Grevfriars' Convent of Dumfries. 341 



cunyngham. 



(24) The quhilk Day hew cunyngham producit ane rentall con- 

 tenand tua akirs of land Hand on est end of corberry hill. 



(25) The qlk Day Dauid toads lands be lentell xxxiiij ss 

 be zeir. 



9th May, 1913. 



Chairman — Mr James Davidson, V.P. 



The Royalty of the Burgh of Dumfries : A Prevalent 

 Misconception Explained. 



By Mr J. C. R. Macdonald, W.S. 



The painstaking- researches of Mr Shirley throw a flood 

 of light on a matter that has often puzzled the local convey- 

 ancer — the fact that a certain number of tenements in Max- 

 welltown, in the parish of Troqueer and Stewartry of 

 Kirkcudbright, bear, according to their title deeds, to be held 

 by burgage tenure as if they were situate, which of course 

 they are not, and never could have been, within the royalty 

 of the burgh of Dumfries. 



To make the matter clear to the lay mind, it is necessary 

 to explain at the outset that under the feudal system as 

 acknowledged in Scotland all heritable property in the country 

 with a few trifling exceptions (the patrimonial possessions of 

 the Sovereign, the manses and glebes of the clergy, and the 

 udal lands in Orkney and Shetland) is deemed to flow from 

 the Crown as ultimate over superior. 



In subjects outwith those embraced in the Charter of 

 Erection of a Royal Burgh, the vassals in possession hold 

 either of the Sovereign direct or, if the property has been sub- 

 feued, of a mid superior who in turn holds of his Majesty. In 

 burghal subjects, on the other hand, the body corporate, of 

 which every individual freeholder is a member, is the vassal 

 in possession, and it holds direct of the Crown. Originally 

 homage, fealty, and military service made up the return that 

 the vassal was bound to give in acknowledgment of the 

 superior's grant, the military duty of burgesses in Royal 



