§ Mr. MOONEY (for Mr. John Roche)asked, in view of the fact that Mr. Patrick Riordan, J.P., was not appointed to the commission of the peace until last June, and his having twice attended Woodford Petty Sessions, what is the reason for declaring his vote invalid at the recent election of petty sessions clerk?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI am informed that Mr. Riordan had only attended the Woodford Petty Sessions once previous to the election, which took place, on 15th March. Having regard to the date at which he became a magistrate, he should have had at least three attendances to entitle him to vote.
§ Mr. MOONEYOn what basis is it calculated that a magistrate appointed in June must have put in three attendances before his votes become operative? Is it not the fact that this gentleman twice attended Woodford Petty Sessions, and that he has put in the full number of attendances if you take that into consideration?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe vote was disallowed because, in the opinion of those with legal knowledge of the matter, he had not made a sufficient number of attendances. The whole question is one of great complication. The great thing is to observe the same rule for each party.
§ Mr. MOONEYIs it not the fact that another person, owing to this decision, has got the appointment?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI cannot help that. If both votes were illegal, I cannot help it.
§ Mr. JEREMIAH MacVEAGHWho decides the actual number of attendances?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI cannot say.