Alexander Young and others v. Andrew Johnston and others — Memorial, 21 Jul 1767

July 2 1. 1767. M E M O R I A L •. F O R Alexander Young Stationer in Anstruther-Easter, George Dars ie Shoemaker there, Thomas Smith Shoemaker there, Robert Bridges Baker there, all Counsellors o f faid Borough, for the Year preceding Michaelmas 1 766; Robert Brown Merchant there, Thomas Scot Wheel­ wright there, and John Smith Watchmaker there, Pur- suers; A G A I N S T Andrew Johnston o f Rennyhill, and others, pretending to be elected Bailies, Treasurer, and Counsellors of said Borough of Anstrutber-Easter, at Michaelmas 1765, Defenders. A Nstruther-Easter, like several other boroughs in theneighbourhood, has a great deal of debt, amounting to a capital of about L. 500 Sterling, and but a small common good. It appears, from the evidence to be afterwards stated, that on a former political occasion in Sir Henry Erfkine’s time, the counsellors of this borough had formed a resolution to get the town’s debt paid; but, at that juncture, private pockets bore away the prize. On the death of Sir Henry Erskine, and the vacancy of a seat in parliament which it occasioned, a fresh and more vigorous resolution was entered into by the counsellors, that whatever might might happen to private pockets, the town’s debt should be paid, by that personage who, in the stile of the witnesses examined in this cause, is denominated the parliamenter. The deceased Andrew Johnston of P i t k e e r i e been long a bailie in this borough, and had the entire management of it. He joined heartily with the motion for payment of the town’s debt, which indeed he would have found it difficult, i f not impossible to dissuade, so strong was the tide in its favour; but, at the same time, he gave his brother-counsellors to understand, that it was improper any bargain for this purpose should be openly made, or publicly known, as it was contrary to law; so that the only safe and sure method, was to trust the management of the matter to him; and, to this proposal, the council readily assented. At the same time, Bailie Johnston did by no means forget to think of his own private interest; but, on the contrary, formed the plan of getting the office of collector of the customs, at this borough, for his son, which he accomplished in October 1765. It appears from the evidence, that before Sir Henry Erskine’s death, which had been long foreseen, Colonel John Scott of Bal- comie, (who afterwards joined interest with Sir John Anstruther), had entered into a political correspondence with Bailie John­ ston. The letters themselves have not been produced, so that it cannot be certainly known what were their contents; though James Nairne merchant in Pittenweem, one of the complainers against the late election there, and a zealous friend to Colonel Scott and Sir John Anstruther, has deponed, “ That in none of these letters was there the least hint of any thing being asked or pro­ mised, either for the bailie himself, or for the town; and no­ thing but common profesio n s of friendship and civility.” This posib l y may have been the case; for neither the colonel nor the bailie were politicians so unexperienced, as not to be sensible that litera scripta manet; for which reason many things ought not to be committed to paper, that might yet be very well settled by a free communing face to face. With this view, Bailie Johnston took a journey to Edinburgh and met with the colonel there, when in his way to Fife from England. The above-mentioned James Nairne, depones, “ That the bailie told him some days after the above conversation,” (i.e.) foon after Sir Henry’s death, and before the middle of August) “ That he designed to go to Edinburgh, whenever he heard heard Colonel Scott was come down, order concert with him the affairs of the election in the different towns •, and the de­ ponent heard and believes, that the bailie went to Edinburgh about eight or ten days thereafter, and met with Colonel Scott in that place.”------And, to the fame purpose, George Hall. The plain meaning of this journey and meeting on the part of of Bailie Johnston was, that he being anxious to have the above- mentioned preliminaries fettled between the colonel and him, re- solved to have an eclaircissement with him on the subject before the colonel should set his foot in Fife. However, whether the bargain was made at this time, or any other, is immaterial; for certain it is, and dist in ctly proved, that Bailie Johnston did assure the coun­ sellors of this borough, that he had agreed about payment of the town’s debt, and desired them to trust to him; adding, by way of confirmation or assurance, that his lands of Pitker wsufi- cient s ecurity for implement on his part'. And under the influence of these declarations, and of a belief that a bargain had been made with Colonel Scott to pay the town' s debt, the election of magi- strates and counsellors for this borough was made, at Michaelmas 17 6 0, four of the old council having been removed, and all the rest continued. The four old counsellors removed were, John Macdougal, Alexander Bruce, John Bald, and John Reid; and those put in their place were, George Brown, George Darsie, David Johnston, and Andrew Johnston quartus. In November 1765, the now pursuers preferred a summary pe- tition and