The Express.
London, England, 1868-08-11 00:00:00

PERM:OUTING • VOTER ANTI EMMY AT TUE BitutroL

ILECTION.

On gaturday Mot :Stools, * tea pecker, was indicted
for knowingly and unlawfully penonating and falsely
assuming to vote in the name of Henry Hurley, at an
election for a member to serve in parliament for the city
and County of Bristol, at Bristol, on the 29th April.
Mr. Justice Mellor, in his charge to the grand jury,
referred to the case, which ill one of three. He said there
were three charges of attempting to bribe and personate
voters. The cases were shirt and very simple, and if
the jury found that the prisoner who was charged with
bribery did really offer a bribe to a person tovute in a par-
ticular, manner, they would ; but if they found that
it was merely a case in which • good deal was said about
voting and what war the value of votes, but that no
money was really offered, they would not find a bill—it
was a matter which depended entirely upon the judg-
ment of the grand jury and the construction they put
upon what took place between tha parties. Then there
were two cases of personation, and these also were tole-
rably clear. Hie lordship remarked that if a man per-
sonated another it was an offence of a very serious cha-
racter, because if it were done to a great extent it would
make the election not only not an expression of the feeling
of the inhabitants of the city, but it would be brought
about by fraudulent means.
Morris, who was first placed at the bar, pleaded not
guilty.
Mr. Norris appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Ffooks
for the defence.
During the swearing of the jury Mr. Maks raised an
objection to Win. Butcher serving as a juror.
The Judge—On what grounds do you object?
Mr. Ffooks—On the ground that he holds very pro-
nounced opinions on politics, and voted at the hat
election.

don't see anything in that objection.
Everybody bolds very. decided opinions in these days, and
vegrP. pronounced
am instructed that his are more pro-
..
pounced than usual: .

............... case of a gentleman of the jury
having expressed a.very strong pi on on the cam about
to be tried there might be for objection ; but be-
cause a gentleman voted on the opposite side I cannot be-
lieve he would be influenced when on his oath. It would
be very difficult in Bristol, or any other city, to find
anybody who is not of pronounced opinions.
Mr. Flocks—As I have expressed an opinion about that
one juryman, perhaps he would allow some other gentle-
man to take his place.
The Judge (warmly)—l shall not allow anything of the
sort to tae Oace, Mr. Ffooks. I should be making a
joked tie brisl if I allowed that.
.

'After several iicinicali;gjectiOna bad been made and
overruled, and formal evidence given, the case was proved
by the following evidence :—Mr. Win. Henry Cork said:
—I was Morley's agent at the last election, and attended
No. 7 booth, Bedminster. I saw the prisoner at the bar
come to the booth. He put down a blue scrip. I heard
the deputy-sheriff ask him the usual question*, and he
answered them. I remember the number on the scrip—it
was 3,090. I heard the oath put to him. Before he voted
I protested against the vote, and said the man was
at sea. The pnsoner made some remark about being at
home now, which I did not exactly understand.
Mr. FfoOke—Mr. Miles' agent also protested at once, I
believe ?
Witness—Yee.

-
Mrs. Harriet Hurley said—l am the wife of Henry
Hurley, who resides at 96, Philip-street, Bedminster, when
at home. He occupies the house, and has a vote. He was
not at home on April 29th. To the beet of my belief he
was at sea. I knew nothing at all of the prisoner. He is
not my husband. No other Henry Hurley lives in
Philip-street
The learned Judge, in summing ups:thgetrte said that
the learned counsel (Mr. Molts) bad the desir-
ability of this offence going unpuniehed when an election
was over. Be confessed that he was of a vary different
opinion. Offences of this description affected the into.
gnty of the return of members to serve in parliament,
and ought not to go unpunished. And he could
not understand how it could be an " agreeable
duty " for the jury to acquit a man if they had
no doubt of his guilt upon looking fairly at the facts of
the care. He admittedthat there were very often charges
of bribery made which turned out nothing at all. A man
said loosely, " Cane with us, and if you vote you'll
get something," and so on. Things like that were some-
times misconstrued, and in those cases in which merely a
little excitement prevailed at elections he, for one, thought
it was generally desirable to let the excitement die away.
If the charge bad been one of making a disturbance or a
riot he should base raid that the counsel's suggestion was
a proper one. The sooner the excitement of a contested
election was buried the better. But this was a very
different thing: This was an offence which sapped the
very foundation of an election altogether, if it was true.
His lordship then proceeded to review the evidence, and,
having done sot said he could not divine what reason or
motive could induce the prisoner to personify another
man. The question was, did he knowingly vote in the
name of Henry. Hurley. If that was made out to the satis-
faction of the jury they must find him guilty, and if it was
not they would acquit him, but not because it was au
" agreeable duty, and not because, the election being
over, there wu a bill of indemnity for every offence
against the law.
After abnef deliberation, the jury returned a verdict of
Guilty.
His lordship said that before sentencing the prisoner he
should try the other cases.
This morning William Cogan, described as a labourer,
was indicted for having unLwfully and knowingly per-
sonated and falsely assumed to vote in the name of one
John Hearth, at an election of a member to represent the
city and county of Bristol m parliament, on the 29th of
April last.
Mr. Norris conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Wood-
ford. Ffooks the defence. _ _

Prior to the calling on of the cane, Mr. Ffooke applied
to the learned judge to allow the hearing to be deferred
for a little time, as he had been told that there was a
clause in the Corrupt Practices Act of the lest amnion
which bore upon it, and be had sent for the act.
Mr. Justice Mellor said the learned counsel had bad all
Sunda_ y and till 10 o'clock that morning to obtain the
act. lie did not see how any clause in the act could apply
to that case, and he therefore saw no reason for inter-
feting with the regular course of business.
Mr. Noma then opened the case, witnesses were called,
Mr. nooks addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner,
the learned Judge summed up, and the jury returned a
verdict of Guilty.
Mr. Justice Nam them directed Morris, who was con-
victed of a like offence on Saturday, to be placed along-
side of the prisoner for sentence.
Each of the prisoners was sentenced to twelve months'
imprisonment with hard labour.
Mirka oteplieffs, a floor-cloth worker, was then indicted
for• having =lawfully offered certain money, to wit, 10a.,
to a certain voter named Albert Hawkins, to induce him
to vote at an election for &member of parliament. In
other counts he was charged with having offered sums of
money to certain voters named Edward Bennett and
Aaron Stiles, in order to induce them to vote.
Mr. Munch and Mr. Norris prosecuted, and Mr.
Ffooke defended the prisoner.
Evidence having been given, the
_jury, after a long con-
sultation, were unable to agree. Three jurors stood out
for acquittal. and the 'udge, as we learn by telegram, at
a late hour dischargedthem. The prisoner was boned
over to appear at the next assizes.

tea is sold Bd. per pound cheaper as
the duty is reduced. This interesting fact Inn, when fullylmoeu,
sten further increase the demand for these choice teen. Horn!.
man's are not sold loose, but only in motets, dancel " limetmaa
11114 owl lasporlours at the pen 080."-1114vieftwalps,1