The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-09-28 00:00:00

The British and American royal mail steamer Britannia,
which would leave Boston on the 16th, and Halifax on the
18th instant, will be due at this port to-morrow.

THE PRINCESS ROYAL.—A lithographic portrait of this
very beautiful steam-ship, sailing between this port and
Glasgow, may be seen in our office window. It is from a
drawing by Mr. M'Arthur, and is an admirable representation
of one of the finest steamers afloat.

QUICK VOYAGE.—The Betsey Hall, Captain Cholditch,
left here on the 17th July last, for Leghorn, with a full cargo
of bale goods, and arrived here on Sunday, with a return
cargo, making the voyage out and home in the short space of
two months and seven days.
A very curious and beautiful diamond ring is now on view
at Mr. Marcus.' " the Athenreum Snuff Box." It is to be
disposed of. Upwards of thirty names are entered for it.
We understand that, during the week ending on Thursday
last, when the Ports were open for the admission of foreign
wheat at a duty of one shilling per quarter only, about
181,000 quarters were entered at the port, besides flour, to
the amount of about 86,000 quarters more. Total at Liver-
pool, 270,000 quarters.
MR. JOHN MARTIN'S PAINTINGS.—We call the atten-
tion of our readers to the advertisement in our paper of
to-day, to the three splendid paintings now on view in the
Union Gallery, Slater-street. It will be seen that they will
positively be withdrawn on the evening of Friday next, Ist
October. No lover of art should omit seeing them, but, in
the uncertain state of the weather, should seize the first fine
day for that purpose. We feel quite assured, that those who
miss the opportunity will long regret it ; as we do; also, that
those who have beheld these glorious productions will never
forget them.

CONCERT FOR PRAYER:—We beg to remind our readers
that the ten days-2d to the Ilth October—are to be devoted
by Christians throughout the world to prayer, for the pro-
gress of the gospel, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the
restoration o Israel, the coming of Christ's kingdom, &c,
during the hours from eight to nine both morning and even-
ing. The first day—the 2d October—being set more peculi-
arly apart to fasting and humiliation, and the last—the 11th
October—to thanksgiving. It is intended that these devo-
tional duties should partake more of a private and social than
of a public character.
THE PHYS-RARMONICA PIANO.—Herr Breunig and the
phys•harrnonica piano has been attracting, during the last
week, numbers of fashionable and musical people to the
Lyceum-room. , The audiences have increased day by day.
The excellencies of the phys-harmonica piano are such that
there is little doubt they will be applied by the London
makers to their piano-fortes, and the instrument will become,
in the course of a year or two, common amongst us. It is
'well known, that the oboe, when well played, closely resem-
bles the human voice; but the tones of the harmonica appear
to us still nearer to imitate it, as the sound is much sweeter.
The capabilities of the phys-harmonica piano are very great,
and Herr Breunig's playing has received the highest enco-
miums. We may, therefore, safely recommend our readers
to visit him. The morning, performance commences at
twelve o'clock and lasts till one ; the evening, from seven
until eight.
The grand improvements that have within the last few
years taken place in the arts and sciences, as tending to the
happiness and comforts of the human race, are a subject
worthy of general remark. Among these we class the new
and highly successful operation for squinting, whereby an
imperfect vision is most completely remedied, and an other-
wise beautiful face relieved from an unsightly imperfection.
A similar operation, whereby stammering or difficulty in
articulation is completely overcome. And lastly, though not
least, the new and highly improved discoveries in the dental
• art, whereby it is said the deficiencies of teeth are so com-
pletely remedied, as to defy detection ; particularly the
newly-invented plan practised by Mons. Le Dray and Son,
of Rodney-street, Liverpool.—See Adv.

SERIOUS CHARGES AGAINST A CLERGYMAN.—The
adjourned enquiry into the charges against the ltev. Robin-
son Shuttleworth Barton, Rector of Heysham, near Lancas-
ter, propounded by Thos. John Knowlys, Esq., took place
on Thursday last, at the White Lion Inn, Halton. Mr.