complaint to your Lordships, in older to have said election reduced and set aside, on the head of bribery and cor­ ruption; but that complaint was cast, upon a misnomer in the com plaint, one Brown having been call Thomas, instead of George. Upon this an ordinary action of reduction was raised, which ha- ving come to be discussed befo re Lord Elliock Ordinary, his Lord- ship, upon advisin g a condescendence and answers, showed a proof hincde. Against this interlocutor the defenders represented to the Lord Orinary, nd reclaimed toyur Lodship invai. Aprof was led by oth parties, and stae prared; on whic your Ldship having allowed memorials, what follows is submitted on the part of the pursuers. The pursuers shall begin with stating the direct irresistable e- vidence of the defenders having voted under corrupt influence, at the Michaelmas election 1765. JOHN John Macdougal cooper in Anstruther-Easter, depones, “ That h e w a s a member of the town-council of Anstruther-East- er, for the year previous to Michaelmas 1765; and re­ members that Mr Robert Fall of Dunbar came to wait upon the town-council, in order to propose Sir John Anstruther as a candidate for that district of boroughs, in place of Sir Hen- ry Erskine; and that this happened before the Michaelmas e- lection of magistrates and council for that year: And the de­ ponent also remembers, that the now deceased Bailie Andrew Johnston called the council together, in his own house before they met with Mr Fa ll: That when the council was met in Bai­ lie Johnstons house, Charles Mitchel, one of the counsellors said to the company, That as there were several different candi­ dates now in the field, it was proper something should be had for the town, and that they ought to do as was done in Crail at Sir Henry's election; that is, a certain sum of money should be given to the town, w hether the candidate who gave it gained the election or not: That, upon this, Bailie Johnston said, That i f any thing of that kind was done, it behoved not to be done openly, or otherwise it might annul any election that was to follow; and that he be­ lieved some of the other towns would have their elections made null by that manner of doing: That Bailie Johnston also said We are now going to meet with Mr Fall, and if he says any- thing to you, you may let him know that I am to be your de­ legate; and to this no objection was made by any person pre- sent Depones, That Bailie Johnston, either at that meeting or at the first meeting thereafter, which was also before the Mi­ chaelmas elect ion, proposed to the council, that they shouldtr him unto the management of what had been proposed by Charles Mitchel; and that he would do for the good of the town: To which some o f the counsellors answered, We want no more-, and others said nothing, but seemed to the deponent to assent. Depones That at a meeting of council, previous to the Michaelmas elec- t i o n which the deponent was present, either in the house of Bailie Johnston or Mr James Johnston his brother, now present but he does not remember which, when some of the counsellors were talking among themselves about what Charles Mitchel had said concerning the payment of the town’s debts, Bailie Johnston he was also present at a meeting of council, upon the Monday after after the Michaelmas election, being his foy, he had gone off the council, in the house of the above-mentioned James Johnston, when Bailie Johnston quarrelled Thomas Smith, a counsellor, for being frequently in the house of Mr Alexander that day, and quarrelled him for carrying tales to Mr Alexander of what was done among them: That Smith denied his being so often at Mr Alexander’s, or his carrying any tales: That Bailie Johnston told the council at this meeting, T h a t he would pay the town's debts, as he had s aid to them formerly and also said, that if any man doubted him, they need not doubt Pitkeerie was s ufficient; and also told them, that ill they w ill they, e would have the major part of the council; and some of the council appeared very well pleased that the town’s debts was to be paid. De­ pones, That Bailie Johnston, at this last meeting, des ired the counsellors to fund by h i m, and he would pay the town's debt And depones, That the whole council voted one way, except Alex­ ander Bruce who was voted out, and who voted for continuing himself.” Alexander Bruce messenger in Anstruther-Easter depones, " That he was a member of the town—council ol Anstruther-Easter for the year preceding Michaelmas 1765 and remembers, that be­ fore the Michaelmas election of magistrates that year, Mr. Ro­ bert Fall of Dunbar came to wait upon the town-council, and proposed Sir John Anstruther as a candidate for that dist r ict of boroughs, and desired the counsellors to keep themselves dis- engaged for nine or ten days, till he should write to Sir John Anstruther to know his mind in that matter; that is, whe- ther or not he would stand a candidate; and that this was soon after Sir Henry Erskine’s death, but the deponent cannot be precise to the time: That, to the best of his knowledge, the deceased Bailie Andrew J ohnston conveened the whole members of the town-council, in his own dining-room, in order to meet with Mr Fall: That when the council was there met, the baile desired them to stick together, for, by