City of 1832. right to have their names placed on the registry, since they did substantially, though not directly, pay the rates and taxes due upon the houses which they occupied. Some of the applicants had, it appeared, claimed to be rated, subsequent, however, to the 20th of July. Mr. Thompson said, that to enable any person to have their names placed on the registry, they must pay the rates themselves. Their names must appear in the parish books as the payers of the poor-rates, or they would have no vote. Such of the applicants as had omitted to make their claim to be rated previous to the 20th of July, were not entitled to have their names put on the registry. A parishioner of St. Mildred's, Bread-street, claimed to vote for a house for which he paid 100l. a-year rent, and intended also to cover rates, which were nominally paid by the landlord, though virtually by the tenant, as he paid from 251. to 30l. more than a fair rental in order to cover the rates. The Court held, that the tenant had a right to claim to be rated, but it appeared that in mistake he had made a claim, not to be rated, but to be put on the list. The omission to make the claim to be rated within the prescribed time was held to be fatal, and the claim was disallowed. 13 ERRORS IN RATE-BOOK. A claimant, named William Hatch, had paid only City of London, the two last quarters' rates. He had previously 1832. occupied the house many years, but the landlord had compounded and paid all rates and taxes. The claimant addressed the Court, and contended that he was entitled to his vote. The Act em. powered the revising barrister to correct all mistakes, not only in names and residences, but also in qualifications; and he was sure the Legislature never designed that the barrister should take advantage of inadvertencies or palpable errors. The Court said, it was empowered to correct errors in the lists, but it had no power to alter the rate-books. residence 1832. Mr. Ware applied to have the residence of MisdesJoseph Goodchild altered, from Long-alley to cription of Leg-alley. On examining the rate books, the re- fatal. sidence was found entered Holywell-street. It appeared that the house was the corner of Legalley, the front door being in Holywell-street. The Court decided against the claimant, as the rate-books did not support Mr. Ware's description of the residence. The name of "Thomas Butler was entered Shoreditch, in one of the rates, instead of " John Butler." In § 50, 2 W. 1832, 2, c. 45. Shoreditch, the other rates the assessment was correctly charged on the claimant, John Butler. 1832. Errors in the Lists to be correct The Court decided that the error was fatal. Mr. Charles Pearson applied to the Court, to know whether misnomers in the list invalidated ed by a re- the claims of the parties. ference to the rate books. 1832. Rating in the name of the claimant sufficient. 1832. Mr. Russell replied, that errors in the original list were to be corrected by a reference to the rate-books, on the parochial officers undertaking to swear that they had made the mistake, if the evidence of the overseers and the rate-books coincided; but errors in the Rate-books were fatal to the claimants at all times, as the revising barrister had no power to have such errors rectified. An objection was taken by the overseers of St. Andrew's, Holborn, to a claim with which they had been regularly served, on the ground, that though the party was rated in the parish books in respect to the premises on which he claimed, yet the rates were, in fact, paid by the landlord. Mr. Thompson held the rating of the party in the parish books to be sufficient to support the claim, notwithstanding that the rates were paid by another individual. (a) (a) Thomas Spanner was rated, and the receipts made out in his name; but the money was paid by his landlord. The question was, whether the rates, so paid by the land 1832. A claimant was entered on the list as "Joseph" Shoreditch, Elvin, instead of "Joshua" Elvin. On reference to the rate-books, it was difficult to ascertain whether the assessment was in the name of "Joshua" or "Joseph." The Court allowed the correction to be made. In one case, where the christian name and place of abode were both incorrectly entered in the list, the Court decided that two such mistakes could not be altered. (a) Leicester. Mr. Thomas Toller (on the list of 101. occu- Borough of piers) was objected to, for not having been rated to all rates made in the parish during the twelve calendar months next previous to the last day of July. The evidence was, that the rates were made quarterly. Mr. Toller was rated for the three last quarters of the year of his occupation, which commenced from the last day of July, 1832. The former occupier of the premises was rated for them for the first quarter. That rate was allowed by the Justices, on the 29th of July, lord, were repaid by the tenant; and no evidence being produced that they were paid by the landlord on his own account, the name was expunged.—Manning's Notes of Revision, p. 66. (a) The claimant, Richard Terry, was rated and registered in the name of William Terry, by mistake of the Overseer. The misnomer was fatal. Name expunged.Manning's Notes of Revision, 110. Borough of and was published the Sunday following, which Leicester. was the 3rd of August. Mr. Toller paid that rate, as well as the other three. It was argued, on this evidence, that Mr. Toller was rated to all rates made during the twelve months of his occupation; that the rate allowed on the 29th of July was made before his entering into possession, and it could not be afterwards altered; that the rate is made and consummated from the day on which it is allowed. It was contended by the objector, that, by 17th Geo. 2, c. 3, s. 1, no rate is valid until pub. lished, and this rate being published in August, was then, and not until then, made; and that, therefore, it was one of the rates made during the twelve months of occupation next previous to the last day of July. The revising barrister was of opinion that, as by the statute referred to, publication was made necessary to the validity of the rate, this rate could not be said to have been made until the 3rd of August, the day on which it was published. By the 30th section of the Reform Act, the occupier had a right to claim to be rated-a remedy Mr. Toller ought to have availed himself of, when he found his name was not on the rate. The overseer being, on this suggestion, called by Mr. Toller, and examined as to this point, said he called for payment of this rate soon after it was made, and Mr. Toller, while paying it, |