As the case of Cooper v. Slade is at present in the House of Lords, in error from the judgment of the Court of Exchequer Chamber, it does not appear expedient at present to make any further comments upon it. The case will probably be determined by the Court of ultimate appeal before any questions of bribery and treating are ripe for decision by Committees of the House of Commons.

ment."

Besides these two cases decided in Westminster Hall, one case of corrupt practices at an election has been investigated by a committee since the passing of the recent statute (a). The petition alleged that "Mr. L. had procured his election by means of a corrupt and illegal bargain or agreement against the statutes in force and the policy and law of ParliaThe evidence in support of this charge was that a Mr. C. had, in the autumn of the year 1853, attended at Barnstaple before a commission of inquiry and had exerted himself to prevent the threatened disfranchisement of the borough on account of corrupt practices which had taken place at a previous election; that he had gone down voluntarily to attend the inquiry, and had incurred a bill of costs for 1,4007. This bill he had not sent in to any one. That a short time before the election in August, 1854, Mr. L. called on Mr. C., and the latter drew up an agreement whereby Mr. L. undertook to pay the sum of 400l., and the sum of 1,000l. within a week after the election at Barnstaple. A few days after this agreement was signed, Mr. L. became a candidate; Mr. C. was not present at the election, and he stated on oath to

(a) Barnstaple, 1855, Pr. Mins., and 2 P. R. & D. 340.

the committee that it was no part of the understanding that he should procure Mr. L.'s return, and that he told Mr. L. at the time that it would in no way influence his candidature or his election one way or the other, that the bill of costs was a charge that he might legally pay, and that Mr. L. undertook to pay the 1,4007. because he, Mr. C., had told him that he had incurred, these expenses in defending the commission of inquiry. The committee decided" that Mr. L. procured his election and return by means of an illegal bargain and agreement."

253

CHAPTER IV.

QUALIFICATION BY ESTATE.

In order to represent in Parliament any county, city, borough or place in England, Wales, or Ireland, with the exception of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge in England, and Trinity College Dublin in Ireland, it is necessary that the person elected, unless he be one of those specially exempted, be possessed at the time of his election and return of a certain qualification in respect of property (a).

The persons here mentioned as specially excepted are those named in the 9th section (a), and are1. The eldest sons or heirs apparent of peers (b). 2. The eldest sons or heirs apparent of persons themselves qualified in respect of estate to serve as knights of a shire.

These two classes may sit for any of the places here mentioned without any property qualification.

(a) 1 & 2 Vict. c. 48.

(b) The eldest son of a Scotch peer is within the exception. Rochester, C. & D., 229. A committee might have to try upon these exceptions most difficult questions of pedigree and legitimacy. See Gloucestershire, 1810; 1 Roe, 51.

The members for Scotch counties and burghs need not have any qualification by estate. For the town of Berwick-upon-Tweed the same qualification is required as for other boroughs in England.

Amount of, in Counties.] No person is capable of being elected for a county in England, Wales, or Ireland, unless at the time of his election and return he be seised or entitled for his own use and benefit of and to an estate, legal or equitable, in lands, tenements, or hereditaments of any tenure whatever situate within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, of the clear yearly value of not less than 6007. over and above all incumbrances affecting the same, or unless he have an estate of similar amount derived from personal estate and effects (a) within the United Kingdom above all incumbrances affecting the same, or unless such estate be derived partly from land and partly from personalty.

As to the necessary duration of the interest, it may be for the life of the candidate, or for that of any other person then living, or for a term of years, either abso. lute or determinable on his own life or some other life, and of which term not less than thirteen years shall at the time of the election be unexpired.

Amount in Boroughs.] For boroughs the qualification is fixed at 300l. a-year over and above all incumbrances affecting the same, and is derivable from the same descriptions of property as those required for counties, and the interest therein must be similar in point of duration.

(a) By the 9 Anne, c. 5, the estate was required to be in lands, tenements, or hereditaments, in England or Wales, for the life of the member himself, or a greater estate.

It will be seen that the qualification, whether arising from land or personal property, must be locally situated within the United Kingdom (a). Therefore where a sitting member gave in as his qualification at the election, and also at the table of the House, an annuity or annual payment of 10007., payable quarterly to him during the whole term of his life by the Hon. East India Company, and receivable at the East India House in Leadenhall-street, in London, and it appeared in evidence that the fund out of which the annuity was paid was situate in India, it was decided, on petition against his election and return, that the sitting member was not duly qualified (b).

It is further required by the statute that the qualification, whether derived from real or personal property, be of the requisite value "over and above all incumbrances affecting the same."

Therefore, when a candidate at an election, upon request made to him, in the manner to be hereafter described, made a declaration that his qualification arose out of a rent-charge of 300l. a-year for his own life, chargeable upon and payable out of certain lands in Ireland, and it was afterwards proved upon petition against his return, that there were unsatisfied judgments against him at the time of the election, to the amount of nearly 12,000l., the committee decided that he was not duly qualified, although it was not proved that the judgment creditors had taken any steps

(a) 1 & 2 Vict. c. 48, s. 2.

(b) 1st Harwich, 1 P. R. & D. 289.