voter having failed to adopt this course, he was disqualified, for the omission was not remedied by any provision of the Registration Act, as s. 75 of the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 18, only applies to a misnomer or inaccurate or insufficient description.

5. It appeared to the revising barrister, that, as the Act of George 2 does not say the incoming tenant shall pay, but only that he shall be liable to pay, and as the proportion which he is so liable to pay must before he can pay it be first ascertained, either by agreement between the parties, or, in case of dispute, by the decision of two justices of the peace; and as, by the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 18, s. 75, a person in other respects qualified shall be considered as having paid all rates when he shall have bonâ fide paid all sums of money which he shall have been called upon to pay as rates, therefore an unascertained proportion, which the voter had never been called upon to pay, was not such a rate as had become payable from him in respect of the qualifying premises, within the meaning of the 27th section of the 2 W. 4, c. 45: and he overruled the objection, and retained the name. 6. If the Court should be of opinion that he was wrong, the name of James Burrington was to be expunged from the list.

7. The validity of the objections in three other cases depended upon the same decision, and they were accordingly consolidated with the principal case.

Dowdeswell, for the appellant.-The question is, whether Mr. Burrington was disqualified from being on the list of voters for the borough of Cheltenham, by reason of the proviso in the 27th section. of the 2 W. 4, c. 45, *that no person shall be registered unless [*154 he shall have been rated in respect of the premises occupied by him to all rates for the relief of the poor made during the time of such his occupation, nor unless he shall have paid on or before the 20th of July all the poor-rates and assessed taxes which shall have become payable from him in respect of such premises previously to the 6th of April then next preceding. The 11 & 12 Vict. c. 90, which enacts that "no person shall be required, in order to entitle him to have his name inserted in any list of voters for any city, town, or borough in England, to have paid any poor-rates or assessed taxes, except such as shall have become payable from him previously to the 5th of January in the same year, and that no person shall be entitled to be on any such list of voters, unless the poor-rates and assessed taxes payable from him previously to the 5th of January shall be paid on or before the 20th of July next following," and the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 18, s. 75, as to inaccurate statements in the rate, do not apply to a case like this. It is clear that the proportion of the rate made in April, 1863, accruing between the 1st of August, 1863, when Burrington's occupation commenced, and the month of September, when another rate was made, was payable from him, within the meaning of the 27th section of the Reform Act. The 12th section of the 17 G. 2, c. 38, enacts, that, "where any person or persons shall come into or occupy any house, land, tenement, or hereditament, or other premises, out of or from which any other person assessed shall be removed, or which at the time of making such rate was empty or unoccupied, that then every person so removing from, and every person so coming into or occupying the same, shall be liable to pay

to such rate in proportion to the time that such person occupied the *155] same respectively, in the same *manner, and under the like penalty of distress, as if such person so removing had not removed, or such person so coming in or occupying had been origi nally rated and assessed in such rate; which said proportion, in case of dispute, shall be ascertained by any two or more of His Majesty's justices of the peace." This provision in the Reform Act has always been construed most strictly. [KEATING, J.-Does it appear from the case that the outgoing tenant has not paid this very rate?] It is not so stated in terms: but it never was suggested, nor is it very likely, that it has been paid. Assessed taxes are (by the 43 G. 3, c. 161, s. 23) payable quarterly, though, by the 48 G. 3, c. 141, the collectors are directed to collect them, and they are accordingly usually collected half-yearly. In Ford, app., Smedley, resp., 12 C. B. 622 (E. C. L. R. vol. 74), 2 Lutw. Reg. Cas. 203, a house-tax was payable on the 20th of December, 1851, but not demanded until the 11th of April, 1852, and the party assessed did not pay it until after the 20th of July and it was held that he had not, within the meaning of the 11 & 12 Vict. c. 90, "paid on or before the 20th of July, all assessed taxes which became payable from him in respect of the premises previously to the 5th of January," and consequently that he was not entitled to be registered. That was an extremely hard case; for, no demand was or could be made on the party assessed until after the 10th of April. Bishop, app., Smedley, resp., 2 C. B. 90 (E. C. L. R. vol. 52), 1 Lutw. Reg. Cas. 384, shows that it is the duty of the party from whom a rate is due to pay or tender it.(a) This person never offered to pay any portion of the rate in question. He has not paid on or before the 20th of July all the poor-rates which had become *payable from him in respect of the premises previously to *156] the 6th of April. The Registration Act has nothing to do

