AS the several Points of great Advantage to Trade over all the Nation, alswell as those parts next adjacent to Leith, were sufficiently held furth in the Reasons offered with the Overture, for ane Act of Commu­nication of Trade to the Town and Brugh of Barronie of Leith. So does the Acts of Parliament Anno 1672. and Anno 1693. Justifie the Legality of the said Overture beyond all Exception that can be foun­ded on the former Old Laws, before the 1672. Depriving Brughs of Barronie and Regality of all man­ner of Trade that the Royal Burrows hade then, and before wrongously Monopolized: For the Words of the said Act 1672. are, That the former Laws anent the Priviledges of Royal Burrows were highly prejudicial to the common Interest and Good of the Kingdom, as extending the Priviledges of Royal Borrows far beyond their ancient Rights, and applying the Priviledges of Burrows in general, such as Taping, Retailing, &c. To Royal Burrows only to the Prejudice of Brughs of Regality and Barronie: For remead whereof, the said Act Anno 1672. Declares Burghs of Barronie, &c. to have Right, not only to Tap and Retail, But to Export all the Native Product of the Kingdom, and Import the special Commodities mentioned in the Act. And so expresly corrects the Abuses committed by the Royal Burrows on pretext of the said Old Laws, Likeas the Act of Parliament anno 1693. anent the Communication of Trade, of whatsoever kind, to all that are willing to bear a Proportionable part of the Cess of the Royal Burrows sufficiently, Justifies the Communication proposed in behalf of the Town of Leith, They being in Contemplation thereof, alwayes ready to bear a Proportionable Burden.

The Representation does make a great mistery of Edinburghs private Rights: As to which, before making particular Answers thereunto, It is to be Considered in the generall, That all these Rights signifie nothing. Because 10, The Case is not of Rights or Decreets belwixt private parties: Or where the publick Interest is not concerned. But the Case is anent publick Rights, betwixt two publick Societies, where the publick Trade of the Nation is Intrested. In which Case, there are many Precedents of the Parliaments interposing without respect to particular Rights. So the Parliament, by several Old Acts did take away Cruves and Yares, did forbid the taking of Black Fish and Smolts, did prohibite huunting and haulking, except in the time and manner prescribed, &c. Without respect to any Infeftments, or other Rights or Pos­sesions, which would have carried the use of the things; prior to the Acts restricting the samen. And thus in part [...]cular Case of Trade. The Brughs Royal had by their Charters and Possession, an unquestionable Right of Trading exclusive of all others; and yet by the Act 1672. That Right is taken from them, and Conferred in great measure, on the Brughs of Barronie and Regality. And without multiplying instances, it is known how there is presently presented an Act for Conjoyning Chyrurgery and Pharmacie, tho they be separated by express Decreets of the Lords of Session, and there are such abuses and oppressiens exerced against the Town of Leith by Edinburgh: that upon that head, tho there were no other Edinburgh deserves to be mulcted in [...]eing deprived (suppose it had it) of a part of that exclusive power, by which it does tyranize over Le [...]th, by debarring them from Trading. Hence 2, No Arguments drawn from Decreets betwixt privat Parties are any ways to the purpose in the present Case. And no Condescendencies or Rights prior to the Acts 1672, 1690. and 1693 can debar Leith from the Benefits of these Acts. Because, in the first place, Leith was a Burgh of Barrony Prior to these Restrictions, and thereby their Jus quaesitum could not be taken away either by any Deed of the Superiour, or Surreptitious Charters from the King And, in the next place, such Restrictions are to be strictly Interpreted of any small Trade which Leith could Claim by the Laws then standing: but can never be undsrstood of Supervenient Rights to Trade which are granted by the new Laws Posterior to these Restrictions. Especially considering that these Restri­ctions does not expresly exclude any benefite which might accrew by Supervenient Laws.

And whereas it is pretended for Edinburgh that the Priviledges which the new Acts grant to Brughs of Barrony, are given to the Barron; and he may Communicate the same to the Burgh, or nor, as he thinks fit. Its Answered, That nothing can be more abfurd; For 10. Its expresly contrary to the Words of the Acts, which give these Privi­ledges to the Burghs of Barrony; and not (personally) to the Barrons only, 2. It is plainly contrary to common sense. For as the Barrons t [...]emselves by their Representatives in Parliament were Voters to these priviledges in Favours of their own Burghs; So the reason thereof was the Advantage and Diffusion of Trade: Which design could not be served any o [...]her ways than by Communication thereof to these Societies. But 3. As a demonstration of the empti­ness of this notion; other Subjeets who shall be content to undergo a part of the Burrow s Taxt Roll; have the Benefit of Trade, so that [...]he Inhabitants of Leith, qua Subjects, can Claim it.

