A letter from Mr. Rawlinson, one of the agents of
Mr. Sturge's Bir- mingham Election Committee, requests us to supply some deficiencies in Muntz soma Sturge, of winch a brief account, the report of' the case, faithfully abridged from one of the daily papers, appeared in our last number. The object of Mr. Rawlinson is to show that Mr. Silage was willing to meet the demand of the Mayor in a liberal spirit, and that he did not refuse to pay even snore than could be equitably demanded. It appears from the statement of the agent, that a written contract was entered into by the Mayor with the builder, the day before the nomina- tion, for the erection of fifteen booths at 15/, a booth ; with an express stipulation, that if the parties did not go to a poll, COL was to be re- ceived in full of the builder's charges for all work up to the day of nomination. The builder, however, on his own responsibility, pro- ceeded to the extent of about 90/. more. The Mayor claimed from Mr. Stage the entire expenses of the election, amounting to 367/. Mr. Sturge's Committee offered to pay one-half of the expenses actually in- curred to the day of nomination, though there were four candidates pro- posed; and a stun of 66i. 12s. Id. wes paid into court with an offer of costs up to that time. The agents observe on these statements— Thus it appears, that Mr. Sturges Committee bra paid into court one- half of the whole amount the Returning-offieer had incurred or became liable for up to the time Mr. Sturge was withdrawn. The Returning-officer, however, conceiving that in point of law Mr. Sturge was liable to one-third of the entire expenses, as well those incurred subsequent as previous to his withdrawal, pro- ceeded to trial at the recent Assizes. Upon the above facts being proved, the Judge, after observing that the case involved a new and very important goes- tins oflaw, directed the facts to be turned into is special case; and a nominnl verdict was accordingly entered for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion o!' the Court upon the special case. Thus the whole question still remains in ale y ewe, andvill come on for argument in the Court of Exchequer next term. As the ease involves a very important principle—viz. whether a candidate, bv me:ely takingthe sense of the electors on a show of hauds, is liable to a propultio 1 of the entire expenses equally with the other candidates who contest the field. and as there is at present no judicial decision upon those clauses of the Reform. Act which create the liability of candidates, the decision in the present ease will he important as a settlement of this question."
Previous page
