Subject_Provisional Order — Private Legislation Procedure — Proposed Clause Disposing of Pecuniary Dispute between Burghs — Competency — Locus Standi — Headnote:
Into this Provisional Order, which dealt, inter alia, with the suppression of betting, bookmaking, and wagering in public places, the promoters, the Corporation of Leith, proposed to introduce a section dealing with a pecuniary dispute between themselves and Edinburgh. The Burgh of Leith being like other burghs in Scotland entitled to redeem its land tax made certain payments with that object. These payments however accidentally were set down as contributed by Edinburgh, and under the Agricultural Rates Act 1896 Edinburgh obtained from the Treasury certain repayments in respect of these payments. The Corporation of Leith claimed that they were entitled to the sums repaid. The promotion of the Order proposed to introduce into the Bill a section leaving the whole matter for the Secretary of Scotland to adjust.
The Chairman—I do not think we are a Court of Arbitration between two burghs in a question of this sort. I think you must leave other parties to decide as to that. … I quite see that this is a dispute between two burghs as to the money. I do not see that a dispute of that sort should be bought into a burgh Bill of this kind. It is entirely without our powers. We certainly prefer not to take it up. … I think it is a locus standi case whether this is a subject which should be brought into the Bill at all.
Counsel for the Promoters— Wilson, K.C.— Constable. Agents— T. B. Laing, Town Clerk, Leith— John Kennedy W.S., Parliamentary Agent, London.
Counsel for the Lord Provost, Magistrates, and Council of the City of Edinburgh— Clyde, K.C.— Cooper— Wallace. Agent— Thomas Hunter, W.S., Town Clerk.
Counsel for the Leith Dock Commission— J. H. Millar. Agent— Victor A. Noel Paton, W.S.