7TH MARCH, 1864.

SHERIFF COURT, LANARKSHIRE-GLASGOW. (SHERIFFS SIR A. ALISON AND SMITH.)

WORKING MEN'S TEMPERANCE ASSOCIATION v. GLASGOW GAS LIGHT CO.

Gas Company-Contract.-In what circumstances may a Gas Company, incorporated by Act of Parliament, cut off the supply of gas?

NOTE. This is a very important case, both to the Gas Company and to the inhabitants of Glasgow and its neighbourhood, and the Sheriff has pronounced the above Interlocu tor in order, if possible, to put the case in proper shape, in order to bring out the real and important question at issue between the parties. As a proof is only to be allowed, as yet it is premature to pronounce any findings in point of law, absolutely fixing, so far as this Court can do it, the important question at issue involved in the case. But as the case was fully debated before the Sheriff on the merits, as well as on the preliminary point, and the Sheriff-Substitute has decided it upon the merits, the Sheriff deems it best to state the views he at present entertains upon it in a Note, premising that he will willingly alter them if sufficient reasons are shown against them. In the outset, it is to be observed that it was admitted, on both sides of the bar, in the most deliberate way, that the defenders, as a public company incorporated by Act of Parlia ment for the purpose of supplying the city and suburbs with gas, and armed with extraordinary powers, much beyond what the common law recognises in such cases, for carrying that The terms, of course, may be matter of arrangement or agreepurpose into effect, are bound to furnish gas to the inhabitants. ment, but the obligation to furnish the gas is imperative. In the next place, the clause in the statute empowering the Gas Company to furnish the gas, and empowering them, in the event of the gas not being paid for, is the 18th of the Act 57

Having considered the closed record and whole process, with the productions made by both parties, and having heard parties' procurators thereon, Finds that the respondents, the Glasgow Gas Company, are incorporated by Act 57 Geo. III., cap. 41, and their powers enlarged and amended by the subsequent Acts 3 Geo. IV., cap. 80, 6 Geo. IV., cap. 35, 7 Geo. IV., cap. 38, and 20 and 21 Vict., cap. 35, copies of all of said Acts being produced in process: Finds that by neither of said statutes is it made imperative on the respondents to supply gas to the public: Finds, further, that by the 18th section of the Act 57 Geo. III., cap. 41, the respondents are expressly empowered to do the very act complained of by the petitioners: Therefore sustains the defences, recalls the interdict, assoilzies the respondents from the conclusions of the petition: Finds the petitioners liable to them in expenses, allows an account thereof to be given in, and remits the same to the auditor to tax and report, and decerns. The pursuers appealed this Interlocutor, and after a hearing the Sheriff pronounced the following judgment: Having heard parties' procurators at great length under the pursuers' appeal, upon the Interlocutor appealed against, and whole process, recalls the Interlocutor complained of, and, in particular, the finding that it is not imperative on the respondents, the Gas Company, under their statutes, to supply the public with gas, which finding is not rested upon by the defenders, but on the relevancy of the petition, in respect it is not distinctly alleged therein that the quantity of gas charged for against the pursuers is greater than what was actually furnished or consumed, but only that the quantity charged for the year in question was greatly increased from what it had been in previous years, which may have arisen by the quantity actually consumed having been greater than what it formerly was, and it is not alleged that this was not the case: Finds that the petition, as it stands, is not relevant to support its conclusions; but in respect of the importance of the point at issue, on which both parties are desirous of having a judgment, and that the pursuers stated at the bar, that what they really meant to say was that the quantity of gas charged for was really greater than what had actually been consumed during the time specified, and that the meter used for ascertaining the quantity was in so defective a state that it could indicate no correct measure of the quantity of gas consumed, which was set down merely at random by the respondents' servants, without any increased consumption on the pursuers' part; allows the original petition to be amended to the effect of adding, on the margin, these allegations; opens up the record accordingly, and remits to the Sheriff-Substitute to adjust and close the record of new, when the amendment has been made, and thereafter to allow the pursuers a proof of their allegations, and to the defenders a conjunct probation.

