Scotland’s Supreme Courts

Part One · 1. A Genuinely Mixed System

There is broad, authoritative agreement on the classification. Vernon Valentine Palmer’s landmark study Mixed Jurisdictions Worldwide: The Third Legal Family (Cambridge University Press, 2001; 2nd ed. 2012) groups Scotland with “South Africa, Quebec, Puerto Rico, the Philippines, Louisiana, and Israel”. Reinhard Zimmermann’s Max Planck Encyclopedia of European Private Law goes further, stating that “the key members of this group are Scotland, South Africa, Louisiana, Quebec and Israel” — one of “the five major mixed systems in the world”.

Scots private law — persons, obligations, property — is substantially civilian in origin and retains real civilian elements: delict rather than tort, unjustified enrichment drawing on Roman condictiones. The system as a whole is uncodified, precedent-based, adversarial and split into a bar and solicitor profession — all common-law traits.

Scotland occupies a genuinely special position within this small family, for two reasons. It is often described as the oldest of the mixed jurisdictions. And, unlike South Africa, Louisiana or Quebec, which became mixed through colonial transfer of sovereignty — a civilian system falling under a common-law imperial power — Scotland’s mixture arose from the voluntary Union of 1707. Palmer notes explicitly that “Scotland and Israel… are exceptions to this pattern”.

But “mixed” means more than civil plus common law. Scholars such as Stephen Thomson stress that the historical mixture also includes pre-twelfth-century Celtic, Gaelic, Britonnic, Norse and Anglo-Saxon custom — Norse udal law survives distinctively in Orkney and Shetland; feudal law, introduced under David I; canon law, transmitted through the medieval church courts, whose importance Lord Cooper regarded as at least equal to the common law’s in that period; and, since 1707, an intensifying layer of English-influenced statute and commercial law, plus, until Brexit, EU law and, ongoingly, the European Convention on Human Rights. Direct Roman-law influence was in truth slight until around the fifteenth century and only ever partially received — a useful corrective to the popular idea that Scots law is essentially Roman. Encyclopaedia Britannica itself warns against the “fallacy” that Scots law “is founded on the law of Rome”.

One further debate deserves recording rather than dismissing. The legal historian Andreas Rahmatian argues that the “mixed system” idea has functioned as “an ideological and political device to further the cause of legal nationalism”, rooted in twentieth-century figures like Lord Cooper and T. B. Smith. That is a genuine and serious minority scholarly critique, and it is presented here as a live academic debate rather than a settled rebuttal of the classification.

2. The Institutional Writers

If the system has one genuinely unique feature, this is it. Between roughly 1681 and 1829 a small number of jurists produced systematic treatises that the courts came to treat as a formal source of law in their own right — a status with no true equivalent in English common law. The principal figures are Viscount Stair (Institutions of the Law of Scotland, 1681), John Erskine (An Institute of the Law of Scotland, 1773) and George Joseph Bell (Commentaries, 1804; Principles, 1829), with Craig, Mackenzie, Bankton, Hume and Kames also recognised.

Sir Thomas Smith described their authority as roughly equivalent to “a decision made by a Division of the Inner House of the Court of Session”, and in Drew v Drew (1870) Lord Benholme declared that where “Stair’s opinion [is] uncontradicted, I look upon that opinion as ascertaining the law of Scotland”. For balance, Rahmatian observes that this institutional status was itself a nineteenth-century judicial construction — the courts effectively made these writers authoritative by repeatedly citing them approvingly — and scholars genuinely disagree about how much operative weight institutional writings still carry today, as against serving as a largely symbolic moral and intellectual anchor.

3. The Four Sources of Scots Law

Scots law recognises legislation, judicial precedent, institutional writings and custom. Legislation now comes from three layers: the Scottish Parliament for devolved matters since 1999, the UK Parliament for reserved matters, and a small surviving body of pre-1707 Acts of the old Parliament of Scotland — around 80 remained in force as of a 2017 count, including the Royal Mines Act 1424, the oldest Scots Act still in force, and the Leases Act 1449, still relied on in property cases.

A surviving Act can nonetheless lapse through desuetude — long disuse combined with contrary practice — itself a distinctively Scottish doctrine. Case law works on binding precedent broadly as in English law, though a single sheriff’s decision is only persuasive.

