1799
TeindThe Earl of Aberdeen claimed a deduction on a quarter of the rent from several estates in order to reduce his teinds payment. The Officers of State objected to his activities on three grounds, 1) his deduction for use of peat on his land was unjustifiable, 2) by allowing cottagers to live on his land but pay rent to a third party meant that he did not get income directly, and 3) through patronage he claimed deductions on rent from lands outside the areas subject to those tithes.
Documents in this case (2)
- Officers of State v. Earl of Aberdeen — objections, 13 May 1799May 13, 1799 Objections of the Officers of State, against the deductions claimed by the Earl of Aberdeen in the process of valuations of the teinds of his lands in Coull, Farland, Logie Coldstone, and Udny.
- Earl of Aberdeen v. Officers of State — answers, 21 Jun 1799June 21, 1799 Answers by the Earl of Aberdeen to objections for the Officers of State, responding to deductions claimed in the valuation of his teinds.
People & places in this case
People involved
- George, Earl of Aberdeen — Pursuer
- John Burnett — Advocate for Pursuer
- Andrew Balfour Ramsay, of Whitehill — Advocate for Defender
- Alexander Fraser — Agent
- Sir Robert Dundas, 1st Baronet of Beechwood — Agent