BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you
consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it
will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free
access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
You are here:BAILII >>
Databases >>
Scottish Court of Session Decisions >>
James Tait v Samuel Gray, Fiscal of Edinbubgh. [1705] 4 Brn 610 (28 February 1705)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1705/Brn040610-0104.html Cite as:
[1705] 4 Brn 610
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JOHN LAUDER OF FOUNTAINHALL. Subject_2 I sat in the Outer-House this week.
James Tait v. Samuel Gray, Fiscal of Edinbubgh
Date: 28 February 1705
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
James Tait, servant to Mr John Falconer, younger of Phesdo, against Mr Samuel Gray, procurator-fiscal to the Town of Edinburgh. Some English stockings and silk stuffs, which are prohibited by the Act of Parliament 1700, being seized; and, in carrying them away, this Tait and others assaulted the town-officers who were carrying them, and took away a pock, containing a quantity of these stuffs, from them: whereon Tait being apprehended and imprisoned, he gave in a bill of suspension, complaining he was illegally incarcerated, without a previous subscribed information; and they had refused bail, contrary to the late act for personal liberty, and had taken the officers as witnesses against him, though inhabile; seeing, if the goods were either lost or embezzled by their fraud or negligence, they became answerable therefore.
The Lords considered, that these acts against imported prohibited goods did not receive punctual and rigorous execution, but their transgression was much connived at; and lately, when such goods were seized in Captain Charters's custody, that he run with his sword at some of the manufactory-men; yet this riot was not resented, but stifled; therefore the Lords would not pass his bill of suspension, without he found sufficient caution to pay the damages, and undergo the censure that should be inflicted on him, if found liable.
