THE Teinds of the Paroch of Paslay having belonged to the Earl of Abercorn, Lord of the Erection, the Minister of that Parish obtained a Decreet before the Commission, in anno 1636, modifying 15 Chalders of Victual to be his constant modified Stipend, which was divided and allocat upon the Teinds payable to the Earl of Abercorn, and the Earl's Pro­perty was altogether free.

The Charge being great, Mr. Alexander Dunlop was called to be Second Mi­nister; and the First Minister did allow six Chalders of Victual of his modified Stipend for Mr. Dunlop: But the 15 Chalders of Victual, which was a plenti­ful Stipend for one Minister, being too narrow a Provision for two, there was a Decreet of Augmentation obtained in anno 1650, adding two Chalders of Victual and 100 lib. to the Second Minister, which was thereby allocat and divided u­pon the several Heretors burdened therewith; and not one Sixpence, either of the first Modification or Augmentation, was laid upon the Earl of Abercorn's Lands; as will clearly appear by the saids two Decreets, and especially the last, which contains the Allocation both of the Stipend first modified, and of the Augmentation.

The Earl of Dundonald having purchast the Lordship of Paslay some Years af­ter the said Augmentation, the Right to the Teinds made by the Earl of Aber­corn, first to the Lord Angus, and conveyed to the Earl of Dundonald, was ex­presly burdened with the said Modification and Augmentation.

The two Ministers of Paslay enjoyed a Stipend of 17 Chalder of Victual and 100 lib. of Money, from the 1650, till the Establishment of Episcopacy: And thereafter one single Episcopal Minister coming in, he received and contented himself with a Stipend of 15 Chalder of Victual; whereby the Earl enjoyed 2 Chalder and 100 lib.

Two Presbyterian Ministers being indulged to the Paroch of Paslay, they were also necessitat to content themselves with 15 Chalder of Victual during their In­cumbency.

The indulged Ministers being turned out in 1684, two Episcopal Ministers came in their place, who would not rest satisfied with the 15 Chalder of Victual: And the Earl of Dundonald finding, That the Augmentation which he had kept in his Pocket would then come upon him, the Ministers and Heretors were made believe, That the Decreet of Augmentation 1650 was Reduced, which was not so in fact: And there was a new Decreet of Augmentation pursued in 1686; libelling upon the first Decreet of Modification 1636, and upon the Aug­mentation in the Year 1650; and that the said Augmentation 1650 was Redu­ced, in respect that the same was wholly laid upon the Earl of Abercorn's Lands; [Page 2]and likeways upon an Agreement betwixt the Earl, my Lord Ross, and Others, for themselves, and in Name of the rest of the Heretors and the Ministers, where­by there was a Chalder of Victual agreed to be added to the last Augmentation, And in respect of the Reduction of the said last Locality in anno 1650, the saids Heretors are libelled to have obliged themselves to have procured a Locality for the said Victual and Money formerly allocat, and now to be added, and concluding, That there should be an Allocation; and accordingly there is an Augmentation decerned; as also an Allocation, by which the Earl put 3 Chal­ders of Victual fairly in his own Pocket, and lays the whole Burden of 3 Chal­ders of Victual, and 100 lib. of Augmentation, upon other Heretors, where­of some had bought the irredeemable Right of their Teinds from the Earl of A­bercorn: And with the burden of which Dispositions of Teinds, the Earl of Dundonald's Rights were acquired.