Brandt, who appeared on the former occasion for Mr.
Barton, was unavoidably absent. Mr. Shuttleworth was,
consequently, the only representative of the accused. Mr.
Knowlys and Mr. Birch were present. The first witness
was a young man, named William Banton, who deposed to
several circumstances of swearing, on the part of Mr. Barton,
in the month of July last. In cross-examination, however,
it was elicited that this witness had been twice imprisoned,
and that he was connected with a gang of bad characters,
well known to the Lancaster Police. The remaining wit-
nesses were George Clementson, James Hartley, and Wm.
Fox, but their testimony did not carry the case further to
any material extent. With these closed the case on the part
of Mr. Knowlys. The court then adjourned till Tuesday
morning, (this day,) at Lancaster.
THE LATE ACCIDENT ON THE NORTH UNION RAILWAY.
—We have learned, with much regret, that one of the suf-
ferers by the recent collision on this railway is Mr. Bowness,
a gentleman well known to many of our readers, both by his
estimable personal qualities and his talents as a portrait
painter. The injury he suffered in the collision was a fracture
of the patella, an injury which, though, we hope, not likely
to leave any permanent lameness, is of a very painful and
tedious nature. Mr. B. was removed to the Victoria Hotel,
in,Preston, where he is now lying; and, we are happy to
learn, though suffering much, is doing well. It is the more
necessary that the cause of this gentleman's detention should
be known to the public, as lie was on his way to Liverpool,
where he had numerous professional engagements, his non-
fulfilment of which must hitherto have been unaccountable to
those of his friends to whom his calamity is unknown, and
to whom the severity of the shock he sustained rendered him
unable to write.—Journal.

SHOPLIFTING.—Ann Greenwood was, on Saturday charged
with felony under the following circumstances :—lt appeared
that, at eight o'clock on Thursday morning last, she and a
man entered the shop of Mr. Lloyd, draper, corner of Great
Nelson-street, Scotland-road, and asked to look at some
silk handkerchiefs. Mrs. Lloyd was in the shop without any
other assistance. The prisoner contrived to employ Mrs.
Lloyd as much as she could, and at length she madc choice
of a handkerchief. The prisoner held an umbrella in her
hand. The man desired Mrs. Lloyd to show him a ha:taker-
thief with a spot on it. Many pieces of handkerchiefs had,
'of course, accumulated on the counter. As she turned to
comply with his command, she saw him take up a piece con-
sisting of seven handkerchiefs, and throw it into the um-
brella. He immediately threw down two shillings, saying,
" This will do," alluding to the handkerchief, and they both
left the shop and got clear away. Information was given to
the police, and, next morning, police-officer Clarke took the
prisoner to Mr. Lloyd's shop, when Mrs. Lloyd identified
the prisoner, and saw that she had one a the handkerchiefs
on her neck. The prisoner was committed for trial.
IMPUDENT ROBBERY.—At the police court yesterday, a
man named John Foster was placed at the bar, on a charge
of having carried off and sold a large quantity of clothing,
furniture, money, &c, the property of a Mr. Turner. It
appeared from the evidence of Mr. Turner, a publican, and
that of his wife, that they had taken lodgings at the prison-
er's house, in Blake-street, a short time ago, and had there
deposited furniture, bed and table linen, &c, sufficient to fill
a house, as well as boxes of wearing apparel. These were
deposited in a room occupied by the complainant, and which
was not locked up, he having great confidence in the prisoner,
from his " seeming to be a very nice man, and moreover a
teetotaller." The articles were all left safe in the room on
Friday night. On Saturday morning, Mr. Turner went to
the house, and wished to go into his room, but was told by
the prisoner's wife that he had gone out to work with the
key of the room, which he had locked lest any of the chil-
dren should get in and meddle with the goods. She did not,
however, know where her husband worked. The complain-
ant then tried to open the room door, but he could not.