tants of the city and suburbs of Glasgow and places adjacent, as shall be desirous of having the gas laid into their houses or other appurtenances, may, and are hereby authorised and empowered, at their own expense (having first obtained the consent, in writing, under the hands of such person or persons as shall be authorised by the said committee of management to give such consent), to open the ground between the pipes belonging to the company and the respective houses, etc., of such inhabitants, and to lay pipes from such respective houses, and to communicate with the pipes belonging to the said company," and "paying to the said company of proprietors yearly, quar terly, or monthly, such sum or sums of money for such gas as shall be mutually agreed upon between them. And in case of default of payment of any such sum or sums of money so agreed to be paid as aforesaid, it shall, and may be lawful, for such company to cause the pipe or pipes belonging to the person or persons making such default, and communicating with any main or other pipe or pipes belonging to the said company, to be separated from the said pipe or pipes with which the same shall so communicate, and to cause the gas to be stopped of every person making such default; and that the sum and from issuing or running into the dwelling-house or houses, etc., sums of money which shall be due and in arrear from such person or persons to the said company of proprietors shall and may be recovered by the said company by distress and sale of the goods and chattels of the persons liable to pay the same." What is particularly to be observed in reference to the chief question in the present case is, that the power of cutting off the supply of gas conferred upon the Gas Company is confined to the "agreed on" price or rate not being paid. It is not said that the same power is to exist in the event of the price or rates demanded not being paid. The statute evidently contemplates the case of the consumers of gas making a certain fixed payment or price, and in the event of the same not being paid, authorises the company to cut off the pipes. But it says nothing as to a similar power being exercised where the price of the gas has not been agreed on and is still unliquidated like an ordinary shop account. And the Sheriff apprehends that, on a sound construction of the Act, the cases in which the cutting off the supply of gas may be held as authorised, are three1st, Where the rate has been agreed on, which is expressly provided for in the statute; 2d, Where, without the rate being agreed on, the demand has been liquidated by the decree of a competent Court; 3d, Where, without either express agreement or decree, the rate or price may be held as having been agreed on by previous usage or implied agreement. But what is to be said of a fourth case different from any of the three preceding?—and that is where the amount of gas charged has not been liquidated either by express agreement, decree, or previous usage, but is simply demanded by the Gas Company, and the demand is denied and resisted by the consumer. It appears to the Sheriff that it is impossible to hold that, upon the simple ipse dixit of the Gas Company that a certain quanD*

tity of gas has been furnished, they are entitled to have the demand immediately paid, under the penalty of cutting off the pipe, and throwing the party using the gas into total darkness; for which, if the demand is for ten or twenty times the amount formerly paid, and the party consuming the gas is a manufacturer, who has laid out perhaps hundreds of pounds in gas fittings and lamps to light up his establishment, can it be said that in such a case the gas company are entitled to constitute themselves judges in their own cause, and throw the consumer's establishment into darkness by cutting the pipes, with the possibility of its being regulated till the termination, perhaps, of a litigation months after? On the other hand, the Sheriff is perfectly aware of the many difficulties in practice which would attend any attempt to liquidate, by express agreement or decree, the amount due for gas furnished to all the numerous householders and consumers of gas in this city and neighbourhood. He knows that the threat of cutting off the supply is a much cheaper and more effectual compulsitor in a great majority of cases than the threat of serving a summons or any decree that may be obtained. But, like other cheap and effectual compulsitors, care must be taken that it is not carried too far. Perhaps the difficulty might be avoided by the expedient either to get the consumer to sign an agreement to the pipes being cut, if the charge made by the company is not paid; or, what would probably be the better and easier way, for the company to send a printed notice to all the consumers, as is done with the public taxes, intimating the quantity of gas consumed, and giving notice that, if not objected to within ten or fourteen days, the quantity indicated by the meter and charged for, will be held as acquiesced in; and that if the sum due is not paid within a certain time, the statutory remedy of cutting off the supply will be applied. This would furnish the Court with a sufficient legal ground for holding that there was an implied agreement between the parties as to the amount of gas furnished, and not interfere with the statutory remedy of cutting off the supply. As the petition in the present case at present stands, it is evidently defective to warrant the prayer, as it neither alleges that the quantity charged for was not furnished, nor that the quantity consumed during the period in question was not greater than it had been in former years. These allegations, however, were distinctly made at the bar, and it is to make the case embrace the important question treated of in the present Note, that the Sheriff has allowed the record to be amended. Act. J. L. LANG. Alt. MITCHELL, ALLARDICE & MITCHELL.

STII MARCH, 1864.

