Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JOHN LAUDER OF FOUNTAINHALL.
The Coble-Fishers on the Don v. The Heritors of the Cruives
Date: 17 November 1692
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Mersington reported the objections against the hability of the witnesses adduced at the visitation of the salmon-fishing on Don, made by the coble fishers against the heritors of the cruives, viz. against Dr. Middleton, that he was son-in-law to James Gordon of Seton, who was a party that could tine and win in this cause, being an heritor of a coble. The Lords thought it hard to admit him, unless there was penuria testium, which would appear at advising. But their manner of fishing was not such a latent thing, as that there could be a penury for clearing it. 2do, It was objected that the fishers could not be habile witnesses, because they were hired servants to the coble-heritors, and who could turn them off.
Answered, they were not domestics, and they were common servants to the cruive-men, as well as to the coble-fishers, and were not constant servants, but only at set times of the year, and could no more be rejected than a mason, wright, or ditcher, employed by us.
The Lords found them legal witnesses, unless they dwelt on the lands belonging to the coble-men, and were not cottars, but removeable by them.
[See the subsequent part of the report of this case, Dictionary, p. 14287.]