He could, however, open it so far as to see that all his goods
had disappeared. Information was given, and they were
finally traced to a Mrs. Harrisons's, furniture broker, of
Stanley-street, to whom the prisoner had sold them for
£5 4s. 3d. It was afterwards found that the prisoner had in
the first instance taken most of the goods to a work shop in
Waterloo Road, representing them as his luggage, which he
was taking to America. He then took ten boxes, two carpet
bags, and four other packages. Most of the goods were
found, but none of the money in one of the packages amount-
ing to upwards of £4. The prisoner, who seemed quite un-
concerned, said that he had been a tee totaller, but had taken
something to drink on Friday night. He intended to have
sold some of his own furniture, but, through the drink, took
another thought, and sold some of the complainant's. He
was committed for trial at the sessions.
THE MERCURY AND THE GAME LISTS. —We expected
that the niggardly set at the Mercury-office would begrudge
the STANDARD the government advertisements with which
he has discovered we are in course of being favoured; but
we certainly did not expect that,our contemporary would
have shewn so little discretion as to make the public aware
of his chagrin and disappointment. Such, however, is the
case. In Friday's publication will be found some spiteful
remarks, which we shall not condescend to notice further than
to expose the hollowness of the Mercury's boasted publicity.
ho suppose that because a newspaper possesses a superiority
on the stamp returns, it is therefore the best medium for
advertisements, is ridiculous. Of what utility would it be
to place the game list in the Mercury when not half a dozen
persons enumerated in it are readers of that journal, and
when few of the vaunted 7000, who patronise the Mercury,
know the difference between al partridge and a peacock. The
fact is, as has been already painly proved, that the radical
papers find the great majority of their customers in public-
houses and beer-shops—among a class who have nothing to
lay out in the shops of tradesmen--are no very likely bidders
for estates or villas—do not want cooks, or footmen, or
coachmen, or butlers, or gardeners—in fact never take the
trouble even to read advertisements, which are matters that
do not often concern them. The class of persons by whom
advertisers are •likely to benefit, are those who have money
at command, and these are generally not radicals. Let our
conservative friends think of this when spending their mo-
ney over advertisements which not only bring them no re-
turn, but which assuredly serve to keep alive a miserable
crew, who take every opportunity of vilifying their patrons
and the best institutions of their country.

CASE OF SMUGGLING A LARGE QUANTITY OF TOBACCO.
--At the Police Court yesterday, Captain William Murphy,
of the ship Ellen, was placed at the bar, charged on an infor-
mation laid by the Solicitor for the Customs with having on
board of his ship, a large quantity of tobacco, so concealed
that he must have been cognizant of the fact. Mr. James
Dunn, one of the tide-surveyors, said that on the Bth instant,
he boarded the Ellen, of which the prisoner was captain, on
her arrival in the Prince's Dock Basin, from Quebec. He
searched her, and behind a stair or ladder leadingc, to the
water closet, he dlscovered a concealment, which he had
opened, and then discovered three bales of leaf tobacco, of
261 b each. The bales were what are called " smugglers'
packages." He also fou.nr,d,fourparcelr, of foreign
manufac-
tured tobacco, weighing tzi ID. The prisoner's sleeping berth
and he must have
f
was only five or sixeet from the place,
known it was there from its strong smell. It was taken out
in the prisoner's presence, and he said nothing for some time,
but afterwards said that "it was a bad job. The dayfollow-
ing witness went to the ship to take a sketch of the conceal-
ment, and found it nailed up. He found in the same place 321 b
of cavendish tobacco, which was not left there on the previous
day, as he had examined the place with a lantern on leaving
it. The total quantity found was 2361b5. On mentioning
the second seizure to the prisoner, he again remarked that it
was a bad job, and afterwards said that his second mate had
absconded. Some tobacco, which the prisoner said he had
for stores, was like a portion of that seized. The witness was
cross-examined for the prisoner, by Mr. Brown, solicitor.
lie (witness) admitted that the concealment was not nailed
up, but it was so closely fitted that it required great strength
to remove the board. The captain alone had access to the
water closet. On the second day, the captain had men-
tioned that his second mate had absconded, but he said in
reply to his questions that he did not suspect either of his
officers.; and he (witness) had no knowledge of any such
erson being on board except from the prisoner's word. Mr.
