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

Daniel Campbell of Shawfield, William Graham younger of Gartmore and Alexander Cunnynghame Clerk to the Signet v. William Muir of Caldwall — Replies, 28 Jan 1760

Abstract
AI-generated
Replies by Daniel Campbell of Shawfield, William Graham younger of Gartmore, and Alexander Cunnynghame Clerk to the Signet, to the Answers of William Muir of Caldwall, to their Petition and Complaint.

Daniel Campbell of Shawfield, William Grahame younger of Gartmore, and Alexander Cunnynghame v. William Mure of Caldwall — Answers, 11 Jan 1760

Abstract
AI-generated
Petition and Complaint of Daniel Campbell of Shawfield, William Grahame younger of Gartmore, and Alexander Cunnynghame, rejected by freeholders; Answers by William Mure of Caldwall, Esq, responding to the argument that the petitioners' qualifications are valid.

Petition and Complaint — Daniel Campbell of Shawfield, Esq; William Graham younger of Gartmore, Esq; Advocate, and Alexander Cunnyngbame one of the Clerks to the Signet

Abstract
AI-generated
Petitioners seek admission to the Roll of Freeholders in Renfrew County, challenging Freeholders' refusal based on entail objections and procedural grounds.

Sir Michael Stuart of Blackhall, Bart. and William Cunningham of Craigends v. Captain John Pollok — Memorial, 18 Feb 1760

Abstract
AI-generated
Memorial of Captain John Pollok, arguing that he is entitled to vote as a Freeholder under the Statute 1681, based on his Charter and Infeftment of the half of Over-Pollock lands valued at 500 l. Scots.

Sir Michael Stewart of Blackball, Baronet, and William Cuninghame of Craigends, Esq; v. Captain John Pollock — Memorial, 12 Feb 1760

Abstract
AI-generated
Memorial of Sir Michael Stewart of Blackball, Baronet, and William Cuninghame of Craigends, Esq; Complainers, arguing that Captain John Pollock's admission to the Roll of Freeholders is illegal because his property and valuation are undivided.

Sir Michael Stewart of Blackball, Baronet, and William Cuningham of Craigends v. Capt. John Pollock — Replies, 28 Jan 1760

Abstract
AI-generated
Replies by Sir Michael Stewart of Blackball, Baronet, and William Cuningham of Craigends, Esq to the Answers for Capt. John Pollock, arguing that his claim to vote under the Act 1681 fails because his estate is held pro indiviso and thus not a proper estate or possession.

Sir Michael Stuart of Blackhall, Bart. and William Cunningham of Craigends v. Captain John Pollok — Answers, 15 Jan 1760

Abstract
AI-generated
Answers by Captain John Pollok to the petition and complaint of Sir Michael Stuart and William Cunningham, responding that his undivided half of Over-Pollok lands qualifies him as a Freeholder under statute and feudal law.

Petition and Complaint — Sir Michael Stewart of Blackhall, Baronet, and William Cuningham of Craigends, Esq

Abstract
AI-generated
Petition of Sir Michael Stewart of Blackhall and William Cuningham of Craigends, asking the Court to alter the Freeholders' Roll of Renfrew County for admitting Capt. John Pollock and the Burgh of Paisley as Freeholders.

Alexander Cunnynghame v. William Muir of Caldwall — Duplies, 26 Feb 1760

Abstract
AI-generated
Mr Cunnynghame defends his liferent-right to Craigbait and Kersemeadow against objections that his title is nominal and he lacks possession, rebutting claims via historical retours and vassal possession.

William Mure of Caldwell v. Alexander Cunnynghame — Replies, 19 Feb 1760

Abstract
AI-generated
Replies by William Mure of Caldwell to the Answers of Alexander Cunnynghame, one of the Clerks to the Signet, arguing that Mr Cunnynghame's title is nominal and fictitious and he is not in possession of the lands claimed.

Pagination

  • First page « First
  • Previous page ‹ Previous
  • …
  • Page 662
  • Page 663
  • Page 664
  • Page 665
  • Current page 666
  • Page 667
  • Page 668
  • Page 669
  • Page 670
  • …
  • 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