But that the Parliament may see more particularly, how the private Rights founded on by Edinburgh are taken off; They aae earnestly intreated, for so great a publick Good, to consider the Special Answers following.

1. Quoad King Robert's Charter anno 1333, It Entitles Edinuurgh to no more in Leith than the very Harbour and Shoar allanerly, without so much as a foot of Ground farder; So that Edinburgh wronguously lays claim to the Town of Leith, as pertaining to them by that Charter.

2. No Respect to Restalrig Superior of Leith, his Concession in favours of Edinburgh, whereby he renounced all Power of Leith's keeping Hostlaries or any kind of Retail: For 1. Utcunque Restalrig, so long as he was Proprietar of the whole Houses and District of Leith, he for the fewing out of the same to the Inhabitants as his Vassals, might have renounced all Priviledge of Trade; Yet after he had so fewed out the Ground whereon the Town of Leith stands; And for which, in Contemplation of the Trade competent to these Fews and Inhabitants thereof, he got greater Price then he would have go [...]. For so much of any other Ground, he the said Restalrig as Superior, could not dispence with, or renounce the Prediarie Right of Trading competent to his Vassals the Inhabitants, without their own consent, more than he could turn them out of the very Property of their Fews. Beside that, 2. Restal­rig's said Renounciation of Trade relates expresly to the Law that then was, as appropriating the universal Right of Trading to Royal Burrows only, and the Law so inducing Restalrig to renounce, Esto he and his Successors had re­mained Proprietars of Leith to this hour, being taken away be the said Act of Parliament 1672, giving Burghs of Barronie Priviledges of Trade de novo; No antecedent Renounciation of Trade, with express relation to the saids old Laws, can never Incapacitate Leith from bruiking the Benefit of Trade by the said superveening new Law.

3. No Respect to King James the third's Charter discharging Strangers to House in Leith, or Mercats to be used there, because the said Charter was impetrate, but periculo pet [...]ntis, and neve [...] [...]ook effect: For it is well known that Stran­gers did, and do House there, and that near an hundred Years after the said pretended Charter. Leith as a Burgh of Barronie, not only used Mercats, but had Gifts of the Bailiarie of their Town, granted them by Queen Mary, [...]pon Restalrig the Superior's Resignation, for the Town of Leith's behoof.

No Respect to the old Acts of Parliament, declaring the Priviledges of Trade to be Competent only to Royal Burrows, and particularly the Acts in King James the fourth's time, discharging Packing and Peiling in Leith; For [...] said [...]ostior Act of Parliament anno 67 [...], declares the saids old Laws to have been highly prejudicial to the Comm [...]n [...]ure [...]st and Good of the Kingdom, in restricting the universall Priviledge of all kind of Trade to the Roy­al Burrows only: And for Remeid thereof, declared the Points of Trade competent to Burghs of Barronie and Re­galitie, as afo [...]s [...] where by the saids old Laws being in tantum rescinded, Edinburgh ought not to be heard to plead [...]ny thing thereo [...], con [...]ar to the said Act of Parliament anno 1672. Nor

[Page]5. Ought Queen Maries Charter to Edinburgh, wadsetting to them the Superiority of Le [...]th, with Edinburgh [...] acqui­ring the Reversion of the said Wadset, and thereby becoming Superiors of [...]ith be regarded as a privat Right, exclu­sive of Leith from all Trade. Because 1. A Burgh of Barronies Powe [...] of Trading is very consistent with its having a Superior, whose duty it is to Govern and Judge their Vassals the Inhabitants of the Burgh of Barronie, but not to destroy their Trade, which is the Inhabitants and Few [...]rs of the Burgh their Prediarie and Patrimonial Rights by Law. 2. That the said Right of Superiority being resigned by Restalrig, conform to a special Contract betwixt the Queen and the Town of Leith, for most Onerous Causes in the year 1555; And the Queen having by her Letters of Bailia [...]ie to L [...]ith medio tempor [...], and [...]ay and while t [...] Terms of her Contract aforesaid should be fulfilled, to them Hypothica [...] the Superiority of Leith: Edinburg [...]s po [...] [...] [...]isirio [...] of the Superiority from the Queen, was but Surreptitious, and where [...]ent Edinburgh was put in dol [...] pessimo before taking Seasiue on the said Wadset Right, in so far as Leith, at the Sight, and in the Hands of multitudes of Notta [...]s and Witnesses, Instrumented the very Provost of Edinburgh, the time of taking Seasin, as said is; Protesting, for the Safty of Le [...]th's Interest, and for Cost, Skaith, and Dam­nage.