that means, they would get a candidate who would pay the towns debt, or who would or might pay the town's debt: That the bailie said Leave it to me, and stand all as one man, and we w ill see to get something done for the town, or the towns debts paid: That the generality of the council did agree to this motion of the bailie's and the bailie did also propose to them, at that time, to chase him for their de- legate; legate; and the deponent thinks, that the generality o f them did also agree to this, for nobody objected, and some did openly assent to it: That the deponent himself said nothing: That Charles Mitchel, when Bailie Johnston had spoken of getting the town’s debts paid, said, That's w ell sa id ba ilie; bu t let us make a s urer bargain than we did last, for they s aid we were cheated: That John Aldie and William Bell expressed their being very well pleased with the proposal: That there were others also who expressed their willingness, but the deponent docs not recollect their names: That the bailie desired the counsellors not to make any promise to Mr Fall. Being interrogate, I f he ever heard Bailie Johnston engage to the council, or give his personal se- curity, that their debt should be paid? depones, That he heard him, at an after-meeting say as much; and this after-meeting was upon the Monday after the Michaelmas election, which was on the Saturday preceding, when the deponent was with the council at his foy, having gone off the council: That when the deponent came first into this meeting, Bailie Johnston was not come in, but his son was there: That thereafter the bailie came in, and the son went out: That the bailie said to the counsellors then met, Gentlemen, what would we be at? Each of you would have a member of parliament for himself: We have got a v e r y good man to deal with, who w ill pay the town's debts. I f you are afraid of the thing not being done. Pitkeerie is sufficient for it. Depones, That Pitkeerie is the name of Bailie Johnston’s estate. Depones, That Bailie Johnston had a great command in the council, and the counsellors ordinarily voted as he incli­ ned; and that, to the best of his knowledge, the couns ellors vo­ ted oll the same way at the election in the year 1765.” John Bald, who was also a member of the council at Michael­ mas 1765, but was removed, depones, “ That at this meeting in Bailie Johnston’s dining-room, the bailie desired the counsellors- to stand together as one man, for the good of the town; and that this was all Bailie Johnston said to the council, so far as the de­ ponent remembers.” The reason why the deponent does not remember the other par­ ticulars of Bailie Johnston’s conversation, appears from the sequel of his oath. “ Depones, That he is dull of hearing, and things may pass in company that the deponent does not hear. De­ pones, That he has been deafi sh for some years past. And being ing interrogate for the defenders, I f things did pass at that meeting in Bailie Johnstons dining room which he did not hear? depones, That some things past which he did not hear; for Bailie Johnston made a speech, and the deponent, though he heard his voice, did not understand what he said, from his deafness.” And the deponent sat at a good distance from Bailie J ohnston in the above meeting.” The pursuers examined one of the defenders themselves, and who attended as agent in leading the proof, viz. Andrew Black, trust­ ing to this principle, That it is extremely difficult, and commonly impossible for a witness, if properly interrogated, to conceal the res gesta, however able and artful he may be: Accordingly Mr Black, though he exerted himself to the utmost to avoid facts that he thought material against the defenders, and to give a colour to such as he acknowledged, has yet been obliged to emit a deposi­ tion that carries irresistible evidence of the guilt of the defend­ ers, and the strongest corroboration of the testimonies of Mac- dougal and Bruce. The memorialist s must intreat your Lord- ships to peruse the whole deposition, as the non meminis with which it abounds, and the whole strain of it, merits attention; but they shall only transcribe the most decisive passages. He depones, “ That he was a counsellor in the town of Easter- Anstruther the year preceding Michaelmas 1765, and is so still: That he was present at a meeting of the council, upon the 24th of October that year, being the day after Bailie Johnston’s death; and remembers that Alexander Young, addressing himself to the counsellors, mentioned that Bailie Johnston was dead, who should have said, that he would pay the town’s debts; who will pay them now? That upon this, the deponent said, There was no engagement of honour or friendship but what Bailie Johnston's son knew of, and would fu lf il; and that they might expect an equal friend in him, as in his father; and the deponent told the council, that Baile Johnston's son had signified to him, that they might de- pend on him as an equal friend with his father. “ That he was present at a meeting o f the council, upon the Monday after the the Michaelmas election. And being interrogate, If Bailie Johnson said any thing at that meeting about the payment of the town’s debts? depones, That the bailie said no bargain could be made but he would always take care of the good of the town, that