Brown contended for the prisoner that the place in which the
tobacco was found was not nailed up, and that it could not
therefore be said to be concealed ; that the prisoner had
offered a handsome reward for the apprehension of the second
mate but without success ; that the crew might have con•
sealed it, and that taking all the circumstances into con-
sideration it could not be fairly inferred that the prisoner was
the offending party, Mr. Rushton said there was no resist-
ing the evidence again, the principal points of which lie reca-
pitulated, iu proof that the prisoner must have known of the
tobacco being there, particularly as it was stated that it smelt
strong. The quantity found in the same place, on the second,
Cay, was also corroborative of the fact. Mr. Brown stated
that the prisoner had been in the employ of the same firm
from a boy, and had always borne an excellent character.
Mr. Rushton said that being the case, he should prefer in-
flicting the penalty. Addressing the prisoner, he then said,
" you are convicted in the penalty of £100."

BOROUGH REVISION LIST

THE VOTES OF THE PROTECTOR SOCIETY.
On Saturday morning, as we announced in our last, Mr
Temple delivered the judgment on the much-controverted
question whether the payment of votes by a society esta-
blished for an express political purpose is a good payment,
so far as the voter is concerned. As the decision is most
important, and affects the rights of a considerable number of
persons whom the radicals are striving to foist upon the re-
gister, we give the judgment in full :
" I have given this case the best consideration in my
power, and have discussed the question most fully with my
learned colleague ; and I regret to say, that although we
have both entered upon the investigation with an anxious
desire of concurring in opinion, we are compelled to remain
with different impressions of the law upon this subject. If
either of us had entertained any strong doubt of the correct-
ness of his own view, lie would, for the sake of avoiding the
inconvenience of a diversity of decision in sephrate courts,
have yielded to the other. But that is not so ; and there-
fore, if any cases arise in Mr. Wilde's court, they will be
probably determined by him in a different mariner from that
which I feel myself bound to adopt. For this inconvenience,
however, we are not responsible. We are both bound to
act upon our own understandings ; and the legislature hav-
ing created no controlling power to decide between us, I
cannot see that we have any means of evading the difficulty.
There are three grounds upon which this question may rest.
First, it may be urged that the payment was not substan-
tially a payment by the voter; and, secondly, that the pay-
ment was a fraud at common law, and therefore brings it
within that class of cases in which it has been held that the
act is entirely null and void. There is a third ground, upon
which I shall enter with some particularity after I have con-
sidered these two. It is said with regard to the first, that
the act requires the payment to be by the voter himself ;
and that if the means be provided by another person for the
express purpose of enabling the party to exercise a franchise,
and with the implied contract that the franchise so procured
shall be exercised in a particular manner, that payment is
not a payment by the voter himself. I will here state that a
pamphlet was sent to me on Thursday night, by some gen-
tleman with whom I have not the honour of being acquaint-
ed, accompanied by a letter calling my attention to the opi-
nions of Sir Frederick Pollock, Mr. Fitzroy Kelly, Mr.
Wightman, and Mr. Crompton, upon cases laid before them
upon this point, and printed in the pamphlet. I have per-
used those eases and opinions; but as the pamphlet, from
the first two pages which I read of it, appears to be written
in a tone and with a temper which afford little promise of
its containing impartial and dispassionate arguments, I
thought the time which would be occupied_in its perusal
would be more usefully employed in seeking light from some
other source. With regard to the opinions, I am not pre-
pared to say that I dissent from them ; but I must say that
the cases upon which those opinions are written, fall very far
short of the real facts which have been proved before me.
In order, therefore, that there may be no mistake of that
circumstance upon which I ground my decision, I will dis-
tinctly state what are the facts which I consider to have been
sufficiently established in evidence. Some time previously
to the 20th of July, 1840, certain persons of a particular side
in politics formed themselves into a society for the purpose
of advancing sums of money to poor persons to enable them
to pay up their arrears of poor rates. Those sums were to
be advanced, and in fact were advanced, only to such per-
sons as either entertained, or undertook to further by their
vote at any election which might take place in the course of
the ensuing year, the particular political views of the society.