6 No respect to Edinburghs Ratification in Parliament anno 16 [...]1. of Restalrigs Concession and Renunciation aforesaid and Wodset of the Superiority, including the Jurisdiction of Shirrif-Ship over Lieth; Because Ratifications are but periculo petentis & nihil juris tribuunt, but fall with the Rights ratified; so that Restalrigs Concessions, being but when he was [...]uperiour, and so a non habente potestatem, to dispose on the Inhabitants and Vassels properties; besides that the said Concession mentions the Old severe and New Rescinded Laws, as the Cause thereof, is in the case of a sublata causa, &c. And the Right of Superiority per se, can never preclude the Burgh of Barrony from its predial Right of Trading as aforesaid, and quoad the Sherriff-ship, Lieth non facit vim.

7. No respect to Edinburghs Charto [...] from the King anno 1636, bearing a novo damus of Leith, in favours of Edinburgh, with an Annexation thereof to the Royality of Edinburgh; But with express seclusion from Trade, without licence from the Magistrates of Edinburgh. Because, 1. The said Charter, with all the other pretended Private Rights aforesaid, obtruded be Eir. are but the results of Edr. Usurpations, by vertue of the old rescinded Laws, & the Annexing of Lieth to Edr. Royalty, as the same is litteraly conceived, resolves into no more, but a societus leon [...]na reprob [...]t in Law; In so far as by the pretended Anna [...]ation to Edinburghs Royalty, Edinburgh there throw pleads a Right of Burdening Lieth with the Cess of Edinburgh qua par [...] of Edinburghs Royaltie; But with the same breath denys Lieth the benefit of Trade, which is the only consideration and ground in Law, why our Royal Borrows bear any Burden of Cess, and why the other Leidges that undertake any part of the Royal Borrows Cess, are allowed to Trade bethe Act of Parliament 1672. So that the Clause uniting Lieth to Edinburghs Royalty, as it stands is not Justifiable by any Law. And therefore the Parl. may very justly regulate such an abuse, by allowing L [...]eth the benefit of Trade, n contemplation of its said Burden, & that more especially considering that 2. The said very Charter towards the close thereof, erects Lieth de novo in a Burgh of Barronie without any restraint imaginable, upon the freedom of its Trade, as a Brugh of Barrony; But upon the contrai [...], allows the same in the amplest Form, which ipso facto cuts off all preceeding Restraints on the Freedom of Leiths Trade, before the said Year 1636. Especially seing there is no mention made in the said Clause of Errection of any Reservation of by gone restraints, so much as by way of Qualification, &c, Nor

8. Does there any right of Debarring Lieth from Trade, arise to Edinburgh by their alledged use and wont of Re­straining Lieth by Sentences, binding them to comply with Edinburghs Usurpations, or by oblidgments granted by some Lieth Men, for obeying the Sentences mentioned in the Decreet of Suspension anno 1615. Because 1. The severe old Laws, that debarred Burghs of Barrony from Trade, and which were the Foundations of the saids Sentences and Oblidgments, & against which, Leith did always strugle, being taken away by the said new Law anno 1672. Induing Burghs of Barronrie, with a priviledge of Trading, Edinburghs Right to restrain Lieth from Trade, on pretence of these Sen­tences, Bands and others fall in consequence; And that more especially considering, That 2. The Bonds and Ob­ [...]idgments then granted, were but meerly Personal by private Men and so not binding on their singular Successors for less upon the Incorporation of the Town: Besides, That 3. None of these Sentences Bonds or others, are so much as reserved in the subsequent Errection of Leith, in a Burgh of Barrony anno 1636, in most ample Form. ut supra.