the town should not suffer; and i f any body doubted him, they were sensible the lands of Pitkeerie were to the f ore, or words to purpose, purpos e, and was s urpris ed that any such demand was made. And being interrogate, What he means by a demand being made? Depones, That some of the counsellors, particularly Dars ie and Young, had expressed a des ire to have the town's debts paid, and it was up­ on this that Bailie Johnston spoke as above. Depones, That he does not remember any other of the counsellors who expressed a desire of having the town’s debts paid, except the two per- sons already mentioned. And being interrogate, Remembers that some words past betwixt Bailie Johnston and Thomas Smith, but does not remember the particulars. And being in­ terrogate, If he knows one Charles Mitchel, and whether or not he remembers of any proposal being made by him for paying the towns debts about the time of the elections? depones, t h a t That he is acquainted with Charles Mitchel, and remembers that, at some meeting of council, but whether before or after the Michaelmas election the deponent does not remember, he (Charles Mitchel) did mention the payment of the town’s debts; and the answer he got was, that no bargain could be made; and the deponent thinks the person who made this answer, was the deceased bailie Johnston, and the deponent was prelent when this past; and upon Mitchel’s geting this answer, he seemed to be satisfied. And being interrogate, Whether or not there was any more said to Mitchel than that a bargain could not be made? de- pones, h e does not particularly remember. And being interrogate, What he understood Bailie Johnson meant by s aying he would stand by the town, and that Pitkeerie was to the fore? depones. That he cannot depone to the meaning of any words people speak; but he him- self thought that Bailie Johns on mean, that no body should molest or trouble the borugh, or do it any harm; and the deponent thinks the question not a proper one. And being interrogate, Whether or not he understood bailie Johnston, from the speech above deponed to, meant also to assure the couns ellors as to the towns debt being paid. It was objected on the part of the defenders, That the pre­ ceding interrogatory was extremely improper fo r several reasons. i t i s in the first place, out of the power of the pursuers to put such a question, as they are only authorised to examine witnes- ses on facts and circumstances, and this question relates entire­ ly to a matter of opinion; and that not only the witness’s opi­ nion, but even the opinion of a third party, Bailie John- ston. The defenders, in order to save time and avoid disputes did not not chuse to object to the two immediate preceding interroga­ tories, which are equally improper and incompetent; but as the pursuers seem to be going on in a train similar to what was prac- tised with witnesses on a former occasion, in these political dis putes, and seem inclined to teaze the witnesses into inconsi sten- cies, rather than to explicate facts, the defenders therefore insi st, that this interrogatory shall not be put.— Answered, That it is a very material fact and circumstance in a question of bribery, what a counsellor understood by general and ambiguous expres- sions: Besides this question is but a part and explanatory of pre­ ceding questions. Although this may be a teazing question to the witness, yet it ought not to be so, as, if he was disposed to tell the truth fairly, it would not teaze him to tell his own ap- prehension of Bailie Johnston ’s meaning. “ The commissioner having consid ered the objections and answers, in respect the question now objected to is proper­ ly a part of a preceding question, which was put and an- swered, allows this question to be put. And it being put accordingly, depones, That he thinks he has answered the question fully already, and can give it no other." Here the memorialist s might rest, as the above evidence is di- rect and irresi st ib le; but as farther corroborative evidence was ad­ duced, they shall shortly lay before your Lordships a view of it, and particularly of that arising from the acknowledgments of the de- fenders themselves, as in former cases. And with regard to 2 1. 7 6 F O R S t a 1 F 6 i John Grove shoemaker in Kilconquhar, depones, “ That he is acquainted with Charles Mitchel one of the defenders, and remembers to have been in company w ith him some time in the month of August or the beginning of September, in the year 1765, in the house of George Darsie, when the conversation turned upon the subject of the elections; and the deponent said to Mitchel, That he wondered he was not upon the side or Mr Alexander, as he was a good and worthy man: To which Mitchel answered, I believe so; but, by God, we are to be for Co­ lonel Scott: Upon which Darsie said to Mitchell, you will just play play as you played last; and Mitchell answered, By God we will not do that; f or I have fixed the thing with Bailie Johnston” And being interrogate, What he understood by that expresio n o f Darsie ’s, You will ju st play as you played last? depones, He understood that Darsie meant, that the counsellors had got mo- ney to their own pockets at former elections, but that the town’s debts had not been paid; and the deponent has often heard that this was