an elector, as an advertising agent, to exhibit, for payment, bills and advertisements, a payment to or contract with such elector, if made in the ordinary course of business, shall not be deemed to be an illegal practice within the meaning of this section." The first offence consists (whether to an elector or not) in actually paying, or contracting to pay, any money on account of the conveyance of electors to or from the poll, and it is specifically stated that the offence is complete, whether the payment or contract for payment relates to the hiring of horses or carriages, or for railway fares, or otherwise. This is a material change upon the old law. Prior to the new Act, in county elections it was perfectly legal to convey electors to or from the poll in hired carriages, or to bring them from a distance by means of free passes on the railway, or otherwise; and in the case of borough elections, while the conveyance of voters to or from the poll in hired conveyances was legal within the limits of the boroughs themselves (43 & 44 Vic. c. 18, s. 2), any payment on account of their conveyance outside the boroughs was illegal, though it did not avoid the election (the Bolton Case, 2 O'M. & H., 31; L.T., n.s., 194). Now, counties and boroughs are placed upon exactly the same footing, and not only is the conveyance of electors at the candidate's expense to or from the poll in hired conveyances, or upon the railway, made illegal ; but when any agent of the candidate makes any payment, or contract for payment, with a view to their conveyance, the election is avoided. So far as regards payments made for railway fares this is reasonably clear; but with reference to the effect of entering into a contract to secure carriages and horses for the conveyance of voters to the poll, the wording of a later section of the Act, raises a nice question. Section 14, sub-section 1, forbids any person to let, lend, or employ for the conveyance of voters to or from the poll, any carriage, horse, or animal, which he keeps or uses for the purpose of letting out to hire, and the second sub-section goes on: "A person shall not hire, borrow, or use for the purpose of the conveyance of electors to or from The effect of a contract with livery conveyance of voters. Sections 7 & 14. the poll any carriage, horse, or other animal which he knows the owner thereof is prohibited by this section to let, lend, stablemen for or employ for that purpose, and if he does so, he shall be guilty of an illegal hiring." An illegal hiring is treated in the Act as a less heinous offence than an illegal practice, and does not avoid the election, unless it is committed by the candidate personally, or his election agent. Now, suppose a person who is held to be an agent of the candidate, though he is not the election agent, hires all the carriages and horses in the stables of a livery stableman, and uses them for the conveyance of voters to or from the poll, is he only guilty of an illegal hiring? If so, the election will stand. On the other hand, if he hires a single horse from a person who is not a livery stable keeper, he clearly comes within Section 7, sub-section 1, and, committing an illegal practice, the election is avoided. If this be so, the result is curious, for then, to make a contract with persons whose business it is to supply horses and carriages, and who can supply them wholesale, would not defeat the election, but to make a contract with other persons would. It can hardly be supposed that the legislature meant this, but it is open to argument that it has enacted it. Section 7 contains a merely general prohibition against entering into contracts for the hire of conveyances, and annexes a heavy penalty to any breach of it. Section 14 specifically deals with the hiring of conveyances from one class of persons, and prohibits this under a much lighter penalty. Unless the view is adopted, that the penalty under Section 14 is cumulative, and that, therefore, the persons mentioned in it are guilty both of an illegal practice and an illegal hiring, the only other construction is that the latter section qualifies the former, and takes the persons specifically dealt with by it out of the general words of Section 7. However this may be, it should be noted in connection with the prohibition contained in Section 7 against payments and contracts for the conveyance of voters to the polls, that sub-section 3 of the 14th Section provides that "nothing in this Act shall prevent a carriage, horse, or other animal being let to, or hired, or employed, or used by an elector, or Proviso to sub-section 14 engrafted on Section 7. several electors, at their joint cost, for the purpose of being conveyed to or from the poll." any Illegal to pay placarding. electors for The second offence consists in paying to any elector, or contracting to pay to him, any sum on account of the use of house, land, building or premises, for the exhibition of any placard, &c., or on account of the exhibition of any placard, &c., with the proviso that if it is the ordinary business of an elector as an advertising agent, to exhibit placards, &c., any payment to him shall not be illegal. This section speaks for itself. It strikes at a form of corruption suggested in the Westminster Case (referred to at p. 14) where it was charged that the respondent sought to influence voters by paying them sums of money for the privilege of exhibiting his placards in their window or upon their shutters. That was held to be a corrupt practice only where the payment was made with the corrupt view of influencing the vote of the person who got the money; but under this section it is an illegal practice to make these payments to any elector without reference to the motive which dictates the payment. It would seem, however, that it is legal