9 It is wrongously pretended for Edinburgh that the new Acts of Parliament, Anno 1672. and 1690. Declaring the Priviledges of Burghs of Barrony and Regality as to Trade, cannot derogate from Edinburghs Restraints as so many Private Rights left entire by the Acts Salvo J [...]e. For it is manifest from what is above said, that the Town of Edinburghs whole Restraints and pretended Rights for so doing did arise directly from the saids old severe Laws, in so far as the pretended Concession from Restaelrig, expresly mentions these Laws as the cause of his Concession, and their preten­ded Sentences and Bonds, are also founded thereon, and quoad any pretence to the Right of Superiority over Leith, the same can never Impower Edinburgh as Superiours to Robb Leith of their Right of Trading which is their Property also well by their Original Errection in a B [...]rrony as by their late and absolute Errection aforesaid without Reserve. And seing no Man can Doubt, but one Parliament may abrogate and rescind the Acts of a former, and thereby in consequence overturn all Pretensions of Right arising from the so rescinded Acts, it will necessarly follow, that the saids Old severe Laws being abrogate, the Acts Sal [...]o Jure can never wa [...]rand Edinburghs Usurpation and Restraints upon Leith arising from the saids old Acts.

10. Edinburgh wrongously recurr [...] to the Exception in the Act 1693. Allowing the exercise of Trade to all except the Inhabitants of the free Ports of Royal Burrows, who are not to Trade but with consent of the Burgh to whom they belong; For it is manifest by Edinburghs very an [...]ient Charter in King Roberts time, and by the Concession made them afterwards by Restalrig, that they have no more of Leith given them as their free Port, but the Channel of the Rive [...] only within the Banks by King Robert [...] said Charter, and from the brink of the River to the Foot of the Walls of the Houses on the Shoar, only by Restalrig [...] Concession, without an Inch of Ground farder, save that Restalrig al­lowed them Ish and Entrie throw his Land to the said Shoar: And consequently, that Edinburgh can restrain no Man in Leith from Trading, except such as Buy and Sell only within that part of L [...]ith which is Edinburghs free Port. viz upon the Shoar all [...]erly, but can never extend their said Restraint to the Houses and Precinct of Leith and In­habitants thereof, why they may not conform to the said Act 1693. brook the Priviledge of Trade upon their contri­buting a proportional part of the Cess and Burden of the Royal Burrows.

11. No respect at all to any pretended Decreet of Declarator, alledged lately obtained by Edinburgh against Leith, as to Edinburgh, its exercising its saids Restraints upon Leith. Because 1. Whatever way the said Decreet might have been gotten out by Collusion of some particular persons in Leith; yet it is manifest from what is above-said, that Edinburgh [...] pretensions to such Restraints are of no Weight, & can never be sustained for prepondering the Publick & Common Good that would arise to all throw Leiths becoming a Trading Port, which some few of the Lodging-monger Neigh­bours, &c. of Edinburgh oppose for their own privat Gain, viz. the heightning of their House Rents, throw their proclud­ing Merchants to dwell in Leith, by which means they obstruct the advancement of Trade, and extortionously exact up­on all the Leidges that have and must have a resort to Edinburgh. Beside that 2. The said pretended Decreet is now upon the matter, laid directly open, and manifestly turned into a meer Claim on the Town of Edinburghs part be­fore the Parliament, in so far as they have held forth all the Grounds of the said Decreet, and endeavoured to support the same with all the artifice they can in their p [...]inted Representation, but how absolutely insufficient these Grounds are, is left to his Grace and the honourable Estates of Parliament, to consider upon perusal of the above-mentioned Answers thereto.

And therefore, and upon the whole matter, it is humbly hop [...] the Parliament will prefer the publick and common well of the Nation, quoad the matter of Trade to any such sham privat Interest as Edinburgh lays claim to, on no better ground at the Bottom▪ than the old severe and old abrogated Acts of Parliament which a [...] the Parliament 16 [...]2: has expresly declared to have been highly prejudicial to the common In­terest and good of [...]he Kingdom: so it is hopt the Parliament will find the Town of Edinburghs said pre­tentions founded thereon, to [...] likewise such, and that these pretentions have fallen in consequence of the saids old abrogated Laws, and therefore will pass the [...] for communication of Trade, humbly offered in Favours of the Town of [...].