Powers and Privileges of Corporations. - Employment of the Funds.
The Coopers in Perth v. Davidson and Others
Date: 8 July 1752 Case No. No 112.
The privileges of corporations will be interpreted, so that they will not be allowed to interfere with undertakings of great public utility.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The fishing company in Perth having contracted with Davidson and others, coopers, but not freemen of the burgh, to make the barrels and other vessels for the use of the company, the Corporation of Coopers brought a process before the magistrates of Perth for having them debarred from usurping the privileges of the corporation. In which process, compearance was made for the fishing company, who pleaded, That as burgesses of Perth, they were entitled to deal in this branch of foreign trade, and consequently could, by themselves, or others employed by them, whether freemen or not, prepare and make all such barrels and other vessels as were necessary for exporting their salmon: That the exclusive privilege of the corporation went no farther than a monopoly of making such pieces of work as were to be exposed to sale within the burgh, but could not be extended so far as to debar them either from importing barrels ready made, or from employing any skilful persons, freemen or not, to make such barrels and vessels as were necessary for carrying on the trade which they were entitled to deal in.
As this defence imported an acknowledgement of the facts libelled, and as the fishers had failed in the proof which the Magistrates had allowed them, of the coopers of Perth being insufficient tradesmen, the Magistrates found, ‘That the defenders had encroached upon the privilege of the wright calling, and therefore did inhibit and discharge them in all time coming from working in the cooper trade within the burgh or liberties, under the penalty of L. 5 for each transgression.
Of this decree the defenders having obtained suspension, and the Ordinary having reported the debate, the Lords at discussing, by a great plurality, found ‘That the fishing company, the suspenders, were at liberty to employ their own servants in making casks and barrels for curing the salmon exported by them.’
The minority were not displeased with the Court's so finding, as it were to be wished that corporations had no such exclusive powers; but they doubted of the point of law: They thought the company could not employ their servants to make the casks, more than they could make the casks to be sold in the town of Perth: And they put the case of persons making a trade of exporting empty casks, and asked, If it were pleadable that they could employ their own servants to make such casks?
The suspenders in their information had referred to the case of Tenant, No 65. p. 1934. and to the case of Buntein and Flockhart, vintners in Dunfermline, No 62. p. 1926. 26th January 1743. But it was not by any of the Lords said that these cases were any ways similar to the present case; they could only apply where the casks were made for curing fish for the use of the families of the persons who cured them. See No 68. p. 1938.
