Rintoul v Falconer
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 06 December 1898 |
| Date | 06 December 1898 |
| Docket Number | No. 36. |
| Court | Court of Session |
Lord Kinnear, Lord Trayner, Lord Kincairney.
Election Law—Inhabitant Occupier—Postman employed at a distance from constituency—Electoral Disabilities Removal Act, 1891 (54 Vict. cap. 11), sec. 2.—
A postman, employed as such in Edinburgh, was tenant of a house at Milnathort in Kinross-shire, where his family resided. He spent his annual summer holiday with his family at Milnathort, and at periods varying from one month to two months he came to Milnathort on Saturday evening and remained there till the following Sunday evening. At other times he lived in lodgings in Edinburgh. He was never absent from Milnathort consecutively for more than two months. Held that he was not an inhabitant occupier of the house at Milnathort, in respect that he had not the necessary residential qualification, and was not entitled to be retained in the register of voters for the county of Kinross.
The following facts were stated by the Sheriff (Mackay), in a case for appeal at the instance of David Rintoul:—‘David Rintoul, Milnathort, described as post-runner, tenant of house, Inchmary, has been entered in the Parliamentary register of the county of Kinross as an inhabitant occupier in respect of the said house, which is situated in the parish of Orwell, in the said county. An objection has been duly taken to the said entry by W. K. Falconer, solicitor, Kinross.
‘It was admitted that David Rintoul is tenant of the house in question. It was also admitted that Rintoul is a post-runner in the service of the Post-Office Department in Edinburgh, whose duty it is to deliver letters daily, except Sundays, at Liberton, near Edinburgh.
‘It was further admitted that under the rules of the said Post-Office Department his holidays are a fortnight, usually in the month of July, and the Sundays of the year.
‘It was proved by the evidence of Dr William Marshall, Milnathort, and Mrs Rintoul, wife of the said David Rintoul, that the facts of the case as regards residence are as follows:—
‘Mrs Rintoul, and two of the children of the marriage who are of an age to be, and are, self-supporting, reside continuously during the year in the said house in Milnathort.
‘David Rintoul resides throughout the year, with the exceptions stated in the next paragraph, in lodgings in Brighton Street, Edinburgh.
‘He spends his fortnightly yearly holiday with his family in the house in Milnathort, and he, from time to time, comes to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Miller v Bruce
...v. Falconer, Dec. 6, 1898, 1 F. 207; Bond v. Overseers of St George Hanover Square, 1870, L. R., 6 C. P. 312. 2 L. R., 6 C. P. 312. 3 1 F. 207. 4 20 R. ...
-
The Statutory Separation of Powers.
...WASH. POST (Dec. 8, 2017), https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/an-american-energy-plan-straight-from-coal-country/2017/12/08/1f207a26-d6ab-11e7-a986-doa9770d9a3e_story.html (296.) See Edward Cantu, The Separation-of-Powers and the Least Dangerous Branch, 13 GEO. J.L. & PUB. ......