to pay non-electors But not for the right of exhibiting placards, &c., unless it could be illegal in case clearly shown that by excessive payments to such persons it electors. was sought to influence the votes of electors connected with them. Then it would probably be bribery. of non for committee rooms in ex ber allowed. The third offence consists in paying, or contracting to pay, Illegal to pay for any committee rooms in excess of the number allowed in the first schedule to the Act. The second part of the first cess of numschedule prescribes the number of committee rooms which may legally be paid for in the cases respectively of borough and county elections. Legal number of committee rooms in In a borough, at least one committee room is allowed. If the number of electors exceed 500, then one extra committee room for every complete 500, and if there is a number boroughs. of electors over and above any complete 500, then another committee room for such extra number. Thus where the number of electors is 1,501, it would seem four committee rooms would be allowed, and so on. In the case of counties, the following committee rooms are In counties. Committee rooms in counties. : allowed (1.) One central committee room; (2.) One committee room for each polling district; (3.) When the number of electors in any polling district exceeds 500 one additional committee room for every complete 500 electors over and above the first 500. Thus if there is a county with polling districts A, B, C, and D, and in A there are 400 electors, in B 600, in C 1,000, and in D 1,060, the committee rooms which may be legally hired will be as follows: (1,) One central committee room; (2.) One committee room in A; (3.) One committee room in B, for though there are more than 500 electors there is not a second complete 500; (4.) Two committee rooms in C; and (5.) Two committee rooms in D. It is important to have a clear view of the number of committee rooms which may be hired and paid for, because, under the section we are considering, any payment or contract for payment made in respect of any committee room in excess of the number allowed is an illegal practice which will defeat the election if made by any agent. There is no definition in the Act of what constitutes a committee room. Is a committee room a single room or a suite of rooms? Is it an illegal practice for the election agent to have in addition to the room in which the general work of the election is conducted, another room contiguous in which he sits himself, and uses for necessary purposes of the election? The only attempt at a definition of a committee room is a negative one in the general interpretation clause, "the expression committee room shall not include any house or room occupied by a candidate at an election as a dwelling, by reason only of the candidate there transacting business with his agents in relation to such election; nor shall any room or building be deemed to be a committee room for the purposes of this Act by reason only of the candidate, or any agent of the candidate, addressing therein electors, committee Only payment men, or others." What the Act strikes at is payment for for committee additional committee rooms. There is apparently no objection to a candidate using as many committee rooms as his friends are content to lend him, subject to a restriction on the premises employed as committee rooms to be presently mentioned. What is a committee room. rooms illegal. penses ex cept through election agent. rule. Section 28 creates another illegal practice, which, if com- Illegal to pay mitted by any agent, will avoid the election. It declares election exthat no payment and no advance or deposit shall be made, whether by the candidate or any other person, before, during, or after an election, in respect of the expenses incurred on account of the election, except through the election agent. acting in person or by a sub-agent. There is a proviso to Proviso to this the effect that this section shall not apply to-(1) any payments made by the returning officer; or (2), any sum disbursed by any person out of his own money for any small expenses legally incurred by himself, if such sum is not repaid to him. The design of this section is to secure the payment of all election expenses through the medium of a responsible election agent, who is bound to make a return of every farthing. No other person is now allowed to make any payment on account of them. If such a person does disburse any small Small sums disbursed by sum in any way in promotion of the election it must be taken to be a gift, and he cannot recover it again from the than election agent gifts. candidate. What is "a small expense" within the meaning of the proviso has yet to be decided. It will probably receive a very strict construction, because the latter portion of Section 28 provides-" All money provided by any person other than the candidate for any expenses incurred on account of or in respect of the conduct and management of the election, whether as gift, loan, advance or deposit, shall be paid to the candidate or his election agent, and not otherwise." Unless, therefore, the permission given in the proviso is strictly limited, it will convert Section 28 into a dead letter. person other To what extent is it possible for a candidate to obtain The possirelief against the consequences of an illegal practice com- bility of relief. mitted by himself or an agent? One penalty of an illegal practice is- and it is the only one with which we are now concerned-the loss of the seat. Can this be averted in any case? It will be remembered that the qualified relief given under Section 22 of the Act of 1883 applies to illegal practices as well as to treating and undue influence, when they are committed by any person except the candidate |