Skip to main content
  • twitter
  • facebook
  • instagram
Scottish Court of Session Digital Archive
SCOS The Scottish Court of Session Papers University of Virginia Law Library
  • Explore
    • Map
    • Browse by County
    • People & Place Network
  • Scholarship
  • About
    • The 2026 Modernization
    • Searching the Archive
    • Computational Methods
  • Search
  • News

Breadcrumb

  1. Home

William Graham v. The Creditors of Harry Graham — Minutes, 1 Dec 1792

Abstract
AI-generated
December 1, 1792 Minute of Decanus for William Graham, heir of entail of Hourston, arguing that the common agent Mr Young improperly supports objections out of the common fund while also answering them, violating his duty to defend all parties equally.

Andrew Stuart v. Lord Frederick Campbell — Information, 3 Jul 1792

Abstract
AI-generated
Andrew Stuart, John Davidson, and Andrew Steele assert Crown commission grants them lawful authority over the general Register of Seisins and receipt of particular register books.

Frederick Campbell v. Andrew Stuart — Information, 26 Nov 1792

Abstract
AI-generated
Lord Clerk Register sues Andrew Stuart to reclaim authority over sasine registers under the 1617 Act, challenging Stuart’s commission and demanding surrender of unmarked books.

John Wilson and Others v. James Scott and Others — Petition, 25 Jan 1793

Abstract
AI-generated
January 25, 1793 Petition of the late Deacon and Masters of the Incorporation of Hammermen in Glasgow, asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor

John Wilsone and others v. James Scott and others — Note, 14 Jan 1793

Abstract
AI-generated
January 14, 1793 Note of John Wilson and others, against James Scott and others, stating the financial history and assessment of the Incorporation of Hammermen in Glasgow.

James Scott and Others v. John Wilson and Others — Information, 11 Oct 1792

Abstract
AI-generated
October 11, 1792 Information of James Scott late Deacon and others, Members of the Incorporation of Hammermen in Glasgow, arguing that the corporation has legal power to apply its funds for public reform purposes

John Wilsone v. James Scott — Information, 6 Sep 1792

Abstract
AI-generated
September 6, 1792 Information of John Wilson, &c., arguing that the defenders unlawfully applied L.20 from the Hammermen Incorporation's funds to a burgh reform

David Wilkie v. Heritors of the Parish of Cult — Answers, 18 Dec 1792

Abstract
AI-generated
Dec 18, 1792: Heritors of Cult reply to David Wilkie’s petition, claiming the Court lacks power to award extra stipend beyond allocated teinds.

David Wilkie v. The Heritors of the Parish of Cult — Petition, 4 Dec 1792

Abstract
AI-generated
Rev. David Wilkie petitions Dec 4, 1792 for full free teind as stipend and communion allowance, citing prior parish precedents and current rental surplus over old teind valuations.

John Ure and others v. Patrick Carnegy — Information, 13 Nov 1792

Abstract
AI-generated
November 13, 1792 Information of the Heritors of Forfar, arguing that the church should be divided in proportion to population, against Patrick Carnegy, Esq; Ja. Young Agent. H. (Lord HENDERLAND Reporter.)

Pagination

  • First page « First
  • Previous page ‹ Previous
  • …
  • Page 910
  • Page 911
  • Page 912
  • Page 913
  • Current page 914
  • Page 915
  • Page 916
  • Page 917
  • Page 918
  • …
  • Next page Next ›
  • Last page Last »
Subscribe to
Home

The Scottish Court of Session Digital Archive is a multi-institutional collaborative initiative featuring Session Papers held by the Arthur J. Morris Law Library at the University of Virginia School of Law, the Library of Congress, and the University of Edinburgh.

The project is made possible with generous investments from the Horatio and Florence Farmer Fund at the University of Virginia School of Law and the William Nelson Cromwell Foundation. 

Support SCOS with a tax deductible gift.

© 2026 by the Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia
© 2026 by the Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia

User account menu

  • Log in