Kings of Scotland to have the sole choice of the Lords of Session Which can import no more save that they have the sole nomination of them but not the tryal of their qualifications seeing all along since both in that Reign and in the next that ensued the examination and acceptance or refusal of those that were recommended by the two last Kings upon emergent Vacancies to be Lords of the College of Justice were always certified to the Actual and Sitting Lords of Session to be by them tryed and admitted or rejected as they should see cause Thirdly What the Gentlemen who make this Exception would give the Crown with one hand they take away with the other For while they would Preclude the Parliament from taking notice of the qualifications of those who upon a total vacancy are nominated by the King under a pretence that the sole choice of the Lords of Session is by the forementioned Statute Declared to be an Inherent Priviledge of the Crown They at the same time seek to skreen and vindicate themselves from the Violation of the other Laws that prescribe the method of trying and approving those who are nominated now by His Majesty for Lords of the College of Justice by alledging that S N and M are both in a capacity through having been formerly Judges and are commissionated to try and approve them Fourthly All that some apprehend to be contained in the 11 Act Parl. 1. Charles the Second is wholly Narratory and no part of it Statutory at least so far as our concernment lies in it and as we are therein referred unto other Acts for the knowledge of what is Statuted and Ordained So upon our application unto and consulting of Act 2. Parl. 1. Charles 2. all we find there enacted is That it is an inherent Privilege of the Crown and an undoubted part of the Royal Prerogative of the King to have the sole Choice and Appointment of the Officers of State and Privy Counsellors but that he hath only the Nomination of the Lords of Session as in former times preceding the year 1637. and what that was we have already shewed and do find it to be so far from interfering with or derogating from what the Parliament doth now insist upon and demand that it both warrants and justifieth it I may fifthly subjoyn That upon supposition that the Act 11. Par. 1 Charles the Second were Statutory which it no ways is yet there is a later Act pass'd in the said first Parliament of King Charles the Second though unprinted yet upon Record in our Registers of Parliament and which was purposely made for the Regulation of the College of Justice and about the admission of the Lords of Session as the very title and rubrick bears wherein all that we find Enacted is That the King instead of having the sole choice of the Lords of Session shall only have the Nomination of them as the Crown stood possessed of it in times before the year 1637. and that their admission in all times to come shall be according to the Laws and Acts which were in being before the year which we have already mentioned So that fancy what they will beyond this granted unto the King by Act 11. yet it is all withdrawn and reassumed from him by this later Act of April the 5 th All that now remains to be further added on this Subject so far as concerns the controversial part is to inquire whether the King hath at all times the sole Power and Right of chusing and appointing the President of the Session And we presume with all humility to say that by the Laws of the Kingdom and according to ancient Practice and Custom he hath it not nor can he legally lay claim unto it seeing by Act 93. Parl. 6. James 6. Anno 1579. It is Statuted and Ordained That the President of the College of Justice shall be always chosen by the whole Senators of the said College Which Statute is confirmed by Act 134. Parl. 12. James 6. wherein it is expresly declared That the King with advice of the Estates doth ratifie and approve all the Acts made either by his Majesties Predecessors or by his Highness himself before upon the Institution of the College of Justice and the Reformation of the abuses thereof Nor can it be denyed but the appointing that the President should be chosen by the whole Senators was designed as the Reformation of an Abuse in the College of Justice which either had not been provided against and obviated in the first Institution of the Session or which had crept in afterwards And as this was the Law about the Election of the President so the Practice was always conformable thereunto until that my Lord S came to be constituted President by King Charles the Second and was illegally obtruded upon the Lords of Session without the being either chosen or approved by them For from the time of the making the Act until then there was not one that had ever sate President but who had been chosen by the Lords of the College of Justice except Sir John G who upon being nominated and recommended by the King in the Case of the total Vacancy Anno 1661. was approved and confirmed by the Estates in Parliament But for the Lord P the Lord U the Lord C Sir Robert S and the Lord D who were all that had been Presidents from 1579. until 1661. they were every one of them chosen and admitted by the Lords of Session Nor is it unworthy of Remark that the Lords of Session upon every Election they made of a President declared that they did it in conformity unto and in pursuance of the Act of Parliament And as King Charles's departing from the Law in this particular was one of the first steps towards Arbitrary Power so it was both in order to farther Incroachments upon our Laws and Rights and prepared the way for most of the Tyranny that he