SHERIFF COURT, LANARKSHIRE-GLASGOW. (MR SHERIFF STRATHERN.)

ALEXANDER DICK v. UNITED OPERATIVE MASON'S ASSOCIATION.

Workmen's Combination - Relevancy.-An Operative Mason Lodge imposed a fine on a member, who refused to pay. Thereupon the members working at the same job struck work, and the master dismissed the de. faulting member. In an action of damages against the Lodge, statement or summons for such an action found relevant.

"To loss and damage sustained, and to be sustained by the pursuer, the said Alex. Dick, by and through the oppressive and illegal acts of the defenders, or one or other of them, jointly and severally, or severally and respectively, under the following circumstances:-The defender, the said Wm. Alexander, is, or sometime was, the secretary of the lodge in Glasgow. That association has for its ostensible object the protection of the rights and interests of its members, operative masons. The business of the association is conducted by a central committee in Edinburgh, local lodges, and with officebearers in the various towns and districts throughout Scotland. The said association affects or arrogates a certain kind of jurisdiction over its members, with regard chiefly to the employment or disposal of their labour or industry, and as respects this certain restrictions are imposed on the members, a breach or infringement of which is visited by the association with certain penalties. The payment or recovery of these penalties is enforced throughout the country by a system of communication between the Central Committee and the various local lodges, and by the exclusion or extrusion of defaulting or supposed defaulting members from jobs or work at which these members may be employed. This exclusion or extrusion is effected by a general strike among their other members in obedience to instructions to that effect from the local lodge, or its delegate or representatives; and the strike is used and maintained as a means of intimidating the master masons or employers from employing, or continuing to employ, the defaulting members referred to. On or about the month of April, 1863, the Greenock lodge of the aforesaid association illegally inflicted a fine of £3 on the pursuer for an alleged breach of the association's rules or laws, and on or about 6th October, 1863, with a view to recovery, for infringement of payment of said fine from pursuer, the defender, the said Wm. Alexander, as secretary of the aforesaid Glasgow Lodge, and on its behalf, or on his own account and personal responsibility, appeared at Springburn, where the pursuer was employed as a mason, at a job under David Lockerbie, builder, and coerced, caused, or induced the pursuer's fellow-workmen and masons at that job to strike work until the pursuer paid the aforesaid illegal and oppressive fine, or was expelled and extruded from Mr Lockerbie's service and employment. The strike was devised and intended by the defender, William Alexander, as a means of intimidating Mr Lockerbie or his foreman, Mr Young, from retaining pursuer in Mr Lockerbie's service, in default of the non-payment of said fine, and in consequence thereof, and through the defender's illegal and oppressive procedure, as above set forth, the said David Lockerbie, or his foreman, Young, were intimidated against continuing pursuer at the job referred to, and coerced into dismissing pursuer therefrom,

"The Glasgow Lodge of the United Operative Mason's Association of Scotland, and William Alexander, residing at No. 1 Well Street, Calton, now or lately secretary of the said lodge and representing the same, and on its behalf, and as an individual, jointly, severally, and respectively, to Alexander Dick, mason, residing in Duke Street, Glasgow.

The pursuer has, moreover, since the date in question, and through the illegal and oppressive acts or reports of the defender, Wm. Alexander, as aforesaid, and means afore set forth, or others similar devised for the same end, been prevented and restrained from following his employment as an operative mason throughout the country, whereby he has sustained damage to the extent of not less than £12, for which defenders, or one or other of

At a former diet certain objections to the relevancy were stated, which the Sheriff having considered, gave the following judgment, prefacing his remarks by stating that he had submitted his note to Sheriff Sir A. Alison,

who concurred with him in the views he had taken.

