BY the Mayors Poll (who as chief Magistrate is Judge of the Electi­on) after the strictest Scrutiny imaginable, and a good deal of par­tiality show'd by the Mayor in favour of Mr Bankes and Mr Fownes, Mr Culliford had 85 Votes, Mr Bankes 70 Votes; Mr Clauell (who Petitions against Mr Bankes) 63 Votes, and Mr Fownes (who Petitions against Mr Culliford) but 52 Votes, whereupon the Mayor proclaimed Mr Culliford and Mr Bankes duly Elected.

Mr Fownes in his Petition allows the Majority to be on Mr Culliford's side upon the Poll; But says that Mr Culliford, by Treating, and several in­direct Practices, at and before the Election, did procure several Votes to his prejudice; otherwise he had been Chosen and Return'd; alledging he can prove the same.

Mr Culliford denies the fact absolutely, and believes that no person, who has either Credit or Reputation in his Country, or can be trusted there for six-pence, will pretend to prove any such thing.

Mr Clauell in his Petition against Mr Bankes Insists to prove, that the Mayor did allow 5 persons to Vote for a Charity, contrary to all former useage, and against Law; and also 13 persons more, that pretended to have purchased several small Tenements of one Mr Dackombe, just before the Election; which, as is conceived, is expressly against the late Act of Parliament, for preventing the splitting and dividing of interest in Houses or Lands, in order to multiply Votes: for that the same was not known in the Burrough above a week before the Election, and the Leases were dated all of one day, and some of the persons that bought the said Tenements ne­ver had seen them, or took possession of the same, until the day of Electi­on. Which said 5 Trustees, and 13 new made Votes, voted all for Mr Bankes and Mr Fownes. Which, if set aside, then the Poll will stand, for Mr Culliford 85, for Mr Clauell 63, for Mr Bankes 52, and for Mr Fownes but 34 Votes.