exercised afterwards And as S assuming the Office of President upon the illegal choice of the aforementioned King was both an Affronting and Betraying of the known Laws of the Kingdom so his whole Behaviour in that Station was of one piece and complexion with his entring upon it being a continued Series of Oppression and Treachery to his Country For besides that all his Verdicts between Subject and Subject were more ambiguous than the Delphick Oracles and the occasion of the Commencement of innumerable Suits in place of the determining of any he was the principal Minister of all L 's Arbitrariness and of King Charles's Usurpations Nor was there a Rapine or Murder committed in the Kingdom under the countenance of Royal Authority but what he was either the Author of the Assister in or ready to justifie And from his having been a Military Commander for asserting and vindicating the Laws Rights and Liberties of the Kingdom against the little pretended Invasions of Charles I. he came to overthrow and trample upon them all
in the quality of a Civil Officer under Charles II. Nor is there a Man in the whole Kingdom of Scotland who hath been more accessary to the Robberies and Spoils and who is more stained and died with the Bloody Measures of the Times than this Lord S who his Majesty hath been impos'd upon to constitute again President of the College of Justice And as an aggravation of his Crimes he hath perpetrated them under the vail of Religion and by forms of Law which is the bringing the Holy and Righteous God to be an Authorizer and Approver of his Villanies and the making the Shield of our Protection to be the Sword of our Ruin. But there being some hopes that the World will be speedily furnished with the History of his Life I shall say no more of him but shall leave him unto the expectation and dread of what the famous Mr. Robert D foretold would befal them him in his Person and Family and of which having tasted the first Fruits in so many astonishing Instances he may the more assuredly reckon upon the full Harvest of it And the Method he hath lately begun to steeer is the most likely way imaginable to hasten upon him and his what that Holy and I might say Prophetical Man denounced against them For whereas the Nation would have been willing upon his meer withdrawing from Business and not provoking their Justice by crouding into the Place in which he had so heinously offended to have left him to stand or fall at the great Tribunal and to have iâ—â—â—mpnify'd him as to Life Honour and Fortune here upon the consideration of his having co-operated in the late Revolution and of his having attended upon his Majesty in his coming over to rescue and deliver the Kingdoms from Popery and Slavery He seems resolved to hasten his own Fate and through putting himself by new Crimes out of the Capacity of Mercy to force the Estates of the Kingdom to a punishing of him both for them and for the old But to return to what we are upon about the Right of Electing a President of the Colledge of Justice It is excepted to what hath been said in proof that the Power is by Law in the Lords of Session to choose their own President that Sir John G was upon King Charles the Second's nomination approved and confirmed in Parliament Anno 1661. which was a divesting of the Lords of Session of it and a vertual rescinding all the Laws by which that Power had been settled upon them To which I have several things to reply that will discover both the Impertinency of the Objection and the Treachery of those who have insinuated it to the King. First It is acknowledged in the very Exception that the sole Choice of Sir John G as President was not in King Charles seeing the Parliament had the Approving Allowing and Admitting of him which makes that case to differ very much from the Present In which the choosing of the President is not only taken away from the Lords of the Session but the approving and admitting of him is denyed to the Estates of the Nation in Parliament assembled Secondly What was done in Ordaining Sir John G President was not a repealing of the Laws by which the Choosing of the President is vested in the Lords of the Session but was at most only a dispensing with them in that extraordinary case of a total Vacancy and in reference unto a Person of a most unspotted Integrity and unpaâ—allelled Knowledge in the Laws Nor will any Man pretending to acquaintance with Parliamentary Customs and Proceedings reckon that a Law is therefore rescinded and abrogated because the Parliament hath seen reason to supersede it in a single Instance and in a particular case Laws once Enacted and established are never accounted to be abrogated unless by particular future Laws formally repealing them or by posterior general Statutes inconsistent with and destructive of them Nor do Two or Three particular Instances varying from and repugnant unto them bring them so much as into disuse and desuetude but even in order to that there must be immemorial Prescription against them and that without being disallowed or complained of in Parliament Thirdly What the Parliament did Anno 1661. in the Case of Sir John G it was not properly done by them in their Legislative capacity but as a part of the Supream Authority of the Kingdom concurring with the King in an Act and Deed of the Supremum imperium and illimited Power of the Government which the appointing of Judges for the equal administration of Justice came to be at that season and conjuncture by reason of the total Vacancy and the impossibility that thereupon ensued of Choosing and Ordaining the Lords of Session whereof