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 Smith v John Lennox. [1707] 4 Brn 662 (22 March 1707)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1707/Brn040662-0158.html
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 Smith v. John Lennox
Date: 22 March 1707
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
James Smith, glover, against John Lennox, deacon of the incorporation of the skinners and glovers in Edinburgh. Smith being a freeman in that trade, but using the help of one Simpson and other unfreemen, he is convened by the trade for contravening the rules and acts of their calling; and Bailie Cleghorn offering him a bond to subscribe for observing their rules; and he, declining to do it, was, for his disobedience, put in prison, and 18 pairs of kid-leather gloves taken from him. Whereon he gives in a suspension, and charge to set at liberty, with a declarator, that, being a freeman, he had as much liberty to work as any of them; and that their rancour at him was, because he sold cheaper than they. His reasons of suspension were, that the warrant for his imprisonment was illegal, contrary to the Act of Parliament 1701, not bearing the cause. 2do, That no bonds can be imposed on the lieges but what are enjoined by public authority.
Answered,—Their rules and constitutions had brought the manufactory of gloves to great perfection; one of which was, to name visitors and censors to debar unfreemen, and to try the sufficiency of the work; and that this Smith both employed unfreemen and likewise vended most insufficient work, and therefore was imprisoned.
The Lords thought it too summary; and therefore ordained him to be set at liberty, without caution or consignation.
Then Smith gave in a bill, Alleging, That, by their bangistry and oppression, the trade had damnified him in £200 Scots by his imprisonment and loss of trade; and therefore craved that both the deacon and bailie might be condemned in his expenses for their illegal and irregular procedure.
The Lords referred it to the Lord Forglan reporter, to modify his damage, after hearing parties, if he saw cause.
