock regality Clerk of St Andrews James Smith merchand Late and present bailzie there George Rymer present bailzie there Alexander Ferriar merchand and Late bailzie there William Jack wreitter in St Andrews now one of the Bailzies of the said burgh James Nicolsone maltman and Late theasurer Simon Dairsie apothecary now Theasurer John Bruce baxter conveener Thomas Bell merchand Councellour Thomas Ferriar merchand Councellour John Phenisone messenger Councellour David Craig wreitter Councellour John Craig wreitter Councillour Robert Law Indueller there Robert Watsone deacon of the smiths Andrew Dickison deacon of the wrights Robert Harlaw deacon of the taylors Walter Gibson deacon of the Cordiners John Duncansone deacon of the baxters William Baird deacon of the fleshers Thomas Peattie deacon of the weavers and Andrew Phenisone toun clerk of St Andrews most Contemptuously dissobeyed and proceeded and made a pretended electione of magistrats and of a new Councill at Michaellmess last for the year Ensueing without sending Lists to the Lord High Chancellor as they ought to have done And as they were ordained by the forsaid act of privie Councill As also They did make choise of severall persones to be Magistrats of the said burgh as were not Capable be the Law and sett and constitutione of the burgh to bear office within burgh And particularly They did make choise of the Earle of Crawfurd to be proveist who is not a merchant and actuall traffiquer and residenter within the said burgh And so ought not to bear any office in the said burgh And therefore the saids Magistrats and Councillours that served in the said burgh for the year preceeding ought to be punished for there Contemptous dissobeying the act of there majesties privie Councill And the pretended new electione at michaellmes ought to be declared null and voyd And the former magistrats and Councill ought to be ordained to give in Lists to the said Lord High Chancellour That out of these Lists he may make choise of the Magistrats Conforme to the forsaid act of Councill as the Arch Bishop wes in use to doe befor the abolishing of prelacie And Anent the Charge Given to the saids defenders above Compleaned upon To have Compeared befor the saids of there Majesties privie Councill at Edinburgh or where it should happen them to be for the tyme at ane certain day bygone To ansuer to the points of the above Lybell or Complaint And to hear and see such order and Course taken theranent as the saids Lords should think fitt under the pain of rebellion and putting of them to the horne with certificatione to them If they failzie There majesties other Letters should be direct simpliciter for putting them thereto. As the said Lybell and excecutiones thereof bears. This Actione being upon the third day of November Instant Called In presence of the saids Lords And the said Sir William Lockhart there Majesties sollicitor and Sir Patrick Home and Mr Hugh Dalrymple advocatts his assistants Compearing personallie as persewers And the haill defenders except John Finnisone David Craig Robert Law and John Duncansone Compearing also personally The Saids Lords of there Majesties privie Councill Haveing Considered the Lybell and ansuers made for the defenders They befor ansuer ordained both pairtyes to adduce probatione anent the electione of the Magistrats of St Andrews viz The defenders anent the Inhabitants or toun councill of St Andrews there possessione of electing the Magistrats of the said burgh and the maner thereof And the persewers anent the Arch Bishops of St Andrews there possessione of Electing the saids magistrats of St Andrews and the maner thereof And assigned ane certain day to both pairtyes for adduceing such probation as they would make use of for proveing the points forsaids with Certificatione etc And allowed diligence at both pairtyes instance both againest witnesses and havers And ordained the defenders to produce in the Clerks hands there court books or registers anent the electione of there magistrats And allowed the persewers to have Inspectione of them And declared any three of the defenders sufficient to attend for the wholl at the dyetts of this process And ordained the magistrats who served in St Andrews for the year preceeding michaellmess Last to take care of the government and peace of the Citie untill this process be discussed as they will be ansuerable Conforme to the former act of Councill of the date the thretteint day of October Last And the defenders haveing accordingly produced in the hands of the Clerks of Councill Severalls of there court books or registers which were taken up and Inspected by the said sollicitor and his assistants And The Said action being this day again Called In presence of the saids Lords of privie Councill And the Sollicitor and his assistants haveing Compeared personally as of before And the Earle of Crawfurd and severalls of the Inhabitants of St Andrews haveing also Compeared personally with Sir James Ogilvie and Mr David Forbes advocats there procurators The saids Lords of there majesties privie Councill Haveing again this day Considered the above Lybell with the court books or registers forsaids Together with the Charter of Erection and other wreitts produced for the defenders And haveing heard both pairtyes debate at Length in there presence upon that point If the possessione which the toun of St Andrews have hade these years bygone since the revolution be sufficient to Continow the toun in electing there magistrats till the point of right be discussed be the Judge ordinary The saids Lords Finds the toun of St Andrews there possession since the revolutione Sufficient to Continow them in the Electing of there magistrats untill be declared before the Judge ordinarie that they have no right so to doe And therefor assoilzies the defenders and allowes the magistrats of St Andrews elected at Michaellmess Last To exercise there offices of magistrats in the said burgh notwithstanding of the sentence of Councill of the date thretteinth day of october Last Suspending them from the Same

