CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS. (Hansard, 2 July 1906)

§ Mr. SPEAKER

informed the House that he had received from the Judges appointed to try the several Election Petitions the following Certificate and Report relating to the Election for the South Eastern or Bodmin Division of the County of Cornwall.

The Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868, The Corrupt and Illegal Practices Prevention Acts, 1854–1895.

Election of a Member of Parliament for the South Eastern or Bodmin Division of the County of Cornwall, holden on the 22nd day of January, 1906.

To the Right Honourable The Speaker of the House of Commons.

We, Sir William Grantham, Knight, and Sir John Compton Lawrance, Knight, Judges of the High Court of Justice, and two of the Judges on the Rota for the time being for the Trial of Election Petitions in England and Wales, do hereby Certify in pursuance of the said Acts that upon the 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th, and 18th days of June, in this year, we duly held a Court at the Assize Courts, Bodmin, for the trial of, and did try the Election Petition for the South Eastern or Bodmin Division of the County of Cornwall, between William Henry Vallack, Tom and William Stuart Bruton Duff, Petitioners, and The Honourable 1367 Thomas Charles Reginald Agar-Robartes, Respondent.

And in further pursuance of the said Acts We Certify that at the conclusion of the said trial, we determined that the said Thomas Charles Reginald Agar-Robartes, being the Member whose Election and Return were complained of in the said Petition was not duly elected and returned, and we do hereby certify in writing such our determination to you.

And whereas charges were made in the said Petition of Corrupt and Illegal Practices having been committed at the said Election, We, in further pursuance of the said Acts, Report as follows:—

1. That no corrupt or illegal practices were proved to have been committed by or with the knowledge or consent of any Candidate at the said Election.
2. That the person whose name appears in the First Schedule hereto was proved to have been guilty of the corrupt practice of treating.
3. That there is no reason to believe that corrupt or illegal practices have extensively prevailed at the said Election.
4. That the said Thomas Charles Reginald Agar-Robartes was guilty by his Agent of the corrupt practice of treating.
5. That a Certificate of Indemnity has been furnished to the person found guilty of treating whose name appears in the Second Schedule hereto.

And in further pursuance of the said Acts we hereby certify that at the con elusion of the said trial we differed as to whether the return concerning election expenses made under Section 33 of The Corrupt and Illegal Practices Prevention Act, 1883, did or did not constitute a proper or sufficient return of the said election expenses.

A Copy of the Evidence and of our Judgments, taken down and written out at length by the Deputies of the Shorthand Writer of the House of Commons, accompanies this our Certificate.