249, line 21, read feveral. 417, line 25, read this defcription. 420, line 2, read the evidence. 482, in the note, read 1 Hen. V. and 8 23 Hen. VI. 502, Fill the blank reference in the note with p. 521. After the cafe of T. Kidman, in p. 447, add a reference to the cafe of John Creaker in p. 603. In p. 319, add a note of reference to Bird and Smith's cafe, Moore Rep. 783. DIRECTIONS TO THE BINDER. Place the Paper intitled Copy of the Poll, fo as to front p. 157; and the Paper intitled Saltash 13th Aprill 1722, to front p. 211. The Committee was chofen on Tuesday the 15th Day of February, 1785, and confifted of the following Members: Hon. John Charles Villiers, Chairman. Richard Aldworth Neville, Efq; Sir Robert Salusbury Cotton, Bart. John Call, Efq; Jeremiah Crutchley, Efq; David Murray, Efq; Lord Apfley. Gabriel Steward, Efq; George Sutton, Efq; NOMINEES. Charles Robinson, Efq; Of Petitioners. Bamber Gascoyne, Efq; Of Sitting Members. PETITIONERS. Robert Wood, and John Cator, Efquires, and certain Freeholders of the Borough; by feparate Petitions. Sitting Members. Hon. Henry Fane, and Hon. Thomas Fane. COUNSEL. For the Candidates Petitioners, Mr. Wilson, and Mr. Lawrence. For the Electors Petitioners, For the Sitting Members, Mr. Serj. Rooke, and Mr. Partridge. THE petition of the candidates stated, That at the election, a great majority of legal electors appeared in favour of the petitioners, and that the returning officer acted with great partiality in favour of the fitting members, and admitted many illegal votes for them, and rejected many legal votes tendered for the petitioners, under colour whereof the fitting members gained their apparent majority, although the petitioners were duly elected, and ought to have been returned. There was alfo a charge of bribery against the fitting members *. The petition of the electors alledged, that none but perfons refident ought to have been admitted to vote, and that the returning officer, by receiving the votes of others, and rejecting thofe of freeholders who had a right to vote, * Votes, p. 25, 28th Jan. 1785. B 2 had had given an illegal majority to the fitting members, in violation of the rights of the legal electors of the borough; a majority of whom had chofen the other candidates *. The present conteft is the fecond which has occafioned the right of election in this borough, to be difcuffed before a felect committee. The first happened upon the general election in 1780, the merits of which were tried in february 1781; after a previous determination by a former Committee, upon the merits of a double return, in which the cause was at first involved †. The claims of each party were the fame in both trials: one fide contending for a right of election in the members of the corporation, generally the other for a right in the freeholders of the borough as well as in the corporators; fuperadding to both, the qualification of residence. The petitioners in both contests were those who supported the latter claim. The former Committee determined in favour of the fitting members, and declared the right of election to be" in the freemen only, as well nonrefident as refident." Votes, p. 26. + An account of this caufe is in print, and makes one of the four election cafes publifhed by Mr. Philips. See 38 Journ. 12, 13, 95, 108, 273. There |