Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Subject_1 BURGH ROYAL.

Trades of Burntisland
v.
The Magistrates

Date: 15 December 1752
Case No. No. 37.

Whether a non-resident Burgess might be chosen Provost?

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

In a declarator between the Trades and Magistrates of Burntisland, the Lords, in respect of the set of the Burgh in 1708, (recorded by the Royal Burghs in 1710) certifying the custom then, and for 60 or 70 years before, and in respect of the custom since that time, found that any nobleman or gentleman, though no merchant nor residenter in the Burgh, might be chosen Provost; and that in that case, he was supernumerary over and above their ordinary council of 21, but if he was a residing trafficker, that then he was one of the 21; and that notwithstanding the acts of Parliament, that officers in Burgh should be residing traffickers, and notwithstanding a decreet of Session in 1681, that the Town Council should consist of 21 persons, viz. fourteen residing merchant traffickers and seven trades; and a decreet-arbitral in 1727, on a submission signed by one of the Bailies for the Guildry, and the Convener for the Trades; which decreet they thought was not binding, because the submission was not signed by the proper parties. They also found that the seven Deacons of Crafts were not virtute officii Councillors, but that the Town Council had the election of the seven Trades' Councillors, one out of each Craft.