BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom House of Lords Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom House of Lords Decisions >> Sir David Maxwell of Cardoness, Bart., and Others, Heritors of the parish of Anwoth, in the Stewartry of Kirkcudbright v. Robert Gordon, Writer, Factor, appointed by the Reverend the Presbytery of Kirkcudbright [1816] UKHL 6_Paton_184 (20 June 1816)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1816/6_Paton_184.html
Cite as: [1816] UKHL 6_Paton_184

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


SCOTTISH_HoL_JURY_COURT

Page: 184

(1816) 6 Paton 184

CASES DECIDED IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS, UPON APPEAL FROM THE COURTS OF SCOTLAND.

No. 40


[Dow., Vol. iv., p. 279.]

Sir David Maxwell of Cardoness, Bart., and Others, Heritors of the parish of Anwoth, in the Stewartry of Kirkcudbright,     Appellants


v.

Robert Gordon, Writer, Factor, appointed by the Reverend the Presbytery of Kirkcudbright,     Respondent

Page: 185

House of Lords, 20th June 1816.

Subject_Church — Presbytery's Powers to Order the Building of Do. —

Held that the Presbytery's powers were rightly exercised, in ordering a new church to be built, and failing the heritors obeying that order, of proceeding themselves to get the church built, and decerning for the expense thereof against the heritors. Affirmed in the House of Lords, with a declaration.

A complaint having been made to the Presbytery of Kirkcudbright, of the insufficient and ruinous state of the church of the parish of Anwoth, they, after examining tradesmen as to that fact, decided that a new church was absolutely necessary. Although almost all the heritors of the parish were present, by themselves or agents, when this investigation and decision took place, the presbytery afterwards proceeding with all the regularity and form capable of being observed in such cases, repeatedly called upon the heritors to take the necessary measures for rebuilding the church, and to assess themselves in the expense; but the heritors having failed to do so, the presbytery, after various meetings, and much deliberation on the matter, were obliged to take upon themselves the exercise of the jurisdiction conferred upon them by the law of Scotland. They accordingly procured plans of the proposed church, and estimates of the expense of building it; they contracted with tradesmen, and got the church built; they then decerned against the heritors for the amount of the necessary sums, and payment having been refused, letters of horning were raised on the decree, on which the heritors were charged at the instance of the respondent, factor, appointed by the presbytery to collect the assessment.

A bill of suspension of the charge was brought on the ground, that the proceedings of the presbytery were not only precipitate, but altogether irregular and illegal;—That it was not within the province of the presbytery to interfere, but belonged of right to the heritors, and that on assessing the heritors for the amount, they had omitted to assess the feuars of the town proportionally, in terms of a former decision of the House of Lords.

The Lord Ordinary and the Court refused the bill.

Upon appeal to the House of Lords, the following judgment was pronounced.

Ante, vol. iv. p. 356.

It is ordered, that the interlocutors complained of, excepting in as far as the same relate to the allocation of the

Page: 186

expenses of rebuilding the church be affirmed. And it is ordered, that, with regard to such allocation, and particularly the questions, whether such allocation ought to be made according to the real or valued rent of the persons liable to pay the same, and whether the feuars of the village of Gatehouse-of-Fleet are liable to such allocation, the case be remitted back to the Court of Session to reconsider these points, in case the appellants shall, within four months after the date of this judgment, apply to the said Court by petition for such reconsideration, the said Court, in the event of such reconsideration, having regard to the rule declared by the judgment pronounced by this House in the case of Peterhead, on the 24th June 1802; and it is further ordered, that in case the said appellants do not apply to the said Court within four months, as above directed, that the said interlocutors be, and the same are, wholly affirmed.

Counsel: For the Appellants, Sir Saml. Romilly, Fra. Horner.
For the Respondents, Wm. Adam, H. Brougham.

1816


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1816/6_Paton_184.html