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 >>
Sir Ludovick Grant of Grant, Bart. and Others, v Archibald Duff Sheriff-clerk of the County of Elgin. [1773] Mor 8778 (24 February 1773)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1773/Mor2108778-157.html Cite as:
[1773] Mor 8778
Subject_1 MEMBER of PARLIAMENT. Subject_2 DIVISION IV.
Decisions common to qualifications upon the old extent and valuation.
Subject_3 SECT. IV.
Trust Oath.
Sir Ludovick Grant of Grant, Bart and Others, v. Archibald Duff Sheriff-clerk of the County of Elgin
Date: 24 February 1773 Case No. No 157.
Found as above.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
A complaint was presented by Sir Ludovick Grant, and certain other freeholders, who attended at the last Michaelmas meeting of freeholders for the county of Elgin, which was held the 2d October 1772, charging, that Archibald Duff, acting in the character of Sheriff-clerk of said county, had been guilty of the offence enacted by the 16th of his late Majesty in the instances therein set forth, and, of consequence, had incurred the statutory penalty.
The point on which the merits of the complaint chiefly turned was, whether the trust oath could be legally tendered, (as in fact it was, and refused to be taken, at this meeting), before the choice of the preses and clerk; as, if not, Mr Duff's conduct deserved no blame. In which view, he argued, that the penult clause in the act 7th of the late King, founded on in the complaint, could not be meant to include the case of the trust-oath, which is regulated by a preceding clause of the same statute; and that the oaths spoke of in the penult clause are those appointed by law to be taken by electors in general, including delegates of burghs; which are, the oaths to government, but not the trust-oath, which respects alone the qualification of freeholders.
The judgment which Court gave upon this complaint imported, that the trust-oath was, in this case, legally tendered before the choice of preses and clerk; and that so stood the law. But this judgment was reversed in the House of Lords, March 31st 1773.
Act. Dean of Faculty, Sol. General.Alt. Ilay Campbell.Clerk, Pringle.
Fol. Dic. v. 3. p. 421. Fac. Col. No 62. p. 152.
