Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by WILLIAM FORBES, ADVOCATE.
Date: The Magistrates of Glasgow, and their Stent-Masters,
v.
Robert Sanders of Aldhouse, Printer in Glasgow
17 July 1711 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
King Charles the Second, having, by his gift and patent under the great seal, May 12, 1671, granted to Andrew Anderson, his partners, substitutes, and assignees, the sole privilege of printing and causing to be printed and published, all manner of books, learned or vulgar, within Scotland, together with the direction and regulation of all other presses there, and an express immunity and exemption from taxations, stents, annuities, and impositions upon the said office or trade to him and his foresaids, for the space of forty-one years after his entry thereto: Andrew Anderson assumed four printers as his co-partners in the art of printing, and communicated to them the privilege of the gift. Robert Sanders
(who hath right by progress from one of these four partners, to an eighth part of the gift,) being charged by the Magistrates of Glasgow and their stent-masters, for payment of his proportion of stent for his trade; he suspended upon this ground, that the assignment in his favours did entitle him to an exemption from stent. But the Lords found, that transferring a share of the gift by progress to the suspender, did not transfer to him an immunity from public burdens. Seeing the heir of Andrew Anderson and his other partners do still claim to enjoy the same immunity and exemption. And albeit the sovereign hath power to name one of every employment to be his own servant therein, with special immunities and exemptions to that person, and such partners as he should assume; it were absurd to think, that that gift might be divided and subdivided in infinitum, or in so many parts as would turn the privilege to be universal. Andrew Anderson, or his partners, might indeed denude themselves, by assigning their share of the gift and privilege to another, who comes in their place; but could not both give away and retain the same privilege. Dans et retinens nihil dat. Page 525.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting