Reports of claims preferred to the House of Lords in the cases of the Cassillis, Sutherland, Spynie, and Glencairn peerages

20
and wife, in conjunct fee and liferent, and the heirs-
male of the marriage, whom failing, to the heirs-
male of Cuthbert. It is particularly provided in the
charter, that the lands disjoined from the barony of
Kilmaurs were only to be held separately during the
lives of the son and his wife, but after their decease
should be re-united, and held as one entire barony.
Some stress was laid by Sir Adam Fergusson
upon a charter 1511, erecting certain lands in comi-
tatum, to be held by Cuthbert and his wife in life-
rent, and by William, their son, and his heirs, in fee.
Whoever reads this charter will see it does not relate
to the present question. The object of it was to
change the barony of Glencairn, which was before
held in ward, or military tenure, to a blench holding,
for the annual payment of a pair of spurs. This
was of Immense consequence to the family ; and in
order to make this grant available, Cuthbert,
Marieta, and William, are all made grantees, in re-
spect of their several interests under the subsisting
charter of 1498. But this was merely an accessory
right, and did not change the entail in any sort, nor
the succession of the family from the ancient inves-
titures.
In 1614, (the succession had always hitherto gone
to heirs-male,) the then Earl of Glencairn makes a
long entail of his estates, calling to the succession
many persons of the name of Cuningham, and the
heirs-male of their bodies.
His son, in 1642, but five years after he had ob-
tained the charter 1637 from King Charles the
First, instead of altering the succession of his estates,
and limiting them to heirs-general, as a man think-