The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1876-01-25 00:00:00

PORTLAND.
TIIE BOARD ELF:6:IION CASE.
QLEE HRNCH THURSDAY.

THC QUERN V. COLLINS.

This ease rased a qqestion of consilershle impartance
whether the ilecisrotis of the returning OINCISTS in the
numeroate elections for Loral Boris are eonclimive. so as
to preclude litigateon as to the validity of the elections, It
was a proceeding liv way of emo enemata to try the ques-
tion whether We. C dlins Was ilily elects, a tnember of the
Local limed of Health of P..rtl awl under the Public
Health Act of Pile. the 11th anal 12th Vie., c. 63: and this
involved the question whether the reception of votes by
the elsairman. who is reternine nflieer, is to be taken as
conclusive, The Aet Rays that the chairman is to receive
and collect the votes, and, at the close of the election,
shall make out lists of the vote!, and reckon up such of
the n as lie shall find to be valid, anal shall then give •
certificate that saeh or such a party is duly elected, and
that +ltch 'party shall he deemed to be duly elected. At
the election in question the usual course was taken.
though the attention of the chairman was not directed to
any particular vote., heat, at the dose, the chairevui gave
Mr. Vollins his certificate. Afterwards some votes were
found to have been improperly given, and this 111,01,011ing
was taken. At the trial el the case at the Assize+, before
Mr. Justice eertain votes bar oppenent
were objected to, and the chairman's certificate was nut
in, and it was eontende 1 that it Vf4.l r.oncliasivo. The
learn"' Jure" "Ifertal ta reeeive any evallence that the
objection to these votes (for non-payinent of rates, ttc,)
hal besot linto.:llt hefore the chairman, and that he had,
in fact. rune to any .leeision upon it, NO pawl' eviilenee
was tilferetl, and it Wa.l it 1.14441 that the certificate Was
eonchative. The learns! Jolt,, thamight otherwise, anal,
the votes being roleete.l, left. Mr. Collins in a majority,
and the verdict l 4 cot in his favour. This was an applies.
tint to set aside the verdict on the 'mound that the
chairman's certific.ate NOS conclusive. It was admitted
that his decietm, on an',' oldeetion taken, wenl.l he final,
lett it wail 'lonic.! that 1114 mere certificate was cenelwave
as ttl 011i0e61114 net taken before hint. Under these
stances, the question anew whether the certificate given
WAS conclusive. On tho ono +Me it was ttrztal that the
stabile did not in terms e ay and on the other side It
was larm.l that it was virtually involved in the enactment
that the person in whose favour the certificates is given
-hall he 'teemed duly elected. But thee, again, it was
itmel that in this cam no decision had been distinct!y
given on the votes no* ohieetel to, the objection not
linyjng been taken at the election.
_ . _

Q. t. 'PIN ORR were for the defendant,
C lUn.. who., eleeti to was impeached, and contewled
tin!, tht.rertilieate mt. :tot coneluaire.
_

...... ....
Mr. Ktmonoa, an I Mr. Com.ins were for the
prowent,r. who unpeaclse 1 the election, and contended
that the certine.tte wo4 roncln 4i re.
_ . _ .

_ ....
On the part of the defendant it W 4, tinted that, if the
certificate wt. c mclasive.then a Ina /termite could n•.t be
inte4 to .its...tion an elertion en any :mound, and that
the 7.1 te.yaml ..11411t, net ti have been arante I, nor any
evi tune,' received at all. A. to this, however,
Th., ('lima intimated that there were ;tr. Is on which
the eleetion ...mid Ir .pie.tione.l in ends a proceeding, aa,
for inotance, in c I.e. .if e mreptien or persanation. or in
cam, of miseeming of vote. u accidental lom of voting-
napers, de. Wit the .pie.tion MX, whether, a• to the
validity of vote., the certificate of the returning officer was
not ...mein-ire. ihi an extreme and literal o.nstmetim
of the writ. "th it the party shall he dome' duly
elected," ivi donlit no amount of fraud or mistake or
forzery or bribery c•nild be inquired into; but could that
bare lien Intended!

iin the part of the defendant it was urged that, if the
certificate was ronchisive. no e-ror, however gross, could
lie•.orrectel. On the part of the prosectitor it was urged
that it V 1,14 Contrikry to public p Airy that these elections
should be liable to be questioned and set aside for any
mistake, and that the Jecision of the chairman on the
validity of the votes was intended to be conclusive in order
to preclude such
Mr. Justice BIANCHI:RN obgeriell, after a great deal of
argument, that the Act mat- no provision for the presence
of the parties when the chairman reckoned the votes, and
the chairman would often be, as the mayor often
p irtisan ; soil it would be a strong thing to say than:shit
decision, in a secret sitting an I in the absence of the
parties. shall be conclusive. That required rather a strong
enactment, anil the question was whether it was involved
in the terms of the Statute that he shall receive and col-
lect the votes and ascertain their validity, and reckon up
such as he shall deem rilul ATI,I then give his certificate
to thy harty who has the majority of the votes, and that
the party to whon; he shall thus give the certificate shall
be deemed dalv elected. To this it was answered that the
worts were strong cnouah, and were in accordance with
the C mmon Law, for it hail been held in this Court
within the last few years, im the election of a Coroner for
Middlesex, that the Sheriff havin declared the party duly
elected, the validity of votes coold not be questioned (the
Queen v. Diplock).
Mr. Justice Blackburn sail this seemed • startling
doctrine if applied to all elections.
To this it was answered that the statute in effect put
the chairman, as Returning Offi^er, in the same position,
and that the same principle applied.
The Court took tune to consider their judgment, thee-ASO
being important.