with the matter. The 75th section,-after reciting the 2 W. 4, c. 45, s. 27, as to rating and payment of rates, and that "doubts have arisen how far any misnomer or inaccurate or insufficient description in a rate of the person occupying any such premises as in the said recited Act are mentioned, or any inaccurate description of the premises so occupied, has the effect of preventing any such person from being registered and entitled to vote in respect of such premises in any year,"-enacts, that, "where any person shall have occupied such premises as in the said recited Act are mentioned for twelve calendar months next previous to the last day of July in any year, and such person, being the person liable to be rated for such premises, shall have been bonâ fide called upon to pay in respect of such premises all rates made for the relief of the poor in such parish or township during the time of such his occupation so required as aforesaid, and such person shall have bonâ fide paid, on or before the 20th day of July in such year all sums of money which he shall have been called upon to pay as rates in respect of such premises for one year previously to the 6th day of April then next preceding, such person shall be considered as having been rated and paid all rates in respect of such premises, within the meaning of the said recited Act, and be (a) That was the case of a claim to be rated: the party was doing an act to qualify himself to vote, and did not do it properly.

entitled to be registered in respect of the same in any year, any misnomer or inaccurate or insufficient description in any rate of the person so occupying or of the premises occupied, notwithstanding." In Moss, app., The Overseers of St. Michael, Lichfield, resp., 8 Scott N. R. 832, 7 M. & G. 72 (E. C. L. R. vol. 49), 1 Lutw. Reg. Cas. 184, it was held that that provision has reference only to inaccuracies of description. There, a father and son jointly occupied premises as *partners: the name of the father alone was inserted in the [*157 first two rates made within the year, and both were inserted in the third: all the rates were paid by the hand of the son: and it was held that this was not a rating of the son, within the 2 W. 4, c. 45, s. 27, nor an inaccurate or insufficient description of the person rated, within the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 18, s. 75. "The appellant," says Maule, J., "clearly was not rated within the 2 W. 4, c. 45, s. 27; and the 75th section of the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 18 only applies where there is an inaccurate or insufficient description of the party intended to be rated and called upon to pay the rate. If he were the party intended to be charged, and was called upon to pay and did pay the rate, the blunder would not vitiate the rating. But here the father was rated, and not the son." Here there was no inaccuracy or mistake.

Campbell Foster, for the respondent.-This person was entitled to be registered. The liability of the incoming tenant under the 17 G. 2, c. 38, s. 12, is, to pay a proportionate part of the rate for the time of his occupation, provided the outgoing tenant has not already paid it. The case does not show that the last occupant did not pay. [ERLE, C. J.-If our decision was to turn upon that, we should send the case back for amendment.] If there be any portion of the rate due, and the incoming tenant be liable for it, the non-insertion of his name in the rate is an inaccurate or insufficient description of the person liable, within the 75th section of the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 18.(a) The case finds that no demand was made upon Burrington. How was he to know whether anything or what was to be paid by him? The cases as to assessed taxes are altogether inapplicable: the poor-rate is payable as soon as it is allowed and published. Blakey v. Dixon, 2 Bos. & P. 321, was referred to. The Court called on [*158

Dowdeswell.-There is no uncertainty as to the amount which the incoming tenant is to pay: he is to pay in proportion to the time he has occupied. Id certum est quod certum reddi potest. [WILLES, J. -It may be that there is a dispute as to when his occupation began. It is not a sum payable from the party until the amount is ascertained.] If there be any doubt, that is to be settled before the justices. The Act of Parliament imposes upon the occupier the duty of paying the rates; he is not to wait for a demand. The parish officers have no means of knowing when the occupation commences: the party himself has. [ERLE, C. J.-How can the incoming tenant know what has been done by the outgoing tenant? The utmost that can be said is, that the former has a capacity to be made liable.]

Campbell Foster.-This man has paid all the rates which had become payable from him, within the 2 W. 4, c. 45, s. 27. He has paid the September rate; and, if the collector had at that time made a demand on him for his proportion of the April rate, defining the sum, and he (a) Quære. See Rogers, app., Lewis, resp., 7 C. B. N. S. 29 (E. C. L. R. vol. 97).

C. B. N. S., VOL. XVIII.—8

had refused to pay it, there would have been something in the argument. No sum could be payable from him, unless it was defined and ascertained. He was not absolutely liable, but only upon the contingency of his being resorted to on the default of the outgoing tenant. The 28th section of the Reform Act gives the right of voting in the case of different premises occupied in immediate succession, the party "having paid on or before the 20th of July all the poor-rates and assessed taxes which shall previously to the 6th of April then next preceding have become payable from him in respect of all *159] such premises so occupied by him in succession." In Rogers, app., Lewis, resp., 7 C. B. N. S. 29 (E. C. L. R. vol. 97), K. & G. 279, it was held that, in the case of an occupation of premises in succession under that section, it was not necessary that the party's name should appear on the rate: it is enough that he has paid the rate. Bishop, app., Smedley, resp., 2 C. B. 90 (E. C. L. R. vol. 52), 1 Lutw. Reg. Cas. 384, turned upon the 30th section of the 2 W. 4, c. 45, which was designed to meet the case of a man whose name had been altogether omitted from the rate. As the party had neither paid nor tendered the amount of the rate, it was held that he was not entitled to be registered. The claimant here has paid all that he has been called upon to pay, and all in respect of which a direct liability is imposed upon him by the Legislature; and, if necessary, he is entitled to rely upon the curative power of the 75th section of the 6 & 7 Vict.

c. 18.

