MR. WEBB, on behalf of Mr. MCLAREN (Cheshire, Crewe)I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether it is the fact that the Local Government Board decided some years ago, in the case of Mrs. M'llquham, that a married woman having the necessary rating qualification was entitled to be nominated for election as a Poor Law Guardian; and whether, in view of that decision, any official is entitled to refuse to receive the nomination of a married woman who is legally qualified?
§ THE SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. LONG, Wilts, Devizes), who replied, said: The case to which the hon. Member refers appears to be one in which it devolved on the Local Government Board in 1881 to determine an appeal against the election of Mrs. M'Ilquham as a Poor Law Guardian. The objection which the Board were called on to decide was whether Mr. M'Ilquham, by whom Mrs. M'Ilquham was nominated, was entitled as a ratepayer to nominate a candidate. The decision was adverse to the validity of her election on the ground that there was no valid nomination. The Board did not decide in that case that Mrs. M'Ilquham was as a married woman qualified for election. The practice of the Board has been where the question has been raised as to the right of married women to be elected as Guardians practically to decline to interfere with the decision of the Returning Officer. The question is one of so great importance that if there is to be any decision on the point the Board consider that it should be a decision of the High Court. It is, at the same time, to be remembered that, there are cases where the Board have nominated as Guardians married women. We think that the question is 981 not free from doubt, although we have not gone so far as distinctly to say so.