View report page

135
ments will be of the greatest importance. Both high-class flat tenements, as
well as hovels and artisans' tenements, are alike hit by the decision. But the
hovel dweller and artisan usually have no written agreements, and the presumption
will be that if the landlord or his agent is resident on the premises
the general control remains with the landlord. There will be no distinction,
moreover, between cottages, where, say, a landlady dwells on the ground-floor
and lets, say, two rooms on an upper floor to tenants, and tenements or flats.
But it is in the Metropolitan area that the " latchkey " voter will be most
hard hit if the Revising Barristers act upon the decision, for it is there that
the tenement blocks exist in greatest numbers. House farming prevails in
many of the densely crowded poor parts of London —a system whereby several
families live in the same house, or, worse still, where a family rents only one
room—and though in these cases the tenant generally has in fact full control
over his own part of the house, it may well be and often is the fact that the
landlord performs certain duties, and resides somewhere 011 the premises.
The saving clause in Section 7 of the Representation of The People Act,
1867, which applies the principle of constructive rating to the case of tenements
wholly let out in apartments or lodgings not separately rated, does not
apply to business tenements, flats, or offices. If, therefore, the tenant be not
rated, he may be disfranchised, unless he can come in under the service
franchise.
Apparently these considerations apply only to Boroughs, and not to Counties
or County Boroughs, as the enactments relating to the rating of the occupier
in lieu of the owner, specially mention "boroughs" only. In short, there
must be a rate paid and made in respect of the separate dwelling or other
tenement to confer the franchise on the inhabitant occupier.
Undoubtedly large numbers of voters will be disfranchised. Lord Justice
Fletcher Moulton pointed out that the decision would " probably deprive of
the right to the franchise a large number of people who, if they had known
what were the necessary steps to be taken . . . would probably have
obtained it." Moreover, about two years will elapse before they will be able
to be reinstated, either as lodgers or inhabitant occupiers (according to which
•qualification they possess), inasmuch as a claim must first be put in, to say
nothing of the period of 12 months before July next, during which the claimant
must have occupied the premises. Such claimants cannot be " rated
inhabitant occupiers" for 12 months by July, 1912. They can apparently
only fulfil the conditions by July, 1913.
It is for the Legislature to supply the casus omissus pointed out by Lord
Justice Fletcher Moulton, if casus omissus it be—though in a great many cases
the explanation clearly enough is to be found in the fact that the claimant is
in reality a lodger, who cannot prove an adequate value.—[The Tunes, September
8th, 1911).