At Edinburgh 22 November 1692

A1692/11/401

Decreet

Decreet absolvitor inhabitants of St Andrews against the solicitor

Concerning the libel pursued before the lords of their majesties’ privy council at the instance of Sir William Lockhart, their majesties’ solicitor, mentioning that whereas by several laws and acts of parliament, and particularly by the act eighty parliament sixth King James IV, and act twenty-sixth parliament fourth King James V, it is statute and ordained that no men be chosen provost, bailies, or magistrates of burghs but those that are honest and respectable burgesses, merchants, and indwellers in the burgh under the pain of loss of their freedom who does in the contrary. And act eighth, parliament twentieth King James VI it is statute that no man shall be capable of provostship or other magistracy within any burgh of this realm, or to be elected to any of the said offices within a burgh, but merchants and actual traffickers, inhabitants within the said burgh only and no others. And the electing or choosing of magistrates or councillors within burgh contrary to law and the set and constitution of the burgh, and the contemptuous disobeying of the acts and orders of their majesties’ privy council are crimes of a high nature and severely punishable. And it being of verity that, by the set and constitution of the burgh of St Andrews, it being provided that before they choose their magistrates, they should present to the archbishop a leet of the persons to be chosen magistrates viz two persons with the old provost and two persons with the old dean of gild and eight persons with the four present bailies and two persons with the old treasurer who are or have been councillors within the city, actual traders and residents therein, to the effect that out of these leets the archbishop should elect the magistrates at Michaelmas yearly. And prelacy being now abolished and the king’s and queen’s majesties having come in place of the bishops as to all their rights and privileges, and the lords of privy council conform to their right having by their act of 16 September last ordained the town council of the said burgh to send their lists to the lord chancellor, who thereby was authorised to nominate the magistrates, and which lists were appointed to be sent in such a competent time before the day of election, as was accustomed to be done to the archbishop. And albeit the said act of the privy council was duly intimated to the said magistrates and town council who served for the last year, yet the said magistrates viz [William Lindsay] the earl of Crawford, provost of St Andrews, Andrew Clerk, maltman and late dean of gild now, Thomas Orrock, regality clerk of St Andrews, James Smith, merchant, late and present bailie there, George Rymer, present bailie there, Alexander Ferriar, merchant and late bailie there, William Jack, writer in St Andrews, now one of the bailies of the said burgh, James Nicolsone, maltman and late treasurer, Simon Dairsie, apothecary, now treasurer, John Bruce, baxter, convener, Thomas Bell, merchant, councillor, Thomas Ferriar, merchant, councillor, John Phenisone, messenger, councillor, David Craig, writer, councillor, John Craig, writer, councillor, Robert Law, indweller there, Robert Watsone, deacon of the smiths, Andrew Dickison, deacon of the wrights, Robert Harlaw, deacon of the tailors, Walter Gibson, deacon of the cordwainers, John Duncansone, deacon of the bakers, William Baird, deacon of the fleshers, Thomas Peattie, deacon of the weavers, and Andrew Phenisone, town clerk of St Andrews, most contemptuously disobeyed and proceeded and made a pretended election of magistrates and of a new council at Michaelmas last for the year ensuing without sending lists to the lord high chancellor as they ought to have done, and as they were ordained by the foresaid act of privy council, as also they did make choice of several persons to be magistrates of the said burgh as were not capable be the law and set and constitution of the burgh to bear office within burgh. And particularly, they did make choice of the earl of Crawford to be provost, who is not a merchant and actual trafficker and resident within the said burgh, and so ought not to bear any office in the said burgh. And therefore the said magistrates and councillors that served in the said burgh for the year preceding