Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Subject_1 MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT.

Sutherland of Swinzie
v.
Sutherland of Langwell

Date: 8 February 1751
Case No. No. 52.

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

Sutherland of Swinzie having complained for refusing to enrol him, though he produced a sentence of the Commissioners of Supply, dividing the valuation of his lands of Risple from the lands of Langwell, whereby the first was valued at L.4 12s.;—the defence was, that the sentence was most partial and iniquitous, and for that reason they had raised reduction, wherefore the complaint was delayed till the reduction should come in, and which was reported by me this day:—the reasons of reduction were chiefly two. 1st, That the Commissioners had not qualified by taking the oaths. Answered, The act authorizes them to act, if they either had already qualified or should qualify, and they had all formerly qualified. Replied, The Supply Act 1748 and 1749 introduced another proviso obliging the Commissioners to qualify anew before they act in execution of these acts. Duplied, That proviso has an annexed penalty of L.20 sterling;—Ergo, Their acts are not void, only the penalty is incurred.—The second reason was, great iniquity in making the division. Answered, These Commissioners are Commissioners of Parliament, and none of their proceedings can be reviewed by the Courts of law. We were very unwilling to determine this last point, because of difficulty, and likewise of manifold inconveniencies on both sides, therefore we determined the first, and found these Commissioners not capable to act, and dismissed the complaint. Vide Sir John Gordon's Case, No. 53. (See No. 58.)