The Sun.
London, England, 1851-11-07 00:00:00

:,r7l
7 , NOVEMBER 7, 1851.

ST. ALBAN'S BRIBERY C OMMISSION.
The inquiry was resumed yesti rday morning, at
half-past ten o'clock, as-usual.
Mr. 'Rumbold begged to explain that the reason
why he and other Conservatives ressented the conduct
of Mr. Blagg et the last election was, that they were
annoyed at being sold to Henry Edwards.
Mr. Henry S. Law, the London agent of Sir R.
Carden, was then called and sworn —He stated, that
when Sir Robert first told him the t he had been so-
licited trebecome's candidate for kit. Alban's he ap-
prised 'lira of the reputation of the• borough and en-
deavoured to dissuade him from ;going to it. Sir
Robert told him that he had received a requisition
very fairly signed, and said that it bad been strongly
represeeited to him that if he would come down to
the borough with the resolution not to spend any
money in bribery be would be returned. Witness
said lie entertained serious doubts about it, and asked
Sir Robert to consider of it. Sir Jiobert afterwards
told him that he bed received a further requisition,
respectfully 'signed, and, then they began to entertain
some,hopes of suF.eess. • But it was understood that
befoi.e that time se many vOtee were pre-engaged that
there was' no chance of doing anything by the payment
of money voters... Sir Robert and he went down to St.
Albao's to see what the chances were. Sir Robert was
very well ecoeivedt and thatgave them still further hopes
of success. They canvassed tie electors, but they made
very little way indeed in claneassing. He then told
Sir Robert that ;he dint think there was any
chance for hies, but Sirtobert said -that as he had
entered; iteto the matter* wbuld a on with it. He
did go on, and the .reatittg.Wee ewe known ; but wit,''
ness begged,to say, that it Irobert vas not returned
simply because the great majority of the electors had
previously been bought. Witness had several inter-
views with the deputation from St. Alban's, and he
had.always Understood, from first to last, that not a
farthing should be spent in bribery. He was not of
opinion with Sir R. Caiden that by spending a little
money among the -electors they could have got as
many votes over from the other side as would have
turned the election in Sir Robert's favour. Sir Ro-
bert and witness were repeatedly asked if they were
in earnest' in their determination not to bribe. Mr.
Rumbold, and Mr. Dunning, a clergyman were
among the number of those who put that question to
them.
Mr. Slade—What should you understand by that
question ?
Mr. Law—l understood it 'was intended to test
whether we really intended to abide by purity of
election or not. '
Mr. Slade—And not whether you had better swerve
from the rule you bad laid down ?
Mr. Law—Not in the slightest degree. Witness
remembered being pressed by Mr. Webster, and be
thought also Mr. Blanks, on the day before the elec-
tion to advance money.. Mr. Webster put it to him
in different shapes how the' bribery might be done to
avoid detection. Witness declined Most positively to
adopt the suggestion. Mr. Webster, when he made
the suggestion, asked witness to speak to him in a
private room! He told witness that, unless money
was forthcoming, it would be useless for Sir Robert
Carden to go ' forward, but that if he would advance
5001. he would undertake to return him. Witness
did not want to cut him short at 'once, and argued
the matter with him, endeavouring to show him its
absurdity. Witness told Mr. Webster that his belief
was the other side were so far committed in the prac-
tice of bribery, that, upon petition, Sir Robert was
sure to succeed in unseating Mr. Bell. He also
reminded him of the promise of the deputation to se-
cure Sir Robert's return upon purity principles, and
said that Sir Robert was determined to abide by his
original resolution, which he was ,bound in consis-
tency to do after proclaiming it far and wide. Mr.
