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!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
Scottish Court of Session Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Archibald Hope v William Leitch, Grieve of Lord Abercorn's Coal-Work. [1769] 5 Brn 418 (11 February 1769) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1769/Brn050418-0379.html Cite as: [1769] 5 Brn 418 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
[1769] 5 Brn 418
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by ALEXANDER TAIT, CLERK OF SESSION, one of the reporters for the faculty.
Subject_2 COALLIERS.
Date: Archibald Hope
v.
William Leitch, Grieve of Lord Abercorn's Coal-Work
11 February 1769 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Every person versant in coal-works knows how many and various are the interruptions which occur in the management of a coalliery. An accident of this kind having happened in the coal-works of Edmonstone, under lease to Mr Archibald Hope, several of his colliers deserted, and went in quest of work in other collieries, declaring that they would not work one inch beyond the march of ground in which Edmonstone coal was situated, to which they had respectively engaged; and this, notwithstanding that Mr Hope offered them as good bread and equally convenient work in a neighbouring coal belonging to him, either in property or under lease.
The Lords gave judgment against the coalliers upon that point, (11th February 1769.) Coalliers are not so properly ascripti glebœ as domino; and if a master is entitled to retain colliers, on his alimenting them,—why may not he do so, upon giving them work equally advantageous and convenient at a neighbouring coalliery?
For the above see 4 New Coll., p. 337.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