Two modern reforms are worth flagging. The Abolition of Feudal Tenure etc. (Scotland) Act 2000 ended Scotland’s centuries-old feudal system of land tenure on its appointed day, 28 November 2004 — Professor Kenneth Reid calls it “the most important single change to have occurred in land law in Scotland”, making Scotland one of the last European jurisdictions to formally abolish feudal landholding, and the Court of the Lord Lyon ceased officially recognising feudal barons from that date. And Scotland’s General Register of Sasines, created by a 1617 Act of the pre-Union Parliament, is described by Registers of Scotland as “the oldest national public land register in the world” — a claim attributed here to Registers of Scotland’s own characterisation rather than stated as an independently audited global superlative, though it is widely accepted.

4. Articles XVIII and XIX, Precisely Distinguished

The Treaty of Union preserved Scotland’s legal distinctiveness through two separate articles doing two separate jobs. Article XIX preserved the courts — the Court of Session, the High Court of Justiciary and other Scottish courts — and barred Scottish cases from being heard in the English courts at Westminster Hall. Article XVIII preserved the laws, but drew a crucial distinction: laws concerning “public right, policy and civil government” could be made uniform across Britain by Westminster, whereas “no alteration be made in laws which concern private right, except for the evident utility of the subjects within Scotland”.

In other words, Scotland’s public law was always more freely alterable by Westminster than its private law — a nuance popular accounts routinely flatten into “everything was frozen forever”, which overstates the protection considerably.

Part Two · 5. The Court of Session, 1532

The Court of Session’s formal foundation rests on three linked, well-documented events. King James V obtained a papal bull from Pope Clement VII, dated 15 September 1531, allowing the Crown to draw 10,000 gold ducats from the Scottish bishoprics and monastic institutions to fund a permanent, salaried bench of judges. The Scottish Parliament then passed the College of Justice Act on 17 May 1532, “Concerning the ordour of Justice and the institutioun of ane college of cunning and wise men for the administracioun of Justice”, establishing a College of 14 members — half spiritual, half temporal — plus a President and the Lord Chancellor. The court first sat on 27 May 1532, in the royal presence.

Because so much of the funding was ecclesiastical, half the members were required to be drawn from the ecclesiastical dignity. The first President was Alexander Mylne, Abbot of Cambuskenneth and a trained canon lawyer, who presided until his death and drew up the court’s first procedural rules.

6. Outer House and Inner House

The court divides into the Outer House — first-instance cases, heard by single judges called Lords Ordinary — and the Inner House, the appeal chambers: the First Division, led by the Lord President, and the Second Division, led by the Lord Justice Clerk. The division emerged practically during the regency of Mary of Guise in the mid-sixteenth century and was formalised by reforms between 1808 and 1825.

In 1672 the court ceased hearing criminal cases entirely, when the High Court of Justiciary was established as a separate standing court. Over the nineteenth century the Court of Session absorbed further civil jurisdictions instead: Admiralty and Jury Court business in 1830, Exchequer revenue work in 1856.

Today the court sits at Parliament House, Edinburgh, whose oldest part — Parliament Hall, completed 1639 — was the first purpose-built parliament building in the British Isles and home to the pre-Union Scottish Parliament. After 1707 dissolved that Parliament, the building’s function became judicial, and the court has sat there ever since. It is led by the Lord President, who is simultaneously Lord Justice General, head of the High Court of Justiciary, and head of the entire Scottish judiciary — currently Lord Pentland (Paul Cullen), sworn in on 3 February 2025. The two offices were formally merged in 1836.

7. The Appeals Asymmetry

Between 1707 and 2009 there was a right of civil appeal from the Inner House to the House of Lords; since 2009 the final civil appeal lies to the UK Supreme Court. That route exists for civil cases only. Scottish criminal cases do not appeal to the UK Supreme Court: the High Court of Justiciary is the final criminal court of appeal, with only a narrow devolution and compatibility issues exception.

This asymmetry is genuine, constitutionally significant and widely misunderstood by the public, and it is worth leading with wherever the system is explained. Article XIX also illustrates the limits of the Union’s protection: it provided “That the Court of Session or Colledge of Justice do after the Union and notwithstanding thereof remain in all time coming within Scotland as it is now constituted”, and the protection has proven durable in substance — but the same article expressly reserved to the Parliament of Great Britain the power to make regulations “for the better Administration of Justice”, and a right of civil appeal to the House of Lords developed after 1707 regardless.

