Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
The nature of the question which arose in this case, as well as the proceedings previous to its going to the House of Lords, will be found in the speech of Lord Brougham , on moving the judgment, by which ‘It is ordered, that the cause be remitted back to the Second Division of the Court of Session, in order that their Lordships may direct another trial before a jury,’ and in which the form of the issue is specified.
Accordingly, the following issues were tried before Lord Moncreiff and a jury at Dumfries, on the 30th April 1836: ‘Whether the places in which, during the years 1822, 1824 and 1825, stake-nets or other fixed machinery were placed and used for fishing salmon by the said Richard Alexander Oswald or John Pagan, his tenant, are within the water of Solway?’
A similar issue was directed against William Constable Maxwell and Joseph Grierson, his tenant.
The following minute was given in by the defenders, (pursuers in the issues,) during the trial: The jury are to return ‘a verdict, that the stake-nets placed above Airds Point and Glenhowan Scar are not in the Solway.’
Notice was also taken of the expressions in the titles, and in some old local acts, in support of the above view.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.