The Lords repelled the objection to coaliers, burgesses of a town, voting in the election of its magistrates, that they were slaves, and under influence.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In a process, wherein the election of magistrates and counsellors for the burgh of Rutherglen at Michaelmas 1746, was disputed, the question turning on the validity of the votes of certain coaliers, who were burgesses of the town, and who had concurred with the other incorporated burgesses to make a leet of eight, out of which four behoved to be chosen by the magistrates to be upon the council; it was objected, That the right of election ought not to be committed to persons so much dependent as coaliers were, whose masters had a right to their service, and could detain them from attending any election; could commit them to a private prison; and who were so little freemen, as to be an exception to the act against wrongous imprisonment, which is the security of the liberty of the subject.
Answered, There is no state of slavery with us; and a man's dependence as a servant, will not take from him a right otherwise competent; although in fact a coalier may be detained from an election, yet if he is present, he must be allowed to vote; and perhaps his master, who would arbitrarily hinder him, may be compelled by order of law to allow him to go. Coaliers are capable of property; and if one of them were possest of a freehold, he would surely be allowed to vote for a member of Parliament.
One of the Lords declared he thought this might be a reason of reducing their burgess tickets; but as they were in possession of all the other rights of burgesses, their votes, while they continued so, behoved to be sustained.
The Lords, 15th January, Found the whole of the incorporated burgesses, whether coaliers or not, entitled to vote and poll in leeting Eight; and repelled the objection to the coaliers' votes: And, on bill and answers, adhered.
Act. Arch. Hamilton & W. Grant.Alt. J. Graham & Maitland.Clerk, Forbes.
Fol. Dic. v. 3. p. 99. D. Falconer, v. 1. No 171. p. 228.
