Powell v Guest
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 22 November 1864 |
| Date | 22 November 1864 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 144 E.R. 367
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND IN THE EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. H. & P. 149; 34 L. J. C, P. 69; 11 L. T. 599; 10 Jur. N. S. 1238; 13 W. R. 274. Applied, Ford v. Pye, 1873, L. R. 9 C. P. 272; Ford v. Hart, 1873, L. R, 9 C. P. 275. Commented on, Ford v. Drew, 1879, 5 C. P. D. 63. Discussed, Donnelly v. Graham, 1888, 24 L. R. Ir. 132.
[72] borough of k[ddkrm[nhter. richard powell, Appellant; thomah guest, jun., Respondent. Nov. 22nd, 1864. [S. C. H. & P. 149 ; 34 L. J. C, P. G9 ; 11 L. T. 599; 10 Jur. N. S. 1238 ; 13 VV. K. 274. Applied, Ford v. Pije, 1873, L. R. 9 C. P. 272 ; Ford v. Hart, 1873, L. R, 9 C. P. 275. Commented on, Ford v. Drew, 1879, 5 C. P. D. G3. Discussed, Donnelly v. Ch-a/iam, 1888, 24 L. R. Ir. 132.] A man hsjs not " resided " in the borough " for six calendar months next previous to the lasi day of July," within the 27th section of the 2 W. 4, c. 45, when he has for a portion of that time been detained in a gaol situate more than seven miles distant therefrom, tinder a sentence of imprisonment for an assault, without the option of paying a fine. 1. At a court held for the revision of the lists of voters for the borough of Kidderminster, Richard Powell duly objected to the name of Thomas Guest, juii., being retained on the list of persons entitled to vote in the election of a member for the borough of Kidderminster in respect of the occupation of a house in Stourbridge Street, (a) And is in affirmance of the franchise'! See (Jlarke, App., The Overseers of Bury St. Edmwids, llrxp., 1 C. B. (N. S.) 23, 33. 36$ POWELL V. GUEST 18 C. B. (N. S.) 73. iu the pariah of Kidderminster Borough, on the ground that the said Thomas Guest, j mi., had not resided for six calendar months next previous to the last day of July in the present year within the said borough or within seven miles thereof. 2. The qualification of the said Thomaa truest, jun., was duly proved in all other respects. 3. On the 27th of February in the present year, the said Thomas Guest, jun., was convicted of ati assault, and committed by the magistrates of the borough of Kidder minster to Worcester gaol for six months' imprisonment, without the option of paying a fine. He duly served the said term of imprisonment, and returned to Kidderminster on the 25th of August in the present year. 4. Worcester gaol is situate more than seven miles from the borough of Kidder minster or any part thereof. 5. At the time of his conviction, the said Thomas Gkiest, jun., resided at the above- mentioned house, and carried on there the businesses of a butcher and beer-seller; and after his conviction, but before leaving Kidderminster, he made arrangements by which the said businesses were carried on and the said house was occupied by his servant on his behalf during his ab-[73]-sence, to whom he gave the key of the house, and paid him 15s. per week to conduct the said businesses. His furniture remained undisturbed in the house during his imprisonment; and immediately on the termination thereof he returned to his said house, and has continued to reside there ever since. 6. The said Thomas Guest, jun., is a widower, and has no family. 7. It was contended, on behalf of the said Eichard Powell that, under the circum stances stated, the said Thomas Guest, jun., had not resided for six calendar months next previous to the last day of July in the present year within the said parish of Kidderminster Borough, or within seven statute miles thereof, or of any part thereof. 8. The reyising-barrister held that, under the circumstances stated, the said Thomas Guest, jun., had resided for six calendar months previous to the said last day of July in the present year within the said parish of Kidderminster Borough ; and he therefore retained his name on the list of voters. 9. If the court should be of opinion that, under the circumstances stated, the said Thomas Guest, jun., had not resided for six calendar months previous to the last day of July in the present year within the said parish of Kidderminster Borough, then the name o! the said Thomas Guest, jun., was to be expunged from the list of voters, and the register of voters was to be altered accordingly. But, if the court should be of opinion that the said Thomas Guest, jun., had resided during the time and in manner aforesaid within...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Uratemp Ventures Ltd v Collins
...but, on the contrary, with an intention … of leaving it when she could": Dunston v Paterson (1858) 5 CB(NS) 267, per Willes J. In Powell v Guest (1864) 18 CB (NS) 72, 80 Erle CJ expressly approved a statement in a contemporary textbook which stated that the occupant must have "at the least......
-
In Re Moresby North East Parliamentary Election (No 2): Goasa Damena v Patterson Lowa [1977] PNGLR 448
...Carter (1873) LR 9 C.P. 261 at 266, R v The Midland Licensing Court [1959] SASR 229, Tanner v Carter (1885) 16 QBD 231, Powell v Guest (1864) 18 CB (NS) 72; (1864) 144 ER 357 at 370–371 and Bond v Overseers of St. George, Hanover Square (1870) LR 6 C.P. 312 at 314 referred to. (5) The elect......
- Sumnal v Statt
-
In the Matter of a Reference under s18 of the Constitution in connection with an Electoral Petition; Kevin Masive v Iambakey Okuk [1984] PNGLR 390
...provisions of this country. The following passage from Elliot on Registration (2nd ed), 204 was approved in Powell v Guest (1864) 144 ER 367 and in Bond v The Overseers of the Parish of St George Hanover Square (1870) LR 6 CP 312: " . . . in order to constitute residence a party must posses......