ought to be punished for their contemptuous disobeying [of] the act of their majesties’ privy council, and the pretended new election at Michaelmas ought to be declared null and void, and the former magistrates and council ought to be ordained to give in lists to the said lord high chancellor that out of these lists he may make choice of the magistrates conform to the foresaid act of council, as the archbishop was in use to do before the abolition of prelacy. And concerning the charge given to the said defenders above complained upon to have compeared before the said [lords] of their majesties’ privy council at Edinburgh, or where it should happen them to be for the time at a certain day bygone, To answer to the points of the above libel or complaint, and to hear and see such order and course taken therein as the said lords should think fit under the pain of rebellion and putting of them to the horn, with certification to them if they fail, their majesties’ other letters should be directed simpliciter for putting them thereto, as the said libel and executions thereof bears. This action being upon 3 November instant called in presence of the said lords, and the said Sir William Lockhart, their majesties’ solicitor and Sir Patrick Home and Mr Hugh Dalrymple, advocates, his assistants, compearing personally as pursuers, and the whole defenders except John Finnisone, David Craig, Robert Law, and John Duncansone compearing also personally, the said lords of their majesties’ privy council having considered the libel and answers made for the defenders, they before answer ordained both parties to adduce probation concerning the election of the magistrates of St Andrews viz the defenders concerning the inhabitants or town council of St Andrews their possession of electing the magistrates of the said burgh and the manner thereof, and the pursuers concerning the archbishops of St Andrews their possession of electing the said magistrates of St Andrews and the manner thereof. And assigned a certain day to both parties for adducing such probation as they would make use of for proving the points foresaid, with certification etc. And allowed diligence at both parties’ instance both against witnesses and havers. And ordained the defenders to produce in the clerk’s hands their court books or registers concerning the election of their magistrates, and allowed the pursuers to have inspection of them. And declared any three of the defenders sufficient to attend for the whole at the diets of this process. And ordained the magistrates who served in St Andrews for the year preceding Michaelmas last to take care of the government and peace of the city until this process be discussed, as they will be answerable conform to the former act of council of the date 30 October last. And the defenders having accordingly produced in the hands of the clerks of council several of their court books or registers which were taken up and inspected by the said solicitor and his assistants. And the said action being this day again called in presence of the said lords of privy council, and the solicitor and his assistants having compeared personally as of before, and the earl of Crawford and several of the inhabitants of St Andrews having also compeared personally with Sir James Ogilvie and Mr David Forbes, advocates, their procurators, the said lords of their majesties’ privy council having again this day considered the above libel, with the court books or registers foresaid, together with the charter of erection and other writs produced for the defenders, and having heard both parties debate at length in their presence upon that point if the possession which the town of St Andrews have had these years bygone since the revolution be sufficient to continue the town in electing their magistrates until the point of right be discussed by the judge ordinary, the said lords find the town of St Andrews their possession since the revolution sufficient to continue them in the electing of their magistrates until [it] be declared before the judge ordinary that they have no right so to do. And therefore acquit the defenders and allow the magistrates of St Andrews elected at Michaelmas last to exercise their offices of magistrates in the said burgh notwithstanding of the sentence of council of the date 30 October last, suspending them from the same.

