case tempt Hardwicke FLUDIER versus sir thomas lombe at the same sit where  person be householder of house above the value of a year and pay scot and lot  but have let part of their house to lodger and thereby reduce their rend to be  under per and hold that they be occupier of house and entitle to vote under  the stat geo I c for regulate election in London a mandamus direct to sir t l  alderman of the ware of bassishaw in London to swear in the plaintiff Fludier  to be common council man of that ware be have case tempt Hardwicke er p be  choose into office on saint Thomas day last the defendant have return that he  be not duly elect which return the plaintiff accord to the late Act of  parliament Ann c have traverse and that be the issue now to be try and that  depend on the question whether there be a majority of legal voter for the  plaintiff or a majority for Reynolds who be his opponent the plaintiff bring  evidence to disqualify several of the vote which have be allow in favour of  Reynolds and evidence be bring on the other side to disqualify several of the  plaintiff vote and among the rest of the plaintiff vote objection be make to  five all for the same reason videlicet the fact be that they be householder of  house above the value of pound a year and pay the parish and other rate in  respect of their house but have let part of their house to lodger at such rend  as reduce their rend to be under pound per and and the question be whether  these be legal voter within the stat g I c and this be argue before the Ch  justice at nisi prius by counsel on both side and then he give his opinion as  follow Lord Hardwicke c j I be clear of opinion that these person be well  entitle to vote the intention of the Act of parliament appear to be to provide  that the voter be freeman and of ability of which ability it have appoint two  evidence videlicet that they shall not receive nourishing and that they shall  live in a house of the value of pound a year and it be a reasonable thing that  nourishing people shall be exclude and to admit person who landlord will trust  with a house of pound a year as person of proper ability it have be right say  that this be law to take away people franchise shall be strict construe and  therefore it shall not be construe to exclude any person from vote unless they  appear to be exclude by the plain word and pen of the statute now the statute  declare in general that the right of election belong to freeman of the city be  householder and pay scot and bear lot when require but this general rule have  three sort of restriction put upon it by the Act first that the house of such  householder be respective of the true and yearly value of a year at least dly  that such householder be respective the sole occupier of such case tempt  Hardwicke house dly that they have actual be in possession respective of a  house of such value in the ware wherein the election be make by the space of  calendar month next before such election in this case the only question be be  it whether these voter be householder of house of the yearly value of pound  dly whether they be the sole occupier of such house as to the saint to be sure  the let lodging do not at diminish the true yearly value of the house and the  Act describe the qualification to be the yearly value and not the rend and the  reason of that be a person may hire a house of a very large yearly value and  pay a large fine upon come into the house and therefore a very low rend may be  reserve possible under pound a year so that these voter be not disqualify in  that respect why then do their have let lodging make they cease to be the sole  occupier within the meaning of the statute and I must own I have no notion  that they do thereby cease to be so for no man can be occupier of a house but  either by live in one of his own or in one that he hire and a lodger be never  consider by any one as a occupier of a house it be not the common  understanding of the word neither the house nor even any part of it can be  proper say to be in the tenure or occupation of the lodger and this  construction will answer the intention of the Act in prevent the multiply vote  for though a lodger shall pay rate yet will he not have power to vote not be  to be deem a householder or occupier lodger be inmate and sure the take in  inmate do not make a man cease to be in the occupation of his house there be  in this Act of parliament a clause that where two person and no more not be  partner shall have by the space aforesaid several inhabit in the same house  such two person several pay their scot and bear their respective lot shall  have vote so as the house wherein they inhabit be of the real yearly value of  pound and that each person pay the rend of pound at least for his respective  part of such house S the vote now in question be not disqualify upon this  clause neither nor do the clause seem at all to relate to lodger but like the  distinction in Kelynge as to burglary it relate to house that be divide  between two inhabitant and therefore the word of the Act be who several  inhabit the house for a lodger can be say to be a inhabitant but a case tempt  Hardwicke er p inmate under the tenant there be likewise another clause in  this Act that in case two or more partner carry on a joint trade in any such  house together and shall have be householder of such house by such space as  aforesaid such partner shall pay their scot and bear their respective lot have  vote at such election so as such house wherein such partner carry on their  trade be of the real yearly value of as many respective sum of pound a year  compute together as there be partner S which clause I take notice of in last  place because of itself it be a plain proof against the defendant case tempt  Hardwicke for the cause plain take the case of such partner out of the clause  relate to sole occupier why then suppose in a house of the yearly value of  pound where two or three partner and they shall let the house in lodging be  they not full entitle to vote to be sure they be for the clause as to the sole  occupier do not extend to they and can the legislature be suppose to give they  a right of vote in such a case and yet prohibit a person who be sole occupier  from vote because he have lodger if it must be take that when a man have let  lodging he be no long the sole occupier then if a man shall have a house of  pound he will lose his right of vote if he take one lodger though he pay he  but pound a year for his lodging the Ch justice direct the jury to find for  the plaintiff and accord they find for plaintiff d damage and S cost