The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1879-10-07 00:00:00

THE PARLILNLENTARy AND MUNICIPAL

liffifoif.

TM lists of county voters for the Poole Polling District
and the hate of Parliamentsry and municipal voters for
the borough of Poole, were revived at ttie ()oddball on
Friday and Saturday by Mr. Samuel Carter, the newly.
appointed revising barrister.
The Liberals were represented by Mr. H. T. Trovanion,
and the Conmirativss by licws. F. Tf•Vtlill, P. E L.
Budge, and J. S. Barrett.
LISTS.

CIMIXTT

The only feature ol interest in the revision of the lists
of county voters wee the ral.ing of the question as to
whether claims could be objected to in Curt without any
merlons notice being served on the claimant or the over.
an _

IC Travers handed in written objections to the claim
of William Young. of Lmgfieet, and livrbert Alfred
Lawt". John Thomat Luny, and Thomas White. of 81.
James s parish.
The Barrister at first held that In the ease of county
claims notice in Court wits insufficient, but, after Inking
Into the authorities on the point, he ruled that such notices
were ad snisai ble. _ _

Mr. Young s claim fur Lnoseeet was then disallowed,
on the ground that his name u idreedy on the St.
James's hat; and the claims of Messrs. Lawtoo. Licht.
and White were alma disallowed, es they were on the
borousti list for the same property.

THE BOROUGH Lan
The lists of clams sor the perieh of St. ham.' wane
tales first.

fr-a;en opposed Jam& Chistnan, Ltglandutreet, on
the ground that he had received parish relief during Me
qualifying year, but the claimant attended and disproved
this, and the vote was allowed.
Henry Dibben, Esst-street., RS4 also opposed by Mr.
Travers, on the rpround of break of residence, bat the man
attended and substantiated his Maim.
Yr. Travers successfully objected to the claim of Samuel
Fisher, Stokes-alley. who bad received medical relief.
Henry Paull, Stokes-alley, was opposed by Mr.
Trams, but Mr. 3. llowlmo, jun., proved his right to a
vote.

•
-.ilia claim of Albert Saunders, Waterloo-buildings, was
opposed by Mr. Travers, who said the claimant had
received relief, bat the objection failed.
Walter Sims, Kest-street, claimed fore dwelling-house.
and Mr. Travers contended that he was only the lodger of
a man named Tartleld.—Br. J. Bloomfield and the clal.
meat proved seperato occupation, and the vote wee

---kie.-7fravers supported the claim o( William Tilled
Brown, eitrandktreet, which was opposed by Mr. Treven.
lon, who said the mother was the occupier—Mr. Travers
maintained that the claimant was the oocupier, and add
the hones was rated with the Red Lion bantam at £l6,
and there was no internal communicetion.-14. Trevanton
said a beerhowae must be rated at £l5 to retain the Imensa
and I/ the house in question was not a pinion of the beer-
house the license would be lost.—Tb• claimant was sworn,
and said his mother took the house of Mr. Janes Andrews,
and be paid his rent at the Pools Brewery office. There
was no internal communication between his house and the
beerhouse, sad Foster, the landlord, had no right In his
h0n!....7-Tbe claim wee allowed. _

William Edward Waterman, Corte Hulk, cialmad for
stores and buildinp in Fish-street. hut Yr. Travers said
he had gone on the county lota for the same property that
morning, and tdui claim warn disallowed.
Mr. Travers opposed th• claim of Thomas Williams,
Avenue-buildings, on the ground that hi was not the ten-
ant, but the an proved that be WI., and the claim was