the President is always one in the ordinary Legal and Established Methods What the King and the Estates of Parliament did in the case of that Vacancy of the Colledge of Justice was much of the Nature of and parallel unto what the Estates alone have done upon the late Vacancy of the Throne wherein they acted not in the way of a Legislative Body but in the Vertue of that illimited Power which resided in them as Representatives of the whole People and who knew no other Measures whereby to act but what lay most in a tendency to the Publick Safety Fourthly The King 's having a Right to choose the President of the Session is disclaimed and ridicul'd by those very Persons that have advised him to challenge it For my Lord S in whose Favour and in pursuance of whose Advice his Majesty hath claimed a Right and exerted an Authority of appointing a President hath by the Method of his entring upon that Office and Station renounced the Legality of his Majesty's acting in that particular and declared that he holds not his Place by vertue of the King's Choice and Designation For after he had prevailed upon the King to elect and send him down President of the Session the first thing he did at their Meeting and that in order to the throwiag the blame upon his Majesty of all that had been transacted before was to wheedle that over-aw'd and pack'd Bench to choose him for President of the Colledge of Justice which as it shews the Disloyalty and Treachery of the Man so it testifieth and publisheth his Folly. For how could they be in a capacity as Lords of Session to choose him for a President that were not antecedently legally tryed and approved themselves And who knowing their own unqualifiedness both as to Literature and good Fame made his Majesty's having nominated them an excuse from their undergoing a Tryal For though it be both required by the Laws and was accordingly given out all along here that they should be tryed yet Five of them being conscious unto themselves how little they answered the Qualifications prescribed in the Statutes refused to submit to be examin'd under a Pretence that they would not thereby weaken his
be modestly said that it is not only one of the wisest but constituted of the most considerable Persons for Quality Estate and Esteem in their Country that ever Scotland had For even the Vote about the Lords of the Session which is most censured and stumbled at pass'd the whole House without any more dissenting Voices than barely four and of those Sir J. D ple who was the leading Man amongst them sensibly biassed by the Consideration that if the Vote obtained his Father would have been excluded from the Honourable and to him Beneficial Place of President to which he is now advanced Is it not more likely that these few should act without regard to the King and Kingdom 's Interest and depart from the Laws Rights and Customs of the Realm thâ—n that the whole Body of the Parliament should be unacquainted with what the Constitution as well as the common Safety of Prince and People authorize them to claim And that they should exceed the measures of Law Justice and Equity in what they demand Nor was the Parliament under the Influence of such Motives for encroaching upon the King's Prerogative as these Gentlemen were for betraying both the Jurisdiction of Parliament and the Priviledges of the Nation For having sacrificed all the Laws and Rights of the Kingdom under the late Reign to the Lust and Will of one Arbitrary and Despotical Monarch they could do no less both by the Rules of Policy and Uniformity than endeavour to vest his present Majesty in the Robberies of former Princes there being no such way for Thieves to escape at the Bar as to prevail with the Judg to receive and harbour their stolen Goods And for the King to rely upon being informed by Sir J. D pie what is the Prerogative of the Crown and what are Rights and Jurisdictions of Parliament is as if King James's Attorney-General were to be made the Oracle of the Court in reference to what Crimes and Offences Peers and Gentlemen were to be condemned and executed for and for what Failures and Miscarriages Cities and Corporations were to Forefault their Charters and to be deprived of their Franchises Could the Parliament have been guilty of so Impudent as well as Criminal a Thing as to incroach upon the just Prerogatives of the Crown and to rob his Majesty of his legal Rights it would have been more for their Profit and Interest to have effectuated it in relation to the disposal of Offices of state and of Military Commands than to claim meerly a right of interposing and that only in the Case of a total Vacancy of the Session about the approving of Persons nominated by His Majesty to judicial Places For whereas the former would look like the putting themselves into a condition of giving check to their Prince whenever a Capriciâ— should take them and they should fancy themselves agrieved all that can be aimed at or possibly compassed by the latter is to have Justice equally administred according to the known Laws which is no less his Majesties Interest than his Duty to make wise and careful Provision for In a word it would seem to command as well as to bespeak belief that a whole Parliament who in all other Proceedings have acted with the highest Prudence Temperance and Justice and where there are so many Persons of Vertue Honour Probity and Knowledg of the Laws and Customs of the Nation should be more regardful of voting justly and challenging nothing but their legal Rights than that only four Men should be found insisting upon what is Right and they such as most of