The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1874-10-06 00:00:00

NEW RAILWAY FROM LYME REGIS TO

- - -
AXMINSTER.
The first and of the proposed new railway between
Lyme Regis and Axminster was cut on Tuesday, at
the former place, by the Mayoress of Lyme, MIL
Skinner. The Chard scheme haa been abandoned in
favour of the above. The mileage of the new line will
be 71, and the capital of the company £86,000. The
ceremony commenced at two o' clock, in the presence
of a large assemblage. The chairman of the companT,
Mr. Ralph Jackson, of Hartlepool, presented a spade
and barrow to Mrs Skinner, and the first sod was
then cut amid much applause. After the ceremony, a
luncheon was given at the Royal Lion hotel, at which
Mr. Ward Jackson presided. The chairman in
acknowledging the toast of prosperity to the under-
taking, stated that important works were about to
commence in connection with the harbour, and that it
was intended to extend the new railway to Bridport.

I REVISION OF VOTER'S LISTS AT IVEYMOITTLL
The Revising Barrister, Mr. John Eastabrook Moulds-
worth, held his court at the Guildhall, Relecintre Regis,
on Prikly hid, for the revision of the paliamentary
vO4-311.
- .

At nine in the morning the County Lists sere taken,
the overseers .4 the different parishes apialtring with
them ; but there Ivai no inter- t shoxii : there being only
two claims, both for freeholds in the parish of Weyniouth,
which were allowed.
Mr. Howard appmred for Mr. Edwards, who did not
object to any person qualified blving a vote Mr. Howard
therefore made no objections, hut claimed for any party
who had applied to him.
lii Wineitith were B houshold claims. 4 Vidger
awl 4 olimetiona in Wylie s household awl Dodger claims,
I and 8 objections, in )lelrombe Regis 43 household and 9
I lodger claim*. and 50 objections, in Itmlipole were only
two claims, Mr. Henry Naugle and Mr. C. J. Crocker.
NaLcOalli ItY9la CLAIMS.
Meagre. Thomas Bales, Derby-street; Samuel Clapp,
Upwey-street ; kilmund Crab'', York-buildings, Edward
Sly, Royal-terrace; Boyton Smith. Frederic-place:
M. Thiselton, East-street; F. Wadsworth, llartford-
terrace- (7) were supported in their claims by Mr. Hooper,
and allowed. Messrs. Joseph Drew, Devonshire-build-
ings ; Richard Chalker, Radipolseterrace ; James Walter
Chiveralls, Seymenstreet ; Thomas I 'road. Coeygar-laue ;
Frederick Dowling, School-street; Richard Gill, Carter's-
cottages ; Walter Gillingham, Bury-street ,• William
Groves, Seytuer-street lienry Hampton, Brunswick-
place ; Thomas Heal, Bnusswick-Imildings : Mr. James
llines, John Hines, Gloucester-street; \V. U. JeY.
Bunlon-buildiags ; W. 11. Legg, Bury street: James
Lovell. Waterloo-cottages ; John Morley, William
Norman, Mullserry-cuttL:e ; Josiah (altered from Jessie)
Pretty, Lower Bonilstreet; George Rabbetts, St. Edmund-
street ; John Angel Sherren, St. TI as-street. Richard
Gill, Carter's cottages ; Samuel Stark, St. Thomas-street;
Willem Vallatme, Governor's-tone: Tom Priestly, Derby-
street ; John henry hlarri,, Governors-lane; were
supported either by Mr. Howard or Mr. Mamie and all
MI) allowed.
In James Lovell's cane, Mr. rooks, the assistant over-
seer, was asked by Mr. Hamm if he could tell whether
the rates were paid or not?
Mr. Fooks, said they were carried into arrear.
Mr. Lovell in answer to Mr. Howard, said that one
rate was called for, 13s. 4.1.; but afterwards when he
offered to pay, they would not take it By Mr. Iloward'a
advice, he took a witness and tendered the money; but
they would not receive it- Vote allowed.
Tbe following also claimed for themselves, and were
allowed without objection—Messrs. Christopher Bolt, St.
Thomas-street; Charles Brown, James Ilodges, and gli
Hutchings; but Henry Jamesdof Wiltowterrace, Was not
allowed.

