CORRUPT PRACTICES.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOI2.".1 SIR,—Mr. C. R. Buxton justly foretells in your last issue that few will venture on an election petition in future. Those who desire to buy constituencies will do so without fear. We knew, even before the Yarmouth case, that candidates could go a considerable distance in corruption with impunity. For example, in my own experience, a petition appeared too expensive a luxury (because it might possibly fail), though the following cases were well attested :-- (1) A B was called upon on the polling day by Mrs. C and invited to vote for D. A B replied that D's party had done nothing for him at Christmas. Mrs. C then left him, and within half-an-hour seven pounds of beef was delivered at A B's house. Soon afterwards Mrs. C called again, and with mutual delight the pair drove off to the polling station. The brilliance of organisa- tion which, even on polling day, could work with such unerring precision almost obscures the crime.
(2) When the contest was already far advanced, a lady issued invitations to a large party of poor people, to meet the candidate's wife, openly announcing that refreshments would be provided free.
(3) Bribery, personation, and intimidation were, however, deemed insufficient to ensure victory. Voters absent from the division were paid to come. E F, who gave them the money to do so, believing that he was speaking to a sympathiser, unwarily remarked that he had "provided the needful" for a number of men to travel up and vote for D, and had received a nice letter of thanks from Mr. D himself for doing so.
The case for a more stringent law was strong indeed when such methods could be practised with impunity, but now, thanks to the Yarmouth decision, it is overwhelming.—I am,
Previous page