Webster said it might easily be done, without risk of
detection ; in the first place, a parcel could easily be
brought to him by coach. Witness said that was a
flimsy mode of proceeding; who would take the par-
cel to him? " Oh," he replied, " it need not be known
who did that." Witness then said that some one
must deliver it. Mr. Webster answered that it could
come in the ordinary course, and that no one would
think of watching it. Witness said he did not see
the thing so clear as he appeared to do. Witness un-
derstood that the parcel was to contain money to pur-
chase votes. leir. Webster did not say how many
votes he would procure for the 5001. His object was
evidently to get them committed to the first 5001.,
believing that, after that, they might go as far as
they liked. Witness declined to have anything to do
with the proposal. Mr. Blanks proceeded in a dif-
ferent way. He was always endeavouring to get Sir
R. Carden into a bet of 5001. that he would win the
election. He never communicated Mr. Webster's
proposition to Sir R. Carden, but took upon himself
to negative it at once. Mr. Law, the local agent, was
the only person ' who could speak positively to the
precise amount of the election expenses.
Mr. F. T. Webster was next called and sworn. He
stated that he was a surgeon in the borough; that be
had been born there, and had been a voter for twenty
years. He bad voted at all the elections since the
Reform Bill. His political principles were Liberal;
he was of the party to which Mr. Edwards belonged.
He was,one of the deputation who waited upon Sir
R. Carden, and who signed the requisition to him.
He understood Sir Robert was liberally disposed—
a Liberal Conservative, in fact. The requisition
asked Sir Robert to come forward upon purity prin-
ciples, for the purpose of rescuing the borough from
the thraldoth of corruption under which it had so long
lain. The principal object of the party with whom
witness acted was to do away with the interference
of Mr. Coppock in their elections. If they could
have got the borough relieved of the influence of Mr.
Coppock, they would have been content to have left
matters as to head-money very much as they were,
with this exception, that they desired to restore the
old practice of giving each voter a guinea for his vote,
and half-a guinea :to his wife
at each confinement.
This would of course have reduced the price of votes.
He remembered the conversation to which Mr. Law
had referred. He recollected asking Mr. Law whether
Sir R. Carden was determined to go to the poll, and
telling him that it would be' impossible to succeed
unless money was passed. He did not remember
saying anything about sending a parcel by coach;
but he certainly did state that the election might be
won by an expenditure of 5001. He meant that cer-
tain electors, who had not promised their votes, might ,
be got over for a certain sum, and that others who
had promised their votes might have been sent out of
the way. These were the- former tactics of the
borough, ib which witness had himself taken a part.
Witness's father had been at the bead of a considera-
ble party in the borough, but his object was not to
secure the ascendancy which his father had enjoyed.
His father, however, had been the friend of every
man, and witness's aim was the same. Witness did
the way he proposed, as bribery. It was merely a
nmoatttreergaorfdctuhsetopcnra of giving money to voters, in
custom.
Mr. Slade—l cannot understand how you can re-
concile your professions of purity to Sir R. Carden
with your suggestion to his agent, Mr. Law, as to
how so many voters could be bribed and others spirited
away.
Mr. Webster—l merely made the suggestion to
Mr. Law in the course of conversation, for him to act
or not upon it 'as be thht roper.
you mean. us to understand that
awareim of Mr.
Mr. Slade—You did not give it him as your advice?
Mr.
jee did not wish to iake the
Edwards's interference in the elections, and also wished
youM dridSnlaodtew—isDhnhim to adopt it?
Mr. Webster—r_lNleof.t itNevnitt.inreesl.ys
wthash
toMr. Edwards.
Mr. Phin—What was your object in seeking to
reduce the price of votes?
Mr. Webster said his oj bdiotioanw of
fy with that.
position
ect
should be allowed to do as they usually
a y had done in
to St. was that
Albans,
prevent
the electors
a
contest ?
the time of his father, without the
interference of Mr.
om act with two parties pre-
and by entering into a
e"
vented " the third party from
h coming
Comppro.crkh,
iwn—holasofmeeett,imyeeus
fearedcam down
eewould
Witness had received 201.