1. PC1/48, 455-8.

2. The phrase ‘within burgh’ **scored out here.**

1. PC1/48, 455-8.

Act, 22 November 1692, Edinburgh

Posted on by

Att Edinburgh the Tuenty second day of November Jaj vjc and nyntie tuo years

A1692/11/391

Act

Protection Viscount Kenmure

Anent the petitione given in to the Lords of there Majesties privie Councill be Alexander Viscount Kenmure Shewing That where the petitioner hes been this Long tymes bypast2 plagued by the unjust clamor and Importunity of Margaret Rasper who wes Legallie ejected out of her pretended pairt of the Lands of Knockman and her goods Legally poynded which came verie farr short of what she justly rested the petitioner And sieing the petitioner can make appear the Justice of his cause And that he never designed any Contumacie in the Least And is verie readie and willing that the saids Lords should call the cause Imediatly or upon thursday next And the other pairty to be Certiorat for that effect And that the petitioner Cannot safely Compear because of what he is resting to severall persones for his Engadgements for his regiment not haveing receaved his arrears And therefore Craveing to the effect underwreitten As the said petitione bears The Saids Lords of there majesties privie Councill haveing Considered this petitione given in to them be the above Viscount of Kenmure They hereby grant personall protectione to the petitioner untill the sixt day of December next to come Inclusive And discharges all messengers officers within burgh and other ministers of the Law from putting any Letters of Captione acts of warding or other personall3 diligence to executione againest the petitioner dureing the said space Except as to there majesties rents and dues allennarly And assignes the First day of december next to the Viscount and Margaret Rasper and there process to attend the Councill and debate the above cause Sic Subscribitur Tweeddale cancel: Linlithgow Stair Beilhaven William Anstruther Francis Montgomery Robert Sinclair William Lockhart Patrick Murray.

At Edinburgh 22 November 1692

A1692/11/391

Act

Protection Viscount Kenmure

Concerning the petition given in to the lords of their majesties’ privy council by Alexander [Gordon], Viscount Kenmure, showing that where the petitioner has been this long time past plagued by the unjust clamour and importunity of Margaret Rasper, who was legally ejected out of her pretended part of the lands of Knockman and her goods Legally poinded, which came very far short of what she justly rested the petitioner. And seeing the petitioner can make appear the justice of his cause, and that he never designed any contumacy in the least, and is very ready and willing that the said lords should call the cause immediately, or upon Thursday next, and the other party to be certified for that effect, and that the petitioner cannot safely compear because of what he is resting to several persons for his engagements for his regiment, not having received his arrears, and therefore craving to the effect underwritten, as the said petition bears. The said lords of their majesties’ privy council having considered this petition given in to them by the above Viscount of Kenmure, they hereby grant personal protection to the petitioner until 6 December next to come inclusive, and discharges all messengers, officers within burgh, and other ministers of the law from putting any letters of caption, acts of warding, or other personal diligence to execution against the petitioner during the said space, except as to their majesties’ rents and dues only. And assigns 1 December next to the viscount and Margaret Rasper and their process to attend the council and debate the above cause. Sic subscribitur Tweeddale cancel: Linlithgow; Stair; Belhaven; William Anstruther; Francis Montgomery; Robert Sinclair; William Lockhart; Patrick Murray.

1. PC1/48, 455.

2. Word inserted above the line.

3. The word ‘executione’ **scored out here.**

1. PC1/48, 455.

Act, 22 November 1692, Edinburgh

Posted on by

Att Edinburgh the Tuenty second day of November Jaj vjc and nyntie tuo years

A1692/11/381

Act

Protectione Robert Robertson

Anent the petitione Given in to the Lords of there Majesties privie Councill be Robert Robertsone weaver in Edinburgh Shewing That where the supplicant haveing Intented ane persuit befor the saids Lords againest John Scott and Andrew Leitch in Rutherglen for severall acts of oppression and ryotts Comitted by them upon the petitioner And the summonds being duely execute both againest him and the witnesses who were all readie to have compeared upon the Eight day of november instant notwithstanding whereof the saids John Scott and Andrew Leitch haveing execute ane recoventione that very day againest the petitioner used all there Endeavours to hynder the calling of the petitioners actione these three Councill dayes last bypast where throw Eight or nyne witnesses whom the petitioner hade Cited for proveing the points of his Lybell being wearied throw there ten dayes attendance in this place to no purpose have returned homeward Lykeas the saids John Scott and Andrew Leitch haveing gained that point of getting the petitioners witnesses to be abesent now when his actione may be called And resolving to preclude the petitioner of the benefite of being present at the Calling of his oune actione or to ansuer to there reconventione They have fallen upon this Indirect and unwarrantable method of hounding out some of the petitioners creditors (To whom is owing not above thretty or fourty pounds scotts) To apprehend the petitioner with Captione Thereby thinking to dissappoint him of there Lordships Justice And get him Lykewayes decerned and declared in absence upon there reconventione without the saids Lords provyde remeid thereto And therefore Craveing to the effect underwritten As the said petitione bears The saids Lords of there majesties privie Councill Haveing Considered this petitione given in to them be Robert Robertson weaver in Edinburgh They hereby grant personall protectione to the petitioner untill the sixth day of december next to come Inclusive And discharges all messengers and officers within burgh and other ministers of the Law from putting any Letters of Captione acts of warding or other personall diligence to executione againest the said petitioner Dureing the said space Except as to there Majesties rents and duetyes allenarly sic subscribitur Tweeddale cancel: Linlithgow Raith Beilhaven Francis Montgomerie John Lauder William Anstruther William Lockhart Patrick Murray