The relevancy of this action, as directed against the now sole defender, Alexander, has been challenged, even if the grounds on which it is laid were admitted or proved. The pursuer demands reparation from the defender, who is described as secretary of the lodge in Glasgow of the United Operative Mason's Association of Scotland, because on 6th October last, and with the view to recovery or enforcing payment of a fine of £3 which in March or April preceding had been illegally and oppresively imposed on the pursuer by a lodge in Greenock connected with the same association, the defender had proceeded to Springburn, where the pursuer then wrought, and coerced, caused, and induced other workmen employed at the same job to strike work until the fine was either paid or the pursuer expelled from his master's service, this strike having been intended and devised as a means of intimidating the pursuer's master, or foreman, from retaining him in their service in default of payment of the fine, and in consequence of this procedure on the defender's part, the pur suer's master or foreman were intimidated and compelled to dismiss him, although the pursuer was able and willing to continue his work; and since that date, and from the same causes, he has been prevented and restrained from following his trade. Now the test of relevancy in an action of this sort is, whether or not the defender acted legally in what he did, assuming the pursuer's allegation to be true? In examining this point, it may be premised that it is not necessary to inquire whether the fine which the Greenock lodge imposed was a proper proceeding or the reverse. The pursuer, it seems, was one of its members, and by voluntarily submitting him self to its laws, he may have erred and been dealt with, perhaps, as he deserved, but with that, I repeat, the Court has nothing to do. Indeed, it is only in a case like this, where instruments of the union are said to have stepped furth of its rules and the jurisdiction which it has arrogated over its members, and illegally endeavoured to enforce its decisions, that a court of law could with propriety be invoked to stay what is irregular, or impair what has been injuriously done. The pursuer does not complain that the act which he imputes to the defender was done in contravention of the combination laws, he simply alleges that what was done was illegal; but the question cannot be got rid of, wherein the illegality lies. The existing combination laws are comprised in the Act of 1825 (6 Geo. IV., c. 129), as amended by 22 Vict., c. 34, and materially relaxed the earlier and far more oppressive laws on the subject. It thenceforth became no longer unlawful for masters or workmen to combine for having the rates of wages or hours of labour regulated; to effect these objects, workmen may leave off work in a body, or strike, as they term it, provided they do so peaceably and break no contracts; and masters may simultaneously cease employing workmen, subject to the same conditions. But these laws were passed, as the preamble of the Act 1825 bears, "as well for the security and personal freedom of individual workmen in the disposal of their skill and labour, as for the security of the property and persons of masters and employees." So that while privileges were conferred there were equally salutary restraints imposed; and inter alia it was enacted that if any one should use violence to the person or property of another, or threats, or intimidation, or should molest, or in any way obstruct him, for the purpose of forcing him to belong to a club or association, or to contribute to a common fund, or to pay any fine or penalty, the person offending may, on conviction, be sentenced to imprisonment for a period not exceeding three months, to which hard labour The recent Amendment Act softened may be superadded.

the rigour of interpretation which had been given to the words "molestation or obstruction," by defining in some instances what did not amount to the statutory offence; but otherwise the law was left as before. And what constitutes molestation and obstruction in the sense of the Acts may be gathered from instances where judicial interpretation was given to these words. Thus, in Rex v. Bykerdike and Others

refused to work with seven other men who wrought in the same pit, and the discontented addressed a letter to the manager, intimating that if these seven men were not discharged, the rest of the workmen would strike in 14 days. The accused who were concerned in this step were charged with intimidating and oppressing their employers, so as to prevent their workmen continuing in their service, and were convicted. Again, in Rex v. Hewell and Others (5 Cox., Criminal Cases, 162), a member of a workman's club had incurred a fine of £10 for breach of one of the rules, and on his refusal to pay an instalment of the fine, his fellow-clubsmen left their work and refused to return so long as this person who had wrought with them was employed. Some of the Combination Act, and convicted. It will be seen from these, among other decisions which might be cited, how dangerous it is to travel out of the permissive and beneficial objects of the statutes, and, besides enjoying the privileges of combining nation by acts which interfere with the security and personal to regulate wages and hours, to try and promote their combifreedom of individual workmen. Thus far under the statutes the legality of the defender's behaviour, as described by the pursuer, may be viewed; but at common law a still severer ministered, are strictly interpreted, and in prosecutions under test must be applied. Penal statutes, when judicially adthem conduct which is highly objectionable and illegal may immunity; but at common law, if by such conduct injury is not reach the exact letter of statutory offence, and so have inflicted, the wrong doer must repair it (Ersk. III., 1, 13). Alterum non lædere is one of the three general principles laid down by Justinian, which it has been the chief purpose of all civil enactments to enforce; and therefore if the defender, for the purpose of procuring the pursuer's expulsion from his work, or compelling him to pay a fine which he believed to have been oppressively and improperly imposed, instigated the pursuer's fellow-workmen to strike, and so coerced their unlawful act, and committed a wrong from which the pursuer common employers to expel the pursuer, the defender did an alleges he has suffered. It would be no answer to a complaint on these media that the defender neither spoke to the pursuer nor to his master-for all experience shows how much mischief Neither may be done from comparatively remote causes. duty, to recover a fine due to the body of which he was an would it be enough to contend that he sought, as was his officer, and that he simply communicated the state of matters masons' union has not native vigour in its regulations to to other members, the pursuer's fellow-workmen. enforce payment of the fines which it imposes, it would be better either not to impose them at all, or rest satisfied with extruding from their body refractory members; for it may be not entitle them, like other friendly societies, to resort to the certainly predicated that if their constitution is such as does ordinary tribunals of the country to recover the fines inflicted under their rules, a system devised to extort payment by unlawful expedients will not be tolerated. I have said enough to show that, so far as averment goes, the pursuer's summons is relevantly laid, and the wrongful acts set forth, if proved, infer damages.