Dowdeswell, in reply.-Mr. Burrington claims to be retained on the list of voters in respect of a supposed right conferred on him by reason of the performance of two conditions contained in the 27th section of the Reform Act,-first, that he shall have been rated to all rates for the relief of the poor made during the time of his occupation of the qualifying premises,-secondly, that he shall have paid on or before the 20th of July all the poor-rates, &c., which shall have become payable from him in respect of such premises previously to the 6th of April. The second of these conditions is independent of the first, and is intended to be more extensive. Has it been complied with? It is submitted that it has not. A portion of the April, 1863, rate was clearly payable by Burrington. Though not defined or ascer tained, he was liable for it. It was capable of being readily ascer

tained. He might and *ought to have tendered what he con*160] ceived to be the proper sum; and, if the overseers had refused to receive it, an appeal to two justices would have at once settled the matter. If the name of a party be omitted from the rate, it is his duty to demand to be rated: if he fails to do so, he loses his franchise. So, as to payment: being liable to pay, and not paying or tendering, he has failed to perform his duty to the public, and his right to vote is gone. [ERLE, C. J.-The liability here is somewhat like the liability of the drawer or endorser of a bill of exchange,-a contingent liability to pay, provided he has due notice of the default of the party primarily liable. Can it be said that the bill has become payable by him unless he has had notice?] The law merchant can hardly be relied on to assist the construction of the Reform Act. [WILLES, J. -In order to deprive a party of the benefit of a condition, he must have notice. How can a man know whether or not he is liable to

pay until he has notice of the demand upon him?] This is not a contingent liability at all. The rate being unpaid, it is a debt; and it became payable by Burrington immediately upon his entering upon the occupation of the premises.

ERLE, C. J.-The question raised by this appeal is, whether the claimant is disqualified from being placed upon the register by reason of the non-payment of a poor-rate payable from him in respect of the qualifying premises. The revising barrister held that the party was not disqualified. The facts are, that the voter went into occupation of the qualifying premises prior to the 1st of August, 1863, and that the practice in this parish was to make rates for the relief of the poor half-yearly, viz., in April and September. The voter had paid every rate made during the period of his occupation. When he entered upon the premises *in July, there was a portion of the rate [*161 made in April left unpaid; and it is contended on the part of the appellant that that rate had become payable from him by virtue of the 17 G. 2, c. 38, s. 12, which makes provision for the case of the removal of an occupier leaving rates unpaid. That section enacts, that, "where any person or persons shall come into or occupy any house, land, tenement, or hereditament, or other premises, out of or from which any other person assessed shall be removed, or which at the time of making such rate was empty or unoccupied, that then every person so removing from, and every person so coming into or occupying the same, shall be liable to pay to such rate in proportion to the time that such person occupied the same respectively, in the same manner, and under the like penalty of distress, as if such person so removing had not removed, or such person so coming in or Occupying had been originally rated and assessed in such rate,which said proportion, in case of dispute, shall be ascertained by any two or more of His Majesty's justices of the peace." The case does not so find, but we must assume that there was some arrear of the April rate left unpaid by the outgoing tenant; but the claimant has gone on in the full confidence and belief that everything due from him had been paid. Mr. Dowdeswell has insisted, on the part of the appellant, that there was a liability imposed upon the incoming tenant by the 17 G. 2, c. 38, s. 12, and that from the moment he entered into the occupation of the premises a proportion of that rate was payable from him by virtue of that statute: but I take the words of that enactment to mean that the party is thereby subjected to be made liable, acquires a capacity for being made liable,―to pay a proportion of the rate; not that he incurs a primary liability which he has the means of knowing of. It is a liability which the parish officers *may [*162 if they choose enforce. It is matter of contingency whether they will put the law in force, and also matter of contingency what amount they will demand, for the outgoing tenant may have already paid the rate. Until the party has been called upon to make good the default of the outgoing tenant, and has refused or neglected so to do, I think he is not disqualified by reason of the proviso in the 27th section of the Reform Act. The words of that section are, that no person shall be registered "unless he shall have paid on or before the 20th of July all the poor-rates and assessed taxes which shall have become payable from him in respect of such premises previously to