Generally restricted to the provost and bailies (mayor and aldermen) of boroughs.
Definition source
Kinnear, J. B., Digest of House of Lords Cases Decided on Appeal from Scotland, 1709-1864 — Glossary of Scottish Law Terms (Edinburgh, 1865). Public domain.
Legal Subject: Magistrate |
| Case | Date | Legal Subject | Abstract |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counsellors of the Burgh of Burntisland | 1789 | Election contest, Magistrate, Election, Aliment, Decreet-Arbitral, Reduction | The Provost, magistrates, and counsellors of Burntisland defended the validity of the burgh’s 1789 election of counsellors against complaints alleging bribery and seeking voidance or partial relief. Alexander Pitcairn petitioned the Court to alter a recent interlocutor that had ruled against his election as a counsellor, while William Muir and James Davidson also pursued complaints regarding the election, prompting answers from the magistrates and subsequent duplies. The magistrates later submitted a memorial arguing that Muir and Davidson’s election was void due to their non-residence and foreign status. |
| Fleshers of Glasgow v. Magistrates of Glasgow | 1802 | Tax, Rent, Duty (Tax), Magistrate | In 1744, the Magistrates and Town-Council of Glasgow erected a slaughterhouse for the city's butchers use, and an act of council decided that those who used the slaughterhouse would pay a rate proportionate to the amount of cattle slaughtered. In 1755, public markets were erected for the butchers to use, and the Magistrates made regulations that rents and duties should be paid by those who used these markets. In 1799, the Magistrates raised the dues of the beef and mutton markets one-third more than the former rate, and reserved the right to themselves to adjust this rate after a year's time. The Incorporation of Fleshers brought a case against the Magistrates, and the case was decided in their favor, holding that the Magistrates of a royal burgh have no right to impose a tax upon the inhabitants without the consent of the Legislature--they have as little right to increase any duties that have been previously imposed, and as the Sovereign himself has no power of levying such taxes, any reservation of such a right in the articles of the Union is altogether mefiectual. (Scot's digest) |
| James Andrew, and Others, Merchant-Counsellors of the Burgh of Linlithgow, and Thomas Henderson, Deacon of the Incorporation of Weavers there v. Henry Gillies, Provost of Linlithgow, and Others | 1775 | Election, Election contest, Burgess, Debt, Tax, Magistrate | The 1774 election of the council of Linlithgow produced three counsellors who did not reside in the burgh. Several members of the council sought a declaration from the court that the three non-residents were ineligible to serve, and that their election was therefore null and void. The burgh's provost, ten other members of council, and the challenged counsellors opposed such an order, claiming that the suit was politically motivated. The defenders argued that it was unnecessary for counsellors to reside in the burgh, that the pursuers were barred from suing because they had concurred in the election, and that many non-residents had served as counsellors over the years. |
| James Buchanan, Dean of Guild of Glasgow v. Patrick Bell | 1774 | Adjudication, Public Police, Courts, Magistrate, Privilege, Jurisdiction | This case was about the police powers of Glasgow’s dean of guild, a magistrate who supervised buildings. In 1773, the dean and his council ordered residents to take down their “water barges,” which were affixed to buildings in order to carry water away. Suspender Patrick Bell ignored the new rule and was individually ordered to take down his water barge. Bell brought a bill of suspension before the Court of Session. He argued that the dean of guild lacked authority to create regulations that were not based on common law or a statute; therefore, according to Bell, the dean of guild could not require removal of the water barge unless it constituted a nuisance or a trespass. The dean of guild responded that the order was within his jurisdiction, and that it was justified because the water barges were “ugly to the eye,” served to narrow the street, and poured water out onto passing pedestrians. |
| James Duff and William Duff v. Laurence Sutherland | 1793 | Arrestment, Decreet-Arbitral, Debt, Assignation, Magistrate, Sequestration | James Duff in Nethertown and William Duff in Hillockhead of Glass pursued Laurence Sutherland, bailie of Elgin, for obstructing the execution of a caption and withholding consigned money and papers. The complainers asked the court to remit the bailie’s conduct, while Sutherland defended his refusal to incarcerate the debtor and retain the funds, asserting that the complaint was incompetent and that his actions were proper given the complainers’ unlawful proceedings and acquiescence in their own error. He further answered claims of damages and wrongful seizure, maintaining that his conduct had been justified under the circumstances. |
| John Aitchison and others v. The Magistrates and Billet-Master of Haddington | 1795 | Interlocutor, Burgh, Thirlage, Suspension, Representation, Magistrate |
Documents discussing this subject (43)
- Alexander Chrystie and Andrew Chrystie v. William Ferguson, James Orrock, Hugh Bairnsfather, Archibald Bairnsfather, William Kilgour, John Thomson and John Butler — Answers, 13 Jan 1789
- Alexander Chrystie v. William Ferguson — Answers, 13 Jan 1789
- Alexander Grant v. Lewis Ray and others — Interrogatories, 11 Aug 1767
- Alexander Lauder Smith and Thomas Bookless Brewer v. Robert Hog, Charles Dalrymple, Archibald Lauder, Sir Hew Dalrymple, Captain Robert Stair Dalrymple, George Donaldson, John Dobie, Hugh Miln, and Hew Lauder — Replies, 9 Jan 1768
- Andrew Gray v. Magistrates of the Town of Dumfries — Answers, 7 Oct 1780 [2]
- ANSWERS FOR James Couts senior, Provost, Peter Skinner and Alexander Chrystie senior, Baillies, George Murison Dean of Guild, David Skinner, James Couts junior, James Dickson senio
- APPENDIX. No. I. SET OF THE BURGH OF QUEENSFERRY
- APPENDIX. Sett and Constitution of the City of St. Andrews.