At Edinburgh 22 November 1692

A1692/11/381

Act

Protection Robert Robertson

Concerning the petition given in to the lords of their majesties’ privy council by Robert Robertson, weaver in Edinburgh, showing that where the supplicant having intended a pursuit before the said lords against John Scott and Andrew Leitch in Rutherglen for several acts of oppression and riot committed by them upon the petitioner, and the summons being duly executed both against him and the witnesses, who were all ready to have compeared upon 8 November instant, notwithstanding whereof the said John Scott and Andrew Leitch, having executed a reconvention that very day against the petitioner used all their endeavours to hinder the calling of the petitioner’s action these three council days last by past, wherethrough eight or nine witnesses whom the petitioner hade cited for proving the points of his libel, being wearied through their ten days’ attendance in this place to no purpose, have returned homeward. Likewise the said John Scott and Andrew Leitch, having gained that point of getting the petitioner’s witnesses to be absent now when his action may be called, and resolving to preclude the petitioner of the benefit of being present at the calling of his own action or to answer to their reconvention, they have fallen upon this indirect and unwarrantable method of hounding out some of the petitioner’s creditors (to whom is owing not above thirty or forty pounds Scots) to apprehend the petitioner with caption, thereby thinking to disappoint him of their lordships’ justice, and get him likewise discerned and declared in absence upon their reconvention without the said lords providing redress thereto. And therefore craving to the effect underwritten, as the said petition bears. The said lords of their majesties’ privy council, having considered this petition given in to them by Robert Robertson, weaver in Edinburgh, they hereby grant personal protection to the petitioner until 6 December next to come inclusive, and discharges all messengers and officers within burgh and other ministers of the law from putting any letters of caption, acts of warding, or other personal diligence to execution against the said petitioner during the said space, except as to their majesties’ rents and duties only. Sic subscribitur Tweeddale cancel: Linlithgow; Raith; Belhaven; Francis Montgomery; John Lauder; William Anstruther; William Lockhart; Patrick Murray.

1. PC1/48, 454.

1. PC1/48, 454.

Procedure: committee, 22 November 1692, Edinburgh

Posted on by

Att Edinburgh the Tuenty second day of November Jaj vjc and nyntie tuo years

A1692/11/371

Procedure: committee

Comittee to meet with magistrats anent disorders ministers and beggars

The Lords of there majesties privie Councill doe hereby recomend to the Lord Viscount Stair Lord Raith theasurer deput mr Francis Montgomery and Sir Robert Sinclair of Steivinstoun to Call for and meet with the Magistrats of Edinburgh and speak with them anent the dissorders Comitted within the toun upon solemnity dayes And particularly upon the Last Solemnity day being his majesties birth day And know how these dissorders may be prevented and repressed in tyme comeing That If the magistrats be not able to suppress these The Councill may take order for doeing thereof And Lykewayes to know from the Magistrats what progress they have made in freeing the toun from beggars and putting the proclamatione againest beggars in executione And to Let the Magistrats know The Councill is Informed severall ministers who were banished by the Councill out of this City and Suburbs are returned thereto and doe reside therein without being noticed by the magistrats And to take tryall thereanent and report to the Councill accordingly.

