The Sun.
London, England, 1868-12-21 00:00:00

THE ELECTION PETITIONS IN THE

COMMON PLEAS.

Mr. Justice Willes, one of the election petition judges,
attended at Chambers, Rolls-gardens, Chancery-lane, on
Saturday, for the purpose of hearing arguments of counsel
why a number of election petitions " should not forthwith
be removed from the records of the court, and not further
proceeded with, on the grounds that the bond purporting
to be a recognisance, filed in the matter of each petition,
was not a recognisance within the provisions of the Par-
liamentary Election Act, 1868, that it was wholly null
and void, and that no recognisance had been given within
the meaning of the said Act."
The little room in which his lordship sat was densely
crowded by counsel and election agents, and the greatest
interest prevailed.
The first petition brought under the notice of the judge
was that of the city of Hereford, in which the return of
Messrs. Clive and Wylie is impugned, a petition having
been presented against both on the same ground, with the
addition in the case of the latter gentleman that he was a
member of the Indian Civil Service. A recognisance,
has been entered into pursuant to the 6th'
section of the Act, in the sum of £l,OOO only
in the form prescribed by the rules made by the judges.
The objection taken to this was that it was insufficient,
because the 22nd section provided that "two or more
candidates may be made respondents to the same petition;
and their case, for the sake of convenience, be tried at the
same time, but for all the purposes of the Act such
petition shall be deemed to be a separate petition against
each respondent."
Mr. H. James, for one of the sitting members, argued
that all proceedings upon the petition ought to be stayed,
on the ground that the provision of the 6th section, was
not complete, by reason of a recognisance only in £l,OOO,
instead of £2,000, having been entered into. The cases of
the two candidates, he said, might be materially different,
and under these circumstances the security might be whol,ly
insufficient, especially as that in some cases the petitioners
who would be primarily liable for the costa might be
insolvent.

Mr. Dowdeswell, Q.C., appeared in support of the pe

tion, and contended that only one recognisance was provided
for by the Gth section, and that was to be a security to the
amount of £1,000; that noprovision was made for any further
security whatever ; that the petitioners would be primarily
liable for the whole of the costs, and that this was merely
by way of guarantee. Mr. Dowdeswell also argued that
although the 22nd section provid, d that for all the pur-
poses of the Act such petition should be deemed to be a
separate petition against each member, it did not mean
there should be two petitions, and that £l,OOO upon the
joint petition was sufficient ; and further, that any objec-

tion made to the security given did not apply simply to

recognisances, and therefore it was competent fur the judges
to direct the objection to be removed in manner prescribed
by the Otis section of the Act.
Mr. Finlay, on behalf of Mr. Clive, submitted that no
recognisance had been given within the terms of the act.
After a lengthy argument, his lordship deferred judg-
ment.

The summonses in the Penryn and Falmouth petitions
were next taken.

Mr. Serjeant Sleigh and Mr. Straight appeared for the
,wo members, Messrs. Fowler and Eastwick, and Mr. Will

ror the petitioners.

The question raised in this case was that the £.1,000
deposited was not a sufficient security, as required by the
Act 31st and 32nd Viet., c. 125. sec. 6, which provided that
at the time of the presentation of the petition, or within
three days afterwards, security for the payment of all costs,
charges, and the expenses that might become payable by
the petitioner (to the member whose election or return is
complained of) shall be given on behalf of the petitioner,
either by the deposit as security of £l,OOO in money, or by
recognisances by any number of sureties not exceeding

four. Mr. Serj eant Sleigh contended, further, that inasmuch
:.s only £l,OOO had been deposited in this case, and that
there were two members petitioned against, the proceed-
ings ought to be void ; that within the letter and spirit of
the Act of Parliament there ought to be security given in
respect of £l,OOO for each member petitioned against to abide
costs which might be awarded to each one separately. It was
obviously the intention of the Legislature that provisias
should be made for the protection and reimbursement of
each member separately ; whilst the 22nd section enacted
that although two or more candidates might be made
respondents to the same petition, and their case, for the
sake of convenience, be tried at the same time, yet, for all
the purposes of the Act, such petition should be deemed
to be a separate petition against each respondent, and
that there should be a security of at least £l,OOO to cover
the costs of each one petitioned against.
After hearing Mr. Will, judgment in this case also was
deferred.
In the case of the Hull petition a question was raised as
to whether the petitioners could be sureties, and the
learned judge expressed his opinion that they could not,
but intimated his intention of considering as to whether or
not the Act gave him power to amend, so that there might
be time to lodge their recognisances.

It is reported that Mr. Shaw Lefevre has a scheme
,ta preparaticn for settling the Irish Church question, which
he hopes to bo able to submit to the house.

There is a prospect of another Anglo-American
yacht race, to be contested in England. It will be
remembered that the New York Yacht Club won the
great international match in 1851, with the America, and
the forthcoming contest, if it can be definitely arranged,
will be looked forward to with great interest.

The general elections in France cast their shadows
before. The Opposition is founding papers right and left;
and in many places, notably at Valence, Dijon, and Angou-
leme, the Liberal spirit is such that the old Prefectural
organs will scarcely, with all the aid of official advertise-
ments and subventions, find means to retain even their pre-
sent mediocre staffs.

THE BISHOP OF LINCOLN, BISHOP ELECT OF
LoNDo.v.—The rumours about the Bishop of Lincoln's
refusal of the see of London have already been very em-
phatically contradicted, but they have made their way
notwithstanding. The Times is now enabled to state on
authority that there is no truth whatever in the rumours
which have been reported in various newspapers as to the
unsatisfactory state of the Bishop of Lincoln's health.
At the Yorkshire Winter Gaol Delivery for the
West Riding, another serious case of incendiarism
was tried. John Farles, a labourer, aged 44, was charged
with having set fire to a large number of stacks belonging
to his former employer, Mr. Lee, at Thorne, causing damage
to the amount of £1,300. The prisoner was discharged from
Lee's service, and it appears that ho committed this crime
from motives of revenge. He was found guilty, and received
the heavy sentence of 15 years' penal eerviNdo.
.Tuci other
cases tried we Q.O 41.17