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 >> James Wilson v James Jackson [1775] Hailes 608 (18 January 1775) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1775/Hailes020608-0352.html Cite as: [1775] Hailes 608 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
[1775] Hailes 608
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR DAVID DALRYMPLE, LORD HAILES.
Subject_2 USURY.
Subject_3 How and before what Court competent to be tried: If triable without a jury, and at the instance of the procurator-fiscal alone, in case the private party disclaims the process.
Date: James Wilson
v.
James Jackson
18 January 1775 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
[Faculty Collection, VII. 14; Dictionary, 16,433.]
Gardenston. If such petty usuries might not be tried by the Sheriff, it would be a great encouragement to such practices, which are but too common already among the lower classes of people. As to trials by jury, I fairly own that I am none of those who can join in the cry of John Bull about juries, who thinks that his country alone is free because it has juries. In England it is the judge who directs the jury whenever they go right. I admire juries in cases of treason, and in revenue causes; for we have seen from history that bad effects arise from the want of them.
Coalston. As to the first point, I am of the opinion given; the more especially by reason of the decision, 26th June 1766, Mackechnie against Wallace. As to the second, I do not like juries in civil causes, but I have ever been of opinion that it is a great and important privilege,—that of being tried by a jury in matters criminal. I am sorry to see that the line has not been well drawn of late between causes to be tried with or without a jury. I think, that in cases only inferring fine and imprisonment, or smaller punishment, there is no necessity for a jury.
President. I am sorry to see that the practice of exacting above the legal interest of money prevails in Paisley. The former case, in 1766, came from
Paisley, with circumstances very similar. It would be dreadful, were the civil penalties not to be exigible unless in an action before the Court of Justiciary. This would, in effect, be equal to a repeal of a law, very necessary for the lower sort of people, who are apt to offend in this way. On the 18th January 1775, “the Lords found the usurious contract proved, and therefore decerned in the treble penalties.”
Act. Ch. Hay. Alt. G. Wallace. Reporter, Auchinleck.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
