Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JOHN LAUDER OF FOUNTAINHALL. Subject_2 This week I sat in the Outer-House, and so the observes are the fewer.
Robert Forrester v. Captain Sletzer
Date: 27 July 1700
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Robert Forrester, late soldier, pursuing Captain Sletzer for some remains of his pay during twenty-eight months of his service:
Alleged,—He must have retention of fourpence per diem out of his pay of tenpence, on the account of clothing-money, conform to the custom of the army.
Answered,— He was content to bear his share of the poundage, or the invalid's money, but for clothing there could be no retention, because he received no pay from his captain during all that time; and, esto there were a practice among the captains, it was corruptela rather than consuetudo; neither was there any instruction or article allowing the same.
Replied,—This retention was used in Flanders, and all other places; and his Majesty knew of it, and allotted it as one of the perquisites of the officers; and it could not be taken from them.
Some thought this question more competent before the Treasury or a courtmartial than the Session. Others were for trying the custom; but the generality of the Lords thought it an act of oppression to detain any part of the poor soldiers' pay on account of clothing, which was never given them; and therefore repelled the Captain's allegeance. Which interlocutor was much disrelished by the officers of the army.
