THE REGISTRATION COURTS
SOUTH HANTS.
On Wednesday morning Walter Molesworth St. Aubyn, Esq., the barrister appointed to revise the list of the voters for the Southern division of the County of Hants, held court for that purpose at the Guildhall. The overseers for the parish of Portsea present were Messrs. Mason, A. Dugan, and Bailey. Mr. Hordle was the only overseer present for the parish of Portsmouth. The Revising Barrister, on going through the list, said he had found in several places that the same names appeared twice on the list, and it was the same here.—Mr. Hogg, assistant overseer, said two different claims had been made in reference to two different properties and he did not think he was entitled to scratch out either of those names.—The Revising Barrister told him he might do so. He might mention that when a man was down twice, some one ought to object to one of them. He saw the name of Charles Allen down twice for two different places of abode; if that was the same man he could not vote twice and one would thereby be superfluous. If the overseers saw the same name was down twice and knew that it was the same man they might take out one of them, and thus a great deal of trouble might be saved as well as the people’s pockets. —Mr. Hogg said there were none objected to except those cases where the overseers knew the property had been disposed of.—The Revising Barrister enquired if anyone knew anything of Mr. John Emery, of Petersfield.—Mr. Hogg said he believed he was dead.—The Revising Barrister said he was bound to have some little evidence to prove that. If there was no one present who knew anything about him he should leave his name upon the list.—The Revising Barrister said there was some one (Mr. Stigant) present just now to support a claim. The man had sent in his notice, but somehow or other it had been left out. He would be willing to take notice of that.—Mr. Stigant (who had gone away,) had not returned and after waiting a short time, the Revising Barrister said he could not keep the list open. The claims were all allowed with the exception of this one. The Assistant Overseer said several claims had been made in consequence of change of residence, and if they appeared in the original list it was necessary that they should be struck out.—The Revising Barrister thought the same, and proceeded to do so.—Mr. Henry Ford, solicitor, asked what course the barrister intended taking as to the order in which the different claims for the borough would be heard.—The Revising Barrister said his object was to accommodate himself as much as possible to those gentlemen who supported claims, and he would rather that they should arrange it amongst themselves.—Mr. Ford: The first thing you, will do will be to go through the list.—The Revising Barrister replied in the affirmative, whereupon Mr Ford asked him what kind of evidence he would require to support the claims.—The Revising Barrister said he should follow the example of the barristers in London, and take very slight evidence, but he must have some.— There were four new claims for Portsmouth parish and there was no objection to these. Three names were struck off the list, in consequence of the persons having died, viz.,—John Poulett McGhie, Henry James Mitchell, and William Devereux.