There is a Reduction of the said Decreet 1686, pursued by the Town of Paslay and other Heretors; and they do insist upon this Ground, That by the said Decreet 1686, the Earl of Dundonald did gain to himself 3 Chalder of Victual and laid, the burthen upon the Heretors, upon pretence that the Decreet 1650 had been Reduced; whereas the said Decreet 1650 was never once quarrelled, but via facti the Earl got the Advantage and Retention of 3 Chalder of Victual, during all the time of Episcopacy, till 1686, and then got the burden laid upon the He­retors, on supposition that the former Modification had been Reduced. 2 do. The Decreet 1686 libells, That all the burden of the Augmentation 1650, was laid upon the Earl of Abercorn 's Lands: Whereas the Decreet produced in Process clears the contrair, That there was not one Shilling of Burden laid upon the Earl of Abercorn's Lands; in so far as the Decreet not only bears the Lands that were burdened, but expresseth the Heretors to whom they belonged, and the Earl of Abercorn was none of the Heretors burdened. 3 tio. That Augmentation being before the Earl of Abercon's Sale of his Lands; and the Earl of Abercorn having afterwards sold his Lands with the burden of the Minister's Stipend and Augmentation, the Earl of Dundonald had no cause to quarrel. 4 to. The De­creet 1686 doth wholly confound and invert the Locality of both former De­creets, which was necessary to cover the Advantage which the Earl got: For the said Decreet 1686 appoints 10 Chalder and 100 lib. to the First Minister, and 8 Chalder to the Second; and then it proceeds to allocat the 10 Chalder and 100 lib. to the First, and for the Second Minister it allocats 4 Chalder of Vi­ctual of the old Stipend conform to use and wont; and so proceeds to make up the 8 Chalder to the Second Minister.

By this Method of Allocation it would be thought, That the 10 Chalder of Victual and 100 lib. to the First Minister, and 4 Chalder to the Second was the old Stipend of 14 Chalder. And if the thing had been fairly done, it ought to have been done so; for otherways no Man living can make sense of these words, Four Chalder of the old Stipend conform to use and wont; Because use and wont is wholly inverted, the first Modification being 15 Chalder and no Money at all; And the Augmentation 1650 being Two Chalder and 100 lib. And the Allocation 1686, not proceeding conform to the first Modification 1636, but promis­cuously upon the first Modification 1636 and the Augmentation 1650, which did extend in whole to 17 Chalder Victual and 100 lib. of Money: And the said last Decreet having allocat 10 Chalders of Victual and 100 lib. wherein is com­prehended the whole Augmentation 1650 to the first Minister, it proceeds to al­locat [Page 3]four Chalder conform to use and wont to the Second, as if there had been no greater Fond over and above the Allocation to the first Minister then the said 4 Chalder; Whereas truely there was 7 Chalders, whereof the Earl reserved 3 Chalder to be put in his own Pocket. And then the last Decreet proceeds to make up the Second Ministers other 4 Chalders of Victual, which is 8 in all, and bur­dens the Heretors of the Paroch intirely with the said 4 Chalders of Victual; Whereas some of them had their Teinds bought, and ought to have been subjected to no greater Burden.

The Heretors do therefore insist, That the Modification and Allocation may be in the first place conform to the saids two Decreets in Anno 1636 and 1650 which will make the Ministers up 17 Chalder of Victual and 100 lib. of Money; and if the Commission think fit to add a Chalder of the Victual furthr to make up the full Stipend in the last Augmentation, the Heretors will not strugle with the Minister; Only they expect that no such Augmentation should take place, so long as the Cure is served by one Minister; and that the Allocation should be laid upon such Teinds, whereof the heretable Rights are not bought, and the bought Teinds ought to be free of all future Burdens, especially so long as there are other Teinds in the Paroch.

All that was urged in the last Debate was, upon a Consent of the Heretors to the last Decreet.

To which it is answered, 1 mo. The Decreet doth indeed libel upon a Consent, but there is no such Consent produced: And if a Consent be produced it will be found to Contain an express quality, That all former Allocations shall take place: For the plain Truth is, The Heretors were willing the Ministers should be competently provided; and the Teinds and Charge being considerable, they did not grudge, That they should have 18 Chalder of Victual and 100 lib. of Money, which was an Augmentation beyond the former: But they never consen­ted to the Allocation that was made, which did wholly confound both the for­mer Decreets: Nor did they consent, that the Earl of Dundonald should thereby reserve three Chalders of Victual for his Family, of what had been most justly and regularly allocat to the Minister, by former Decreets. And therefore no respect to any pretended Consents, seing the Foundation, Ground and Occasion thereof, is not true in Fact, that the Augmentation 1650 was Reduced.