them have been Tools and Instruments in the Breaches made upon the Rights and Liberties of the Nation And as the whole Blame is to be intirely lodged upon a few Ministers about his Majesty both as to the delay that hath been given to redress any of the Scots Grievances and as to the disputing of the Equity and Justice of actually relieving them from some so besides the Confidence that all Good Men are possessed with from the Consideration of his Majesty's Wisdom and Goodness that all will be at last accommodated to the King's Honour and the Peoples universal Satisfaction the Concessions his Majesty hath lately granted with reference to the Articles even against the Opinion of his Ministers is as an Earnest and Pledg what his People may exspect in reference to the rest if it can be made appear that what is further insisted upon and humbly desired of him is the relieving of his Subjects and not the robbing of himself the being kind to his People and not unjust to the Crown and the exercising Mercy to all without being cruel and unrighteous to any So that we are become obliged in point of Duty to his Majesty before whom our Demands and Claims lie and from the Respect we owe to the English Nation among whom these Matters are both publickly discoursed and differently represented and censured And finally by the Justice we account due to the Parliament of Scotland whose Moderation is not only questioned by reason of their Demands but also their Loyalty I say we are become obliged by all these Motives and Inducements to enter into a detail of the several Particulars in Controversy between some of his Majesty's Ministers and the Parliament of Scotland and not only to state with what distinctness we are able the several heads subjected to debate but to give all that support enforcement from Reason Law and Custom to the Expediency as well as Equity of them that we judg to be requisite and that we can dispatch in the narrow room which we have confined our selves unto In pursuance of which undertaking We will begin with the Vote to which the Royal Assent is not given that referreth to the disabling and precluding Persons from publick Trusts and Imployments And this we the rather do both because we can discharge our Hands the soonest of it and because it is the most censured by some of the English from an apprehension that what of this Nature passeth into an Act at Edinburgh may be drawn into President at Westminster But that every one may judge of it and what shall be offered in the Vindication of the Necessity and Justice thereof I shall present the Reader with a Transcript of the Vote The King and Queens Majesties considering that the Estates of this Kingdom have by their Vote declared their Sense and Opinion That such as have in the former Evil Government been grievous to the Nation or have shewed Disaffection to the happy Change by the Blessing of God now brought about or have been Retarders and Obstructers of the good Designs of the said Estates in their Meeting are not fit to be imploy'd in the Management of the Affairs of this Kingdom Do with Advice and Consent of the Estates of Parliament now Assembled Statute and Ordain That no Person of whatsomever Rank or Degree who in the former Evil Government have been grievous to the Nation
the Lords of the Session in all time coming and that as well in the case of a total as of a single Vacancy This being the Vote so declaimed against and in contempt whereof and in opposition whereunto some Persons having surreptitiously and fraudulently obtained Warrant Countenance and Authority from the King are so vent'rous as to dare to act We shall both with all the Loyalty and Modesty that becomes a Subject and an honest Man and yet with that freedom and plainness which one who hath no other design save to serve God his King and his Country with uprightness and integrity should value himself upon endeavour to vindicate the Wisdom as well as the Justice of the Parliament in the forementioned Vote In the performing whereof with all that exactness which brevity will allow I shall begin with an account of the first Administration of Civil Justice in the Kingdom of Scotland that we meet with in our Records For the College of Justice consisting of those called the Lords of the Session not having been institute till the Reign of King James the Fifth Anno 1537. The Administration of Justice was before that time not only ambulatory and itinerant but was discharged and executed by such Members of Parliament as the Estates of the Kingdom in their several Sessions elected from among themselves and authorized thereunto Nor had they only their whole Authority from the Estates in Parliament but to speak properly they were Committees of Parliament Authorized to such a Work and Office and accountable to Parliaments for the discharge of the Trusts committed unto them for the Domini electi ad causas whom we so often meet with in the Records of Parliament particularly in those of the Years 1524. 1526. 