COLVILL 387 the 51st Foot, never tendered his vote at the election of Scottish Rep. Peers, and d. suddenly, unm., 8 Feb. 1782, in London. Will dat. 7 May 1781, at Mahon, in Minorca, pr. 11 May 1782 by John Wemyss and Robert Colvill, Esq. V. By Robert Colvill, cousin and possibly h. male of the above, being only s. and h. of John C., of Ely, CO. Fife, Wright {bap. 12 Sep. 1691), yst. (but not the next) br. to William C, the father of the last claimant. He was served h. to the 3rd Lord 7 Apr. 1784. He not only called himself Lord Colvill of Ochil- tree [S.], but tendered his vote as such, which ivas received at the elections of Scottish Rep. Peers, 8 May 1784 and 28 Mar. 1787. It was again tendered at the election of 10 Jan. 1788, but was disallowed, it appearing from very sufficient evidence that Robert, the 2nd Lord, had no brother of the name of James, but that the James Colvill of Nether Kinloquhie (ancestor of the claimant), alleged to be such br., was son of an Arthur Colvill at Mylnetown, Pitmillie.(^) VL By a person calling himself Lord Colvill of Ochiltree, who tendered his vote at the election of Scottish Rep. Peers in 1847, which was (notwithstanding a protest of the Earl of Sel- kirk) accepted; when, however, in the following year, he tendered the same, the title of Colville of Ochiltree was (under an ActC") passed in the interval) ordered not to be called, until the right thereto had been established. COLVILLE see also COLEVILLE COLVILLE OF CULROSS i.e. "Colville of Culross, co. Perth," Barony {Colville), cr. 1885, see "Colvill of Culross," Barony [S.], under the loth Lord. COLWOOD See "BowEN of Colwood," Barony {Bozven), cr. 1893, extinct 1894. (*) Robertson, pp. 458-467. This, according to Riddel!, was "an assumption too absurd and preposterous to require comment." (•>) " By one of the provisions of the Act 10 and 1 1 Vic. (c. 52), a vote protested against by two Peers must be reported by the Lord Clerk Register to the House of Lords, and if the person voting fail to appear or make good his right, the House is empowered to order the Peerage in question not to be called again till the Claimant or some one else has established his right to it. The case of Colvill of Ochiltree is (1888) the only instance in which this provision has been put in force." {ex inform. G. Burnett, sometime Lyon).
