Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Subject_1 MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT.

Lord Roystoun's Complaint

1743, July 20.
Case No. No. 20.

Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy

Royston complained that the last Michaelmas court in his absence and without any notice given him to produce his writs had expunged him out of the roll, on which he had stood from 1708, against which Lord Fortrose had protested and required the meeting to attend this court 15th January last for a determination, and therefore praying redress. We then allowed him to serve the parties concerned with a copy, and he served the person who in the minutes had objected, and the President of the meeting, who put in answers, and parties being heard, we found that this complaint was competent notwithstanding the late act concerning elections, (quibusdam renit. inter quos President, as I thought, et me.) 2dly, We found it competent, though Royston was not there to object to the judgment, and that Fortrose who did protest was not a petitioner, in respect of the minutes agreeing in effect to answer Royston if he should complain. 3dly, We sustained it, though only the person objecting and the President were served with a copy, as we did formerly in the case of the Shire of Sutherland. 4thly, We found the proceedings of the meeting as to Hoyston void and null, and ordered him to be reponed to the roll, and would not even hear the defenders to show cause why he should not be upon the roll.