Ancient deeds and other writs in the Mackenzie-Wharncliffe charter-chest

MACKENZIE-WHARNCLIFFE DEEDS
his friends that shee should be secured in ane aliment during his sones
life and in a Jointure after his sones death without either wch shee
might starve or be a burden upon her father.' The whole paper is
of considerable interest, and contains a clever and lucid argument
in support of his daughter's claim to be preferred to the general
creditors.
Another interesting ' Information' with reference to Lady Langton's
claim is found among the family papers. It also bears the date of 1691,
but whether it was prepared by Sir George himself or not does not
appear. The claims of Mr. Archibald Cockburn's children subsequently
became the subject of a reference to an arbiter, Mr. Francis Farquharson,
Accountant in Edinburgh, and among the papers found in connection
with this arbitration it appears that there were three children born to
Mr. Cockburn, Younger, and his spouse, Elizabeth Mackenzie. Margaret,
the eldest, was married to a Captain Urquhart, and Agnes, the youngest,
was married to Sir George Stuart. The third child was a son, Archibald,
who died in early youth. Mr. Farquharson, the arbiter, issued his final
award on the 30th March 1752. He found the Honble. James Stewart
Mackenzie, the successor of Sir George Mackenzie, liable in a sum
of £10,661, 7s. 3d. Scots money, and ordained him to pay that sum
in the proportions therein mentioned to Sir George Stuart of Grantully,
in right of his wife, and to parties of the names of Urquhart and others.
The arbiter's decree contained other provisions, now of no interest.
There was another prolonged litigation in the Court of Session, ending
in 1725, between George Mackenzie of Inchcoulter and James, Earl
of Bute, and Sir James Mackenzie of Royston as executor to Lady
Prestonhall, who, again, was the sole executrix of her son, George
Mackenzie of Rosehaugh. This action was ultimately insisted in by
John, Earl of Bute, the Right Honble. James Stewart Mackenzie of
Rosehaugh, his brother, who was the heir of line and tailzie to James,
Earl of Bute, their father, and Sir James Mackenzie of Roystoun. In
one phase of the litigation George Mackenzie, son to Sir James Mackenzie
of Royston, whose birth had such a startling effect upon a prior lawsuit,
was also a party. From the proceedings in this case it would seem that
the action followed upon a contract of marriage between Mr. Colin
44