neighbouring constituencies who, according to Law XXIV., had a prior right to have their votes appropriated to him; and supposing that the whole, or part, of the 483 Aberdeen votes given for Lord Elcho had been appropriated to him, the residue of his quota being made up by his supporters in other places, he would be the third member entitled to be returned for Aberdeen.
Many other results may be supposed, to show the working of the system. Thus Lord Elcho, Mr. Baillie, Mr. Ellice, and the candidates mentioned as having a smaller number of Aberdeen votes, may all be elected by the constituencies for which they are candidates, and their names being thereupon cancelled on the Aberdeen voting papers, those votes will be given to the next candidate named on each paper. If such next candidate be Mr. Gordon (although it is of course improbable that all of them would be given to one person) the number of Aberdeen votes for Mr. Gordon would be raised from 225 to 1,039, and might, with his votes elsewhere, entitle him to be returned for Aberdeen. It would not follow in either of the cases last supposed, that, because the number of Aberdeen votes which are actually appropriated to Lord Elcho or Mr. Gordon may be few, the number of Aberdeen voters who have placed their names on their voting papers may not be very much more numerous. Many of the voters of that city who have voted for other candidates, successful or unsuccessful, whether they were candidates for Aberdeen or for other constituencies, may have placed the names of Lord Elcho or Mr. Gordon also on their voting papers, and these votes in the ultimate computation, as directed by the foregoing clause, and by a subsequent clause (XXVI.) will be reckoned as votes polled for the two unsuccessful candidates. Many of the votes given for Mr. Leith, Mr. Baillie, and others, might have contained also the name of Colonel Sykes, and many of the votes polled for Colonel Sykes might have contained also the names of Lord Elcho, Mr. Leith, and Mr. Gordon, and