men who had so struck work were for this indicted under the

Act. W. M. WILSON.

10TH MARCH, 1864.

If the

All. J. L. LANG.

SHERIFF COURT, GLASGOW. (SHERIFF SIR A. ALISON, Bart.)

Mr and Mrs SMITH SLIGO, of Carmyle, v. The CALEDONIAN RAILWAY COMPANY.

Land Clauses Consolidation Act, 8 Vict., c. 19, s. 50Jury Valuation Trial-Expenses, Taxation of.-Rule of Taxation of Expenses as to (1) Counsel, (2) Agents, (3) Engineers, Land Valuators, etc.

THE Caledonian Railway Company, in the formation of a branch line, went through the estate of Carmyle, near Glasgow, and in doing so took possession of fourteen acres. For this land, for severance, amenity, etc., the proprietors claimed £10,000. The Railway Company offered £4844 19s. This was refused, and a jury was empannelled, under the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 8 Vict., c. 19, to value the lands taken, and the relative losses by severance, loss of amenity, etc. The trial lasted nine days, before Sir A. Alison and a jury, and each party had counsel from Edinburgh-the Solicitor-General and Mr Moncrieff on the one side, Mr Rutherford Clark, Mr Shand, and Mr Anderson on the other. The account of expenses amounted to £3333. From this sum the auditor of the Sheriff Court, Glasgow, struck off £1890 11s 7d, leaving the account £1442 14s 21. The auditor's report is too long for insertion here. It was appealed, and after a hearing the Sheriff substantially affirmed the auditor's report. We print his Note, as stating principles which may be useful not only in similar trials, but in ordinary trials where the same classes of witnesses may be cited or adduced.

NOTE.-This is a very important case, both from the heavy pecuniary interest at stake on both sides, and from the number of points it involves, which bring out the different principles on which the taxation of the expenses in such cases should proceed. In reviewing the immense mass of details alluded to in the auditor's report, and involved in the objection on both sides, it is not the intention of the Sheriff to go into the whole, or even the greater part, of the disputed pointson many of which he does not feel himself competent to judge, and in regard to which the auditor is much better qualified to form an opinion than he is. It shall be his object, therefore, instead of going into minute details, to confine himself to the determination of general rules or principles, the application of which will determine many of the subordinate points, and possibly form a rule of decision for similar cases in future. In arriving at these conclusions the Sheriff has had the benefit of a most elaborate and admirable report by the auditor, and of a long and able debate by his friends--Mr Gordon, on behalf of the railway company, and Mr Lockhart for the claimants-who have pleaded their respective sides of the case with equal judgment, temper, and ability. In entering upon this subject, the Sheriff cannot refrain from noticing, in the outset, the extremely formidable character of the claims which have been preferred for the costs of the trial by the claimants in the present case. He has only to deal with them, because those of the claimants are only sub judice, and rest with them and the various parties whose assistance was required. It is certainly sufficiently startling to say that in a case which involved only the value of a strip of land, consisting of fourteen acres, passing through the centre of the estate of Carmyle, within four miles of Glasgow, in which the sum demanded by the claimants was £10,000 or thereby, and the sum tendered by the railway company was £4844 198, and that awarded by the jury was £5524-the amount of expenses claimed, on the one side, by the successful party, the claimants, is no less than £3333, and even after £1890 11s 7d had been struck off by the auditor, no less than £1442 14s 2d has been sustained as a charge against the railway company. This result is certainly sufficiently startling, and well calculated to make persons of substance pause before they venture their fortune in the perilous issue of a trial by jury. It seems to be no sufficient observation upon these results to say that although the pecuniary interests at stake were not very great, yet they depended upon a great many separate points-some of them of a scientific nature, requiring the assistance and skill of professional gentlemen, and that the case in this way in reality contained three or more trials in one, and that, in consequence, the trial extended to the unprecedented length of nine entire days. That is perfectly true, but still it will not account for the enormous expense with which the proceedings in this case appear to have been attended, nor will it authorise the imposing the whole of them,