in Henry Elliott, Hillatreet, &Moulded and sub-
stantiated his claim, which was opposed by Mr. Travera
James Inkpeo, Carters-lane, charnel for a d welling-
houas, end Mr. Trav•ra opposed, but the claimant proved
separate occupation, and the vote was allowed-
The objections to persons &inlay on the list for St.
JllOlllll.ll parish were nett beard.
Toro Foster, 1,1(1=d-street was chiseled to by Mr.
Budge, who said the voter lodged with his mother —The
voter attended with his rent-book and receipts for rateh
and the vote wee retained on the list.
Bartholomew Geary. Laglandatreet, was objected to by
Mr. Tretranion, who said the mother was the occupier and
the son bad been away for nine niontbs.—The voter
attended and said be was the tenant and paid the
rent. lie slept in the house two nights last June.—The
Barrister disallowed the objection, and allowed the voter
10s. expenses, sake had coma from II adon to meet the
objection.
Mr. Trevanion sustained an objection to David William
Pearce. Strand-street, on the ground that he wag • minor.
Edmunds Ricketts, Bias Boot-lane, who bad not claimed
foe succeenive ocanpatiort was objected to by gr. Badge,
but the objection felled. sell was shown that the voter
simply removed from one house to another in the roe
luta
Hoary J. Steel, Coach-lent who bad been fi ai
?rtyo.nthis
list by As ovens's,. woo objected to by Yr.
who said It was a manufactured vote, as Steel had neither
occupied nor been rated.—The name was expanded.
Trevanion objected to John Butler, Love-lane, on
the ground that his mother-In-law was the occupier. —Km
Lovell said her son-in-law lived with her, and the house
had never been altered from her name. He pad th• rent
to her and she paid it to the landlord—The objection was
allowed
_ _

7io-ltn Cedes, who was described as of Wrist Qthy-road,
but who at present line in IMarkarlane, was objected to
by Mr. Trennion. and M. Budge asked for moots of
senke of the objection.-1(r. Trevanion proved that the
objection was posted to Cedes at West Quaproed, and
that it had not been returned.—Hr. Bodge contended that
as the objection was not posted to the voter at Dearhay-
lane the service was bad, bet the Barrister said the
materialisoint was whether the notice was received by the
voter. He decided not to exclude he objection, and the
name was expunged from the HA - Mr. Budge intimated
that he should appeal on the punt be had raised.
John Laurance. High-street, was objected to by Mr.
Budikm. who
_said Mr. Hayward was the nal Meant. but
li,. Trevanion produced an agreement in which Me.
Hayward let Um house to Laurence, and the objection was
disailowed.
Frederick Hoary Blade Styling, Karkebetrest, who was
on the list Ice realtliteue and storm in Hill-strest, was
objected to by Mr. Budge, who said Mr. Webb was put oat
the county list that moraine for the same property, and
be was the reel tenant—The objectioe was allowed;
but the next evening Mr. Trevanion applied to have the
name re-ins-rted. He said he found Um% Mr. Stvring sub-
let the mai thous to Kr. Webb, but still had this stable, yard.
and wawa. in his own occupation, and the Barrister
thereupon amended the description of Use qualifying pro-
perty and restored the vote.
Mr. Bodo objected to George O. Aldridge, Christchurch,
whose qualitcation was bond stores on the Quay, on the
ground that the value was under £lO a year, but the
objection failed.
Mr. Budge unsuccessfully objected to the vote of Charles
Railer Baker, Market-street.
Benjamin Elkin'. West-street, was objected to by lb.
Budge, who mid the voter lived with his son at Loneliest.
—llx. Trench:as said the voter still iccupled the hones in
West-street by his furniture, and the rates were paid.—
The object', n was disallowed.
Mr. Budge obierted that William Hopkins, Organford,
was not the lionsejlde tenant of an alas and stores on the
Quay, bat the objection failed.
Jomph Keynes, Market-street was objected to by Kr. I
Trennion, who said the mother wee the occupier and the
owner of the business, but the voter and his mother both I
swore that the farmer had an interest in the Wainer, and
the vote was retained.
George &dont, Marketwiztet, was objected to by Mr.
Trevanion on the rime armee, hat die wets, said he was
partaarsidp with his vastlistr, and the objection was
disedowel.