Me. Webster—Yes•
from Mr. Law for his losses and expenditure during
30e but got only 201. He
the election. He asked
Sir R.Carden. Ile left his
gave his whole time to interests,and had
Profession to attend to S. Robertser s
to pay medical men
for attending his patients. (Wit-
ness afterwards explained that he was the surgeon to
a club, and that the patients whose bills he paid were
club patients.) When be was away his patients got
whatever medical men they liked, and when they
brought the bill to
him he paid it. He paid between
Si. and 10/. in this way. He also incurred a consi-
derable expense in going
round among the voters and
their wives.. He had to give some of the wives a new
cap or the like. People could not go about on such
in their pockets.
their bands
occasions without putting
He was sure that in mere disnur..E.Lneats he had been
out of pocket 151. or
201.
at least. lie received no-
thing for loss of time.
He
was
an
intimate friend of
Mr. Simpson, and he knew that Mr. Simpson was
anxious to get the control of the elections and get
rid of Mr. Edwards. Witness confessed that his
object in taking the part he did at the late election
was to substitute Mr. Simpson for Mr. Edwards.
Mr. Edwards was here recalled, and informed by
the Comulissiouers that they desired to have a state-

ment from him respecting the previous elections for
St. Alban's, in which he was concerned. He then
proceeded to state that, at the election for 1847, there
were four candidates in the field, viz., the Hon. Mr.
Craven (Liberal), Mr. Repton (Conservative), Mr.
Wilks (Liberal), and Mr. Raphael (Liberal). The
Liberal party was at that time somewhat divided. It
was the wish of the principals, both of the Conserve-
, tive and the Liqeral parties, that, if possible, there
should be no opposition, as the Maly means of doing
away with the system which was now so much com-
plained of. To effect that object, each party agreed
' to give witness a tee for not interfering at all. This
agreement was made between Mr. Blagg, on the part
of the Conservatives, and Mr. Coppock, on the part of
the Liberals; the terms were, that each should give
him 2501. ; and, upon the assurance that they
would each pay him that sum, he agreed
to take no part in the election. This bore on the
evidence which had been given by Mr. Coppock,
to the effect that witness had broken faith with him.
In consequence of this agreement witness kept aloof
until there were three candidates in the field. He
then called upon Mr. Coppock, and asked him whether
the assurance he bad received from him and Mr.
Blagg would hold good provided Mr. Craven did not
succeed. Mr. Coppock said he had, certainly under-
stood that the payment of his 2501. was coptingent
upon Mr. Craven's success. Witness said to' him
that the result would be that he would lose Mr.
Craven, apd, witness would lose his position, and
tither of tliem,_,would get. anything. Witness told
thathick . '4OE:4 pay hhn, whether :Mr. Craven got
is or not. werent4itaMmrtbrao Candidates
in the field—viz., Mr. Craven, Mr. Wilks, and Mr.
Repton. There was no chance of Mr. Craven getting
in. Witness then left Mr. Coppock,- who was very
angry with him because he considered he had broken
faith with him. Witness had long had Mr. Raphael in
view as a candidate for the borough through a rela-
tion of witness's who was a tenant of Mr. Raphael.
He immediately called upon his relative on the sub-
ject, and was told that Mr. Raphael was on the conti-
nent. His friend, however, wrote to him, at wit-
ness's request, mentioning the terms upon which he
would undertake his election, for he was generally
very explicit on that point. Those terms were
3,0001. as the expense of a contested election, out of
which he would expect 5001. for himself. The re-
sult was that Mr. Raphael came to England and
bad an interview with witness. Mr. Raphael made
no objection to the terms, but there was, nevertheless,
considerable difficulty in getting him to make up his
mind positively to stand. Before Mr. Raphael had de-
termined to come, there was a requisition presented to
witness pledging the subscribers to support whoever
he should bring forward. A day or two after he had
been in communication with Mr. Raphael, and while
that gentleman was still hesitating, he received a visit
at his farm from a gentleman on the part of Mr.
Montague Gore. He told that gentleman how he
was situated with Mr. Raphael ; but, not wishing to
lose Mr. Gore, he went to town with the gentleman
and saw a solicitor in Linda's-inn-fields on the sub-
ject. The'result was that Mr. Gore declined to come.
