ANSWERS In behalf of the Wellwishers to the prosperity of the Nation, in matters of Trade, WHY The frivolous Points of alleged Private Right obtruded by the Town of Edinburgh should not hinder the passing of the Act for a Communication of Trade, to the Inhabitants of Leith.  
AS the several Points of great Advantage to Trade over all the Nation, alswell as those parts next adjacent to Leith, were sufficiently held forth 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. Justify 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 had then, and before wrongously Monopolised: For the Words of the said Act 1672. are, That the former Laws anent the Privileges of Royal Burrows were highly prejudicial to the common Interest and Good of the Kingdom, as extending the Privileges of Royal Borrows far beyond their ancient Rights, and applying the Privileges of Burrows in general, such as Taping, Retailing, etc. To Royal Burrows only to the Prejudice of Brughs of Regality and barony: For remead whereof, the said Act Anno 1672. Declares burgh's of Barronie, etc. 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 expressly 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, always ready to bear a Proportionable Burden.  
The Representation does make a great mystery of edinburgh's private Rights: As to which, before making particular Answers thereunto, It is to be Considered in the general, That all these Rights signify nothing. Because 10, The Case is not of Rights or Decreets belwixt private parties: Or where the public Interest is not concerned. But the Case is anent public Rights, betwixt two public Societies, where the public Trade of the Nation is interested. 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 prohibit huunting and haulking, except in the time and manner prescribed, etc. 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 particular 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 Conjoining Chirurgery and pharmacy, though 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, though 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 tyrannise over Le●th, by debarring them from Trading. Hence 2, No Arguments drawn from Decreets betwixt private 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 Barony Prior to these Restrictions, and thereby their Jus quaesitum could not be taken away either by any Deed of the Superior, 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 expressly exclude any benefit which might accrue by Supervenient Laws.  
And whereas it is pretended for Edinburgh that the Privileges which the new Acts grant to Brughs of Barony, are given to the Baron; and he may Communicate the same to the Burgh, or nor, as he thinks fit. It's Answered, That nothing can be more abfurd; For 10. It's expressly contrary to the Words of the Acts, which give these Privileges to the burgh's of Barony; and not (personally) to the Barons only, 2. It is plainly contrary to common sense. For as the Barons themselves by their Representatives in Parliament were Voters to these privileges in Favours of their own burgh's; 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 Taxed 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 entreated, for so great a public 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 farther; 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 Privilege 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 than he would have go●. For so much of any other Ground, he the said Restalrig as Superior, could not dispense 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 expressly 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 burgh's of Barronie Privileges of Trade de novo; No antecedent Renounciation of Trade, with express relation to the said's 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 Superiors Resignation, for the Town of Leith's behoof.  
No Respect to the old Acts of Parliament, declaring the Privileges 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 said's old Laws to have been highly prejudicial to the Comm●n ●ure●●st and Good of the Kingdom, in restricting the universal Privilege of all kind of Trade to the Royal Burrows only: And for Remeid thereof, declared the Points of Trade competent to burgh's of Barronie and Regality, as aforesaid where by the said's old Laws being in tantum rescinded, Edinburgh ought not to be heard to plead ●ny thing thereo●, contrar to the said Act of Parliament anno 1672. Nor  
5. Ought Queen Mary's 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 private Right, exclusive of Leith from all Trade. Because 1. A Burgh of Baronies 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 whereanent Edinburgh was put in dol● pessimo before taking Seasive on the said Wadset Right, in so far as Leith, at the Sight, and in the Hands of multitudes of Notta●s and Witnesses, Instrument the very Provost of Edinburgh, the time of taking Season, as said is; Protesting, for the Safety of Le●th's Interest, and for Cost, Skaith, and Damnage.  
6 No respect to edinburgh's 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 superior, and so a non habente potestatem, to dispose on the Inhabitants and Vassals 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, etc. And the Right of Superiority per se, can never preclude the Burgh of Barony from its predial Right of Trading as aforesaid, and quoad the Sherriff-ship, Lieth non facit vim.  
7. No respect to edinburgh's 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 virtue 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 edinburgh's Royalty, Edinburgh there throw pleads a Right of Burdening Lieth with the Cess of Edinburgh qua par● of edinburgh's Royalty; 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 lieges 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 edinburgh's 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 Barony; But upon the contrai●, allows the same in the amplest Form, which ipso facto cuts off all preceding Restraints on the Freedom of Leiths' Trade, before the said Year 1636. Especially seeing 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 alleged use and wont of Restraining Lieth by Sentences, binding them to comply with edinburgh's 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 burgh's of Barony from Trade, and which were the Foundations of the said's Sentences and Oblidgments, & against which, Leith did always struggle, being taken away by the said new Law anno 1672. Induing burgh's of Barronrie, with a privilege of Trading, edinburgh's 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 merely 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 Barony 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 Privileges of burgh's of Barony and Regality as to Trade, cannot derogate from edinburgh's 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 edinburgh's whole Restraints and pretended Rights for so doing did arise directly from the said's old severe Laws, in so far as the pretended Concession from Restaelrig, expressly 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 Empower Edinburgh as Superiors to Robb Leith of their Right of Trading which is their Property also well by their Original Errection in a Barony as by their late and absolute Errection aforesaid without Reserve. And seeing 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 necessarily follow, that the said's Old severe Laws being abrogate, the Acts Sal●o Jure can never warrant edinburgh's Usurpation and Restraints upon Leith arising from the said's 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 edinburgh's very ancient Charter in King Robert's 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 farther, save that Restalrig allowed them Ish and Entry 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 edinburgh's free Port. viz upon the Shoar allanerly, 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 Privilege 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, alleged lately obtained by Edinburgh against Leith, as to Edinburgh, its exercising its said's 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 abovesaid, that Edinburgh● pretensions to such Restraints are of no Weight, & can never be sustained for prepondering the Public & Common Good that would arise to all throw Leiths becoming a Trading Port, which some few of the Lodging-monger Neighbours, etc. of Edinburgh oppose for their own private Gain, viz. the heightening 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 lieges 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 mere Claim on the Town of edinburgh's 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  Answers thereto.  
And therefore, and upon the whole matter, it is humbly hop● the Parliament will prefer the public and common well of the Nation, quoad the matter of Trade to any such shame private 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 expressly declared to have been highly prejudicial to the common Interest and good of ●he Kingdom: so it is hoped the Parliament will find the Town of edinburgh's said pretensions founded thereon, to 〈◊〉 likewise such, and that these pretensions have fallen in consequence of the said's old abrogated Laws, and therefore will pass the 〈◊〉 for communication of Trade, humbly offered in Favours of the Town of 〈◊〉.