ority, is not particularly specified, and the lands dif tinguished by the charter, by which he claims a vote, has any right to vote in the election of a Commiffioner to serve in parliament for the fhire of Dumbarton. The fitting member's counsel admitted, that, upon the foot of these refolutions, the petitioner's poll ftood unimpeached; and that a majority could not be made for the fitting member." The reader may fee a comment upon the above cafe in Wight, p. 235. Pa. 347. (B.) It may be useful in this place to mention the decifions of the Airfhire Committee, in march 1781, upon this fubject. In that cafe Sir Adam Ferguffon had petitioned against Major Mon gomery, (the member returned) upon the ground, that several voters for the latter, had been inrolled at the election meeting, without legal titles; and that others, who tendered their votes for the petitioner, had been illegally refused inrollment: And that a just determination upon the merits of thefe votes, would give him a majority over the fitting member. Before the trial of this petition, the court of Seffion had given judgment, in feveral of the caufes inftituted there, against the proceedings of the election meeting. In fame of them, appeals were presented to the House of Lords against the decrees; and in others, the period of four months allowed for appealing, had not expired when the trial began. Upon thefe cafes the Committee refolved, 1. That it was not competent for them to enter into difcuffion of the qualifications of fuch freeholders, as had either either been four months upon the roll; or whofe qualifications had been fuftained by the court of Seffion, and no appeal entered against their judgments. And upon a fubfequent day, on a confideration of the cafes in which the time for appealing had not expired, they refolved, 2. That thofe cafes, in which it was ftill competent to appeal against the decrees, during that session of parliament, were within the fpirit of their former refolution. And that it extended not only to the judgments of the court of Seffion, adding claimants to the roll, but likewife to thofe expunging perfons from the roll. Pa. 358. (C.) Profecutions were inftituted on the part of the petitioner, Mr. Cumming, against some of the voters for the fitting member to whom the objection was made, for perjury, in taking the oath of qualification. These profecutions were pending in the high Court of Jufticiary, at the time of this trial, and some preliminary legal questions, refpecting the right and forms of the proceeding, had been already decided there in favour of the prosecution, and informations were ordered to be lodged against the voters. The trial came on, after the determination of the election, and the defendants were acquitted. I have been informed that the jury were not unanimous; which, the reader knows, is not required of them by the law of Scotland. The libel charged, " that the pannel falfely and wilfully fwore the oath prescribed by ftat. 7 Geo. II. ch. 16. although he well knew that he had no right or title to the lands of Coltfield and others, and that the fame did not belong to him, nor were his own proper eftate; eftate; and that his pretended right thereto was nominal and fictitious, created for the purpose of enabling him to vote for a member of parliament; and although he alfo well knew that the faid lands were, neither de jure nor de facto, in his poffeffion." The printed information in the cafe of John Lawfon (one of, the voters profecuted) states, that in the preliminary debate upon the relevancy of the libel," the counsel for the pannel were called upon to fay, whether, exclufive of trufts, which are plainly out of the question, there ever was known in Scotland, any fpecies of nominal and fictitious qualification, created or reserved for the purpose of intitling to vote at elections, other than thofe wadfets of fuperiority, and unsubstantial rights of fuperiority above defcribed ? For that thefe muft neceffarily have been the fictitious qualifications intended to be checked, unless fomething else could be pointed out, which the defcription in the oath fuited more exactly. But that the queftion did not receive an answer." The fame paper ftates the argument in defence for the pannel to have been, "That his title could not be accounted nominal and fictitious, created or referved in him, in order to enable him to vote for a member to serve in parliament, because he really had in his perfon all the right which his title-deeds apparently conveyed, without being fubject to any backbond, or obligation of truft: That this conftruction of the ftatute had been fettled by repeated judgments of the court of Seffion, and of the Houfe of Lords; and that many perfons of moft unexceptionable character, had accordingly taken and fubfcribed the oath, under under circumstances precifely fimilar to those of the pannel." I do not know whether this defence was infifted upon afterwards to the jury, or whether it may have led to the defendant's acquittal. When the reasoning contained in the Lord Chancellor's fpeeches, fubjoined to this case, shall have been duly confidered in Scotland, perhaps there will be no further occafion given for a profecution of the fame kind, nor for the use of fuch arguments against it. This, at leaft, muft be the wish of every man who regards the honour of the law, and integrity in fulfilling its decrees. APPENDIX TO THE CASE OF EL GI GIN. INCE the determination of this election, two S' Caufes of great importance to the question of nominal votes, have been decided in the Houfe of Lords, upon appeal from the court of Seffion. In both of them, the Lord Chancellor took occafion to difcufs the queftion at great length. I have been enabled, by the favour of a friend, to gratify the reader with copies of his Lordship's fpeeches taken in fhort-hand, which I have reason to think correct. They make a most valuable addition to the law of elections, not only by the learning contained in them, but likewife by the high authority they proceed from; and may be particularly ufeful at this time. In the first of thefe caufes, the Hon. William Elphinstone appealed against an interlocutor, pronounced march 1, 1787, sustaining an objection to his inrollment as a freeholder of the county of Renfrew. His claim was founded upon a liferent grant of fuperiority of lands fettled upon the grantor by a ftrict entail, with the ufual prohibitory, irritant, and refolutive claufes against alienation. Objections had been made to his inrollment at the Michaelmas Head-court, but were over 2 ruled |