The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1876-08-29 00:00:00

TzoviLq

The Bristol and Exeter Railway Company held its last
meeting at Bristol Wednesday. Upon winding up the
affairs, there was a disposal balance of £1,952 ltia, and
upon the motion of Mr. Macliver it was unanimously
resolved to apply £BOO of this sum in the interests of the
engine-drivers and firemen, to enable them to participate
in the Great Western Engtheinen and Drivers Sick and
Superannuation Benefit Fund. It was further decided
that the remainder of the balance in hand should be
applied to the benefit of such deserving officers and work-
men of the company who bad been unable to obtain em-
ployment since their dismissal by the company on its
amalgamation with the Great Western Company, and of
those who were of the age of sixty or upwards, or who,
being under that age, were incapacitated by infirmity or
disease.

Ilse number ot paupers. The proportion of out-doer and
In-door paupers in 1850, was as 8to1; In 1870, 10.2 to 1;
in 1874, 10.5 to 1. The cost per head in 1860 was Rs. lid.;
la 1870, 9s. 7d. : in 1874. 10a. 74. In 1850 the number of
paupers was fq to the 1,000; in 1870, 70.9; in 1874, 75.3,
the average for the Kingdom being 30.6 ; the coat per
head. fla. Bd. In reply to Mr. Littlehsles, the Impector
said these facts brought him to the conclusion that this
Board had not applied the workhouse test as rigidly as
they might —Mr. uegg doubted whether the Inspector
couM point to • case where the diminution in pauperism
had been unattended by an increase of suffering amongst
the poor ; but the Inspector instanced Leeds and Brad-
ford as places where the "screw " had been put on, and
enquiry had led to the discovery that pauperism had been
much reduced without its entailing any additional suffer-
ing, the poor people having thus been taught a lesson in
self•reliances. and the expediency of making provision for
bad times.—Mr. Nutt, one of the medical officers, thought
that when the minister and resident magistrate of a place
recommended nourishment, he could not 1,6 wrong in
giving an order for mutton; but the Inspector held that
the relieving officer if he thought the paupers friends could
supply the nourishment, was justified in refusing to grant
the order, and Mr. Ruegg deprecated this view, and was
of opinion that a medical order should be obeyed by the
relieving officer, and if the latter saw reason he should
bring the matter before the Board subsequently, and not
usurp the functions both of the Board and the medical
min.—Dr. Davies objected to the offices of medical and
relieving officer being held by one individual and said if
HMI cases in which he had ordered meat had not been
interfered with, the paupers would not have been dead.—
'lb. Inspector said this Board could not alter the standing
n• dors of the Board above, by which a recommendation
y nourishment was to be submitted to the relieving
ral,er, whose duty it was to investigate the rase, and, if
he thought proper, In refuse relief until the matter were
brought before the Board at the next meeting ; but he
must be very careful in refusing.—The Board admitted
that Mr. Nutt's principle of ordering relief on the recom-
mendation of parson or squire was a mistaken one; hut
Mr. Ruegg thought that where a medical man recom-
mended nourishment in the belief that it would be more
beneficial than pills, the order should hold good.—The
medical men having directed the Inspector's attention to
the orders given to overseers, that gentleman said the
overseer was bound to bring the cost of his outer, which
wags parish and not a union charge, into the amounts of
his own parish, and if he did not satisfy the auditor ante
its being a proper charge, he could our-charge the
overseer.
__