In the landmark case MacCormick v Lord Advocate (1953), Lord President Cooper observed in an Inner House judgment that “the principle of the unlimited sovereignty of Parliament is a distinctively English principle which has no counterpart in Scottish constitutional law” — a touchstone dictum on the limits of Westminster sovereignty, even though the petitioners themselves lost on procedural grounds.

8. Judges and Cases

Viscount Stair — James Dalrymple, 1619–1695 — was Lord President from 1671 to 1681 and again from 1689 to 1695, and authored The Institutions of the Law of Scotland (1681), universally regarded as the greatest of the institutional writings and the foundation of modern Scots law. He systematised it explicitly by reference to “the civil, canon and feudal laws, and… the customs of neighbouring nations”. Institutional writer and Lord President in one man: the two parts of this card meeting in a single biography.

Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) — “the Paisley Snail”. This globally famous negligence case is authentically Scottish and needs precise handling. After May Donoghue fell ill from an allegedly snail-contaminated bottle of ginger beer bought for her at a Paisley café in August 1928, she raised an action in delict — the Scots equivalent of tort — in the Court of Session, since she had no contract with the manufacturer to sue on. The Outer House allowed the case to proceed; the Inner House’s Second Division ruled against her, finding no duty of care absent a contract. She appealed to the House of Lords, which on 26 May 1932, by three votes to two, established Lord Atkin’s “neighbour principle”, the foundation of the modern law of negligence. The precise point: the case originated and was litigated in the Court of Session, but the landmark ruling was delivered by the House of Lords on appeal. It was ultimately settled before any factual trial; Stevenson had died.

Cherry v Advocate General (2019). In the prorogation dispute the Inner House held that the advice to prorogue Parliament was unlawful because its purpose was to “stymie” parliamentary scrutiny — a ruling upheld by the UK Supreme Court in the joined Miller/Cherry judgment of 24 September 2019, and a striking modern demonstration of the court’s constitutional weight.

Part Three · 9. The High Court of Justiciary, 1672

The High Court of Justiciary was established in its modern, standing form in 1672 by the Courts Act 1672 (c. 40), originally titled the “Act concerning the Regulation of the Judicatories”. The Act attached five Lords of Session to the Lord Justice General and Lord Justice Clerk as permanent judges of a dedicated Justice Court — the very moment at which the Court of Session ceased hearing criminal cases at all. 1672 is a hinge date for both courts, and the two events are the same institutional transition viewed from either side.

The underlying criminal jurisdiction is far older. The office of justiciar, later Justice General, traces to the reign of David I (1124–53), when justiciars served as the king’s delegates administering justice, holding court “on ayre” — on circuit — around the sheriffdoms to hear the four pleas of the crown: murder, robbery, rape and arson. From the fourteenth century two justiciars covered the north and south of Scotland; these were combined into a single Lord Justice General in the early sixteenth century, with a court based in Edinburgh from 1524. The office was held heritably by the Earls of Argyll from 1514 — some sources say 1567 — until the heritability was resigned to the Crown in 1607/1628. The real innovation of 1672, then, was converting an old, itinerant, deputy-run jurisdiction into a standing, professionalised central court.

Today the High Court sits both as a trial court — the gravest offences, including murder, rape, treason and serious drug and sexual offences, under solemn procedure with a single judge and a 15-person jury, unlimited sentencing powers, sitting in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen and on circuit — and as an appeal court, in Edinburgh only, with at least two judges and no jury. Lesser matters go to the sheriff courts and justice of the peace courts, with the Sheriff Appeal Court, established in 2015, handling summary criminal appeals.

10. Three Verdicts, and the 2026 Reform

For centuries Scottish juries could return three verdicts: guilty, not guilty, and not proven— the last an acquittal with identical legal effect to not guilty, but carrying different social connotations. Contrary to popular belief, the original Scottish verdicts referred simply to guilt and innocence; special verdicts on whether individual facts were proven emerged only in the early seventeenth century, and the 1728 case of Carnegie of Finhaven re-established the jury’s right to return a direct “not guilty” — after which “not proven” survived as what scholars call a historical accident. Sir Walter Scott, as sheriff of Selkirk, called it “that bastard verdict” in his 1827 journal.

