THE SEAFIELD PEERAGE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19695, 23 January 1926, Page 12

THE SEAFIELD PEERAGE.

’EVIDENCE ON COMMISSION. APPLICATION REFUSED. (F-eom Ode Own Coebhwondknt.) LONDON, December H, The Se afield peerage case was mentioned before the Second Division of the Court of Session at Edinburgh yesterday, when counsel for the Countess of Seafield* and others who are opposing the claim asked their lordships to grant a commission to take the evidence of Mary Elizabeth Nina. Countess of Seafiold, who was going abroad for the winter, and would not return until after March 9. the date fixed for the trial. The Lord Justice Clerk: Is it a ground for granting a commission that a witness desires to go to the Riviera? Mr Carmont, K.C. : That is not the situation. The witness is to be absent until April or May. She is going to Malta. She leaves Scotland early next week, and it is proposed to take her evidence before then. Counsel explained that the lady was not vitally connected with the merits of the case. She was, however, « material witness on a minor point. Mr J. Walker, for the claimant, objected to the commission being granted, because it was incompetent, and would prejudice his client’s case through his being compelled to take the evidence piecemeal. The court refused the application. The Lord Justice Clerk said that the grounds on which the application was baaed were insufficient to warrant the court granting it. The claim really amounted to this,'that the arrangements of the court were to be subordinated to the convenience of the lady. Lord Ormidale and Lord Anderson concurred.