1790–1791
Robert Home-Gordon of Embo and others petitioned the Court to expunge John Gordon of Carroll from the roll of freeholders of Sutherland, objecting to his qualification for the roll. Gordon answered, asserting his eligibility by wadset-right and inheritance, and the parties subsequently exchanged replies and duplies disputing whether his wadset was merely nominal and fictitious and whether his possession had altered since enrolment.AI-generated
Documents in this case (4)
- Robert Home Gordon, George M'Kay and others v. John Gordon of Carroll — Petition and Complaint, 12 Nov 1790November 12, 1790 Petition and Complaint of Robert Home Gordon, Esq; of Embo, George M'Kay of Bigbouse, Esq; and others, asking the Court to order the expunging of John Gordon of Carroll's name from the roll of freehold…
- Robert Home-Gordon v. John Gordon — Answers, 18 Dec 1790December 18, 1790 Answers by John Gordon of Carrol to the petition and complaint of Robert Home-Gordon and others, responding to objections regarding his qualification for the roll.
- Robert Home-Gordon v. John Gordon — Replies, 6 Jan 1791January 6, 1791 Replies for Robert Home-Gordon of Embo, Esq; to the Answers for John Gordon of Carrol, Esq, arguing that the respondent's wadset qualification is nominal and fictitious, and that his possession has alter…
- Robert Home-Gordon v. John Gordon — Duplies, 22 Jan 1791January 22, 1791 Duplies of John Gordon, Esq; of Carrol, to the replies for Robert Home-Gordon of Embo, Esq; asserting his qualification as freeholder by wadset-right and inheritance.
