§ The Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868.
§ The Corrupt and Illegal Practices Prevention Act, 1883.
§ To the Right Honorable the Speaker of the
§ House of Commons.
§ We, the Honorable Baron Pollock and the Honorable Sir Henry Hawkins, Judges of Her Majesty's High Court of Justice, and two of the Judges on the rota for the time being for the trial of Election Petitions in England, do hereby in pursuance of the said Acts certify that upon the 15th, 16th, 17th, and 18th days of November, 1892, we duly held a Court at the Town Hall, in the borough of Walsall, in the county of Staffordshire, for the trial of and did try the Election Petition for the said borough between Henry Hately Thomas Moss and James Mason, Petitioners, and Frank James, Respondent.
§ And, in further pursuance of the said Acts, we report that at the conclusion of the said trial we determined that the said Frank James, being the Member whose Election and Return were complained of in the said Petition, was not duly elected or returned, and that his Election was void on the ground of an illegal practice, namely, a payment made by his Election Agent on account of hat cards, which we find to be marks of distinction; and we do hereby certify in writing such our determination to you.
§ And whereas charges were made of corrupt practices having been committed at the said Election, we, in further pursuance of the said Act, report as follows:—
§ That no corrupt practice was proved to have been committed by or with the knowledge or consent of any candidate at such election.
§ We have given certificates of indemnity to—Victor James
§ and
§ William Henry Robinson.
§ That there is no reason to believe that corrupt practices have extensively prevailed at the Election for the borough of Walsall to which the said Petition relates.
§ Dated this 22nd day of November, 1892.
§ C. E. POLLOCK.
§ H. HAWKINS.