1528. were such Members as every respective Parliament elected from within their own Walls for the Administration of Justice between the King and his Lieges and between one Subject and another From whence it appears that it not only appertained unto the Parliament to see that Justice was duly administred but that the Right was originally in them of nominating and ordaining the Administrators of it Which makes it very improbable that after rheir having been possessed of such a Right Authority and Jurisdiction for so long time they should so wholly part from and intirely surrender it as upon no Occasion or Emergency whatsoever to leave unto themselves a share or reserve a concern in it Let us add to this That when the College of Justice came to be instituted Anno 1â—37 Parl. 5 King James the 5 th Act 36. though it was Established and Ordained by the Legislative Authority of the King and Estates joyntly and not by an exertion of meer Royal Prerogative yet the Estates in Parliament then Assembled both took upon them and were allowed the Nomination and Choice of the President as well as of all that were then called forth and advanced to be Lords of the Session or College of Justice as appears by the 39. and 41. Acts of the aforementioned Parliament Yea it is further evident from the Records of Parliament that the Estates of the Kingdom did often in succeeding Parliaments Nominate Choose and Impower those very Lords that were actually of the Session to continue in the Administration of Justice which sheweth beyond all rational contradiction that they could much less â—nter upon the Office at first without their being Chosen and Approved by the Estates 〈◊〉 â—arliament Thus Anno 1542. being the first of Mary we find the President with the rest of the Lords of Session Chosen and Impowered a new as Auditores ad causas for the hearing and deciding Civil and Criminal Causes And again we find the Parliament of the Second of Mary Anno 1543. not only ratifying by the Legislative Authority of the Queen and Estates the Institution of the College of Justice but we find the Estates alone nominating and choosing ad causas the President cum caeteris Dominis Sessionis Collegii Justitiae But forasmuch as there was a change given afterwards by Laws to this Course and Method and a new Regulation ordained by subsequent Statutes of the College of Justice wherein both the qualifications of those that are to be Chosen Lords of the Session and the manner of their Approbation are required and appointed We are therefore obliged in the next place to look into those Laws and to examine whether they detract from the Prudence and weaken the Justice of the Parliament in their fore-mentioned Vote or whether they not only Countenance and Suppport but Justifie and Vindicate them And We 'll begin with the 93 Act 6 Parliament James 6 where it being acknowledged That the Nomination of the Lords of the Session belongeth unto the King and that he ought to name such as have the Qualifications there required which are already specified in the aforesaid Vote It is further added That in all time coming when an ordinary Place becomes vacant in the Session the Person nominated thereunto by the King shall be sufficiently tryed and examined by a sufficient number of the Ordinary Lords of the College of Justice for whom it shall be Lawful to refuse the Person presented unto them and that the King in that Case shall present another and that so often until the Person presented be found qualified But seeing this Act may be said to have passed in the minority of King James and the force of it be thereupon endeavoured to be eluded We will therefore consult Act 134. Parl. 12. James 6. wherein besides a Repetition and a Confirmation of all that is mentioned and ordained in the former Act there is further added That none shall be received to any Place of Senator in the College of Justice unless he be sufficiently tryed by the whole College of Justice Now as those are the Laws relating unto and regulating the Nomination Examination and Approbation of the Ordinary Lords of the College of Justice the Practice hath been in all Times conformable thereunto So that the First Parliament of King Charles the Second which through the prevailing of the like Folly and Madness in Scotland which then reigned in England rob'd the Kingdom of many of its Rights and Privileges to increase and inlarge the Prerogative of the Crown yet they were so â—ender of making any Innovations in his particular that by their Second Act of that Parliament they Ordain The Nomination of the Lords of Session to remain as in former Times preceding the Year 1637. And accordingly we find as there have been several who upon single Vacancies in Former Reigns had been rejected by the Lords of the College of Justice though nominated by our Kings So there was one Sir William Ballanden whom Charles the Second had nominated and recommended who upon examination by the rest of the Lords was refused and rejected as a Person not Qualified according to the Statutes of the Realm Is it not therefore unreasonable to be imagined That the King who
upon a single Vacancy cannot constitute one Judg till he be examined and approved should nevertheless be esteemed impowered to constitute the whole Bench of the College of Justice without a previous Examination and Approbation How improvident were our Parliaments and how weak and ridiculous are our Laws if all that is provided for be only the restraining the King from making one Judg that is unqualified and at the same time to allow him a Power and Authority of making Fifteen that are unqualified for such they are to be esteemed till they have been tried and approved There can be nothing more unquestionable than that they who are nominated by the King to be Judges ought according to the Laws of Scotland to be tried and approved before they be accounted or authorized to sit and act and therefore there being upon a total Vacancy no Lords of the College of Justice to try examine and approve those whom the King hath nominated and recommended it would seem to be uncontroulable by all Persons pretending to reason and acquainted with our Laws and Customs That the Right of examining and of admitting or rejecting