§ 12. Sir J. JARDINEasked the Secretary for Scotland, anent the sentences of fine amounting to £55 passed upon five persons at Jedburgh by Sheriff-substitute Baillie, whether in the case of Mr. James Hunter, sentenced to pay a fine of £7 10s., the learned judge found as a fact that any atrocity or aggravating circumstances was alleged, admitted, or proved constituting a reason for inflicting a penalty of the above amount for breach of the Lighting Order regarding the obscuring of lights?
§ The SECRETARY for SCOTLAND (Mr. Tennant)No finding in the terms suggested was issued, nor was any such finding required. I am informed that at least three warnings were given before the prosecution was instituted.
§ Mr. PRINGLECan my right hon. Friend say on what ground in subsequent cases, particularly that of the procurator-fiscal, the fine was only £1?
§ Mr. TENNANTI do not know whether it is to be put down to the clemency of the sheriff in that case or not. This was a case in which the man who had contravened this Order had been warned three times. Therefore presumably that operated in the mind of the sheriff, and made him think that exemplary punishment was required.
§ Mr. PRINGLEIs the right hon. Gentleman not aware that that was one of the first prosecutions under the Order, and that in subsequent prosecutions the fine was smaller, although people had had notice that such fines were being imposed?
§ Mr. TENNANTI can only assume in the cases where a smaller fine was imposed that the notices had not been so numerous.
§ Mr. PRINGLEIs the procurator-fiscal understood to be ignorant of the law, just as the Attorney-General here is ignorant of the law?
§ Mr. TENNANTWell, Sir, we cannot all be as learned in the law as my hon. Friend.