Wedderburn book; a history of the Wedderburns in ... - waughfamily.ca

.<
Chapter V.
•' Appendix. . .
The Scrymgeours of Duuhope.
I have already (ante, p. 1G9) refcri-od to the descent of the Scrynirrconr.s nf Kirktomi Partii.
from the Scrymf,'coiirs of Dudhofie. who, for many years, were tlie ruling' faniilv
''hap- v,
in Dundee,
where they held the otlioe of hereditary constables of tlic Itiir^h, as \v< fl as that of '^'''''
Hereditary lloyal Standard Bearer- to the Scottish Kind's. The chief of this .'iMinent
family was, in I6tl, hy patent of l.'j Xov., raised to the i)eera«:c by the titles of Vise..iint
of Dudhope and Lord Scryni'jreonr, with remainder to his heirs niulo, and lateron (in llJOl)
his grandson was created Earl of Dundee.'
On his deatii, without issue and with no near male relatives, the Duke of Luie
patent, from which it is clear that the limitations of tliat patent were to heirs male." 'I'his
being so, two questions remain,
(1) Are the SciTmgeours of Kirktoun in fact descended from a counnon ancestor with
the Scrymgeours of Dudhope, and if so, how is that descent sliown ?
(2) Are thev now, by the necessary extinctions of senior branclas being hutticicntljr
shown, tlie senior branch of the Scrymgeour family 7
As to the first of these questions, I have already (ante, p. ll">0) note,l .some of the
evidence, and as to the last, reference maybe made to the accoiuits of the f.imily ^iveii by
both Nisbet (as early as 1742) and by Douglas, both of which are printed lielow (pp.
187seqq.), and still more particularly to an opinion expressed by .Mr. Uiddell, the tiiiinent
peerage lawyer, that no difficulty arose on that score.
In regaVd to both of them, however, there are the two imjiortant facts tliat U.ih liavo
already, iu 1821, been affirmatively answered by a committee of the I'rivy Couiieil. A\U\\^
as a court of claims (ante, p. 179), since the right of Henry Seryni;:e..ur UchI, iburn to
the office of Hereditary Itoyal Standard Bearer rests on jirecisely the -ame -rounds n.s hi»
right to the pccnice of Dudhope, and (assuming the limitations to beii-s male) to th;.t of
the Earldom of Dundee: and further that his right to this office was. as we hive h.cn
(ante, p. ISO), recognised and acted on Ijy the Crown iu lS7i'.. It would >eem ih.il the*c
facts should now go far to render further proof umiece.-sary, hut into this inatlrr I do not
intend to ^o, while I have not attempted to test by an exiimination of tlie evidence
available iu both the Scrvm-eour-Wcdderburn Charter Chest ami the public r.-e..nK the
accuracy of subjoined accounts of the Dudhope family given by .Ni^Ut an.I l>o.i:,.l,i.v
I add tliese, however, as giving, no doubt, much that is accurate and as provMin- a umJuI
groundwork of investigation, if not a history which can be acceptevi williout prxK^f.
> ItisB.idtliattI.eli,i,itMti„n,.,f this p.tent are not known, an-I no .lonht no r'-'-^^J
JV !:"" '.'rV.';
terms is at ,..e.-.ent forthcomii.g. Mr. liiddell, however, s,.«ks ..f t».. .• .< u
•
.
the Patent of the Earldou, of Dundee under the sign ni.un.d i '• 1 »
; ^
'^ ;
Bignatnre in the Advocates Library and in another in the l.n ..-. >!" •" ''
'•
give the Earldom, etc., to heirs male." I have not
.."tent was written to the Great Seal, the index .,";;•:. ,,^ •„;..., j:.i, ....... V.,,.. o,.,..
'"^•'=f.-,'^^'' whicl occira
> in to
The
of vol. 57 of the Kegister, twelve leaves are missing,
"•'(.„,..-..
wi.l. de Dudho,e, Doni. Scriuigeour 15 Ko.. 1641," although in the pK^ce
destroy ed, It w
-'
(.>
.1 .1.. U.-.tn,nc
UuU^oJ^
who, however, forgot the existence of the index. ' '
,.,