taking them by classes, upon the party who, in the end, was unsuccessful in the suit. In this matter the responsibility of unduly swelling the expenses mainly rests with the claimants, because it is their act in having rested their claim upon so many different grounds, and overloading each with evidence, which renders a similar overloading of the expense on all compensation here not only for the agricultural surface of the The claimants demanded these points on the other side. lands, which could have been comparatively easily determined, as they were all under lease, but they also demanded a heavy sum for the injury done to the lands by severance, for the loss of minerals under the surface of part of the land taken, for the injury done by stopping or impeding the feuing of part of the estate, and for anticipated damage by flooding part of the lands by the erection of the proposed bridge over the river Clyde. Upon every one of these points were not only ordinary witnesses, but men of the highest scientific skill, examined at the trial by the claimants, and of course a similar array of witnesses was rendered necessary on behalf of the railway company; and it is the great number of these scientific witnesses, who are a very expensive class, joined to the great fees paid to the eminent counsel engaged in the case, which has been the main cause of the excessive amount In dealing with this of the costs that have been incurred. delicate and difficult matter, the Court can derive compara. tively little assistance either from the statute law, or the decisions of the Court of Session. The Land Clauses Consolidation Act, 8 Vict., cap. 19, sect. 50, merely declares, after saying that in the event of the sum tendered by the railway company being less than that awarded by the jury, that the expenses shall be borne by the company, and declares that "such expenses shall include all reasonable charges and expenses incurred in summoning, empannelling, and returning the jury, taking the inquiry, the attendance of witnesses, the employment of counsel and agents, recording the verdict and judgment thereon, and otherwise incident to such inquiry.” The statute, however, does not say, nor perhaps could it determine, what, shall be held "as reasonable charges and expenses.' It, however, does enact that the expenses shall include the expenses incurred "in taking the inquiry," and "otherwise incident to such inquiry." Under a reasonable interpretation of these words it is obvious that the expense of a previous precognition and surveys and inspection of the lands by skilled witnesses must be included, because these form the very basis of the inquiry for the counsel, the Court, and the jury. But here also it is only the reasonable charges and expenses that can be charged against the unsuccessful party, and the Court is driven to determine what, in the circumstances of each case, is to be held as reasonable charges. With regard again to the light which is thrown on this subject by the decisions, or Acts of Sederunt of the Court of Session, they of course fall as a rule to be obeyed, and must be obeyed in every case in which they seem to be applicable. There is no reason why jury valuation trials or railway cases should be held to be exceptionable cases, and that extravagant allowances are to be made to witnesses in them, for their services and attendance to give evidence, which would not be sustained in ordinary litigations between man and man. But unfortunately, even admitting this principle, it still leaves a great many of the most difficult points in such cases undecided. These are the charges made by railway engineers, mining and civil engineers, architects, master builders, land valuators, surveyors, amenity doctors, country gentlemen, farmers, and the like, most of whom are cited to give opinions upon points before the jury, not to speak simply to facts observed by themselves. These all claim as scientific men at the head of their respective professions, and they claim not merely their personal and travelling expenses, which of course they are entitled to, but a large remuneration, some of them at the rate of five guineas a day, for their alleged loss of time and loss of professional profit in attending the trial. Amidst such a group of different individuals all claiming pre-eminencebut the greater part of whom, though well known in their own immediate vicinity, are known neither to the Court nor generally over the country-it is almost impossible to discriminate with certainty between individual cases. But the rule which the Court is bound to follow, and which in the circumstances is by far the safest, is to adopt, wherever it is practicable, the table of remuneration fixed and allowed by Act of Sederunt for civil jury trials. These are, for a country gentleman or a non-professional person, one guinea a day, in