The second point, decided by the same Judge, had reference
to the Boston case. It was there decided that one vote may, under the Ballot Act, be struck off the poll of any candidate on 'whose behalf it could be shown that any one elector (having Actually voted) had been bribed,—i.e., one vote for every person so bribed, and this without examining the voting-tickets to prove that the vote had been given for the person on whose behalf the bribe was given. Thus in the Boston election 877 voters received presents of coals on behalf of Mr. Parry. Now, as Mr. Parry -received only 1,347 votes, and his opponent, Mr. Malcolm, 996, the difference of 877 votes, when deducted from Mr. Parry's poll, gives Mr. Malcolm the seat. And seated accordingly he is, by
• Lord Coleridge's decision. By a third decision in the same Court, it was established, in relation to the Petersfield case, that the Register is final evidence of the voter's right to vote, even though it can be shown that his qualification was not such that his name should have been put on the Register ;—unless, indeed, his acknowledged status in life was such—say, a peer's or a woman's —that he or she could not have been qualified by any property or occupying qualification to be pat on the Register.
Previous page
