Town Council of Burgh, and Bailie Court. - Burgh of Barony.
Hamilton v. Arbuthnot
Date: 19 June 1750 Case No. No 384.
Action of damages for a verbal injury, found competent before the Bailies of Edinburgh.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Hugh Hamilton merchant in Edinburgh, having brought a complaint before the Bailies of Edinburgh against Robert Arbuthnot merchant there, for having spread a report among ladies and others, that the goods in his shop, whereof he had advertised a sale, were a bite, that they were rotten and mildewed trash, and that it would be found so, the Bailies 'allowed a proof;' and on advising thereof, 'Found the complaint proven, and decerned Arbuthnot in L. 40 Sterling of damage.'
Arbuthnot presented a bill of suspension, wherein he objected first, to the competency of the Court to judge in questions of scandal; 2dly, To the extent of the sum decerned, as extravagant, when the complainer could qualify no damage.
The Lords, on report, 'remitted to the Ordinary to refuse the bill.'
Though the Commissaries are the only competent Judges in matters of scandal, process of verbal injuries lies before the ordinary Judges; nor in cases of this kind can there be a strict calculation of the damage actually sustained; and as the Bailies of Edinburgh are all merchants, there could be no fitter persons to judge of the extent of the damage, and a great part of the sum must have been expended in the process. See Reparation.
Fol. Dic. v. 3. p. 362. Kilkerran, ( Reparation.) No 7. p. 491.