- COMPLAINER'S STATEMENT of FACTS, and ANSWERS thereto for RESPONDENTS.
- Counsellors of the Burgh of Burntisland — Petition, 5 Mar 1790
- Cowley — Petition, 25 Nov 1777
- George Beck v. John Gass — Answers, 17 Feb 1815
- Heritors of North Leith v. The Kirk Session — Information, 12 May 1812
- Hislop — Petition, 22 May 1795
- James Andrew, and Others, Merchant-Counsellors of the Burgh of Linlithgow, and Thomas Henderson, Deacon of the Incorporation of Weavers there v. Henry Gillies, Provost of Linlithgow, and Others — Answers, 21 Feb 1775
- James Bruce v. James Hogg — Replies, 14 Jan 1791
- James Buchanan, Dean of Guild of Glasgow v. Patrick Bell — Petition, 19 Jul 1774
- James Crie, Robert Robertson, John Robertson of Tilliebelton, William Stewart, Thomas Beveridge and Patrick Cri v. William Fergusson, John Fechney, James Davidson, John M'Leish, Joseph Austin, James Brown and Allan Clark — Information, 23 Dec 1740
- James Duff and William Duff v. Laurence Sutherland — Answers, 22 Jun 1793
- James Duff and William Duff v. Laurence Sutherland — Answers, 7 Jan 1794
- James Duff and William Duff v. Laurence Sutherland — Replies, 10 Oct 1793
- James Duff in Netherton and William Duff in Hillockhead of Glass v. Lawrence Sutherland of Greenhall — Replies, 5 Sep 1793
- James Montgomery v. The Fourteen Incorporated Trades of Glasgow — Report, 1 Nov 1791
- John Cooper v. John William Bell & Others — Bill of Suspension, 15 Jan 1836
- John Denny, &c. v. George Marquis of Lorne, &c. — Memorial, 7 Feb 1797
- John Learmonth, Esq. and others v. The Magistrates of Canongate — Replies, 19 Jan 1789
- LC Volume 04 — Petition, 3 Jul 1815
- Main v. High — Notesofthe Decisions, 1 Aug 1789
- Mr John Morthland, Advocate, and John Johnstone, Printer in Edinburgh v. John Cadell, Esq; of Cockenzie — Answers, 10 Dec 1799
- Petition and Complaint — Petition & Complaint Mr John Morthland
- Petition — Alexander Lauder Smith, Thomas Bookless Brewer, and Thomas Whitehead Taylor in Northberwick, Inhabitant-burgesses of the said Borough, Humbly Sheweth
- Petition — James Thomson, Writer in Elgin, Procurator-Fiscal of the Burgh of Elgin for the Public Interest
- Petition — William Chalmers, Son of Alexander Chalmers Farmer at Gateside
- Reclaiming Petition — Robert Primrose, Surgeon in Musselburgh
- REVISED ANSWERS for the Respondents.
- Robert Munro v. John Baxter, Provost of Cupar, and Other Burgesses — Answers, 25 Apr 1772
- Thomas Muckarsie v. Archibald Walker — Petition and Complaint, 20 May 1828
- William Ferguson v. William Muir and James Davidson — Memorial, 11 May 1791
- William M'Indoe v. Major Cowley and Ensign Wallace — Proof, 8 Apr 1777
- William Muir and James Davidson v. William Fergusson and others — Answers, 24 Dec 1790
- William Muir and James Durie v. William Ferguson — Duplies, 22 Feb 1791
- William Muirhead v. John Gillies and Others — Information, 8 Jan 1793
- [Lord Milton Reporter.] INFORMATION