History of the earldoms of Strathern, Monteith, and Airth

52 HISTORY OF THE EARLDOMS
William Aicliesoii, and Sir John Scot. Their opinions
SEVENTH Earl p , „ ,
OF MoNTEiTH. wcrc, ot coursc, condemnatory or the pretensions
^^^^' of the Earl of Monteith to the territorial Earldom
of Strathern, as well as of his conduct in assert-
ing himself to be heir in blood of Prince David.
These learned persons, in answer to the
Propositions, reported that the General Service
of the Earl of Strathern gave no right to that
Earldom, because it was annexed to the Crown
by King James the Second ; and that, as the
Earl had no right to it, his Renunciation in favour
of the King was of no effect, but, on the con-
trary, weakened His Majesty's right by accepting
a right from him, and *' acknowledging a ne-
cessity of renunciation when there was no need ; "
that His Majesty, by granting the Lordship of
Urchat to the Earl, had wronged himself, under
the idea that it was part of that Earldom, by
giving away that which was his own, and would
also wrong those who held under the Crown ;
that the Earl could not be retoured and infeft
in that Earldom as nearest heir of David Earl
of Strathern, conformably to the clause in the
Renunciation, because it was annexed to the
Crown.
To the fourth of those Propositions (which,
like the fifth and sixth, was obviously put with
the view of alarming the King's jealousy and
exciting his displeasure), — "Is it not boldness
that the said Earl siiould have served himself