Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JOHN LAUDER OF FOUNTAINHALL Subject_2 SUMMER SESSION.
Riddel of Haining v. Elliot
Date: 26 February 1681
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The case of Riddel of Haining and Elliot was much agitated. One accused of theft had found caution, under the pain of 5,000 merks, to answer at the court kept by the Commissioners of the Borders; and he not appearing, and thereupon they having found by their decreet that the bond was forfeited:—of this decreet there was a suspension passed by the Lords of Session. Whereupon a complaint was given in to the Lords of Privy Council by the Commissioners of the Borders, that their commission, flowing upon the broad seals of both kingdoms, conform to the 2d Act, Pari. 1612, they were not accountable to the Scotch Council.
The Lords of Council found not themselves judges competent to the decreets of these Commissioners, but found their determinations ultimate, and not to be revised by any but by his Majesty and the Parliaments of the two nations.
Then, against the Lords of Session, it was Alleged, for the Commissioners, That the matter was no ways civil but criminal, and so fell not within the compass of the Session's cognizance.
The President and other Lords, waving that question anent the interfering of jurisdictions, found the letters orderly proceeded in Haining's favours, and repelled the reasons of suspension. Which was tacitly to assume a power of judging these decreets. See 3d October 1677, Rutherford.
