Arthur's inclusion in the Bridport Borough Voters' List was supported by the Liberals but objected to by the Conservatives. Inclusion at the time was on the basis of the value (?in excess of £10pa) of property owned or leased. At the hearing Arthur stated that he paid £13 per annum for his house and bakehouse and that his son [Daniel] occupied the bakehouse and paid him just uner £3 per annum. Asked whether the bakehouse was not worth £4 petr annum he said the Mr Cooper (?his landlord) considered the house worth £10 10s per annum. It was submitted that the bakhouse was worth £54 per annum and a builder named Mr legg was clled and gave evidence that he let a better and bigger house 20 yards away for £1 18s per quarter [£7 12s per annum] and also that he did not know a bakehouse let for less than 2s per week [£5 4s per annum]. Neither he nor another witness, Mr Balston a baker, had been inside the property but Mr Balston thought that £5 per annum would be very cheap. The vote was retained and after the court the revising barrister visited the premises and was satisfied that his decision had been correct