43-0AR:O OF Ilesi.rii.—A meeting of this body was held
on Monday last, at which the chairman (Mr. B. Chandler)
imparted the pleasing intelligence that they had at the
bank • balance of 11S1 145.; and he though tthey might
pay Mr. Digby's next instalment, and even then stand
well. At places in the town where the water supplies for
house and closet were connected the occupiers in the
majority of cases have been induced to adopt the use of
cisterns: but two of those who have not done so—viz.,
Messrs. H. Willis and D. Parsons, have refused to follow
the Board's advice unless compelled, and in these instances
the week was ordered to be done—Respecting a foul
well on the premises of Mr. Faun, Cheap-street, which
he had been requested to close, it had been represented
by the occupier (who now applied for the Board water)
that the contents of the well were never used for culinary
purposes, and seldom at all. It was, therefore, now con-
sidered unneessary that the closing of the well be insisted
on.—lt vriu reported that ti,•• nuisances caused by an open
cesspool en preinises in tin. ',nation of John Hod-
dinett, and a pig-stye at Longman's, which hint lon-
plained of, had been
Temedied.—The Chaiiman hani the
owners of the friends meeting house in George-yard had
been communicated with, and he holed it would result in
an improvement in that locality.—The Water Committee
had ordered the erection of a stand pipe at the corner of
Acrernen-street, in discussing which the chairman said
that such orders were not advisable but the matter under
consideration, was• pressing one. —The late addition to the
water-works machinery having necessitated fresh arrange-
ments respecting its care, • discussion took place anent the
qualifications of the present waterman, in which several
members seemed to be of opinion that he did not
exactly come up, to the required standard, and it
was therefore decided that • man be advertised for to take
the entire charge of the works. —The Board then considered
an application made by the present waterman for an
Increase of wages from 17s. to 21s. a week, which he
supported by a representation that his overtime brought
seven years' work up to ten years. It was decided to re-
fuse the application, but to keep Davis in their employ at
his present wages as well as the new man.- At the
recommendation of the Surveyor an iron tank for the
condensing purposes of the engine, at a cost of £lO, which
is only half what a basin would have cost such as the
engineers asked for.—The Surveyor reported that the
closet accommodation on cottage premises in Hound-street
belonging to Mr Dibsdall which the latter although
repeatedly applied to, had neglected to provide, had now
been made; and the clerk was instructed to take legal pro-
ceedings for the recovery of the cost -XII I or £ls—if
refused.—lt was resolved to summon William Curtis, a
butcher of Cold Harbour, who has been detected in
slaughtering on unlicensed premises alter having been
cautioned.

ELECTION EXPENSES.
(From the Examiner.)
Who is the happiest member of the House of Com-
mons if the measure nt felicity is the sum spent in
order to get there? We are said to value blessings in
proportion to the trouble it has taken us to obtain
them, and the man who pave most for a luxury might
to feel the highest content, comfort, awl pride in
possessing it. Who, then, ought to be, if with the
perversity of human nature he in not, the happiest
member of the House of Commons? That and many
other interesting questions are answered by a statistical
document which has just been printed, showing the
expense., en far as they can be calculated from the
Parliamentary Returns, of the laid three general elec-
tion,' ; the number of voter' on the register. the names
of the candidates, the votes polled, the charges paid,
and the average coat per vote being given in tabulated
columns. One of the happiest and proudest men in
Parliament, according to this instructive document,
ought to be the Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. W. H.
Smith. who has confessed to spending in the last three
general elections for Westminster £17,161 3s. Id. No
borough member can approach Mr. Smith in the
proud retrospect of expended treasure. But he has a
rival among the county members, who has not only
spent more money on hie Rest, but who has also
experienced vicissitudes in his occupancy of it which
must give additional zed to the possession. Sir
George Elliot's election expenses for North Durham,
In 1868, were returned at no less a figure than
£15,302 10s. 73. ; in February, 1874, he spent
0,300 155., and lost the seat; but the February elec-
tion was upset, and he won the election in June of the
same year, after another contest and another expendi-
ture. Sir George Elliott's seat for North Durham
is a really expensive luxury, of which any man may
well be proud
No doubt there are some mean natures who take a
pride in getting a coveted luxury at less than their
neighbours. It is possible that there are in the HOlll6.
of Commons some member,, who pride themselves upon
the low figure at which they have succeeded in keeping
their election expenses. In scanning the roll the best
bargain that we can discover is Mr. Harman's seat
for Liekeard, which has cod him for the last three
general elections only 1:137 Ts. sd. and would not
have cost him so much if Mr. Courtney bad not con-
tested it in 1874. How humble Mr. Horsman ought
to feel in the presence of the member for North
Durham ! lie ought to take his seat every night with
an apology to the house for having got in for such a
ridiculously small sum. Lest we should excite in the
breast of any ambitious young man of moderate
fortune the hope of purchasing the honour of legislat.
ing for his country at the same figure, we hasten to
say that Mr. Hornman's is a very exceptional case.
The only member who cornea anywhere near him for
cheapness is by a curious coincidence the eldest son of
, the member for North Durham, Mr. G. W. Elliot,
I who sits for the small borough of Northallerton at the
small sum of £139 10s. 9d. Very few indeed have
I succeeded in keeping their expenses down to £2OO,
ann, even among the sums spent on borough constitu-
encies, there are as many over 4.1,000 as there are
under 000. It is obvious that the expense depends
very much upon the size of the constituencies, and
there are 801110 small boroughs in Ireland upon which
ambition unsupported by an ample patrimony might
naturally cast longing eyes. But the statistics are
not encouraging. Athlone, for example, is a tight
little borough, with only :436 voters upon the register'
yet one of the candidate in the 1868 election contrived
to spend 1:1000 6a. 11d, upon it, and failed to win the
seat after all. Youghal is another tight little borough
with 278 votes, yet in 1868 the successful candidate
expended £1,216 6s. 43. —nearly £lO for every vote
that he polled What these boroughs cost in 1874 we
do not know, because no returns were sent in, appar-
ently a common neglect in Irish elections. Such sums
for constituencies of that minute size lend a colour to
the story about a certain Irish borough in which the
successful candidate was said to have kept all the
voters drunk for three months.
The column representing the average cost per vote
polled exhibits the most surprising inequalities. The
place of honour in this column im attained by a Mr.
McClintock, who, for every voter that he brought to
the poll in the Louth county election in 1868, expend-
ed I:100 Is. 2i.1. But his pride in the achievement
must have been dashed by the fact that his supporters
on the day of trial numbered only six. Naturally
it is among the unsuccessful candidates that we
must Imik for the highest figures in this column. The
lowest figure attained, if that can be a subject for
just pride, either to candidate or constituent, is the
91d., which was the average cost per vote of the
17,902 votes polled by Mr. Anderson in the contest
for Glasgow in 1874. The oust per voter to the
candidates generally ranges, backwards and forwards,
between two or three pounds and as many shillings,
very seldom reaching the lower figures. Of course it
would be rash to conclude that every candidate who
spends more than 9/.1. per voter must spend it in
corruptly influencing the electors The candidate's
share (3. the returning officer's expenses often comes
to five or six times that amount in a constituency and
with few candidates. Glasgow is a large constituency,
and there were seven candidates, which cinsiderably
reduced each candidate's share of the general
expenses. It would have given us a fairer means of
estimating the principles on which the various
candidates conducted their elections if the expenses of
the returning officer could have been given separately.
It would then have been possible to estimate more
closely the extent to which candidates trusted to the
spontaneous leanings of the electors, and how far,
under the pressure of keen contest, they resorted to
those means of influencing opinion which the law

