Jurisdiction of the Court of Session, in reviewing the procedure of Ecclesiastical Courts.
David Dickson of Kilbucho v. The Heritors of the Parish of Newlands
Date: 6 February 1768 Case No. No 184.
A minister pursued the heritors for payment of his stipend, who produced an extract of the sentence of his deposition by the presbytery, under the hands of their clerk. The Lords found, that the extract was not proper evidence of the deposition, and decerned for the stipend.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Mr Dickson had for many years been settled minister of the parish of Newlands; but, in April 1767, the presbytery of Peebles, upon an action which had been brought before them, accusing Mr Dickson of sundry irregularities, pronounced a sentence, deposing him from the office of the ministry; and the Heritors of the parish having refused to pay Mr Dickson his stipend, in regard of the above mentioned sentence of deposition, and that another minister had been presented to the kirk by the patron, Mr Dickson charged the Heritors with horning, which charge they suspended.
The question came before Lord Stonefield as Ordinary, when it was pleaded for the charger, That the sentence of deposition, said to be pronounced by the presbytery was void and null, in terms of the act of Parliament 1686, cap. 3. and sundry acts of assembly, not having been signed by the moderator, or any of the members of the presbytery; and farther, that the proceedings upon which the sentence is said to be founded, were so irregular and informal, that no faith whatever could be given to them, or effect to the decree pronounced upon them.
Answered for the suspenders; The act of Parliament 1686 relates only to civil, but not to ecclesiastical judicatories; that it was not the practice of church-judicatories to sign their sentences; and, as an extract of the sentence of deposition under the hand of the presbytery-clerk had been produced, the suspenders were not in safety to pay to the charger. And it was further argued, That it was not competent for the civil court to look into the proceedings of the ecclesiastical court, as an extract of the sentence was produced.
The Lord Ordinary, before answer, allowed a proof as to the practice of the presbytery of Peebles in signing their minutes aud proceedings; and a proof being led, and reported, his Lordship ordered memorials to the Court;. upon advising of which, the following judgment was pronounced.
“On report of Lord Stonefield, and in respect there is no proper evidence produced of the charger Mr Dickson's being deposed, the Lords find the letters orderly proceeded, and decern.”
For the Charger, Al. Elphinston.For the Suspenders, Al. Wight.Clerk, ———.
Fol. Dic. v. 3. p. 346. Fac. Col. No 73. p. 128.
