Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	commissioner_n	john_n	sir_n	10,577	5	6.4155	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B02312	Concerning the interloquitor in the action of reduction upon minority and lesion, at the instance of the Duke and Dutchess of Monmouth, against the Earl of Tweedale and his lady.		1677 (1677)	Wing C5696B; ESTC R174219	5,374	4

Concerning the Interloquitor in the Action of Reduction upon Minority and Lesion at the instance of the Duke and Dutchess of Monmouth against the Earl of Tweedale and his Lady PResident Stairs having then great Power and Influence in the Judicatory was so devoted to the Duke and Dutchess of Monmouth that both he and his Son Sir John were Commissioners in ordering and managing Their Estate here And the said Sir John was their Advocate in that Process The Lord Melvil presuming upon that Interest and the intimate Friendship he had with the President and having the managing of that Estate the Friends of the Name and Family being laid aside to endear himself and his Service as more concerned for their Interest than all the Friends Curators and Commissioners and Lawyers and His late Majesty Himself who had interveened in the transaction with Tweedale and his Lady both as Arbiter And there after as Party and Garrantee and taken burden that it should not be questioned upon pretence of Minority He did after they were of perfect Age advise that the same should be questioned by a Process of Reduction at her instance upon the reason of Minority and Norm Lesion and did insist in the same until one Interloquitor was obtained which was in effect a sentence as to the most material points being in Jure and Relevancie So that there needs no probation of the same Reductions of transactions so solemn are so unfavourable that if the persuers after they are of Age do ratifie the same either expresly or tacitly by making use thereof or doing any Act that may import the least homologation and acquiessing thereunto they are so concluded that the Allegiance of homologation is relevant and eleids any Process of Reduction and yet Alleadgiance of homologation founded upon the Duke and Dutchess their giving Warrant after they were of perfect Age to their Commissioners to call for the Money due by Tweedale upon the said transaction and another homologation founded upon an Alleadgiance proponed by the Duke and Dutchess their Advocates in a Process betwext them and a third Person upon the right of Hassindean given to them by Tweedale upon the said transaction were both repelled The first upon pretence that nothing had followed upon the same And the Second because the Duke and Dutchess recovered no benefit upon the said Alleadgiance which pretences were most frifulous seeing Law doth not consider whether any thing follow upon such homologations or whether any benefit was recovered thereupon but whether homologations did follow upon the transactions questioned and persuites and defences founded upon transactions in Law are pregnant ratification the same Et qui accepit agit By the said Interloquitor it is found that Francis Earl of Buccleugh being named by his Father Walter Earl of Buccleugh Executor and Universal Intromettor without any mention of a Legacy left to him was nevertheless Universal Legator as to the Deeds part upon pretence that the Defunct did appoint the Tutors to apply the readiest of the Earl's Goods Geire and Rents for satisfying his Debts by which Article of the Interloquitor the half of the Lady Tweedale's Interest and share of her Fathers Exequetrie is cut off without any Warrant or Ground in Law seeing Universal Legacies in prejudice of Children and nearest of Kin are always and ought to be in clear and in direct and formal words viz. That a Person should be named Universal Legator or that the Defunct should expresly leave in Legacy to him his part or in such like words Whereas the said Earl Walter who was in that quality that in making his Testament he could not want the advice of Lawyers and Writers that knew the form and conception of Testaments and Univeral Legacies did name his Son his Executor and Universal Intrometor without leaving to him any Legacy either particular or Universal And the said Clause anent his Goods and applying the Rents to the use aforesaid is only an Order and Direction to the Tutors to manage so his Estate that the Rents should be applied in manner aforesaid and that they should be comptable yearly to that purpose By the said Interloquiter there is a great part of the Lady Tweedale Her Claim and Share in her Fathers Exequetrie cut off in so far as it is found that Annual rent is not due for the Sums contained in a Decreet obtained immediately after And in pursuance of the said Transaction at the instance of the Lady Tweedale against the Duke and Dutchess Albeit the said Sums being due to the said Lady as Executrix to David Her Brother it was found most justly by the said Decreet Upon a full debate in Foro that Annual rent was due for the same until the death of David in Anno 1648. In respect the said Sums David being Pupill and Minor was not only pecuni● Pupillaris but was in the hands of the said Earl Francis and his Tutors and applied by them for payment of the said Earls Debts and Annual rents and he having that use and benefit of David's Money Annual rent was therefore due not as usura but as interesse because nemo debit locupletare cumaliena jactura And it was a favour to the Duke and Dutchess that Annual rent was only decerned until the time aforesaid and not until the Date of the said Decreet in Anno 1667. And there after until payment seeing Annual rent being once due and currant and the same reason continuing viz. that they had the use and benefit of the Money belonging to David and the Countess in his Right Annualrent continued to be due and could not sist until payment There was due to Lady Mary Scott one of the Bairnes and nearest of Kin to the said Walter Earl of Buccleugh her part of his Exequetrie and movable Estate but she being deceased before the Lady Tweedale was Married her part aforesaid fell and belonged equally to the Lady Tweedale and David her Brother who did survive the Lady Tweedale her Marriage and the Lady Tweedale having by her contract of Marriage discharged and renounced that which might have faslen to her by decease of the said Lady Mary and the said David having thereafter deceased that which fell to him of the said Lady Mary her part did by his death accrew and belong to the said Lady Tweedale and albeit the subject of all dispositions and renunciations of what may fall to any Person by the decease of another is limitted and understood to be that which had fallen to them at the time of their renouncing and disponing the same seeing what after such rights doth fall to them was not existing and is non ens and not cogitatum in the time of such renunciations And what is given to them for the said rights is only given proportionably and with respect and in contemplation of their present Right and not of that which did not then belong to them not so much as in spe or appearance but to another and for the