Some trifling sums were paid in by the poor persons, but so
utterly disproportioned to the sums which they were to re-
ceive out, as to render it quite palpable that they were pay-
ments made merely to give the society the colour and sem-,
blance of a benefit society. Now the act requires that all rates
shall be paid on or before the 20th of July. On the 19th
of July, therefore, all these persons go to the office of a Mr.
Bretherton, who, it should seem, acted as a sort of clerk to
the society. They do not themselves know the amount of
their rates due. They appear most of them to have been
several years (some I think as many as five years) in arrear,
yet, although it is necessary that all arrears shall be paid up,
I collect from the evidence that they made no application to
the overseers to ascertain the amount. But when they get
to Mr. Bretherton's office, that gentleman has got an account
of the rates, and hands the amount to the party, telling him
there is so much due, and he must go and pay it to the over-
seer. I also collect this, (and although it is not stated in
plain terms, yet. using my common sense, as I would if 1
were upon a jury, and had to return a verdict upon the
evidence,) it seems to me to be obviously the true state of
things, that the party having received the money, and received
it in the name of a loan, which he might be called upon to pay
back, did not take care before he paid it to the overseer, to
be certified that he was paying no more than was really due,
as one would suppose any man, and especially a poor man,
would do before he parted with his money in discharge of a
debt, but on the contrary on the word and by the direction
of Mr. Bretherton alone, and without exerting any will of
his own, except that of obeying Mr. Bretherton, took it and
paid it to the overseer. The money having been thus ad-
vanced for the purpose of obtaining a voice in favour of one
political side, it became necessary that the society should
have some tie or obligation upon the voter lest he should
afterwards exercise the right obtained by voting in another
way. To this end therefore the advance was called a loan,
it being understood, that if the voter performed his contract,
the money should never be required back. This would have
the effect, not merely of making it probable that the voter
would not deceive them, but in case of poor persons, of co-
ercing them to an extent entirely destructive of their inde-
pendence ; because, assuming that no persons derived assis-
tance from that society except those who originally did enter-
taini
a conscientious opinion on the same side ; yet, f before
the day of the election their opinion underwent an equally
conscientious change, they, who for five successive years had
been unable, in smaller sums, to discharge their poor rates,
would be exposed to a demand of payment in one lump,
from parties whom they had disappointed, and whose ven-
geance they might naturally believe they had effectually
roused. These are the facts which I consider to have ex-
isted, and about which I believe there cannot be the slightest
doubt. Now, upon the first point, the case of Reg. v Bridg-
north, has been cited in support of the argument, that this
was not the payment of the voter. There the money did
not pass through the hands of the voter, here it did. This
t is contended makes a material distinction between the two
That must depend upon whether the voter paid the
money as his own agent, or as the agent of Mr. Bretherton.
That gentleman alone has taken the trouble to satisfy him-
self of the amount of rates due. He does not deem it ne-
cessary to satisfy the voter of the same fact. He does not
consult the voter as to the propriety of paying that amount.
