The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1866-10-09 00:00:00

OBJECIIIONN FOR THE BOROUGH.

Mr. Edwin Coombs, bookseller, Beaminster, was
objected to vote for Allingtoe, on the ground of his
keeping the .tamp-office at Beaminster. He wee also
partner with Mr. Bendel!, and this vote wag for their
business premise..—His name was struck off the list.
Joseph Ackerman, Fully Mill•lane, Bridpon, was
objected to by Mr. Day, and, not appearing, was
expunged.
Mr. Thomas Beach, of Bradpole, was objected to by
Mr. Day, as • vote for Bridport, and expunged.
William Cornish was objected to by Mr. Day, and
supported by Mr. Gandry. He had occupied •dwelling-
house in Bridport thirteen year., at £l2 per year. The
house stonsisted of four bsd-rooms and three rooms under.
He under-let Iwo bedrooms and ore room under to a
man named Hodder for about six months, who paid
him 2s. GI. per week. He had paid all rates. No part
of the house was out off from the rest.—Cross-euunined
Before Hodder los in the house as lodger, be let theae
rooms to Thomas Legg. who left about two @months ago.
1 Lets furnished the rooms himself. The key was left in
the door, and when witness went te bed the door was
' locked and the key left iii. The Barrister said he vraa
only • lodger it appeared. Mr. Day said his instructione
were that Mr. Cornish had given up the key to the
lodger, and was in reality the lodgir himself, the other
having the control of the house. The vote was allowed,
and the Banister decided that he should have 3a. coats,
having previously been objected to for the same reason,
which objection was withdrawn.
Charles Cook, occupying I a house, workshops,
and land in Wisst-street, Bridport, for three and
• half years, was objected to by Mr. Day,
and supported by Mr. Loggia. He was • tenant
under his mother, and the rent was more than £10; he
had paid all the rates—Crone-examined: His wife and
his mother lived with him, it was his mother's house.
He did not claim to have the el...ening-house, but he
°coupled the workshops and yard in his business with
which his mother had nothing to do, the workshops
separate from the house at the back of it, and there
were dwelling-houses between belonging to his mother.
He WWI a cooper and hasket maker ; his molter had no I
part in the profits of the business; he did not •Ilow her
a certain portion out of the profits. The workshops and
yard he oocupiid were worth more than CIO per year,
he should say they were worth kVA Vote allowed.
Mr. W. C. Frost, West-street, Bridport, was objected
to by Mr. Day, and supported by Mr. Gundry, who
raised • teehniral objection that the notice of objection
served on Mr. Frost was not mad, similar to the copy
of it Mr. Margrie swore he had served. The original
notice having the word "voter." on it, and the copy
which he swore to being written " persons." It after-
wards appeared there were one or two other slight
differences in the loopy. After a very long discussion on
the roint the Barrister retained tie vote.
David Gale, Folly Mill lane, Bridport, was objeetal
to by Mr. Day, and supported by Mr. Loggin. The
value of the property is Ell per year. There is •
combing shop and spinning walk on the property, all
together.—Croloperamined It was his property from
one part to another. Thomas Follett bad no right to go
across, or any one. It appeared that Gsle occupied one
side of • passage and Follett the other, and other
persons could go through. Mr. James Patten, builder,
said the tarnhouse and combing shop were, he thought,
about 15e. per year. and the house £lO 5.. Mr.
Benjamin Margrie said the combing shop was worth 6.1.
Per week, there were moue let in Biklport for less.
Vote allowed.

•-----
Arthur Hann, was objected to by Mr. Day, an 3 sup-
ported by Mr. Gundry. The objection was that his
vote was pertly for • Imkehruse detached from the
house. He paid £l3 per year rent. Witnesses were
called, and it was stater! by some cf them that the bake-
house was worth full £5 per year. Mr. Cooper, builder,
said the premises were worth £l5 together, and that the
dwelling house itself was worth 1:10. Vote retained.
The votes of John CiHinshaw and Charles Hart,
ilridport, objected to by the Conservative., wore
remined. Those of Solomon Hallett, John Male, C,or.
Delius Meech, and George Strong, Bridport, &leo objected
to by the Conservatives, were expunged. An objection
against William White, Bridpor:, was eitbdrewn. The
name of William Farnham, West-street, Bridport, who
was dead, was struck out.
Objection. against Robert Angel and Robert Adams,
Burton, were withdrawn.
Wm..., floor.* and Cha_rlas Hari, Burge* Bradstock.
were objected to by the Conservatives and expunged.