MILLCOMBE 160111 I.ol:wans.
Messrs. James Andrews, jun., Edward Parker, St.
Thomas-street: Hueknall, E. T. Targett, and William
Turner (5) Consenrative claim», were supported by Mr.
Hooper, and allowed ; and Messrs. John Edwards. East-
street; and H. T. Cherie, Johnstune-row V) were supported
by Mr. Hanns and allowed.

lIZLCOXIIE REGIS OBJECTIONS.
The following were objected by Mr. Menne :--Capt
J. G. Mead, Brunswick-building.: Messrs. John Burnaol ;
Benjamin Coleman Harris, Richmond-terrace ; and
George Smith, Creocent-court (i); but the votes were
retained. Mr. Hanna objected to Messrs. Henry
Fooks„ jun., Thomas Fleming, James Gillingham, of
Harmony-court; James Jolty ; Isaac King, William
Leyou, John Mowletn, Thomas Norris Jeremiah
Peach, Robert Slade, George Smith, Capt. Forbes
Thompson, W. F. Tregarthen, Joseph Williams, Lower
Bend-street John Bower, Stanley-street (as not having
been naturalised), and Cornelius Cole, (16) and they were
expunged. Mr. Hooper objected to Messrs. Giles
Daubeny, James Dimond, Richard Edmunds, John
Hanger, Thomas Bugler-Brains, Richard Bragg, Henry
Miller, William Mitchell, West-parade; John Peel,
William Roberts, William Thomas Roberts, Frederic
Stockting, Frederick Taylor, Henry Walden, and Ambrose
White, (16), and they were expunged. The following
were also expunged :—Messrs. Robert -Home Cromwell,
Albert Legg, and Isaac King; but the objections were
withdrawn as to Mr. James Walker. In the objections
the most noteworthy ,nse was that of Mr. W. F.
Tregarthen, objected to by Mr. Hamm ; but Mr. Hooper
attached the notice ef objection, as the two Christian
names were transposed, and the name spelt Tregarthan.
Mr. Ramie contended that this was only a clerical
error, the service had been by post, and the postal
authorities had not been misled.
The Barrister on the same ground supported the objec-
tion notice, and the vote was expunged.
Mr. Howard also remarked on r. Ilooper's objecting
to the vote of Mr. Thomas Bugler, as • most nspedtably
conducted man, who had for many years been a voter ;
but who was now 84 years of age, and had received parish
relief within the year only I Of course the vote could not
In strict law be sustained.

LODOSA CLAIMS.
Mr. William Butt, claimed as a lodger in the house
Mr. Arden magistrates' clerk.
Mr. Hanna contended that a roan was not a lodger, unless
his landlord resided on the premises.
The Revising Wrrister said a case had been decided
exactly opposite te that.—Allowed.
Mr. Henry Bartlett, supported by Mr. Ilooper claimed
for lodging at?, Camden Terrace. Occupied one bedroom,
and a sitting room, and paid .C.G a year.
By Mr. Hamm: Witness would not swear he paid it for
two rooms but for two bedismins and a sitting rooms. A
pupil occupies the other bedroom, and takes his meals
with witness, and hash been there the same time. Witness
was brewer for Mr. Groves, and the pupil was learning the
brewing business. Had nothing extra for teaching the
pupil, that was part of his work. It is a custom in the
brewing trade, for the brewer to teach the pupils. Mr.
Flower, the pupil, paid witness half of the rent; but the
rent-book to not kept.
Mr. Hanna urged that there was a joint occupancy, and
therefore the vote was not good.
Mr. Hooper quoted an opinion that the occupant need
not le the sole occupant but he must be the sole tenant.
In answer to Mr. Hanna the witness cull not tell the
value of the bedroom he occupied alone.—Disallowed.

WEYMOUTH CLAIMS.
FAl‘vant Chad. lock, Hope-strect, and Mr. Charles
William Lovell, Trinity Real, sumnrtod by Mr. fluoper,
claimed for houses in succewsion. —Allowed.
William Powell, High-street :Henry James Rolls, High-
street; Edwanl Taylor, Chapelhay-street Thinning Samuel
Wallbi, and George Turnbull, Barrack Lane, (5) were
elainied for either by Mr. Howard or Mr. Hanne, and
allowed but Samuel Bolt, Fratichise.strvet, was dia.
allowtsl, as Mr. Martin, overticer, neil that Mr. Miller
paid the rates of this house, which ic a little two-roomed
one, in a garden. Geor,:e Walker, New Town Place was
allowed. Some of the claims were for mere changes of
the spelling of names, or for removal, f residence.

_
WEYMOUTH MUTATION&
Mr. James Dunfonl was objecte.l to by Mr. Bann°. and
struck out, and Mr. Richard Towell. Chapellany-street,
was removed from Weymouth b. Wyke list, but Mr.
William Bray was supported by Mr. Hoover, who urged
the objection was inf. I. and the name WWI retained.
Thomas Franks, gone away, was struck out. Mr. Hooper
objected to William Burt, Jockeys'-vow, James 7'.rney,
Francis Ford, Love-lane, John llookig, son., and William
Tizard, (5). and the relieving officer, Mr. Lem having
proved parish relief, they were struck out. In the case of
William Tinned, Mr. Lionel he had desertml his wife
and family: Mr. Ilanne said that Will not provint( parish
relief; but it being shown that the wife and family came
on the parish, the name was expunged.