BRIBERY AT WARWICK.

THE agents of the Earl of WAavvIcx, at the last election, were bungling as well as shameless. They should have taken a lesson from their brother Conservatives at Bristol, and endeavoured, at least to have thrown a veil over their iniquitous proceedings. But they have done no such thing. They appear to have considered bribery and intimidation of voters as matter for glorification; and by no means to have shunned the light because their deeds were evil. Their illegal conduct became, in consequence, capable of easy proof; and the exposure which it has receifed before a Com- mittee of the House of Commons, is as complete as any honest elector in the land could desire, or corruptionist could dread.

That Peers of the realm have been in the constant practice of illegally interfering, by threats and bribery, in the election of members of Parliament, no human being, of ordinary information, can disbelieve. But, with very rare exceptions, they have escaped public exposure. The Committee, however, which reported upon the proceedings at the late Warwick elections, have not shirked that important part of their duty, which called upon them to set a mark upon the principal offender—the prime agent in the disgraceful breach of the laws, which, as Lord-Lieutenant of the County and the head of its Magistracy, he was especially called upon to enforce. " Quod facit per alterum, facit per se," is the righteous maxim which the Committee have adopted in reference to the conduct of this powerful delinquent, as the following pas- sage from their Report will prove.

" It appears that the Right Honourable Henry Richard Greville, Earl of Warwick, a peer of the realm, Lord-Lieutenant of the county of Warwick, and Recorder of the borough, in violation of the resolutions and Standing Orders of the House, did unconstitutionally apply, by his agent and steward, Alexander Browne, 3,0001., and upwards, towards the election expenditure, and promo- tion of the political interest of the candidate, Sir Charles John Greville, in the transfer of such suns of money to James Tibbitts, Town-Clerk of the said bo- rough, who appropriated the same to various corrupt and illegal practices at .the last. election; the office' of 'Town-Clerk being in the appointment of the Recorder."

The mere furnishing of money appears to 'have been only one of the Earl's malpractices. He (through his agent, Mr. ALEX- ANDER BROWNE) "caused numerous persons—many of them non- residents in the borough, and his dependents—to be fictitiously rated to the poor of the two parishes of' the said borough, chiefly in respect of his own property, for the sole purpose-of creating fraudulent votes." False receipts Were given to these tenants of straw, in order, as one of the witnesses said, "to make them as good as they could." The system of treating appears to have been carried on in high style. No fewer than thirty-nine public-houses were opened in 'Warwick, at which the Orange, or Greville party, could get as much brandy, rum, and wine as they liked. Publi- cans' accounts to the amount of 4,270/. were actually proved before the Committee; and bills for 413/. were produced by four mercers for ribands and handkerchiefs alone. Nine tenths' of these hills remain unpaid,—but the three thousand pounds are all gone : it follows, that the actual sum spent in bribing, is three or four times as large as the banking account of the-Earl of WaitwicK would give us reason to suppose was made away with, for tiie purposes of

the election. In fact, the noble Recorder and Lord-Lieutenant may think himself well off if he is only called upon to pay ten thousand pounds for the satisfaction of being thoroughly beaten, to say no- thing of being stigmatized and exposed throughout the land for his shameless abuse of the influence of wealth and station.

There are some amusing details in the Report of the Committee, pf the mode in which the return of Sir CHARLES GREVILLE and the short-lived triumph of the Orange party was secured. One of the witnesses is asked the following question,—" What are you?" Answer—"A Pink and Blue." How came you to vote for the Orange ?"—" Because I was bribed !" One of the most active agents appears to have 'been a person named SAMUEL DINGLE'S?". His mode of proceeding is thus de- scribed by a witness examined before the Committee.

"What did Mr. Dingley say to you? "—" He told me to sit down and have a drop of something to drink : he wanted to talk to me. "You had no objection to that? "—" No; he began about the electioneering, and he said I was very foolish if I did not vote for Sir Charles Greville ; and .1 said I did not know that it would do me any good voting for Jibe; he said the others had got no money, that they were a poor shabby set; and I told him I was employed it the Committee-room ; and he said, 'Well, what will they give you, they have got no money; have you taken any thing of them?' I said Yes, I had 6s. Oct. on the Saturday.'" "What was it for? "—" I suppose for being a messenger ; I was two or three days a messenger before the Monday. I had it of Mr. East."

,

"Was that all you got? "--." yes." ?Perhaps you thought they were a poor shabby set what did Mr. Dingley say to that ? "—" lie told me to come and go along with him ; I walked with him over to Leaniington, and be was talking about it all the while; and he said he would give me 6s. 6d. to take back to them; but I did not go back again. He persuaded me not to go back to the Committee again, that he would give me plenty of money." "Did you have eating and drinking at the Punch Bowl ? I had plenty to drink."

"Did you pay for it ? "—" He did."

This man was kept constantly in pay till, at length, he voted for Sir CHARLES GREVILLE.

Another fellow contrived to get 4/. from one of the agents in the Orange interest, who paid it to him in a dark room, and then went and voted for TOMES and KING. The name of the above agent was WILLIAM HENRY BETTS, a Quaker, who was proved to be an active rioter, leading the Orange mob at night, disguised in a smock frock, a hat like other Christians, and a blackened face.

