Page: 47↓
Act. Clark, Shand, and Black.
Alt. Gifford and Mackintosh.
Circumstances in which held that a party was disqualified as not being rated to the relief of the poor.
The following special case was stated in this appeal:—“At a Registration Court for the Burgh of Wick, held by me at Wick on the 7th day of October 1868, under and in virtue of the Act of Parliament 31 & 32 Vict., cap. 48, intituled ‘The Representation of the People (Scotland) Act 1868,’ and the other Statutes therein recited, John Cumming, harbour constable, Vansittart Street, Pulteneytown, claimed to be enrolled on the register of voters for the said burgh, as inhabitant occupier, as tenant of a dwelling-house in Vansittart Street, No. 17— prior to Whitsunday, Vanasittart Street, No. 29.
The following facts were proved:—The claimant was for several years prior to Whitsunday last tenant and occupant of a self-contained dwelling-house in Vansittart Street; at Whitsunday 1868 he removed to his present dwelling-house, which is part of a house. He was not rated in former years for the relief of the poor, but he appears in the valuation-roll of this year as tenant of his present house, and will be assessed for the present year. The assessment has already been imposed, and ordered to be levied according to the valuation-roll, but the assessment-roll has not yet been made up. John Stewart, coach-clerk. Bridge Street, Wick, a voter on the roll, objected to the said claim, on the ground that he is not rated to the relief of the poor.
I admitted the claim of the said John Cumming. Whereupon the said John Stewart required from me a special case for the Court of Appeal, and in compliance therewith I have granted this case.
The question of law for the decision of the Court of Appeal is,—Whether, being previous to Whitsunday 1868 tenant of a self-contained dwelling-house, and not being assessed for the relief of poor, his claim is affected by such non-assessment? and (2), Whether he is now properly held as separately rated for the relief of the poor in respect of the part of a house which he presently occupies?”
Page: 48↓
The Court reversed the Sheriff's judgment.
Agents for Appellant— Hughes & Mylne, W.S.
Agents for Respondent— Mackenzie & Black, W.S.