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

cussion.
WITH DRUMPELLIER'S EXPOSITION, &c. 115
and probably even surprise. We might naturally expect some reason or feasible
ground, eitlicr from law or precedent, to be given to warrant such conduct ;
but, to our disappointment, the interlocutor was simply to the effect that,^ isis.
" the Sheriff having considered tlie minute and answer, finds tliat the claim Dmmpei.
lier at
cannot go to the iury to any other effect than that of serving the clannant length car-
" J J^ J ^ ^ => ^ rieshis
nearest and lawful heir-male general to Robert Stirling, who died in the year service un-
° D' ^ opposed as
1537, and remits to the jury to inquire into the heads of the brieve accord- J,'f^'",|,gJS.
iugly." It was thus quite oracular : the motiA'es wliich led to the above inter- ''^k^^"-^'''.
^ J 1 ' who ified m
locutor, or the process of reasoning by which it was arrived at, are not con- pretent"d
descended upon ; nothing could be more unsatisfactory. The finding was a int™the°^
mere sic volo sic jnheo, stet 2^fO ratione voluntas — according to a careless, t^T'cadder
lukewarm, and much-deprecated practice at the time, happily now exchanged tion by a
quirk or
for a far better and more satisfactory one, which elicits the legal reasons objection
^ ^ in point of
and motives that rule and influence judges in their findings and decisions, f?,"" ''y
•> O O ^ Glorat.who
In the present instance, the inferior judge possibly was incapacitated to act 'll^^f^^
otherwise, not being a counsel, or legally very proficient in such feudal
points, and hence he had recourse to such summary off-hand procedure.
That it occasioned no small excitement among the members of inquest is
indubitable, and in none more than in Mr Robert Hamilton, advocate, the
learned Sheriff-Principal of Lanarkshire,* who had considerable practice in
peerage and feudal points. His capacity of a member of inquest j^rcvented
his addressing the court, but he could not refrain from giving vent to his
indignation, viva voce, reprobating the finding in question. A scene followed
which is not easily forgotten.
In this way, and at such a juncture, Glorat, and his secret abettor Keir,
momentarily eluded the danger of which they were so apprehensive — viz., that
of a discussion of tlie merits of the Drumpellier-Cadder claim, on the other
hand, so much courted by their opponent, and directly involved in the ques-
tion of identity, so fully treated and fixed in the previous chapter, while they
succeeded, through the instrumentality of the Substitute, in preventing its
* The writer, who of course attended as warped, or unduly biassed, on any subject,
counsel, together with Sir William Hamilton, On no point was he more clear than on
advocate (of European celebrity), can fully that in favour of the identity, as, it is appre-
attest this. Than Sir William, he can posi- hended, all must be who study its merits,
tively add, none had a better opinion of the Indeed, the writer never heard it fairly ques-
present case, and he was too shrewd and tioned.
discerning a person to allow himself to be