Macrorie v Crawford
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 17 July 1906 |
| Date | 17 July 1906 |
| Docket Number | No. 24. |
| Court | High Court of Justiciary |
Lord Justice-Clerk, Ld. Kyllachy, LdStormonth-Darling.
Complaint—Amendment—Competency—Summary Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1864 (27 and 28 Vict. cap. 53), sec. 5.—
A summary complaint charged the accused with contravening secs. 18 and 19 of the Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Act, 1868, in so far as he did (first) time and place libelled use salmon roe for the purpose of fishing, and (second) did also, same time and place, wilfully take eight salmon fry, whereby he was liable to the penalty specified for the ‘first of said offences,’ and to the further penalty specified for the ‘second of said offences’; and prayed the Sheriff to convict said accused ‘of the aforesaid contravention,’ and to adjudge him to suffer ‘the penalties’ provided by the Acts.
After the trial on the complaint had proceeded some length the accused objected to the relevancy of the complaint in respect that, while two distinct contraventions were charged, the prayer was to convict ‘of the aforesaid contravention.’ The prosecutor moved for leave to amend the prayer by adding the letter ‘s’ to the word contravention. The Sheriff-substitute refused the motion, sustained the objection to the relevancy, and assoilzied the accused.
Held, on appeal, that under sec. 5 of the Summary Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1864, the Sheriff-substitute ought to have granted leave to amend.
On 20th October 1905 Wilfrid Clarke Macrorie, clerk to the Fishery Board for the District of the River Ayr, presented a complaint in the Sheriff Court at Ayr under the Summary Jurisdiction (Scotland) Acts, 1864 and 1881, the Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Act, 1862, the Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Act, 1868, and the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1887, setting forth:—
‘That David Crawford, miner, residing at Ballochmyle Row, in the parish of Auchinleck, has contravened sections 18 and 19 of the Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Act, 1868,† in so far as the said David Crawford did (first), on Thursday, the 12th day of October 1905, on the River Ayr, at the back of the dam-dyke at Barskimming Mill, and at that part of said river situated in the parish of Mauchline and county of Ayr, use fish roe for the purpose of fishing, and (second) did also, on the said 12th day of October 1905, from the River Ayr, at the back of the said dam-dyke at Barskimming Mill, and from that part of said river situated in the said parish of Mauchline and county of Ayr, wilfully take or destroy eight or thereby smolts or salmon fry, and did have said smolts or salmon fry in...
To continue reading
Request your trial