The Sun.
London, England, 1859-10-05 00:00:00

WAKEFIELD ELECTION COMIIIISSIO..Y.

WAKEFIELD, TUESDAY.
The inquiry commenced to-day at the Court-
house, before Mr. Sergeant Pigott, Mr. Willes, and
Mr. Slade, the commissioners appointed by her
Majesty to inquire into the condition of the borough.
Mr. Sergeant Pigott said the commission was
appointed under the 15th and 16th Victoria, cap.
57. No doubt it was familiar to all persons con-
nected with that borough that a committee of the
House of Commons had signified in a resolution
that corrupt practices had existed at the last elec-
tion for the borough. By the Bth section of the
act power was given to the commissioners to sum-
mon any person they thought proper, and to call
upon them to produce papers and documents. If
the witnesses did this and told the whole truth it
remained with the commissioners to give them in-
demnification by certificate against the consequences
of bribery. There was no limit to the powers of
the commissioners in their endeavours to arrive at
the truth, and it was therefore his duty to warn
all who might be called before them that the con-
sequences of equivocation might be dangerous.
With those observations he would now proceed to
call before them such witnesses, as far as he was
aware, to speak to those things which were made
known by the investigation before a committee of
the House of Commons.
Mr. James Whitham, town clerk, examined by
Mr. Sergeant Pigott, said—The number of voters
was 952. Of these 70 were double numbers, leaving
882. There were 809 voted last election, 406 for
Mr. Leatham and 403 for Mr. Charlesworth. The
previous election, which took place on the 27th of
March, 1857, was an uncontested one. Mr. John
Charlesworth Dodson Charlesworth was then re-
turned. Mr. Leatham was in the field, but he
withdrew from the contest. The next election
before that was in July, 1852, when Mr. Leatham
and Mr. George Sandon were the candidates. Mr.
Sandon was returned. In July, 1847, there was a
contested election. Mr. Sandon and Mr. W. Alex-
ander were the candidates. The number polled
was 650-392 voting for Sandon, and 258 for Alex-
ander. I myself took no part in the last election.
I simply voted.
Mr. Harrison (examined by Mr. Willes) said—l
was election auditor before the commission. Mr.
Bruce was Mr. Leatham's agent, and Mr. Taylor
was agent for Mr. Charlesworth. I audited the
accounts within three months from the 2d of May.
I delivered to the town clerk the accounts which
were sent in to me. I have a statement of them at
my office.
Mr. Bruce (examined by Mr. Sergeant Pigott)
said—l am a barrister, and was agent for election
expenses on the side of Mr. Leatham at the last
election. I kept my account in a little memoran-
dum book; but I have not the original copy. I
destroyed it. I burnt it because it had got dirty,
and made another copy. I sent a copy to Mr.
Leatham. That was just three months after the
election, when the petition was going on. I will
undertake to swear that the copy I now hand in is
a true one. I have been at the bar four years and
know the value of an original copy. Mr. Wain-
wright was agent for Mr. Leatham at the election.
I know of the expenditure of £4BO. I do not
actually know of any other, but I believe more
money was spent. I forget the amount, but have
heard that there was £450 beyond the £4BO spent.
I have heard a good deal about bribery. I heard
it said that there had been something like £4,000
spent on the opposite side— the Conservative ; and
I have heard it said that as much had been spent
on ours. I heard that said by different persons at
different times, but it was from no person having
authority, and. I cannot remember any of their