The same offer was made to Mr. Gore as to Mr. Ra-
phael. Mr. Gere called himself, he believed, a Li-
beral Conservative. Mr. Raphael was a Radical. He
proposed to take Mr. Gore if Mr. Raphael had de-
clined his offer, with the assurance of being able to
carry him. Politics had little to do with the matter.
He went back again to Mr. Raphael, and urged him
to make up his mind on the subject, one way or other.
The result was that Mr. Raphael agreed to become a
candidate, and to spend 3,0001. He ultimately spent
3,5001. During the canvass, Mr. Raphael said to
him, in the presence of several others, that if witness
succeeded in placing him at the head of the poll, he
would make up the sum to 5,0001. ; but he never did
so. Mr. Raphael came to St. Alban's accompanied by
Mr. Mullens, his solicitor, Mr. Simpson, and Mr.
Bryant (his tenant), who introduchd witness to him.
['hey met many of the voters in the usual way, and
had 120 promises of support before the bag was
opend at all.—(A. laugh) The office in which the
business was done was not in Sovereign• alley, but in
a place equally convenient, opposite the Town-hall.
Witness's party knew that Mr. Raphael was a man
of money. They were quite aware that witness
would not have taken him if he had not been.—
(Laughter) Mr. Raphael was ultimately placed at
the head of the poll, the numbers being :—For Mr.
Raphael, 295 ; for Mr. Repton, 276 ; for Mr. Wilks,
230 ; and for Mr. Craven, 126. On that oceasian he
had the assistance of Mr. Simpson (then Mr. Blagg's
:lerk), for which he agreed to give him one-third of
whatever he received. Mr. Simpson got 1661.135. 4d.
That was rather an extravagant election. The prices
of votes ranged between 71. and 25/. ; but it should
be understood that, in addition to carrying Mr.
Raphael, he had in view the return of Mr. Renton ;
so that he had to pay for two votes instead of one.
Mr. Repton's friends had bound him down so very
close with regard to money matters—in obedience, it
was understood, to the wish of a neighbouring noble-
man—that Mr. Blagg, his agent, had not the means
of paying his voters. In point of fact, it might be
said that Mr. Raphael's money bought Mr. Repton's
election. To assist Mr. Blagg in his operations for
Mr. Repton, witness lent him 5001., which was re-
paid to him shortly after the election. As an in-
ilucement to witness to exert himself for Mr.
Repton, Mr. Blagg agreed to give him one-half of
whatever fee he received, which he did. There
were 16 Conservatives who plumped for Mr. Ren-
ton ; all the others who voted split their votes
between Repton and Raphael. Of the 295 who
voted for Mr. Raphael, 265 were paid by witness.
There were only about .30 voters unbribed ; six of
whom were Liberals and 24 Conservatives. He be-
lieved that money was spent on the other side as
well, but he did not know of his own knowledge.
Mr. Harris was the agent for Mr. Wilks, and still re-
sided in St. Alban's, and could be examined. Mr.
Gibson was the agent for Mr. Craven, but he was
residing at Boulogne, and witness did not think he
could be seen. Witness had heard the term "heavy
weight" applied to some voters, but not often. He
had heard persons who had received as high as 25/.
for their votes called "heavy weight." The persons
who received 251. were rather of a different class of
society from those who received smaller sums. They
were generally small tradesmen. There were 29
electors who voted for Sir R. Carden at the last
election who received money from him for their votes i
in 1847. Other 23 had received money from him on
previous occasions; making in all 52 of the 147 purity
gentlemen who had received head-money on previous
occasions. Witness being asked by the Commissioner
to state the names of those to whom he had paid head-
money in 1847, suggested that the shorter way
would be for him to mention the names
of those who bad not received head-money
from him, and the Commissioners would see
from the remaining names on the register who
had received money. This course was accordingly
adopted, and Mr. Edwards mentioned the names of
29 of Raphael's voters to whom he bad not paid mo-
ney. He could not name those who had received
large sums. He remembered one who had received
451., viz., 101. from himself and 251. from Mr. Blagg,
besides 51. more from each of them to fetch a particu-
lar voter, which he never did. That was the highest
sum he ever knew to be paid. Witness did not make
much himself out of Mr. Raphael's election.
