duct the prosecution with effect, and shall pay to the defendant or defendants, in case he or they shall be acquitted, his or their costs.

XIV. No

Limitation actions.

of

person shall be liable to any penalty or forfeiture hereby enacted or imposed, unless some prosecution, action, or suit for the offence committed shall be commenced against such person within the space of one year next after such offence against this act shall be committed, and unless such person shall be summoned or otherwise served with writ or process within the same space of time, so as such summons or service of writ or process shall not be prevented by such person absconding or withdrawing out of the jurisdiction of the court out of which such writ or other process shall have issued ; and in case of any such prosecution, suit, or process as aforesaid, the same shall be proceeded with and carried on without any wilful delay.

Travelling Expenses. The act is silent as to travelling expenses. Upon this subject it is only safe to say that supplying railway tickets or other conveyance to all electors who may apply for them for the purpose of coming up to the poll and returning, and without making any inquiry or condition as to how the individuals propose to vote, would not be illegal. At the Marylebone election no less a sum than 5921. 6s. 11d. was paid by the election auditor for these purposes.

CHAPTER IX.

AGENCY.

FROM what we have already seen of the responsibility incurred by candidates by the acts of agents, it will be obvious that it is very important to know how a person acquires the character of agent to a candidate.

Of course the principal agents of a candidate are well known. He usually has at least one solicitor acting under retainer. His agent for election expenses has been formally appointed and sworn; and his agents to detect personation have likewise been openly nominated. But a man may be sufficiently an agent to make his principal responsible to the extent of losing his seat without holding the ostensible office of agent. In cases of bribery, the bribery may be proved first and the agency afterwards, so that frequently the very circumstances of the corrupt act tend to show the authority of the person who commits it. In treating, however, the proof of agency must be first given.

A declaration by the candidate, or by his proved agent, that certain persons are acting for him, will show those persons to be agents; but declarations by persons that they are agents for the candidate, are no proof of the fact.

Making arrangements about, and payments for, the hustings' expenses, is strong proof of agency. So auditing bills, especially if reference has been made to the auditor by the candidate, would fix a man as an agent. "Bring

ing the candidate down," taking the chair at a meeting of his friends, and claiming a right to be on the hustings as agent of the candidate, have been held sufficient.

But canvassing in company with the candidate, being a member of the committee, being one of a club of voters which invited the candidate to stand, employment for the express purpose of paying non-resident voters, have all been held to be insufficient to prove such a general agency as to make the candidate responsible for illegal acts.

A review of the multifarious cases upon this subject only shews that it is impossible to deduce from them any definite rule. The committee will be governed to some extent by precedents, such as those I have alluded to, but they will in each instance form their conclusion from the number and weight of the circumstances before them.

CHAPTER X.

EXPENSES OF CANDIDATES.

"A CANDIDATE at an election," said Lord Ellenborough in the case of Morris v. Burdett, (1 Camp. N. P. 221.), " is liable to no expense except such as the statute law casts upon him, or he takes upon himself by his express or implied consent." In that case the high bailiff of Westminster demanded 15077. as the legal expenses of his office; and in the subsequent case of Walthen v. Sandys (2 Camp. 640.) the Sheriff

of Gloucestershire's demand for an election, at which there was no poll, amounted to 14937. 14s.

Several statutes have now marked out, within narrow limits, what a candidate is obliged to pay that is to say:

The polling booths, either according to contract, or at a sum not exceeding 401. for each polling place in counties, and 25l. for each parish, district, or part in boroughs (Reform Act, sec. 71.).

The returning officers' deputies at two guineas each.

The poll clerks at one guinea each.

Check clerks-remuneration not fixed by

statute.

These expenses are divided equally among the candidates.

There is no legal liability in respect of constables, commissioners to take oath of identity, indentures of return or other expenses, incident to the mere exercise of the duty of holding the county and making the return.

To this must be added the liability of a candidate to pay any extra expense occasioned by his requiring sufficient booths to allow the arrangement that only a hundred electors shall poll at each booth (5 & 6 Will. IV. c. 36. sec. 4.).

The expense of the election auditor is 10. 10s. to each candidate, and two per cent. upon the money paid through his hands.

These are the expenses to which a candidate becomes liable upon accepting the position of candidate that is to say, when he demands a poll. It has been held, that up to that time he

:

incurs no liability; although the returning officer may have made preparations and paid for polling booths in reliance on the candidate's intention of proceeding to the poll (Muntz v. Sturge, 8 M. & W. 302.).

With a view to meet this inconvenience, a prudent returning officer will take previous direction from the candidates. We learn from the case of Morris v. Burdett that the high bailiffs of Westminster were accustomed to obtain signatures to the following form of express promise.

“To A. B., Esq., high bailiff of the City and Liberty of Westminster.

66

We, whose names are hereunto subscribed, candidates to serve in Parliament at the election for the City and Liberty of Westminster, do hereby authorise and desire the said high bailiff, or his deputy, to find and provide sufficient clerks, porters, &c., and also to find and provide a table for the high bailiff, his deputy, and officers (the charge of which not to exceed ten guineas per day), and to take every necessary step for the conducting and ordering the said election, until two candidates shall be returned by a majority of electors of the said city and liberty; and we do hereby promise and agree to pay to the said high bailiff, or his deputy, all expenses of the said election. Witness our hands, &c."

If a candidate be proposed without his consent, the person proposing him is liable to pay his nominee's share of the returning officer's charges (Reform Act, sec. 71.).

But although these are the only expenses