§ In the case of the King v. Hawkins, Mr. Abbot and Mr. Buller ware heard for the plaintiff in error (Hawkins); and Mr. Serjeant Pell and Mr. Adam, jun for the defendant in error. Further hearing on Wednesday.
§ This was an information against Hawkins, in the nature of a quo warranto, to shew cause by what right he claimed to exercise the office of an alderman of the borough of Saltash. Mr. Hawkins and a 278 Mr. Spicer were candidates. When two votes had been given for each, Mr. Hawkins was questioned whether he had qualified, by taking the sacrament according to the rites of the Church of England? and answered that he had not. The election, however, went on; and 16 voted for Mr. Spicer, and about 20 for Mr. Hawkins. The object of the proceedings was, to have the election of Mr. Spicer declared valid; the voters who polled for Mr. Hawkins (except the two as above mentioned) having voted for him after notice of his disqualification. Their votes, therefore, it was to be contended, ought to be considered as a nullity; and so it was decided by the Court of King's Bench, from whose judgment this writ of error was brought.