The voter himself does not ask Mr. Bretherton how it is
made out, he does not appear to have discussed it with the
overseer, but is precisely the same instrument obeying the
volition of Mr. Bretherton's mind, as Mr. Bretherton's own
hands would be. When the vote is so purchased, it is to be
used in a stipulated manner, with every precaution taken to
prevent the contrary. How then can he be said to be any
person's agent but Mr. Bretherton's? or the vote to
be any person's vote but that of Mr. Bretberton and
the society ? I cannot therefore see any solid distinc-
tion between this case and the Queen v. Bridgnorth. Then
the second question is, whether thin was a fraud at com-
mon law within the principle of the cases where such
fraud has been held, to vitiate certain acts done. The
cases of Rex v. Inhabitants of Tillingham, 1 Barn. and
Ad. 180, and Rex v. Inhabitants of Sepulchre, Cambridge, 1
Barn. and Ad. 921, are most in point—(read.)—Now the
facts of the present case, it must be acknowledged, are up to
a certain point precisely similar to those of the two cases I
have named. There the rent, which by statute is required to
be paid by the pauper to enable him to gain a settlement, is
paid for that express purpose by another party. Here the
rates which are necessary to be paid to entitle a person to be
put upon the list of voters is also paid for that express pur-
pose by another party. Upon these two grounds, however,
I have had presented to me some very ingenious, and I may
add, forcible arguments. They have been insufficient to
convince me. But there is a third ground which no argu-
ment which has yet been suggested has been able in the
slightest degree to shake. If I concede that this has been an
actual payment by the voter himself, and that it does not
come within the definition of a fraud at common law, I still
most strongly think that it is a fraud upon the law of par-
liament. And for the purpose of showing clearly how I con-
sider that it is so, and that, being so, it destroys a man's right
to be put upon the register ; I propose to consider what is
the nature of such a fraud, and how it taints the cases which
lam deciding. In the case of East Grinstead, which is re-
ported in first Peckwell, p. 307, one material question turned
upon what was termed an election law " occasional-
ity." And in the argument a definition was advanced,
in support of which the case of the Pontefract election,
in 1699, and the case of Weymouth and Melcombe Regis,
in 1714, and other cases, together with the well-known and
undisputed law up to that period, were cited. That
definition is in these words, Perhaps a more precise
idea may be obtained of it by considering it in two different
points of view, and distinguishing between two sorts of it.
The first kind of occasionality is such as does not contain any
of what is generally called legal fraud, but yet is deemed to
be a fraud upon the law of parliament; and this is where
the subject to which a right of voting is attached, is obtained
sincerely and bondfide; but on the eve of a particular elec-
tion, and for the express and only purpose of enabling the
person who acquires it to give a vote at that election. Such
acquisitions have often been determined by the House of
Commons, in its extreme and honourable jealousy of its own
purity, to be void as to the particular purpose for which they
were made, though to every other they may be substantial
and effective.' And again, 'So watchful have parliament
been to prevent the fruit of such practises, that no length of
time has been permitted to establish that which in its origin
was occasional.' Several instances are named in which occa-
sionality had been practised, and amongst others a fraudu-
lent insertion of names upon the poor rates.' Further on
there occurs this passage, 'Now in many• of the cases that
have been enumerated, it is obvious that the acquisition of
the thing to which the right of voting is annexed may be real
and bond fide; and yet if it be made at such a time, on such
an occasion, and in such circumstances as to leave no doubt
that the vote was the sole object in view, the vote is void.
As in the instance of an admission to the freedom of a cor-
poration, doubtless if all the necessary requisites are complied
with, the freeman is entitled to all the privileges and immu-
nitses belonging to his franchise, and is to all intents and
purposes a corporator, by virtue of his admission, but that
will not prevent his vote from being set aside for occasionality,
if he was admitted in the circumstances above alluded to.
The statute of 7th and Bth Willian 111, c. 25, was passed for
the purpose of making certain conveyances for the purpose of
conferring a vote void. But that statute was passed in order
that the aid of the statute law of the land might to a certain
extent further the objects of the law of parliament. And
therefore it was asserted in the case I have quoted, that be-
fore the statute in every case a question arose of the fairness
and reality of the transaction, and of the intention of the par-
ties.' In the East Grinstead case a great number of autho-
rities, besides those which I have named, are quoted ; and
amongst others the case of Haslemere, from Summer's
Tracts, vol. 1. p. 374, in which it was said by high authority,
That the making of votes by such means was a very evil and
unlawful thing, and tended to the destruction of the govern-
ment and debauching of parliament ;' and thatit was sense-
less to think such practises were part of the constitution of
our government, or to imagine that persons whom we entrust
with our lives and fortunes ought to be made and chosen by
such evil devices.' In another case; of Weymouth and Mel-
combe Regis, 2d Peckwell, 195, an occasional voter is defined
to be one ' whose qualification from estate, office, or other
cause, is conferred or taken for the purpose of voting at an
election for a particular candidate or in a particular interest.'