them comes to be devolved upon the Parliament which is the whole that is desired in the forementioned Vote Nor is there any mean but that they either must ascend the Bench without undergoing a Tryal or receiving an Approbation which is openly to Affront the Laws or else the Power and Right of approving and of accepting or rejecting must be acknowledged to reside in the Estates of Parliament Nor was this ever denied them in the Case of a total Vacancy under the worst of the foregoing Reigns Which makes it the more doleful as well as Amazing that through the Subornation and Crafty but false insinuations of Evil Men there should be an endeavour of wresting it from them under the Reign of so Gracious and Temperate a Prince whom they with so much Affection and Zeal called and invited to the Throne not only in gratitude for his having delivered them from Popery but out of a hope and prospect of his relieving them from all their other Grievances It hath been already proved beyond the pâ—ssibâ—lity of a Reply That the fiâ—st Institution of the College of Justice and the Nomination as well as Approbation of those that were then advanced to be Lords of Session was by the Estates Assembled in Parliament And I do now furâ—her affirm That in the two total Vacancies which are all that have since occurred besides this that hath now fallen out upon the late happy Revolution the Estates in Parliament were indisputably allowed the Right of admitting or rejecting those of whom the College of Justice was to be freshly â—onstituted for upon the total Vacancy in the year 1641 which was the first that had been from the Institution of the Lords of the Session the Parliament not only Challenged the Approving but they took upon them the joynt Nomination with the King of all the Persons that were to be admitted into and created Members of the College of Justice But this Example and Pâ—esident I will not insist upon seeing there was something unjust and illegal in it as well as something just and legal For not being satisfied with the Right of admitting to which Law and Reason gave them an unquestionable Title they usurped upon the Crown and took upon them the Power of nominating which had been granted by former Laws unto the King. Let us therefore see what was done upon that other total Vacancy which occurred at the Restauration of Charles II. when nothing would have been departed from by the King that he could have with held without the highest Injustice nor any thing either claimed or accepted by the Parliament that they could have sacrificed or surrendred without becoming obnoxious to eminent dangers and yet even then the King having nominated those whom he designed for the Lords of Session the Approbation of them was submitted unto the Parliament and the Estaâ—es having in full Parliament consider'd them they admitted and received them It is true that the Parliament did not bring them single before them and there Try and Examine them not because they might not have done it but because there was no need of it being all of them of that Eminency as to be Universally and Notoriously known to have all the Qualifications required by the Statutes Yea though that Parliament was abundantly officious towards the Crown and Loyal to that excess to the King as to be Disloyal to their Countrey and unfaithful to their Constituents Yet in the Second Act of their first Session by which they restore to the King what had been wrested from him in the Parliament 164â— they allow him no more in reference to the Lords of the College of Justice but the right of nomination as the Crown had enjoyed it preceeding the Year 16â—7 But I hear there are some who finding His Majesty unalterably resolved not to depart from the known and just Laws of the Land in the Governing of his People have therefore to elude the force of what hath been here Represented and to divert His Majesty from hearkning to the humble desirâ—s of his Parliament in this matter been guilty of the Treachery as well as the Impudence to suggest unto His Mâ—jesty That there is not now a total Vacancy there being of the fiftâ—en nominate by His Majesty for Lords of the Session three that were antecedently such and that it belongeth unto them Three to try and approve the others and that what the Parliament pretends unto being only in the Case of a total Vacancy is here wholly Superceded and that for any to insist upon it is an incroachment upon the Prerogative of the King and a robbing of the Lords of Session of a Privilege vested in them by Law. Now tho all that is here insinuated be rather the Offering an Affront to our Understandings than the Accosting us with a reasonable Objection yet we will so far condescend to the weakness of those that are ignorant of the Laws and Customs of Scotland as to return such a Reply unto it which may not only convince all Mankind of the imâ—ertinency of it but expose those that are the Authors of it to be either loathed as ill men or ridiculed as silly For First Supposing that S N and M who are all that can be referred unto in the pretended Objection did still remain Lords of the College of Justice by Reason of their having formerly been so Yet they are too few to constitute a Session which they ought to be before they take upon them to Try and Approve such as are recommended unto them by the Kings nomination The Quorum of which a Session ought to consist before it can Exercise any Legal Authority should be Nine which I think no Arithmetick will make Three to be Nor will my Lord S and his Son Sir J. D find that Success in their Attempts against the first and self-evident