At Edinburgh 22 November 1692

A1692/11/371

Procedure: committee

Committee to meet with magistrates concerning disorders ministers and beggars

The lords of their majesties’ privy council do hereby recommend to [James Dalrymple] the Lord Viscount Stair, [Alexander Melville] Lord Raith, treasurer depute, Mr Francis Montgomery, and Sir Robert Sinclair of Stevenson, to call for and meet with the magistrates of Edinburgh and speak with them concerning the disorders committed within the town upon solemnity days, and particularly upon the last solemnity day, being his majesty’s birthday, and know how these disorders may be prevented and repressed in time coming, that if the magistrates be not able to suppress these, the council may take order for doing thereof. And likewise to know from the magistrates what progress they have made in freeing the town from beggars and putting the proclamation against beggars in execution, and to let the magistrates know the council is informed [that] several ministers who were banished by the council out of this city and suburbs are returned thereto and do reside therein without being noticed by the magistrates. And to take trial therein and report to the council accordingly.

1. PC1/48, 453.

1. PC1/48, 453.

Warrant, 22 November 1692, Edinburgh

Posted on by

Att Edinburgh the Tuenty second day of November Jaj vjc and nyntie tuo years

A1692/11/361

Warrant

Warrand to the Sollicitor for processing ministers not praying for there majesties

The Lords of there Majesties privie Councill Haveing heard the report of the Comittee anent ministers not praying for there majesties King William and Queen Mary read in there presence They hereby appoint there Majesties sollicitor to raise processes befor the Councill againest the ministers nor prayeing for there Majesties or praying againest the government And to begin with the ministers in Fyff shyre And Cite the ministers in that shyre To ansuer on thursday Eight dayes And the rest of the ministers some of them one tuesday weekly till the wholl number be discust And appoints Letters to be raised at the sollicitors Instance againest the Magistrats of the severall shyres and burghes who have not returned a report of the ministers praying or not praying for there majesties And the sollicitor to Cause Charge them with horning to give in these Lists.

At Edinburgh 22 November 1692

A1692/11/361

Warrant

Warrant to the solicitor for processing ministers not praying for their majesties

The lords of their majesties’ privy council having heard the report of the committee concerning ministers not praying for their majesties King William and Queen Mary read in their presence, they hereby appoint their majesties’ solicitor to raise processes before the council against the ministers not praying for their majesties, or praying against the government, and to begin with the ministers in Fife, and cite the ministers in that shire to answer on Thursday eight days. And the rest of the ministers, some of them one Tuesday weekly until the whole number be discussed. And appoint letters to be raised at the solicitor’s instance against the magistrates of the several shires and burghs who have not returned a report of the ministers praying or not praying for their majesties, and the solicitor to cause charge them with horning to give in these lists.

1. PC1/48, 453.

1. PC1/48, 453.

Sederunt, 22 November 1692, Edinburgh

Posted on by

Att Edinburgh the Tuenty second day of November Jaj vjc and nyntie tuo years1

A1692/11/352

Sederunt

Lord Chancellour; Earl of Drumlangrig; Earl of Linlithgow; Earl of Louthian; Earl of Forfar; Viscount Stair; Lord Raith; Lord Beilhaven; Lord Hattoun; Lord Fountainhall; Lord Enstruther; Mr Francis Montgomery; Laird of Steivinstoun; Sir William Lockhart; Sir Patrick Murray

At Edinburgh 22 November 16921

A1692/11/352

Sederunt

[John Hay, earl of Tweeddale] lord chancellor; [James Douglas] earl of Drumlanrig; [George Livingston] earl of Linlithgow; [Robert Kerr] earl of Lothian; [Archibald Douglas] earl of Forfar; [James Dalrymple] Viscount Stair; [Alexander Melville] Lord Raith; [John Hamilton] Lord Belhaven; [Sir John Lauder] Lord Hatton; [Sir John Lauder] Lord Fountainhall; [William] Lord Anstruther; Mr Francis Montgomery; [Sir Robert Sinclair] laird of Stevenson; Sir William Lockhart; Sir Patrick Murray

1. PC1/48, 453.

2. PC1/48, 453.

1. PC1/48, 453.

2. PC1/48, 453.