The Commissioners here asked if Mr. Edwards
could give them any idea of the sums that had passed
through his hands since the passing of the Reform Bill
in the shape of bribery ?
_ _ _ _ . _

Mr. Edwards said he would endeavour to give them
some idea of it; but he did not like the word " bri-
bery." He called it " head-money."
Mr. Phin—lt smells as nasty by any other name,
does it not.

Mr. Edwards—Well, I beliere it does. Witness
then proceeded to state the gross sums which the dif-
ferent elections in which he bad been engaged had
cost. In 18412 Mr. Ward's election cost 2,0001,
perhaps 2,400/. or 2,5001. In 1835 Mr. Ward's
election cost '2,400/. In 1837 Mr. Muskett,
s elec-
tion cost from 1,8001. to 2,0001. In February,
1841, Lord Listowel's election cost 3,0001.; and
in June, 1841, 2,0001. There was more spent
by witness, but not repaid, making nearly another
1,0001. In 1846, Mr. Cabbell s election cost 5001.
Mr. Raphael's election in 1847 cost 3,5001. ;
and Mr. Bell's, in 1850, cost 2,8001.; making
altogether about 19,000/. This was the cost of elec-
tions on his own side only. lie calculated that about
two-thirds of the money were spent in paying voters
and about one-third for incidental expenses. His ex-
perience agreed with Mr. Blagg's, that the new elec-
tors introduced by the Reform Bill were more extra-
vagant in their demands than the old electors. But
although, under the old system, the voters did not
cost so much, the gross expense of an election was
more than at present. He had known a public-house
bill, for instance, cost 300/. There was also the ex-
pense of bringing up the outlying freemen, which was
very great, as they used to come with their whole
families, including even their grandchildren.—
(Laughter.) Before the passing of the Reform Bill
he calculated that about two-thirds of the cost of an
election would be spent in treating and incidental
expenses, and about one-third in paying voters. The
rule formerly was, to pay the elector after voting ;
the general rule now was to pay him before. Not
one in ten persons thought such payments bribery.
He 114 never known a member for St. Alban'e

[PRICE SD.

tuhnesreeattuedrn
efforLerbdriLbeiwersytel in 1841.. There
petitions on the groundohad
of
hriheryben
se. three
inee
the
passing of the Reform Bill,
aThatnwasagainst
petition
was compromised in souse way or n
was against the return of Mr. Cabbell,ati
o thalel
reo
nfTd h
euw,
nah
sei cxh
had failed. The first
ptia
mere ruse. It was never brought beforet
.1;1 Committee.,ll.
The third petition was
against Mr.
He had seen the bribery oath administer
ds return'
e
at the
hustings, but not frequently. He had known
sons who had previously received bead-mon per-
sons
take
the oath that they had not been bribed. The oath
was not administered at Mr. Bell's election, but it
was at Lord Listowel's election in February, 1841.
He did not know whether Mr. Raphael was aware at
the time that money was being paid to the voters,
but he knew afterwards. Mr. Cabbell said he was
willing to pay all legal expenses, and witness regretted
to say he he told him he had paid none but legal ex-
penses, and, the gross sum being so small, Mr.
Cabbell probably believed him. Mr. Cabbell was
returned for a small sum, in consequence of witness
being actuated by a great deal of spite and malice at
the time. He was quite satisfied that he could have
returned Mr. Bell also for 5001. if he had liked, he,
had so much influence with tha electors. He pre-
served his influence with the voters by personal
kindness in every way. He -did not think he
could bring home to any of the candidates the fact
of their being cognizant of the payment of bead money.