This 300-year-old feature has now genuinely ended. The Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Act 2025, passed on 17 September 2025 by 71 votes to 46 and receiving Royal Assent on 30 October 2025, abolished the not proven verdict for all new criminal trials from 1 January 2026, and simultaneously replaced the historic simple-majority conviction rule with a requirement of at least two-thirds of the jury. A proposal to shrink the jury from 15 to 12 was considered but dropped from the final Act.

And the “uniquely Scottish” framing needs flagging directly. “Not proven” genuinely was part of the only three-verdict jury system of its kind in the common-law world — but the broader idea of a differentiated, middle acquittal is not unique globally: Israel has a doubt-based acquittal alongside full acquittal, and Italy had acquittals “for lack of evidence” until its 1988 code reform.

11. Corroboration and Jury Size

Corroboration. Scots law has long required that each crucial fact be established by evidence from at least two independent sources before conviction: an uncorroborated confession, or a single eyewitness however credible, cannot alone convict. This is genuinely unusual. As the Law Society of Scotland put it, “Scotland, it appears, is unique in requiring it” as a formal rule, even though other systems value and warn juries about uncorroborated evidence informally. A serious abolition attempt in 2013, following Cadder v HM Advocate, was dropped by the Scottish Government in April 2015 after fierce opposition from the legal profession. The requirement remains in force.

Jury size. Scottish criminal juries have 15 members — larger than the 12 used in England, Wales and most common-law jurisdictions, and thought to be the largest in the world. But the historical size has no principled Scottish rationale to boast of. As a Scottish Government consultation itself notes, “there was no set number of jurors in the early days… they were nearly always made up of 15 jurors by the close of the sixteenth century” — a settled convention rather than a deliberate design choice, with nationalist rationalisations developed only in the nineteenth century.

12. The Lord Advocate and COPFS

Scotland runs a public-prosecutor model. The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS), headed by the Lord Advocate, is the sole public prosecution service — a genuinely different structure from England’s later, separately organised Crown Prosecution Service (1986). Procurators fiscal investigate and prosecute in the sheriff and justice of the peace courts, while Advocates Depute prosecute the most serious cases in the High Court itself; COPFS also has a coroner-like function investigating sudden and suspicious deaths.

This structure carries a real and increasingly contested tension: the Lord Advocate is simultaneously head of the prosecution service and a Scottish Government minister, sitting in cabinet as its chief legal adviser. The dual role has drawn sustained criticism, particularly after the 2020 Alex Salmond trial — an acquittal on all charges — and the Rangers “malicious prosecutions” affair, for which the Lord Advocate formally apologised in 2021.

It also creates the one route out of the criminal-appeals dead end. Because the Lord Advocate is bound by the ECHR as a Scottish Minister, the Convention-compatibility of prosecutions can be challenged as a “devolution issue” reaching the UK Supreme Court even in criminal cases. Landmark examples are Cadder v HM Advocate [2010] UKSC 43, establishing a right to a solicitor in police detention and overturning a seven-judge High Court decision, and Fraser v HM Advocate [2011] UKSC 24.

13. Notable Trials

The Lockerbie bombing trial is the High Court’s most extraordinary case. Following the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie on 21 December 1988, in which 270 people died, two Libyan suspects were tried by the High Court of Justiciary sitting at Camp Zeist, a former US airbase near Utrecht in the Netherlands — a domestic Scottish court applying Scots law on foreign soil, made possible by UN Security Council Resolution 1192, a UK–Netherlands agreement, and a specific 1998 Order designating Camp Zeist as Scottish jurisdiction for the trial’s duration. Three judges sat without a jury, jury trial being impractical for a case expected to last a year and dispensed with at Libya’s insistence, though Scots corroboration and majority rules still applied. On 31 January 2001 Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was convicted and sentenced to life, with a 27-year punishment part fixed in 2003; Lamin Khalifah Fhimah was acquitted. Al-Megrahi was released on compassionate grounds in 2009 and died in 2012; a posthumous family appeal was refused in 2020.