the case.” Peter Hodge shoemaker in Crail depones, “ That he has had se- veral conversations with Charles Mitchel, one of the defenders in this action, upon the subject of the elections in the year 1 7 6 5 and that from the time of these elections, till o f late, as Mitchel was always rattling about them: And remembers to have heard him say, that George Darsie was a damned rascal for pursuing them now, when it was he that, along with himself, went to the rest of the council, in order to get something for the town which he thought a very good thing; and that Bailie Johnston said to them at that time, That they could not all be at the bar- gain making, and that he believed every one of them would have a candidate to themselves: That he (Mitchel) had said in the council, that it had been reported that, at former elections when Sir Henry Erskine came one to be their member they had gotten money to themselves, but now he was for getting something to the town; and that it was upon his (Mitchell's) saying this, that Bailie Johnston answered what has been said above, that they could not all be at the bargain making; and said farther, that they might take his word for L. 200 or L. 300 as long as the riggs of Pitkeerie were to the fore. A l e x a n d e r R e i d. John Black weaver in Anstruther-Easte r depones, “ That he is acquaint with Alexander Reid one of the defenders, and re­ members to have been in company with him about the end of harvest 1765, when they happened to talk about the elections when the deponent said to him joking, You’ll get a great deal of good drink and also a good purse now that so many are set- t in g u p T o which Reid answered, That he was very easy about drink, and that they were to get no money to themselves; for got the town was to pay the town’s debt. Depones, That That this conversation happened near the shore of Anstruther; and Peter Hedderwick tanner in Anstruther, was either passing or repassing when Reid spoke to the deponent as above; but the deponent did not observe whether or not Hedderwick spoke to Reid at that time. Depones, There were several women within hearing at the time.” Peter Hedderwick depones, “ That one day about the beginning of the pothering, he was in company with Alexander Reid at the shore-heads, when some women were asking him something about the town’s debts, and he coming up upon the deponent, seemed to be in confusion; upon which the deponent asked at Reid, What they were saying? and, upon his informing him, the deponent then asked, I f the towns debts were to be paid? and Reid answered him, O ay, in an overly manner: And the de­ ponent’s reason for asking Reid this question was, that he had heard it reported, not only in Fife, but also in Angus and Perth shires, that all the towns were to get their debts paid.” Jean Brown, spouse to the above John Black, depones, “ T hat shortly after the Michaelmas elections in the year 1765, as she was standing in her own stair, she observed her husband and Alexander Reid in company, at the foot of the wynd hard by the shore of Anstruther, and heard her husband ask at Reid, who was to be commissioner? That Reid answered, He could not tell; but the man who paid the town’s debt was to be com- missioner, and none else.” o S 6 6 S. n e F 6 6 r John Sunter depones, “ That he is acquainted with William Bell one of the defenders; and remembers to have had a con- versation with him upon election-matters about the time of the Michaelmas election in the town of Easter-Anstruther in the year 17 6 5; in which he told the deponent, that Bailie Johnston had said to him, that the town of Easter Anstruther was to be made as good as any of the five boroughs And being interro­ gate What he understood was meant by the town's being made as good as any of the five boroughs? depones T hat he had no conception of it at that time; but Bell said farther, thaJons had s aid to him, that he would do it though it were out of his own interes t; and the deponent means the late Bailie Johnsto Alexander Alexander Sunter depones, “ That he had a conversation with William Bell, one of the defenders in this cause, about the time of the elections after Sir Henry Erskine’s death, and thinks it was after the Michaelmas election in the town of Easter Anstruther was over; and, upon recollection, depones, it was the day after the Cellardyke election: That, in this conversation, William Bell told the deponent,-that his town, meaning the town of Easter Anstruther, was to be made as good as any o f the rest of the five boroughs, and said, That Bailie Johnston had told him s o; and that he was to make it good, i f it should be out of his own interest or pocket, or words to that purpos e John Thomson “ depones, That sometime before the Michael­ mas elections in the year 1765, he had a conversation with John Aldie, one of the defenders, concerning them, in which Aldie told the deponent, that the town’s debts were to be paid; but did not say by whom: That the counsellors had differed a- mong themselves, and that Bailie Johnston had s aid, they s hould get their town's debts paid." Rachel Oliphant “ depones, That she is acquainted with John Aldie, one of the defenders, and who was a counsellor in the town of Easter Anstruther in the year 1765; and remembers to have been in company with him, sometime