Twenty pounds was the sum frequently paid for votes—ten pounds before and ten pounds after polling. Many of the bribed electors were also maintained from the day of the election, in De- cember, till the Committee met in May, in order to " keep their tongues quiet : " when summoned, however, to give evidence, they spoke the truth with straightforwardness and palpable satisfaction.

A large number of bullies were brought into the town during the election, many of whom were proved to have received written orders from members of the Orange Committee, and to' have been paid by the Town-Clerk, Mr. TIBBITTS, with Lord WanwicK's money. Upwards of 155/. was paid for the damage done by these fellows to the property of the independent party ; and they pro- duced such disorder in the town, that a troop of dragoons was brought from Kenilworth, in order to keep the peace.

Few, we suppose, after the consideration of these facts will doubt that the Committee which sat upon the first petition against Sir CIL AIME S GREY I L LE'S election, came to a right conclusion when they reported that his election was void, and that " his return was in great measure to be attributed to bribery." Neither will it appear possible to dispute the propriety of their second report, "upon the best mode of preventing bribery, treating, and other corrupt practices, ill all future elections for members to serve in Parlia- ment for the borough of Warwick, which concludes with the fol- lowing resolutions.

" 1st. That the evidence of bribery having existed at the last election fo- the borough of Warwick, proved to the former Committee, remaks uncontrar dieted.

"2n1. That gross treating existed in the borough of Warwick at the last election.

"3d. That intimidation also existed to a great extent in the borough of War- wick at the last election.

"4th. That several members of the corporation of the borough of Warwick were cognizant of the introduction of strangers before the election, and are im-

plica i ted n the corrupt practices existing at tile election. " 5th. That it hiss been proved to the satisfaction of this Committee, that many of the other parties implicated were agents of Lord Warwick. ,

"0th, That fictitious qualifications were obtained by parties in both interests by bolourably rating and registering voters."

It is recommended by the Committee that " to prevent the re- currence of the above illegal practices," an enlargement of the boundary of the borough, by the addition of Leamington Priors, should be made. This will give an increased constituency of eight hundred ten-pound voters.

An attempt was made by the disgraced and discomfited tools of Lord Wauwicit—whose steward and factotum, Mr. BROWNE, has decamped, nobody knows whither—to prove that bribery had

also been practised by the opposite party—that of TOMES and KING. This attempt, however, proved to be a complete failure, and was supported by witnesses of such infamous character, that the Com- mittee "were prevented," to use their own language, "from at- taching any credit to their testimony." One of these witnesses was a Mr. THOMAS WOOD. The subjoined extract from his ex- amination. will place his character in a true light.

" What do you say your Christian and surnames are ?"—" Thomas Wood." "Have you any other name ?"—" No." " Have you ever had any other name ?"—" Not that I know of."

• " State to the Committee whether Wood is your proper name."—" Yes."

"What name were you bapITzed in?"—"I will tell you ; my right name is

Mitchell."

"How came you to alter your name?"—" Through having a bad wife. I was obliged to leave her." " How many wives have you had?"—" Three." ie Have you not had four?"—" No' I have not." "You have not ?"—" Yes, I have bad four."

" How many are living now ?"—" One." "Have von not two?"—".Yes ; with that one." "You he got a duplicate?"—" Yes." "Where is your first wife ?"—" In Wakfield, in Sussex."

"Where is your fourth?"—" In Warwickshire." "Have you had two sisters among the four wives ?"—" Yes, yes, yes."

The warm thanks of every honest, and independent, and needy elector in the land, are due to the persevering and upright men who have dragged this overbearing Peer, and his unprincipled satellites—these Aldermen, Town-Clerks, and Magistrates—before the bar of the Reformed Parliament. The case against them has been admirably got up. The grave matter of accusation has been thoroughly substantiated by proof. The bribing money has been traced from the purse of the principal into the pockets of the perjured wretches whom it was employed to suborn. . Evidence was adduced in support of every allegation of illegal proceedings. The common fault of trusting to the notoriety of the corruption practised was not committed by the managers of these petitions from Warwick. We had, indeed, full confidence that, in this in- stance, the cause of independence and purity of election would be maintained with industry, care, and discretion, as well as zeal and spirit, when we found that its management was principally in- trusted to Mr. PARKES ef Birmingham. This gentleman took the

'lead before the Committee on the second petition, and well sup- plied the want of counsel.

The truly "worthy and independent electors of Warwick" then, have performed their duty manfully. The Committee of the House of Commons, with the gallant Sir RONALD FERGUSON at its head, have been as4iduous in the same good cause. It remains with our Representatives in Parliament and the Ministry, to fol- low up the blow thus dealt at corruption in high places. The ignommous expulsion of the Earl of WAaw lex from the high post of Lord-Lieutenant of the county ought not to be delayed a week. If the law will furnish the means of inflicting condign punishment upon the Aldermen and other delinquents who are mentioned by name in the report of the Committee, no mercy shouldibe shown them. - At all events they should be dismissed from the commission of the peace—these patrons of drunken brawlers, and hired fighting men—and the votes of the wretched creatures who have been seduced, by Conservative cash and threats, into a betrayal of their trusts as electors and a violation of their oaths, should at least be neutralized by the addition of an enlarged constituency, as pointed out by the Committee.