1790–1791
James Bruce, a tailor in Anstruther Easter, petitioned the Court against James Hogg, seeking a finding that the Town Council had wrongfully elected Hogg as a Counsellor in place of Bruce, who had been legally elected and accepted. Hogg answered that Bruce’s election was void and that the vacancy had been properly filled. Bruce, joined by other Counsellors and Magistrates of the burgh, replied, defending his own election and challenging the validity of Hogg’s interim election on the grounds of statutory time limits and lack of prior notice.AI-generated
Documents in this case (4)
- James Bruce v. James Hogg — Petition and Complaint, 13 Nov 1790November 13, 1790 Petition of James Bruce, Taylor in Anstruther Easter, asking the Court to find that the Town-council of Anstruther Easter wrongfully elected James Hogg as a Counsellor in place of James Bruce, who had …
- James Bruce v. James Hogg — Answers, 7 Dec 1790December 7, 1790 Answers by James Hogg, &c. to the petition and complaint of James Bruce, &c., responding that the election of Bruce was void and the vacancy was properly filled by Hogg.
- James Bruce v. James Hogg — Replies, 14 Jan 1791January 14, 1791 Replies of James Bruce and others, Counsellors and Magistrates of the Borough of Anstruther Easter, to the Answers of James Hogg and others, pretending to be such.
- James Hogg, &c. v. James Bruce, &c. — Duplies, 29 Jan 1791Respondents defend election of James Bruce as Councillor, challenging validity of interim election and vote, citing statutory time limits and lack of prior notice.
