The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-02 00:00:00

not applied, and " political swearing" placed in
the same category. We shall, however, trust to
the exertions of the Learned Peer above
alluded to for having the matter placed upon a
satisfactory foundation, and thus giving addi-
tional efficiency to these solemn appeals in the
only cases in which they may still be considered
indispensable.
On the other point, the affirmations of
Quakers, Moravians, and Separatists were ad-
mitted in judicial inquiries of every kind ; but
still there was a casus omissus in the Act which
required amendment. Other persons not belong-
ing to any of the sects above mentioned might
have conscientious objections to taking an oath,
and yet be perfectly willing to give true testi-
timony in every point at issue, and yet no power
was allowed to the presiding Judge to take their
affirmations or receive the testimony in the only
form in which they would be willing to give it.
Much mischief occasionally arose from this serious
omission in the remedial statute. After full and
mature consideration of all these points, the
Commissioners arrive at the conclusion, and we
think with much propriety, that, as a gene-
ral rule, judicial oaths should still be retained—
stating, at the same time, that it admits of a
question whether the religious sanction should be
made indispensable in cases where that sanction is
admitted to have no existence, and recommending
that, excei-,t in the cases of sects who object on
religious grounds to the taking of oaths, it should
" be left to the Judge to ascertain whether the
objection professed by the witness be sincere or
not, and that if he be so satisfied, the witness
should be admitted to affirm instead of taking an
oath." This is, perhaps, the best decision that
could be arrived at on a point so doubtful. The
judicial discretion has rarely been abused, and we
believe it may be safely trusted on the point
referred to. It will, at all events, be a decided
improvement on the existing system.

Mr. SLADE'S Election Tales of Canterbury will
hardly rival the interest which the Tales of its
Pilgrims, from the pen of CHAUCER, once excited.
Had they, however, been published before 1853,
and (much more) previously to the St. Alban's
Election Tales, by the same author, they would
have been the first-read-column in every news-
paper. It is true, there is not here an EDWARDS
holding the entire list of bribed electors in his
hand, and divulging name after name, all destined
to be called on in a day or two, like a poor female
before a magistrate, to swear to their own shame.
Lists of the bribed this time had very prudently
vanished past the possibility of recal, and memory
was most conveniently defective ; still there were
incidents in plenty, and exposures of a general
system sufficiently extravagant to keep alive the
unabated attention of a crowded court.

