The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1876-02-29 00:00:00

DEFEAT DrMU. COLLTNA.

QI-ElneS ItrycH DIVI,I. —'.4ittings in Banco,
before Mr. Justice Blackburn and Mr. Jn+tieelluain.
The Quer.; r. rom.i.—The Court as thus e-msti-
tute I, with two Judges only, sat on Thurelay and
again on Stanislav for the purpose of hearing cakes in
the New Trial Paper. This was a ',so 'mow al., on
the part of one Andrews, to qusdi ,n the validity of
an election of the defendant to the offic• of member
Of 3 Local Board in the West of England ; and it
raised an important question, on which the Court was
divided, as to whether the certificate or decision of a
returning Meer at sneh eleetions can be dispute I.
There were seven recite:los and nine can.lidates at the
election, and nix of them, it was admitted, were duly
elected. The contest as to the seventh seat wee
between three candidates—Collins, Andrews, rand
Combe —and the returning officer certified. under 11
and 12 Vie., c. 63, a. 27, that Collins wee duly eleeted.
The statute requires that the returning officer should
aacertain the her of the votes and certify the
result ; and he made ."it a list of the voters with
references to the numbers on the register, and. accord-
ing to thie lint, it appear.. I that C' aline had 382 votes
and Andrewa 37th,,.. that, if the certificate wee to be
taken as c melnaive, Collins, it was clear, was duly
elected. But at the trial of the go. wnrrrinto, before
Mr. Juatice Blackburn, at the Assizes, evidence W3/1
received of three claases of errors or miatakea of the
officer in reckoning the votes ; fuel if thia evidence wee
properly received, then it was admitted that Andrew,'
would have the majority. (ine class of error,. shown
WWI reckoning vote,. for which lutd been given
for Andrews, another we.. em,r in computation or
casting up berm, and a third was in receiving a
voting-paper not in the handwriting of the voter.
The chairman had not had his latention called to these
errors, and though, if he had, he csuiLl legally have
examined into them, in point of fact he did not
examine into thetn. If the evidence was not whnis-
'able, it wm clear that Collins had a majority ; and it
we,, contended, on his part, that the evidence was
asbniasible, and that the certificate was conclusive ;
but that, if it was not so, at all events it could only be
corrected by dewing clerical errors, or errors in corn.
putation, and not by showing such an error as the re-
ception of a wrong voting-paper. The queation of law
was reserved at the trial, and, subject to it. the
verdict went for the defendant. The question of law
reserved had been ar,fued before Mr. Justice Black-
burn, Mr. Justice Mellor, and Mr. Justice Field, and
they had taken time to consider their judgment, and
were now dividedl in opinion—Mr. .Instice Blackburn
being of opinion that the evidence was not sultniamible,
and, therefore, that the verdict for the defembint
should stand ; the other two Judges being of opinion
that the evidence was admissible, and, therefore, that
the verdict ahould ix, for the Crown —that t'ollina's
election was invalid.

Mr. .hastitx Blackburn gave a written judgment to
the effect that the evidence was inadmimible, and that,
therefore, Collins's electilm was valid.
_ .

..... —„_ .....
Mr. Justice Mellor and Mr. Justice Field gave judg-
ment to the contrary effect —that the certificate of the
chairman was not conclusive, and that the evidence
was admissible, and that, therefore, Collins's election
was not valisL The majority of the Court being of
that opinion, judgment wag given in accordance wt h
it—for the Crown—to set aside Collins's election.