Others belong in any short list. Thomas Muir, tried for sedition on 30–31 August 1793 and sentenced to 14 years’ transportation — one of the “Scottish Martyrs” of the 1793–94 reform trials. Madeleine Smith, whose 1857 Glasgow poisoning trial ended famously in “not proven”. And William Burke, tried on 24 December 1828 for the West Port murders and hanged in January 1829, with Hare turning King’s evidence.

Myths and Corrections

• Popular claim

  The Court of Session was modelled on the Parlement of Paris

  Precise correction: A seventeenth-century claim (Mackenzie) rejected by modern legal historians (Hannay, Godfrey), who show a native, canon-law-influenced origin

• Popular claim

  Cardinal David Beaton founded the College of Justice

  Precise correction: The documented founding President was Alexander Mylne, under James V

• Popular claim

  Donoghue v Stevenson was decided by the Court of Session

  Precise correction: It originated there, and the Inner House ruled against Donoghue; the landmark negligence ruling came from the House of Lords on appeal

• Popular claim

  Scots law is “essentially European” or “Roman-based”

  Precise correction: Scots private law is civilian in pedigree; the system as a whole is uncodified, precedent-based and heavily anglicised in public law, commerce and procedure

• Popular claim

  Scotland has the only, or a unique, mixed legal system

  Precise correction: One of five classical mixed jurisdictions worldwide, with South Africa, Louisiana, Quebec and Israel; at least three exist within the EU alone

• Popular claim

  “Not proven” was a uniquely Scottish concept

  Precise correction: The three-verdict jury system was unique; differentiated, doubt-based acquittals exist elsewhere (Israel; pre-1988 Italy)

• Popular claim

  The 15-person jury reflects deliberate Scottish legal philosophy

  Precise correction: It simply settled at 15 by the late sixteenth century; principled rationalisations came later, in the nineteenth

• Popular claim

  Article XIX gave the Scottish courts total, unchangeable protection

  Precise correction: The article expressly reserved Westminster's power to regulate “for the better Administration of Justice”, and House of Lords civil appeals developed after 1707 regardless

• Popular claim

  Corroboration is just “good practice” everywhere

  Precise correction: Scotland is genuinely unusual in making corroboration a formal legal requirement rather than merely valued evidence

Timeline

1. 1124–53

   The office of justiciar under David I

   The king's delegates hold court “on ayre” for the four pleas of the crown

2. 1424 & 1449

   Royal Mines Act; Leases Act

   Pre-Union Acts of the Scottish Parliament still in force today

3. 1514/1567–1607/1628

   The Earls of Argyll hold the justiciarship heritably

   Resigned to the Crown; sources differ on the start date

4. 1524

   A Justice Court based in Edinburgh

   The two northern and southern justiciars combined into one Lord Justice General

5. 15 Sep 1531

   Papal bull of Clement VII

   Allows the Crown to draw 10,000 gold ducats from Scottish bishoprics to fund a salaried bench

6. 17 May 1532

   College of Justice Act

   Establishes a College of 14 members, half spiritual and half temporal, plus a President

7. 27 May 1532

   The Court of Session first sits

   In the royal presence; Alexander Mylne presides and drafts its first rules

8. 1617

   General Register of Sasines created

   By an Act of the pre-Union Parliament; “the oldest national public land register in the world”, per Registers of Scotland

9. 1639

   Parliament Hall completed

   The first purpose-built parliament building in the British Isles; judicial from 1707

10. 1672

    Courts Act 1672

    The High Court of Justiciary becomes a standing court; the Court of Session loses criminal jurisdiction

11. 1681

    Stair's Institutions of the Law of Scotland

    The greatest of the institutional writings

12. 1707

    Article XIX of the Treaty of Union

    Both courts preserved by name; Scottish cases barred from the English courts

13. 1728

    Carnegie of Finhaven

    Re-establishes the jury's right to return a direct “not guilty”

14. 1793

    Thomas Muir tried for sedition

    Sentenced to 14 years' transportation; one of the “Scottish Martyrs”

15. 1808–1825

    Outer and Inner House formalised

    Building on a division that emerged under Mary of Guise

16. 1828–29

    The trial of William Burke

    Tried 24 December 1828, hanged January 1829; Hare turned King's evidence

17. 1836

    Lord President and Lord Justice General merged

    One person heads both supreme courts

18. 1857

    The trial of Madeleine Smith

    The Glasgow poisoning case famously ending in “not proven”

