The Sun.
London, England, 1866-10-11 00:00:00

three-fourths of the boroughs of the United King-
dom were as venal as Yarmouth, perhaps not equally
so. If Sir E. Lacon was of opinion that Yarmouth
could be won without money, witness did not agree
with him. Witness did not consider it a fair infe-
rence that because Mr. Nightingale advanced £l,OOO
on behalf of Sir E. Lacon, therefore Mr. Reynolds
advanced a similar sum on his behalf. He did not
agree with Mr. Watkin as to the majority of the
voters in Yarmouth being Liberal in 1859 ; he
thought it was just the contrary. Witness was
rather disappointed at Sir E. Lacon's want of in-
fluence. He retired from Yarmouth not because of
its venality, but because he had other views.
Mr. Watkin, M.P., before leaving the room, said
he thought the constituency was made worse in
1859 than in 1857, and in 1865 worse still. He re-
quested his leading friends in 1859 to keep clear of
all the difficulties which had distressed him so much
in 1857. In 1860 he heard about Sir E. Lacon's de-
sire for a compromise through Mr. Rose, of the
Carlton ; he supposed it arose from a desire to
cover those things which persons were afterwards
ashamed of.

Mr. Fitzgerald—Sir E. Lacon says he knew
nothing about bribery. (Laughter.)
Mr. Watkin said of the money which he pro-
vided in 1857 and 1859 nothing was paid by
checks—all in notes and sovereigns. The story about
Mr. Mainprice finding a large sum of money in his
pockets was quite new to witness ; he first heard of
it through reading it in the Times.
Mr. W. C. Reynolds said he did not draw upon
Sir H. Stracey's bankers in 1859: he knew, how-
ever, that money was obtained from them.
He now heard for the first time that he had
carte blanche to draw upon Sir Henry. Witness
learnt from Mr. Hill, manager of the bank of Messrs.
Harveys and Hudsons, Sir H. Stracey's bankers,
that money was to be sent in a particular way. On
the Saturday before the election he received a parcel
from Mr. Hill, of Norwich. It contained £l,OOO,
and he gave it to Mr. Green, the leading Conser-
vative " illegal agent." Witness acted on behalf
of Sir H. Stracey, in order to see fair play between
him and Sir Edmund Lacon. One of the parcels
of money came, but not through witness. He learnt
about it from Mr. Green. He should say the total
spent was about £1,500.

Mr. E. R. ALDRED, the election auditor in 1859,
deposed that the expenses returned were, on the
part of Sir E. Lacon and Sir H. Stracy, £BO9 ; and
on the part of Mr. Watkin and Mr. Young, £603.
There were some miscellaneous expenses, amounting
to £2O, but witness could not remember to which
side these expenses referred. At their unopposed
election in August, 1857, the joint expenses of Mr.
Mellor and Mr. Young were returned at £375.
Mr. A. W. YOUNG, late M.P. for Helston, said'
he formerly represented what is now the colony of
Victoria in the Legislative Council of New South
Wales. Witness returned to England in 1851, and
was returned for Yarmouth with Mr. Mellor in
August, 1857. Mr. M'Cullagh was a club acquaint-
ance. A gentleman named Humphreys, now coro-
ner for Middlesex, first suggested that he should
come to Yarmouth. Mr. M'Cullagh, through Mr.
Humphreys, stood his friend. It was generally
understood among the Liberal party that he was
ready and desirous to go into Parliament. There
was no pecuniary arrangement between witness and
Mr. M'Cullagh. Witness had heard long ago that
he was said to have paid £5OO to Mr. M'Cullagh
for his good will, but it was a mere idle rumour.
When witness and Mr. Mellor first came to Yar-
mouth in August, 1857, there was every appear-
ance of a probable contest, but at the last moment
Sir E. Lacon announced his intention to retire.
Witness came down to Yarmouth with Mr.
Watkin in 1859 to canvass. His election agent
was Mr. Clowes, but Mr. Chamberlin was his pro-
fessional friend. He gave Mr. Chamberlin £25.
His whole election expenses in 1859 were between
£l,lOO and £1,200. A good deal of this sum was
paid during the election. He brought down with
him £5OO, and gave checks for £320. Afterwards
he paid Mr. Clowes £3OO, Mr. Chamberlin, £25,
&c. He subscribed £l5O to the subsequent petition,
and a further sum afterwards. He knew that the
£5OO was intended for Mr. Mainprice. He knew
nothing about the great-coat-pocket story. Mr.
Mainprice was known to be managing the election.
Witness remembered a check for £BO being de-
stroyed on the morning of the polling-day. He
never heard of Mr. C. Steward during the election
of 1859. Mr. M'Cullagh never 'made any repre-
sentation to him as to his expenditure in Yarmouth
prior to the election of 1857. Witness knew no-
thing as to differences as to money between Mr.
M'Cullagh and Mr. Watkin. Witness never formed
any opinion from his canvass in 1857 as to the
electoral purity or impurity of the borough. He
never heard at the election of 1859 that bribery
would be necessary on the Liberal side. On the
polling day he heard that the Conservatives had
bought away Liberal votes, and he also came to the
conclusion that the Liberals themselves had been
guilty of corrupt practices.