still permits.
The three deems of which the records are here
talmlsted were interesting in different ways as
regarded the marthinery of election. The election of
1865 was the last general election with the old
constituencies. The election of 1868 was the first
general election with the new constituencies. The
election of 1874 was the first general election under
the Ballot Act. We ha % c not made a strict calculi'.
thin, but on a general impression of the figures
neither the enlargement of the constituencies, nor the
Ballot Act, would seem to have markedly increased
the expenses ot election to the candidate. The
expenses of 1868 show on the whole an advance on
those of 1865, but the advance is not by any means
uniform. And, strange to say, although the
machinery of the Ila Zit undoubtedly added to the
returning officer's charges, the candidates, on the
whole, would seem to have spent less money. It is
' Perfectly intelligible that less should be spent in the
solicitation of votes when it was possible to ascertain
whether promises were kept. The entire absence of
uniformity, however, is the most remarkable fact
about these tables. The expenses of any psirticular
election evidently depend upon a great variety of
, causes, besides the size of the constituency. When
the ‘lifferent elections are tabulated in this way the
discrepancies are often very startling. Thus, two
constituencies stand together in the list, Chipping
Wycombe and Christ Church, the one containing
1,599 xoters on the register, the other 1,831. The
successful candidate in one spent I:181 12s. 100.. in
1874 ; the successful candidate in the other £3,486
lt. Further down the list we find the successful
candidate for Darlington in 1871, with a constituency
~f 4,073, si wilding till 19s. lld. ; while the successful
candidate for the I ienbigh liormieha, is bled to the
amount of £3,702 is. 81. And the difference is not
entirely due to the fact that Denbigh is a group
boroug,hs, for we find that in 1868 Mr. Backhouse
to pay £1,421 163. 21. for Darlington. There is no
end to striking contrasts ,d this sort on the surface,
the explanation of which must be sought in lot.al
circiunstances. There is endless fool for the political
moralist in this tabulation, whether it is approached
from the serious or from the comical side; for a
binlb-eye view of the infinite variety and beautiful
anomalies f election expenses is a solemn as well as
a laughing matter, to the nation as well as to the
unfortunate candidates. It suggests to both whether
they have reason to be satisfied with the existing
, system.