nanlyes B Mr. Slade—l know a man named Thomas
Field Gilbert. I have seen him in Wakefield before
the election. He was introduced to me under the
name of Field. He came before the election com-
menced and remained till it was over.
Mr. Morgan, deputy town-clerk, produced the
accounts of the election auditor, which he received
on the 14th of August.
John Toting Sweeting said,—l am a publican. I
signed the petition against Mr. Leatham's return.
I signed it because I knew from Mr. Charlesworth's
canvass that he must have been returned if there
had not been bribery. Mr. Westmoreland said that
if he would sign the petition, Mr. Barff would hold
him free of all expenses.
Mr. Samuel Richard Green, the other,petitioner,
was then called, but did not answer to his name.
Thomas Beaumont said,—l am a voter for the
borough and a tailor. In the early part of the year
a man named Denison came to me. I was then in
poor circumstances. He asked me if £lO or L 1.5
would be of any service to me. I looked astonished,
when he said, " You need not look alarmed ; you
can have it if you like." I afterwards met Deni-
son at the bottom of George-street. I then got
£lO to vote for Leatham. I did not vote for him.
After the election Denison asked me for the £lO
back. I received nothing for voting on the other
side, nor for voting at previous elections.
By Mr. Willes—l have received nothing before
or since the election, on Mr. Charles worth's side.
Mr. Slade—Do you know the meaning of the
word " sugar,—brass sugar ?"
Witness—Yes.
Mr. Slade—Did you ever hear of any person hav-
ing brass sugar for his vote I"
Witness— heard of a man named John Jackson
getting £3O for his vote.
Henry Denison said he remembered going to
Thomas Beaumont's house in January last, when he
asked him to get him a loan ofi:10 from Mr. Wain-
wright. The money was lent, and Beaumont signed
a promissory note for it. It was not lent with the
object of bribing, although he was asked to vote for
Mr. Leatham.
Thomas Beaumont, recalled, said—Denison did
pay my rate last January. He gave me a pound
then, I never asked him to pay it. He came to
my house and said he had been to pay it with some
others that day.
John Jackson—l keep the Prospect House. Mr.
Hinchliffe called on me in January last. He never
offered me any money. He called on my wife, and
offered to give her £lO or £l5 to get me to vote for
him. Hinchliffe afterwards gave my wife £3O. I
saw only a sovereign of the money lying on the
table, but I never saw any of the £29. The sove-

. _
reign was, given to Hinchliffe. My wife called to
him as he was going through the bar, and said,
" This man wants something." He told her to
give him a sovereign. She said she had £3O, but I
did not see it. I signed a note when the money
was paid. I never kew how the money was spent.
I voted for Mr. Charlesworth. He came back for
the money a fortnight after the election. He re-
ceived the money to vote for Mr. Charlesworth. He
never repaid it, but a person named Jacob Harrison
came for it. Mr. Charlesworth asked me for my
vote. I neither promised nor refused him, and said
that I had not made up my mind. I did not tell
Mr. Charlesworth that I had been offered £3O to
vote for Mr. Leatham.
By Mr. Willes—Some of the voters used to come
to my house, but it was not made an open house.
Sarah Jackson said—l am the wife of the last
witness. I remember Hinchliffe coming to my
house and giving me £3O. My husband was not
present. The money was given to me to persuade
my:husband to vote for Mr. Leatham.. I gave £1
back. I myself took care of the £29, and after-
wards paid my debts with it. A man named Jacob
Harrison came twice to the house for the money
back. Hinchliffe also came for it. I asked him
who the money belongred to, and he said it was his.
I said, "How can it be yours, when you had to go
three times to the committee-room for it ?" I did
not persuade my husband to vote for Mr. Charles-
worth, but for Mr. Leatham.
By Mr. Willes—lt was on the Monday before
the election that Hinchliffe brought the £3O.
Edward Hinchliffe (examined by Mr. Sergeant
Pigott) said—l am a plumber. I remember taking
.£3O to Jackson before the election. Ido not know
the gentleman from whom I received the money.
He was a stranger to me. I had the money in my
possession a couple of hours before I gave it to
Jackson. I received the money from a gentleman
in Mr. Wainwright's office, in George-street. He
was called Field or Gilbert. I took the money out
of a small bag. I offered a voter named Rogerson £2O.
I expected to get that £2O from the same source as I
received the other. I canvassed a person named Wm.
Bairstow, living in Westgate, and several others,
but did not offer them money. Nobody told me
to offer money. It was my own idea, and I
guessed where it might be got. I canvassed a
man named Wainwright, landlord of the White
Bear, a publichouse on the Bradford road, for Mr.
Leatham. I offered him £2O for his vote, which he
accepted. I got the money from Gilbert, at Mr.
Wainwright's office, and gave it to Wainwright,
who, after all, voted for Charlesworth. I got the
money back from him after the election, and applied
it to my own purposes. These were the only persons
whom I bribed, or offered to bribe, in the course of
the election. £2O was about the market price of a
vote, though I have heard of as much as £lOO being
offered. I always did business myself at the lower
amount.

Mrs. Beaumont, wife of a former witness, was
called and denied that she- had ever told Denison
that the Conservatives had offered her husband
money for his vote.

Mr. Beverley, an outfitter, was also examined on
this part of the case. He had canvassed Beaumont
before the election, and had got him to promise to
vote for Leatham. A day or two before the polling,
having heard from Denison that the Blues had
bought Beaumont, lie called on him and found his
wife in. She took him into a side-room to " tell
him all about it." " Our principles are Yellow,