SoME DocuMENtTS RELATING TO GLENCAIRN. 20% 
slaughter of Robert Crichton of Kirkpatrick, were discharged 
because the said Robert was a rebel at the horn, Fergy and 
Robin Fergusson being, however, exempted from the dis- 
charge.4 
This case has a special interest, as it illustrates the view 
which the old law took of the position of the outlaw. It 
shows—and there are other authorities to the same effect*— 
that no process could be maintained for the slaughter of one 
at the horn, whether for civil or criminal cause. In 1587 
the King, with the advice of Parliament, consulted the lords 
of council and session ‘‘ anent slauchter of partiis at the 
horn;’’!6 and in 1612 it was enacted that the fact that the 
person slain was at the horn for civil cause should be no 
defence for the man who slew him. In the old days the 
relatives of the outlaw were forbidden to ‘‘ ressett, supple, or 
manteine or do favors to [him] under pane of deid and con- 
fiscatioun of ’’ their moveable property. 
The next entry in regard to the feud to which we have 
referred relates to an arrangement come to in 1513 by which 
Sir William Douglas and Crichton were not to be summoned 
14 Pitcairn, Criminal Trials, i., 79; Transcript of MS., ‘‘ Curia 
Jtincris Justiciarie,’’ under date September 24th, vol. iii., pp. 298 ff. 
(H.M. Register House, Edinburgh). Robert Crichton’s widow was 
Gelis Greresoun. On 14th December, 1512, she made an unsuccess- 
ful application for terce out of certain lands (Act. Dom. Conc., xxiv., 
fol. 84). 
1s Hume, Commentaries on the Law of Scotland regarding 
Crimes ; Edinburgh, 1844, i., 187 f. and note. 
16 St., 1587, c. 26; Fol. Acts, i1., 448. 
Wf St., 1612, ec. 3; Fol. Acts, iv., 471. See also St., 1649, c. 96, 
and 1661, c. 217; Fol. Acts, vi., pt. ti., 173; vii, 203. By the last of 
these Acts it was provided that homicide committed ‘‘in the persute 
of denunced or declared Rebells for capital crimes or of such who 
assist and defend the rebells and masterfull depradators by armes 
and by force oppose the persute and apprehending of them which 
shall happen to fall out in tyme comeing, nor any of them, shall not 
be punished by death.’’ ecp., F. Pollock and P. W. Maitland, The 
History of the English Law before the time of Edward I., 2nd ed., 
Cambridge, 1898, 11., 449. 
18 St., 1540, c. 96, and 1592, c. 65; Fol. Acts, ii., 372; 1i., 574. 