Mr. Blagg was than examined with reference to
previous ,elootiook, Lia- 'stated that his experience
extended to ten elections; indeed, to all since the
passing of the Reform Bill. He generally acted as
agent for the Conservative party, but not always. In
1835 he merely assisted Mr. Storey, who was then
the Conservative agent. In 1846, at Me. B. Cab-
bell's election, he assisted Mr. Edwards, but there
was no compact between them. He admitted that in
1847 money did pass his hands for the purpose of
election, but not much, for, in consequence of the
pledge which was exacted from Mr. Repton by a
neighbouring nobleman (Lord Verulam) that be
should not spend money in purchasing votes, Mr.
Repton exacted a similar pledge from witness. The
whole cost of Mr. Repton's election, including wit-
ness's agency fee of 3001., was 1,2001. The sum of
5001., which he borrowed from Mr. Edwards and
afterwards repaid, was included in that 1,2001. Out
of the 9001. which was spent in Mr. Repton's election
(exclusive of witness's fee of 3001.), 5001. was paid
tor votes. Of the 276 electors who voted for Mr.
Repton 120 were paid by witness for their votes. He
did not pay any one more than 51. or 61. As he
already said, he was not in a condition to give much.
He was like a man- with his hands tied. He
believed that the agents of the other candidates,
Mr. Wilks and Mr. Craven bribed their
voters too. Mr. Repton was not cognizant of
the bribery in his own case, either before or after
the election. Witness gave him an account of the
expenses, but he admitted that it was a colourable
account, intended to blind the eyes of Mr. Repton as
to what he had done with the sums paid as head-
money. He paid many of the voters much less than
51. He paid some of them as low as 2/. and 1/. The
greatest sum be had known spent on the Conservative
side was at the general election in 1841 The candi-
dates then were Mr. Repton, Mr. Worley, Lord Lis-
towel, and Mr. Muskett. The two former were Con-
servatives, and the other Liberal. The expenses of
the two Conservative candidates were about 3,500/.
Witness had funds at his control above that amount,
but he returned some that was not sPent. About
two-thirds of the money were spent in paying voters.
Going back to the first election with which he was
connected as agent, viz in 1832, he stated that the
candidates then were Mr. (now Sir) H. G. Ward,
Sir F. Vincent, and Mr. Turner. The expenses in-
curred by Mr. Turner, ..the Conservative candidate
(including 7804 of unpaid tradesmen's bills), was
3,780/. ; but then there was a six months' canvass,
from June to December. The next election tooa
place in 1835, when the expenses of the Conservative
candidate (Mr. Grimstone), including the payment of
the tradesmen's bills previously incurred, but not paid,
by Mr. Turner, was between 1,5001. and 1,6001. Wit-
ness stipulated that if these bills were paid he would con-
duct the election without taking any fee for himself ;
his object being to place himself in a favourable po-
sition with the persons to whom the bills were owing.
Exclusive of these bills, the expenses would have been
about 1,0001. This, however, did not include the
expenses of the second Conservative candidate, the
Hon. Mr. Beresford. In 1837 the candidates were
Mr. Grimstone and Mr. B. Cabb-211 (Conservative),
and Mr. Muskett (Liberal). Mr. Grimston's ex-
penses on that occasion were about 1,8001., certainly
under 2,0001., and Mr. Cabbell's about 1,0001. Mr.
Cabbell having lost the election, witness made no
charge for his services as agent. In February, 1841,
Mr. Cabbell was again a candidate, when his expenses
were under 1,000/. There was such a lavish expen-
ditcre on the part of Lord Listowell, the Liberal can-
didate on that occasion, and Mr. Cabbell was so little
inclined to advance funds, that witness told Mr.
Cabbell very early in the canvass that he had no
chance whatever. In 1841 the Conservative can-
didates were Mr. Repton and Mr. Worsley, and the
Liberal candidates were Lord Listowell. and Mr.
Aluskett. The expenditure of the two Conservative
candidates, as he had already stated, was 3,500/. In
1848 he assisted Mr. Edwards in the election of Mr.
