oth for
the past and the future, that elections held before the election
of assessors, but with the mayor or council presiding, should be as
effectual as if they had been made before the mayor and assessors. The
act provided, that the councillors who should go out of office were to
be those who had been elected by the smallest number of votes; and if
the votes had been equal, the majority of the council was to determine
who should first go out. This did not provide for the case when there
was no division of votes, in consequence of there being no contest; and
the present bill provided for this case, by enacting that the majority
of the council should select their out-going colleagues. The act did not
provide for the town-councillors being equally divided in the election
of mayor or alderman, and instances had occurred of two parties in
the council dividing against each other till midnight, after which no
election could take place, as the day named in the act had expired: it
was proposed by the present bill that, in such a case, the councillor
who had the greatest number of votes at the election should preside, but
without any casting vote, and that when the councillors could not
agree on a mayor or alderman, the election should be referred to the
constituent body. The act had abolished various corporate officers,
without observing that, by their charter, their presence was necessary
at the sessions. Serious doubts had arisen from this as to the legality
of the proceedings at the sessions, before the new officers entered upon
their duties under the act of parliament. The present bill declared that
any court held since the passing of the act of last session, or before
the 1st of May, 1836, in presence of the recorder, or any two persons
who, at the date of that act, were entitled to act as justices for
the borough, had been well and lawfully held. Many of the municipal
elections having been questioned by proceedings in the King's Bench,
as being illegally and invalidly made, it was proposed by the bill that
these causes should be decided in favour of one of the parties by act
of parliament; that the proceedings should be quashed, and suits
prohibited, by enacting that the defendants should have the right of
getting them discontinued on making payment of costs. This bill passed
the commons; and when it came to be read a second time in the house of
lords, the Duke of Wellington and Lord Lyndhurst pointed out the grave
consid