I was only quoting that website and had not delved deeper, but now I have.
A legal tome on the Representation of the People Act 1918 describes the successive
occupations as a series of occupations that together make up the qualifying period for
registration. It gives an example that the 30 day qualifying period could be made up of
consecutive occupations at different premises partly as tenant and partly as owner. So it
wasn't just where someone lived or traded, but *how long* they were there as well. The
qualifying periods were the 30 days ending on 15 January and 15 July, for the Spring and
Autumn registers, respectively.
In the light of this I think the descriptions on both electoralregisters.org.uk and the
Sheffield leaflet Adrian quoted are incomplete and slightly misleading, because they do
not mention the qualifying period and the fact that the occupation of the two addresses
had to be consecutive. The qualification to vote involved both suitable premises and
sufficient duration of occupation, thus 'successive' indicates that the
qualification had been obtained by successive occupation of multiple premises over the
qualifying period. (From what I can make out the qualifying period in the 1884
Representation of the People Act seems to have been one year, but I think that otherwise
the same principles must have applied. However, I haven't found the full text of that
Andrew Millard - A.R.Millard(a)durham.ac.uk
Chair, Trustees of Genuki: www.genuki.org.uk
Maintainer, Genuki Middx + London: www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/MDX/
Academic Co-ordinator, Guild of One-Name Studies: www.one-name.org
Bodimeade one-name study: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/Bodimeade/
My genealogy: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/
From: sog-uk-bounces(a)rootsweb.com [mailto:email@example.com]
On Behalf Of Adrian Bruce via
Sent: 17 August 2015 10:02
Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] Register of electors entry
While I hesitate to disagree with Andrew Millard, I have to say that my
understanding of "successive" was subtly different. It certainly
appeared when someone moved, but the indication was, I understood, that
the qualification was effectively carried over from the previous
property, *regardless* of the value of the second property.
Presumably the intention was that once one got a qualification to vote
in a particular year, it could not be lost in that year.
"Sheffield Local Studies Library and Sheffield Archives: "Electoral
Registers - a brief guide" quotes this:
"If a voter moved during the electoral year, his right to vote could be
carried forward to his next address. This would be indicated in the
next register with a note 'house successive' and the previous address
would be given. "
Although I note that the phrase is "house successive" here.
The source that Andrew quotes says "each was of a sufficient rateable
value to qualify its occupier to vote" - I can't actually see the point
of such a note as if your current property entitles you to vote, then
the previous property is surely irrelevant.
On 17/08/2015 08:00, sog-uk-request(a)rootsweb.com wrote:
> According to http://www.electoralregisters.org.uk/codes.htm
> Where someone had moved house during the last 12 months, the word
"successive" often appears followed by their previous address to show
that each was of a sufficient rateable value to qualify its occupier to
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SOG-UK-
request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in
the subject and the body of the message