Cabbell, but not professionally, and he had no know-
ledge of the expenditure beyond what he had heard
from Edwards. He had already spoken of the election
in 1847. Mr. Wilke, one of the Liberal candidates
on that occasion, was rather a formidable opponent,
being exceedingly popular with a large class of voters,
and witness therefore agreed that if Mr. Edwards
would exert himself to secure Mr. Repton's return he
would divide his fee with him. The total cost of the
Conservative elections since the passing of the Reform
Bill would be about 13,2801., exclusive of Mr. Beres-
ford's expenses in 1835, which he understood were
about 2,0001. Including them the total would be
15,2801. All these facts, he begged to observe, were
given from memory. He concurred with Mr. Ed-
wards in thinking that about two-thirds of the ex-
pense were incurred in paying voters, and the witness
was certain that landlords frequently gave a receipt to
tenants for 101. rent, when the payment was only 71.
or 8/. This was done for the sake of being placed on
the register. He did not think the bribery oath had
ever been administered in the borough except at the
election to which Mr. Edwards referred viz., Lord
Listowel's in 1841. It was then administered to
every voter, and he did not recollect one who refused
to swallow it. He remembered one who gave up the
money he had received before taking the oath, and then
went back for it after he had voted.—(A. laugh.) He
was a Roman Catholic voter who was not now living
in the town. In the elections in which witness had
been engaged the candidate generally knew nothing
of head- money being given. He had always care-
fully endeavoured to conceal it from them. Witness
they stated, that of the 29 supporters of Mr. Raphael
who had not received money from Mr. Edwards, two
bad received money from himself; and that out of 147
supporters of Sir R. Carden, 21 bad received head-
money from him on previous occasions. This was in
addition to those who bad received money from Mr.
Edwards. Witness here mentioned the names of 17
of them. There were a few others he was rather
doubtful about. Sir R. Carden had stated on the pre-
vious day that by a small expenditure of money he
could at the eleventh hour have gained over some of
Mr. Bell's supporters. Witness's experience justified
him stating that was a mistake, and that there was not
a borough in England where the electors were more
faithful to their promises, when once made, than in
St. Alban's. He never recollected more than half a
dozen turncoats on any one occasion.
Mr. Webster was here re-called, and stated that
before he saw Sir R. Carden he had offered the
rough to Mr. Norton—mentioning 2,500/. as the sum
required. He also went to the National Reform As-
sociation in Cheapside, of which Sir J. Walmsley was
chairman, and inquired if they knew of
wished a seat in PHe didarliament._ any one who
not recollect
whom he saw, but he met with no success. Until be
went to Sir R. Carden he did not go upon the purity
principle. That was his last resource.—(Laughter.)
Mr. Fairthorn, the legal agent for Mr. Wilks in
1847, was next examined. Witness was, generally
spealiing, a Liberal in his sentiments. His votes de-
pended on circumstances. He had voted for a Con-
servative once or twice. Mr. Harris managed the
pecuniary transactions of Mr. Wilks's election. Wit-
ness had nothing to do with them. His
fee wa
a 25
guineas ; but, in addition to that, he received auk
presents
got
from Mr. Wilks after the election. Mr.
o expenses
w
230 votes. He believed his whole election
amounted to about 1,0001. Witness
of Mr. Wilks's
was not Cogni-
zantn
of money being paid to
aaPassed through his
voters. Certainly no moneyr Wilks was supported by
had
hands for that purpose.
the Dissenters and others of the Liberal party. There
I
were 72 electors who split their votes between Ar.
Raphael and Mr.
Wilk,'
and 95 whodid the same
between Mr. Craven
and Mr. Wilks, There were
24 plumpers for Mr. Raphael.
Mr. Wilke was not so
Radical as Mr. Raphael. Witness never expected
that Mr. Wilks would succeed without putting his
hand in his pocket. He remembered hearing towards
the close of the election that Mr. Wilks had advanced
a large sum of money—he understood about 8001.—
and he remonatated with him about it, Mr. Wilks