Canterbury is one of the boroughs in which the
old freemen are still numerous ; they amount to
946 of the electors, the ten-pound householders
numbering net more than 1,306. Hence, like
Norwich, Liverpool, or Nottingham, it is one of
those boroughs where the family influence is com-
paratively small, but the money influence omni:
potent. In such boroughs the battle of the Long-
purses quite enlists the old English party spirit,
almost extinguishes all sense of dishonour, and he
who " comes down with the dust like a man," is
the candidate cheered at public meetings as " the
man who deserves to win." Mr. BUTLER JOHN-
STONE, one of the lately unseated candidates, con-
fesses to this species of Joux Bum, pugnacity. He
paid 1,3001. for his election expenses. When he
had paid great part of this sum, he learned that
the Marchioness of CONYNGHAM had opened the
" Bifron's Purse," and was coming down with
her thousands for her son-in-law, Sir WILLIAM
SOMERVILLE. When, said he, "I heard this, I felt
fairly in the fight, and that I would not be beaten
even by her"—and in the tournament of purses
Mr. JOHNSTONE was not beaten. As to being
unseated on an election petition, why that's no
more dishonour than being disabled by the musket
ball of a vanquished enemy. It may happen to
any man, to the bravest most likely of all ; sic
volvere Parcas, is the consolation for that. As a
sample (of the same feeling on the part of electors,
a man held up a purse to Lord PELHAM CLINTON,
who, after his defeat, was gazing on the field of
battle from a window in the Rose Hotel, exclaim-
ing, " This here's got the election—if you have
some next time, we'll get you in."
As might be expected, the contributions levied
on gentlemen who aspired to represent the Archi-
episcopal City, were in proportion to the honour.
The Hon. GEORGE AUGUSTUS FREDERIC PERCY
SIDNEY SMYTHE, had, in 1841, to pay 1,0001.
a-piece for each of his names, and another 1,0001.
for luck probably-7,0001. in all ! In 18'47 he
was more gently dealt with: he and Lord ALBERT
CONYNGHAM were let off with 9001. each. Per-
haps it was because Mr. SMYTHE by this time had
softened down from Conservative to Liberal-
Conservative. "He was neither red, pink,
nor blue; in short, a nondescript, a good
card" according to Alderman BRENT. Mr.
JOHNSTONE, as we have seen, got through with
1,300/. at the election of '52. Mr. GIPPS, his
colleague also paid I,osol.—defending his seat in
vain afterwards cost him another 1,0001. Of
course the colour-ticket system was abundantly
illustrated by the evidence. Nothing, however,
was elicited additional to what was already known.
The money disbursed by this means was some-
times of surprising amount. In 1841 Mr. SMYTHE
reckoned that he spent 2,0001. in this -way, ,and
the opposite party quite as much ; 4,0001. in all
spent in colour tickets ! Colour tickets, as might
be expected, were not, however, the only kinds of
bribery employed at Canterbury ; in many in-
stances sums of money were directly given.
Higher game was hawked for in much nobler style.
Alderman BRENT, who for more than twenty years
has been active on the Liberal side, " had been
appointed Deputy-Lieutenant of the county,"
" had good appointments for four of his sons."
" One was made about 17 years ago, another 14,
another 3, another just as the Whig Government
went out and the Derby Government came in. Two
of the sons were in the Custom-house with ad-
vancing salaries beginning at 1501. per annum.
Two in Somerset-house at from 901. to 100/."
Again, Mr. G. DAVEY had been exchequered to
the tune of 1,9001. "Lord CONYNGHAM agreed
to use his influence with the Excise for witness, if
witness would use his power for his Lordship at
the election, and they both performed their pro-
mise." That is, Lord A. CONYNGHAM got in for
Canterbury and the Liberals, and G. DAVEY got
off 1,8001. of the fine. Tho Whig Lord and the
Excise agreed to let off a Whig election agent for
1001. It would seem that other Government ser-
vices and secretaries will need to undergo scrutiny
as well as the Dockyards and the Secretary to the
Admiralty.
It was but to be expected that Mr. FORBES
MACKENZIE and W. B. should figure in the remi-
niscences of Tory candidates for Canterbury. No
one heard, therefore, with surprise that the for-
mer gentleman had paid £5OO of Mr. GIPPS'
expenses, out of a political fund subscribed for
that purpose ; or that Lord PELHAM CLINTON
had seen Major BERESFORD, who sent down the
money that was to pay the expenses of the elec-
tion ; but it was hardly looked for that Colonel
Romurx would be by far the most interesting
witness. Most unexpectedly, he found all his
election bills paid, and that at costly Can-
terbury. " Whence Alderman BRENT got the
money, he could not tell ; he had no legal
knowledge—no knowledge at all. It was not
from the Reform Club ; it was not from Mr.
Corrocx ; nor from Downing Street ; nor from
the Treasury ; from nowhere that he had any
knowledge of. He could conjecture, he should
suppose, the money came from a source which was
notorious as supplying funds of that kind for
carrying on elections. It did not strike him
as very odd, under the circumstances, that his
election expenses should be paid. He had
heard a rumour that a fund of that kind existed,
and was managed by the Reform Club. He
believed the person who was supposed to have
connection with this fund teas, when the party was
in power, the Secretary of the Treasury !" The
Commissioners are to meet again after the evidence
has been printed. Will they send for Mr. HAY-
TER 'I
Between Colonel BOXILLI'e mysterious