DR. CAMERONasked the Lord Advocate, If it is the case that, for some months past, there has been a dispute among the Fraserburgh magistrates as to whether Mr. Finlayson or Mr. Tarrass was the procurator fiscal; whether Mr. Tarrass, having raised an action in the Court of Session, was, on February 24th, declared by that Court to be the procurator fiscal of the burgh; whether, notwithstanding this decision of the Court of Session, on February 28th, Mr. Finlayson appeared in the Burgh Court as procurator fiscal, and, at his instance, a man named Thomas Hill was sentenced by the senior magistrate to ten days' imprisonment for breach of the peace alleged to have been committed on February 27th; and, what steps the Crown authorities intend taking to enforce the judgment of the Court of Session, and to protect the public against prosecutions by a gentleman whom the Court of Session has declared not to be the public prosecutor, before a magistrate who, notwithstanding the decree, persists in accepting him as such?
THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR)Sir, it is the case that for some months past there has been a dispute as to whether Mr. Finlayson or Mr. Tarrass was Procurator Fiscal, as also that Mr. Tarrass raised an action in the Court of Session to have it found that he was Fiscal, and in that action he obtained decree in absence on or about the date here mentioned. It is also the fact that after the date of this decree in absence, Mr. Finlayson appeared in the Burgh Court as Procurator Fiscal on 28th February, and that at his instance Thomas Hill was sentenced by the Senior Magistrate to ten days' imprisonment for breach of the peace. It is to be kept in view that such a decree in absence may be opened up within a limited time, and it is stated by the Senior Magistrate that a doubt had existed as to its effect. It appears, however, that Mr. Tarrass has taken proceedings for obtaining an interdict against Mr. Finlayson acting as Fiscal, and if Mr. Finlayson does not carry the case further, it may be assumed that he will be interdicted from continuing so to act. In answer to the last part of the Question, I have to say that the appoint- 1746 ment of the Burgh Fiscal does not rest with the Crown authorities, and that they have not hitherto seen cause to interfere in a dispute which appears to be in course of settlement by the proper tribunal.
DR. CAMERONasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the imprisonment of Thomas Hill, under the circumstances set forth in the preceding Question, Whether, considering the irregularity of the proceeding, he will order Hill's immediate release?
THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR)Sir, the Secretary of State does not intend to order Hill's release. No objection was stated on the part of Hill to Mr. Finlayson's title to prosecute, and it does not appear that there was any doubt as to Hill's guilt, or as to the propriety of the sentence. If he should be advised that he would be likely to get the sentence quashed upon the ground that Mr. Finlayson was not entitled to prosecute, it is open to him to take the ordinary steps for that purpose.