§ DR. CAMERON (Glasgow, College)asked the Lord Advocate, Whether his attention has been called to the report in The Coatbridge Express of the 27th ultimo of an action for slander tried at the Airdrie Sheriff Court before Sheriff Mair on the 25th; whether Sheriff Mair is correctly reported to have asked three successive witnesses, who swore that they had seen pursuer the worse for drink, whether they were teetotallers; and on their replying in the affirmative to have said to the first "Go away, I don't believe you;" to the second "You may go now, because I don't believe you;" and to the third "You may go away;" and, whether, considering the public stigma thus cast upon the sworn testimony of total abstainers by the Airdrie Bench, he proposes to take any action in the matter?
§ THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. H. A. MACDONALD) (Edinburgh and St. Andrew's Universities)The case referred to was one at the instance of an Inspector of Police and a constable against whom a clergyman had made in a newspaper an accusation of drunkenness in commenting on an hotel licence case, in which the officer's evidence had influenced the Bench on the question of granting the licence. An apology was tendered and accepted in the case of the Inspector. The constable's case went to trial. The Sheriff did state, in regard to the evidence of two witnesses, that he did not believe them; but this was not on their stating that they were abstainers, but because their evidence was contradictory, and their demeanour in giving it unsatisfactory, and that, as regards its main statements, it was contradicted by the unimpeachable evidence of several respectable people. The Sheriff did not cast any stigma upon the evidence 32 of teetotallers. On the contrary, in giving judgment, he stated that, in ordinary cases, a teetotaller's evidence was most reliable. But he did say that in questions relating to intoxicating drinks and their effect, teetotallers were apt to take extreme views and form mistaken conclusions. I may add that the constable who was alleged to have been repeatedly intoxicated has a very high character, having been 15 years in the Force, during which period no charge or report has ever been made against him at any time until the letter was published of which he complained. I may add, also, that I think it extremely unlikely that my friend the Sheriff, whom I know very well, would have said anything against teetotallers, because he happens to be one himself.