Comments in refutation of pretensions advanced for the first time, and statements in a recent work "The Stirlings of Keir and their family papers"

COREIGENDA ET ADDENDA.
150,
... 175,1
...206,]
Page 42, line 11. — For " second" heir, read "served " heir.
... 12, ... 3. — Even if it be explicitly proved that Craigbernard recognised Keir as chief, that might
not be conokisive, chief not beiug held (as was maintained in a case) nomcn juris, nor always
per se denoting direct blood representation. Tiie woU-known Scotch designation " of that
Ilk," pre-eminently applied to a family, and, as has been seen, to the Stirlings of Cadder, is
much more .signific.int and unequivocal in such respect.
... 107, note.— Further, to shovi' the hackneyed and confessed technical import of " natural and lawful,"
the Imperial Crown of France, by the organic decree in 1852, is eventually settled on Jerome
Napoleon Buonaparte and his direct descendants, " natural and legitimate," certainly including
the lawful only, and technically affixing such exact sense to the words.
... 132, line second from foot. — A charter in a private charter-chest, dated Linlithgow, June 2, 1479, to
Robert Livingstone, son and heir-apparent of Henry Livingstone of Middlebinning, " ct Jonete
Streuelyne, spouse sue," is witnessed also by "Mayistris Humfridro Strirelyne, et patricio were,
vicario de benyug, Willelmi Strev . . . Ka . . ." (evidently, though partly obliterated by time,
William Strivelin of Kader) ; the whole, we may conclude, a Livingstone and StirUng of Cadder
family transaction.
paragraph 3. — Of course the argument of the filain bend in favour of Cadder is relevantly based
upon Sir David Lindsay's Matriculation Register in the reign of James V., the unexcep-
tionable ruling authority — irrespective of what may have in part erroneously preceded — and with
wliich the subsequent heraldic practice and understanding are ever in conformity ; the bend
inyrailed being then, too, as clearly and uniformly the exclusive distinctire Keir bearing.
line 12. — For " delecto armigero nostro," read " dilecto armigero nostro."
pai-agraph 2. — There still remains, it seems, another gross misrepresentation to be exposed
in the Keir work, it not being easy to exhaust them. At p. 66, ibid., it is actually afiSrmed
that "the lauds of Ochiltrees, in the parish and county of Linlithgow .... prolsably first
became the property of the family {of Keir, undouhtcdhi, it heincj here exclusively discussed) in
the 12th or 13th century ! " when they certainly only first were acquired by them at the much
later epoch of 1541, by the nolcd transaction, then sufficiently spoken to. Nor is this a solitary
instance of the kind ; there is, over and above, forsooth, the equally unfounded and flagrant one
of the acquisition of Cadder by Keir at the same distant period, palpable enough in the
page referred to. Neither has the Keir editor (in keeping with Lis usual fashion) adduced any
authority of Ochiltrees being in the Stirlings in the 12th century, and he may be unaware of
the curious and interesting deeds regarding it in the Chartulary of the Priory of St Andrews.
— (See£.tj)os. ,pp. 194-5,) as he quotes not a word of it, or has more than the above of such ancient
Stirling tenure of the fief by Cadder solely, not by Keir.
... 212, two last paragraphs, /6.— By authentic legal evidence adduced by Hodgson, in his recondite His-
tory of Northumberland, Sir John de Strivelin, the Scoto-Anglo Knight, was iufeoffcd 31st of
Ed. III. (1357) in the Manour of Camboys, &c., and the 41st of the same monarch (1367), other
lands, including Bedelynton, were granted "prefato Johanni de Strevelyn, et Johunni filio sua
JAM DEFUNCTO," 1 thus introducing us to his son of the same name, who had predeceased. Hodg-
son has equally established that the Knight, and Joan his wife, styled one of the three co-
heiresses of Richard de Emeldon, in the first of Richard II. (1377), had lands in Holforth,
which they settled upon John de Jliddleton, and Christian, his wife.-
It is proved, by an English i-ecord in the text,'' that in 1364 the fealty " Johannis de Strive-
lyn, chivaler qui duxit in uxorem Jacoham iertiam filiarum Richardi de Emeldon defuucti de pro-
parte sua mauerii de Jermuth."'* This Jacoba must evidently be the same with the preceding
Joan do Emeldon. And lastly, it is proved, by an inquisition (in perfect concurrence with
Hodgson) by WaUis, in his history of the same county,'' that Sir John died, 2d of Richard II.
(1378), infeoffed, " cum uxore sua," who must still have been the same lady, in the Manor of
Burnton there.
He was evidently opulent, and a large proprietor, independently of the inheritances of his two
wives, Barbara de Swinburne, and Joan de Emeldon, both co-parceners, having acquired
various grants of lands, from Edward III. (with whom he was in high favour), as well as certain
parties in Northumberland, while utterly estranged from any Berwick burgesses or ancestry, so
absurdly introduced with him as if connections, in the Keir Performance, under the head of
the " Sir John de Striveling" in question."
1 Vol. ii.,
Part ii. p. 5.
2P.31(3, note.
3 See Expos,
p. 212.
■i Tlie .same
with Jess-
iimth.
s See vol. ii.
p. 641.
6 See Keir
Perform-
ance, p. 195.