§ Sir JOHN JARDINEasked the Lord Advocate whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Thomas Nichol, farmer, of Hughsrigg, Dumfriesshire, convicted on 29th April last by two justices, at Hawick, for removing swine from one area to another—that is, between Dumfriesshire and Roxburghshire—without a properly filled-up licence; whether the conviction was based on the mere omission to get inserted by the issuing constable the words "for breeding purposes," opposite an asterisk on a form which contained no information about the asterisk, nor any intimation that on getting the words "for breeding purposes" inserted the licensee might lawfully convey his pig to the place required and bring it back over the area boundary if he did the double journey within six days; whether he will examine the record of the case and communicate with the justices as to the function of the constable in issuing the licence, and if he ought to have inserted the words "for breeding purposes": and whether he will take into consideration the need of having plain directions printed on such removal licences for the guidance of farmers 485 owning swine for breeding purposes who may wish to do the double journey within the six days allowed?
§ The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Ure)My attention has been drawn to the case referred to by my hon. Friend, and further inquiry will be made as to the facts.