1792–1793
ArrestmentDebtContractAlimentEmploymentActionDaniel M'Kenzie, a spinner, pursued James and Archibald Buchanans and Company, his masters, contending that they had unlawfully deducted from his wages without contractual authority. The Buchanans subsequently petitioned the Court to overturn an inner-house interlocutor that had been pronounced against them.AI-generated
Documents in this case (3)
- Daniel M'Kenzie v. Archibald Buchanan and Company — Information, 6 Sep 1792September 6, 1792 Information of Daniel M'Kenzie, spinner, arguing that his masters unlawfully deducted from his wages without contractual authority
- Daniel Mackenzie v. Messrs James and Archibald Buchanans and Company — Information, 11 Oct 1792October 11, 1792 Information of Messrs James and Archibald Buchanans and Company, arguing that deductions from wages are lawful under their indenture with Daniel Mackenzie
- Buchanans — Petition, 27 Feb 1793February 27, 1793 Petition of James and Archibald Buchanans and Company, asking the Court to overturn an inner-house interlocutor
People & places in this case
People involved
- Archibald Buchanan — Party
- Donald Macdonald — Party
- James Buchan, W.S. — Party
- James Knox — Party
- David Miller — Party
- Sir James Montgomery, of Stanhope, Bart. — Advocate for Party
- Allan Maconochie, Lord Meadowbank — Advocate for Party
- William Craig, Lord Craig — Lord Ordinary
- William Alexander, of Blackhouse — Named in case documents
- James Clark — Named in case documents
- James Wood — Named in case documents
- Robert Pitcairn — Named in case documents
- Alexander Bayne — Named in case documents
- John Gloag — Named in case documents
Places
- Perth (principal)
- Perthshire
- Deanston House
- Glasgow
- Kilmadock