19. 1932

    Donoghue v Stevenson

    Raised in the Court of Session; decided by the House of Lords on 26 May

20. 1953

    MacCormick v Lord Advocate

    Lord President Cooper's dictum on the limits of Westminster sovereignty

21. 2000–01

    The Lockerbie trial at Camp Zeist

    A Scottish court in the Netherlands; verdict 31 January 2001

22. 2009

    Final civil appeal moves to the UK Supreme Court

    From the House of Lords

23. 2010

    Cadder v HM Advocate

    The UK Supreme Court establishes a right to a solicitor in police detention

24. 2019

    Cherry v Advocate General

    The Inner House finds the prorogation unlawful; upheld by the UK Supreme Court

25. 2025–26

    Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Act 2025

    Passed 17 September 2025; “not proven” abolished for new trials from 1 January 2026

Did You Know?

• The Court of Session was funded by a papal bull: 10,000 gold ducats drawn from Scotland's bishoprics and monasteries.
• Scotland's two supreme courts are headed by the same person, who holds the titles Lord President and Lord Justice General — merged in 1836.
• The Royal Mines Act 1424 is the oldest Act of the Scottish Parliament still in force.
• A Scots Act can die of neglect: the doctrine of desuetude lets long disuse plus contrary practice end it.
• Scots law abolished feudal land tenure only on 28 November 2004 — among the last in Europe.
• The Court of Session sits in a building constructed for the Parliament that dissolved itself in 1707.
• Donoghue v Stevenson never went to a factual trial: the case was settled, and Stevenson had died.
• In 2000–01 a Scottish court sat in the Netherlands, applying Scots law on Dutch soil by international agreement.
• “Not proven” survived for three centuries as, in effect, a historical accident — and ended on 1 January 2026.
• Sir Walter Scott, a sheriff himself, called “not proven” “that bastard verdict” in his 1827 journal.

Honest Caveats

• Source tiers. The load-bearing sources here are the primary constitutional texts — the College of Justice Act 1532, the Courts Act 1672, Articles XVIII and XIX of the Treaty of Union, and the Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Act 2025 — official bodies including the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service, legislation.gov.uk, Judiciary of Scotland and gov.scot, and named academic historians. Tourism and low-authority secondary pages were used only for orientation, never as the basis of a superlative claim.
• Recurring date discrepancies. The Earl of Argyll’s heritable justiciarship start date is given as 1514 or 1567; the number of surviving pre-1707 Acts is approximately 80 on a 2017 count that will have shifted since; the Lockerbie minimum-term figures — a 20-year initial recommendation and a 27-year punishment part fixed later — are sequential, not contradictory.
• The 2025 Act’s other reforms are still being phased in. A specialist Sexual Offences Court, a Victims and Witnesses Commissioner, independent legal representation for complainers and expanded jury research run through 2026 and beyond. A proposed single-judge rape-trial pilot and the jury-size reduction from 15 to 12 were both dropped from the final Act and must never be reported as enacted law.
• The Rahmatian “legal nationalism” critique is a genuine but minority scholarly position, presented here as a live debate rather than a settled rebuttal of the mixed-system classification.
• Comparative-law superlatives are attributed, not audited. “Oldest mixed jurisdiction”, “oldest national public land register in the world” and similar framings belong to specific scholars and agencies — Palmer, Reid, Registers of Scotland — and are presented as such.
• Two live reforms could date this card. If corroboration is later abolished, or the Lord Advocate’s dual role formally split, the criminal section will need revising.

Frequently Asked Questions

Related Cards

• The Procurator Fiscal

  The prosecution service that feeds both courts.

• Scotland's Two Parliaments

  Parliament Hall was its home before the courts took it over.

• Faculty of Advocates

  The bar that pleads before the Court of Session.

• Registers of Scotland

  The 1617 Register of Sasines and Scots property law.

• The Scottish Office

  Administrative devolution worked around this legal separateness.

• National Records of Scotland

  Where the court records are held.

• University of Edinburgh

  Where the institutional writers taught and were taught.

• Scotland's Medical Establishment

  Burke and Hare, and the courts that tried them.