GENERAL HISTORY. 



[49 



it as his duty to dissent from the 

 irotion. 



M>: Abcrcromhy aflinned that 

 the subject brought fonvard by 

 his noble friend had no connexion 

 with that of parliamentary reform. 

 It was said, that it was only 

 when the rights of the burgh were 

 suspended, that the crown inter- 

 fered to reanimate them ; but in 

 the case alluded to, it went 

 farther; it altered the set alto- 

 gether. If this was wrong, it 

 was an usurpation on the part of 

 the Crown; and though in the 

 present instance it might have 

 been exerted beneficially, yet it 

 went to establish a precedent 

 which, in the hands of bad minis- 

 ters, might be made use of to 

 justify the worst encroachments. 

 No subject appeared to him 

 more suitable for parliamentary 

 inquiry. He thought that copies 

 of the old and new set should be 

 produced, that they might be 

 able by the comparison to see 

 whether the Crown had improperly 

 interfered, or in such a manner 

 as demanded parliamentary in- 

 quiry. If its interference was 

 improper, and no notice was 

 taken of it, the measure would be 

 acquiesced in, and be established 

 as a precedent. Finding that in 

 the course of this year five or six 

 other burghs were likely to be 

 placed in a similar situation to 

 that in which Montrose lately 

 stood, he thought it of very great 

 importance that the subject 

 should be fully discussed. 



I The Lord Advocate said, that 

 the noble mover had given it as 

 his opinion that the magistrates 

 and counsel of the burghs pos- 

 sessed an unlimited power of 

 taxing the property of persona 

 Vol. LX. 



residing in the burgh ; but he had 

 forgotten that in the Declaration 

 of Grievances at the Revolution, 

 to levy money without the con- 

 sent of parliament was declared 

 contrary to law. He knew that 

 opinions had been given by 

 counsel that the inhabitants were 

 liable for the debts of the burgh ; 

 but though these opinions had 

 been given j'ears ago, no suit had 

 ever been commenced on them. 

 The magistrates of some burghs, 

 Aberdeen for instance, had at- 

 tempted to levy petty customs 

 for the defrapifient of the public 

 debt ; but the question was ulti- 

 mately decided on appeal to the 

 House of Lords that the magis- 

 trates of burghs had no such 

 power to levy customs. There 

 was hardly a year in which appli- 

 cations were not made to the 

 legislature by burghs, for a power 

 of levying money to pay debts : 

 surely, if an'act of the town council 

 was a sufficient authorit)^ they 

 would not have been so ill ad- 

 vised as to apply to parliament. 

 The noble lord would find the 

 power exercised by the crown in 

 the case of the burgh of Montrose, 

 was virtually recognized in the 

 Declaration of Grievances. The 

 complaint in that declaration 

 against king James was, not for 

 altering the constitution of burghs , 

 but for having done so of his own 

 authority, " without judgment, 

 surrender, or consent.'' In 1789 

 or 1790, there was a motion 

 respecting the state of the Scots 

 burghs, and in the report of a 

 committee the modes were dis- 

 cussed by which alterations could 

 be legally made by course of 

 time, by the burghs themselves, 

 and by the act of the crown. The 

 [EJ case 



