Scottish Court of Session Records Marginalia Project

OverviewStatisticsSubjects

About

Thumb scos b01 17661220 petition argyll 0001

The University of Virginia Law Library's collection of Scottish Court of Session Papers consists of printed and formerly bound case materials presented before the Court of Session, the highest civil court in Scotland, from 1757 to 1834. As a court of appeal and of first instance, the Court of Session in this period held jurisdiction over contract and commercial cases, matters of succession and land ownership, divorce proceedings, intellectual property and copyright disputes, and contested political elections. The UVA collection includes approximately 2500 printed petitions, answers, replies, and case summaries.

William Craig, Lord Craig (1745-1813), began assembling this collection as an advocate and later a judge on the Court of Session in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. The papers apparently passed to Andrew Skene after Craig's death. Skene (1784-1834) also worked as an advocate and later briefly served as Scotland's solicitor general. He greatly expanded Craig's original collection. When Skene died in 1835 the papers were sold in an estate sale after which the Library of the Society of Advocates in Aberdeen, Scotland came into possession of them. The Library sold them along with many of their manuscript collections in the 1980s. The UVA Law Library purchased the records in 1986.

These records are distinctive for their marginalia. While copies of these records exist in other archives, Craig's and Skene's handwritten annotations make the material in the UVA Law Library's collection unique. The two men frequently summarized a case's major points, commented on Scottish law, created schemes to link documents together, and included notations to published case reports within the margins of these documents. These notations represent two men participating in the making and interpretation of Scots Law in the 18th and 19th centuries.

This transcription project is a challenge because the annotations were done at different times in two separate hands. We believe that Craig had the messier handwriting and Skene possessed the finer penmanship. The two men often wrote all over the first page of a case document, although Skene tended to confine his notations to the top center of the document while Craig usually commented in the right or left margins. (This is not always the case)

We need your help to make sense of the marginalia. The first step is to transcribe the handwritten information on these pages. We are less concerned with assigning authorship to each piece of written text at this stage than we are with getting a good sense what those penned words say.

Your work will form an important part of a major initiative to build a digital archive of our Court of Session Papers at the UVA Law Library that we hope will be useful to academics and the general public. You can see our progress thus far here.

Works

24624 thumb

Alexander Mudie v. John Ouchterlony (1766)

1 page: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
22357 thumb

Archbishop of York, and Others v. Haldane (1769)

After purchasing the estate of Airthrey, Captain Robert Haldane sought to close a road that crossed the property. Residents and property owners in the parishes of Callender, Kincardine, Kilmadock, Dunblane, Leckropt, and Logie objected that the road was a necessary public highway that provided...

1 page: 100% indexed, 100% transcribed
24592 thumb

Archibald Craig v. Emilia Brodie (1773)

1 page: 0% indexed, 100% transcribed
24583 thumb

Competition Among the Creditors of Macfarlane (1766)

2 pages: 0% indexed, 100% transcribed
24573 thumb

David Fowler v. Andrew Reid (1767)

1 page: 0% indexed, 100% transcribed
24574 thumb

Earl of Rothes v. Alexander Shepherd (1767)

1 page: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24600 thumb

Elizabeth Wallace v. William Gordon and Others

4 pages: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
22356 thumb

George Anderson v. James Stephen, Andrew Jamieson, and Others (1766)

The complainers in this case alleged that the counsellors of Crail were under the influence of Sir John Anstruther and that Sir John's representatives sold meal to the trades at a special price in order to bribe certain men before the borough's election.

1 page: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24623 thumb

George Mackenzie v. Henrietta Cockburn (1767)

1 page: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24610 thumb

George Trail v. Thomas Lyell (1766)

3 pages: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24612 thumb

Gideon Kemloe v. Dun, Reid, and Company (1767)

1 page: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24571 thumb

Helen Binning v. James Binning (1767)

2 pages: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24589 thumb

Helen Brebner v. Alexander Brebner (1767)

2 pages: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24596 thumb

James Fisher v. Donald Maclachlan (1769)

2 pages: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24614 thumb

John Krassaw v. Neil, Earl of Roseberie (1769)

3 pages: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24622 thumb

John Maxwell v. James Maxwell (1767)

1 page: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24635 thumb

Margaret Telfair v. Janet Milmyne (1769)

2 pages: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24620 thumb

Marquis of Lothian v. His Majesty's Advocate (1767)

2 pages: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
 thumb

Mary Muir v. Isobel Buchanan (1771)

4 pages: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24575 thumb

Mrs Anne Nielson, &c v. Austins (1767)

2 pages: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24619 thumb

Mrs Florence M'Leod v. Mr John Nicolson (1768)

1 page: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24608 thumb

Patrick Heron v. Adam Menzies (1767)

1 page: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24633 thumb

Peters v. Speirs, and Others (1767)

2 pages: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24632 thumb

Robert Alexander v. James Chrystie (1767)

1 page: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24630 thumb

Robert Hunter v. Robert Robb, &c (1766)

1 page: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24631 thumb

Robert Robb v. Gabriel Halladay (1767)

1 page: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24587 thumb

Thomas Wright v. John Ure (1767)

3 pages: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24591 thumb

Walter Colquhoun v. Duke of Argyle (1767)

Pursuer Walter Colquhoun sought payment of a bill that was allegedly owed to his father by the father of defender John Campbell, Duke of Argyll. Campbell raised a defense based on his status as heir of inventory, which meant that his liability was limited to the value of the estate. He also...

3 pages: 0% indexed, 67% transcribed
24598 thumb

Walter Goodall v. Robert Fleming

1 page: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed
24585 thumb

William Wright v. Mary Ellis (1767)

1 page: 0% indexed, 0% transcribed

Subject Categories

People, Places