These definitions and arguments are all supported by autho-
rities, which leave no doubt as to what is the law of parlia-
ment. It does not seem to me to be requisite to lay down
any doctrine of what would be 'occasionality,' or whether such
thing would be held to exist since the Reform Act. I incline
to. think it would. But in considering what was occasion-
May, in numerous cases which occurred before thpt act, we
must necessarily enquire into its origin, and in searching for
that we clearly discover certain fixed and settled principles,
which were adopted as the law of parliament. In taking the
reported decisions of committees as our guide, it is much to
he regretted that we do not find the reasons of those decisions,
because we are left in ignorance whether the ultimate
decision of each case was upon legal arguments or upon
lack of evidence, to make those arguments applicable.
11 a are therefore compelled to fly to the authorities
cited in order to assure ourselves whether the doctrines pro-
pounded are, or are not, consisteut with the recognised law.
I have applied my mind to those considerations, and I have
arrived at a conviction that the law of parliament as far as it
can be brought to bear upon the present case is this, that
where a test of qualification is created by statute or other-
wise, that test must exist in a full, pure, and complete degree,
untarnished by circumstances which point in an unequivocal

manner at a particular exercise, with regard to politics, and
leaving the possession of it in a free and independent condi-
tion for the proper discharge of its resulting duties ; and as
the law of parliament is part and parcel of the general law of
the land, I am of opinion that it must be called in aid in the
construction of any act of parliament which has for its effect
and operation the constitution of the parliament itself. It I
do so the next question which I ask myself is, " What could
be the object of requiring any voter to have paid his poor
rates ?" I cannot think that the object was merely to apply
a screw or a bait which should produce payment of a public
burthen, and increase the public revenues. I think it must
have been meant as a test of a man's being qualified to have a
voice in electing representatives to assist in the deliberations
of the great council of the nation—and if, in referring to the
law of parliament, I find that that test must be pure, unde-
filed, and independent, I cannot believe that what would be
a fraud upon the law of parliament is a sufficient compliance
with the requisite of a statute directed to the formation of
the parliament itself. How can 1 say that the circumstances
of the cases before me are not a fraud upon the law of parlia-
ment? If a man is merely the machine to pay rates, and
thereby acquire a certain mechanical capability which can
afterwards be worked according to the will of another per-
son, does that man shew himself to be possessed of the crite-
rion of qualification which the law of parliament would
countenance ? And if lam right in supposing that the law
of parliament may be resorted to for the proper construction
of this statute, is not that which is a fraud upon the law of
parliament with respect to qualification destructive of the
right to vote under the provisions of the statute ? I think
these questions list be answered in the affirmative. Then,
how does the anfter apply to the present case? A man pays
his rate without any means of his own, but by means given or
lent to him, not generally and without condition, but by a
particular party in politics, to enable him to vote at any
election which may occur witnin a limited time, and under a
compact either expressed, or under circumstances of the most
cogent character, that he shall vote in favour of that interest,
and supported by the party who furnishes him with the
means. It is in my eyes a clear fabrication. It is an attempt
to put before the world a shadow which has no substance,
for the purpose of producing an illusory exhibition of the in-
dependent sense of persons appointed by the constitution to
exercise their judgment in the formation of the legislature of
the realm. 1 cannot at present know whether, or not, my
opinion is correct; but, I have formed it after the most se-
rious consideration, and with an intense anxiety to be right.
The persons who by my decision are deprived of their fran-
chise have an opportunity of tendering their votes at any
election which may take place ; and I have the satisfaction of
knowing that if I am in error, a committee of the House of
Commons has the power of rectifying it. My decision is
that the objection to these votes is fatal, and that all which
come before me must be expunged. With regard to one of
the cases which arose before me, in which the claimant had
repaid the money,l entertain very much doubt whether that
is not sufficient. The benefit of that doubt 1 shall give to the
voter, and retain him upon the list.