before the Michael­ mas election in that year, and to have talked with him about election-matters; and particularly remembers that he said, up­ on this occasion, that he hoped to have the honour to see the town a free town; and Robert Caition, another defender who was also in company, said yes.” Janet Bald “ depones, That one night before the Michaelmas e- lection 1765", John Aldie and Robert Caition came into the house of John Bald, the deponent’s father; and thinks it was that night the council first met with Colonel Scott: That John Aldie said, He hoped to have the honour to see the town a free town, and Robert Caition agreed to this.” James Browster, foreman to Mrs Pollock of Balcormo, depones, That J o h n A l d i e Ale R xa n d r R A i r i x l That he is acquaint with Robert Caition, one of the defenders and had occasion to be in company with him at Balcormo, in the month of August 1765, where Caition was employed in building park-dikes, being a mason to his employment: That they happened to discourse about the then ensuing elections in the town of Anstruther-Easter, the deponent said to him, that he would get a piece of money, to which Caition answered, No; for Bailie Johnston and the council had agreed, that as the town is in debt, no man should take money for his private pocket; but whoever was the best fellow, and would give them a piece of money, should be accepted for their parliamenter." Several instances have come out in the proof of private douceurs. The office of surveyor of window-lights, coveted by the defend­ er Charles Robb before the election, and conferred upon him since, on the deprivation of Bailie Martin, affords one Unking ex­ ample. See State, page 22. G, H; p. 32. E, F; p. 33. D, E. But on these the memorialists think it needless to insist, as they are advised that the proof of the public bribery is invincible, and that there can be no doubt of the relevancy, after the decision in the late case of the neighbouring borough of Pittenweem. An objection was s t ated against Alexander Bruce, the second witness for the pursuers, founded on his having been one of the complainers in the summary application made to your Lordships in November 1765; from which the defenders conclude, that he was really a party, though his name had been left out in the Pres ent action, in order to make him a witness. But it appears from Bruce’s oath, that though he concurred in the summary complaint, yet he refused to do so m this ordinary action; for this reason, that his engaging in a a political dispute might hurt his business as a messenger; so that his name was not left out with a view to make him a witness: And indeed, had the pursuers been disposed to manage in that way, they worn a not have, been so numerous, for your Lordships will observe, that besides burgesses, there are four counsellors pursuers, viz. Young Darsie, Smith, and Bridges; whereas had the pursuers meant to conduct their cause as the defenders insin uate, only one of them would have been made a pursuer and the rest reserved for witnesses and very good witnesses the defenders must admit them to have been JO. M A C L A U R I N In respect whereof, &c. been, as they have been at pains to prove, that the scheme for pay­ ing the towns debt consisted with their knowledge. The objec­ tion, therefore, to Bruce is not founded in fact; and though it were, it is perfectly irrelevant, seeing, since he is not a pursuer, he can neither gain nor lose by the event of the cause; and there­ fore this objection, though ill-founded in fac t was yet very just ly disregarded in the other political questions that lately occurred from this district of boroughs However, supposing Bruce’s testimony to be not omni exceptione major, yet it must gain full credit, as it is confirmed by that of macdougal, against whom no objection whatever was made, and who appears, from his oath, to have gone off the council without any re- luctance or regret, and to have had the sense not to filtered him- self on either side in these political questions. And even supposing the bribery not to be Sufficiently proved by these two concurring testi— monies, yet the matter could not but be put out of all doubt by the testimony of Mr Black the defender, to which no objection can be made, not to mention the hearsay-evidence of the acknow­ ledgments of many of the other defenders. As to the proof adduced on the part of the defenders, the pur- suers are very much at a loss to know what the defenders meant by it. They have been at much pains to prove, that the four counsellors, complainers, knew of the corrupt bargain; from which it is supposed they meant to infer, that they are barred personali exceptione from insi sting in this action. But this objec­ tion, at any rate, cannot militate against the title of the burgesses, the other complainers: Nor is there any thing in the objection; and it accordingly was over-ruled, when pleaded against the title of Peter Ramsay and Andrew Wilson, who prevailed in reducing- the election of Pittenweem. As to the rest of the proof for the defenders, the pursuers are by- no means certain if they perceive the drift of it; and therefore shall defer saying any thing upon it till the hearing, when they w ill learn from the counsel for the defenders, what their ingenuity proposes to make of it.