The Sun.
London, England, 1859-10-13 00:00:00

been an appeal to right reason or to mere passion P
They had, at all events, vindicated the dignity of
scientific principles, and had not exhibited the mere
blind impetuosity of ignorance. (Cheers.) The
people of this country had for many years, slowly
and. patiently, but surely, obtained many great re-
forms—as many great reforms as a neighbouring
country had had revolgtions—(hear)—and even the
classes in this country who, by their position, had
to make the concession of these reforms had made
them, if slowly, at all events with a good grace.
(Cheers.) If a tree must be judged of by its fruit,
these were not the fruits of an uneducated nation.
(Great cheering.)
The Association then separated.

THE GLOCES2ER ELECTION COM-
MISSION.

CLOCESTER, OCT. 12.
The Commission met again in the Shire-hall this
morning, and proceeded with their investigation.
It being understood that Sir R. W. Carden, the de-
feated Conservative candidate at the last election,
would be examined, the court was unusually full of
spectators.
Sir R. W. Carden, sworn—Was a candidate for
that city at the last election, and also in 1857. Had
no local or commercial connection with Glocester.
First became a candidate because a deputation of
Glocester gentlemen waited upon him in London to
request him to do so. That must have been several
months before the election in 1857. Had not been
applied to before that
.by Mr. Cooke to become a
candidate. Had no recollection of having had any
conversation or communication with Mr. Cooke on
the subject of his becoming a candidate. Never
heard that Mr. Cooke was an agent of the Carlton
Club. The first deputation consisted of about four
or five gentlemen, among whom were Mr. Mathews,
Mr. Lovegrove, and Mr. R. T. Smith. Thought Mr
Whithosn might also have been one of the mem-
bers. Received a second deputation, composed of
pretty much the same parties as the first, with a
few additions, the names of whom he did not re-
member. Asked the deputation to furnish him with
information as to the nature of the constituency and
his chances of success. His first question to them,
as there had been two Liberal members for Gloces-
ter for many years, was as to what led them to be-
lieve there was an opening and a fair chance for a
Conservative. In answer to this they showed him
the register of voters, and stated, in reply to further
questions, that a very great change had taken place
in the constituency—that formerly the whole cor-
poration, with one or two exceptions, were Liberals,
whereas at that time nearly the entire corporation
were Conservatives. On these representations he
concluded that he had a fair prospect of success.
Nothing was said to him with respect to the venal
character of any'portion of the constituency.. Did
not make any inquiry of the deputation whether it
would be necessary to resort to corrupt practices to
ensure his return. He did not contemplate such a
thing. In fact he might say he believed Gloucester
to be so pure that it would be an honour and dis-
tinction to represent it in Parliament. He then
agreed to become a candidate when a vacancy oc-
curred. Something was said as to the sum of money
that would be required for the 1857 election. Was
very particular in his desire, after being assured of
his prospects of success, to know what the cost of
his return would be. Was told by Mr. Helps, one
of the deputation, on witness stating the difficulty
he fancied must be encountered in opposing a man
like Admiral Berkeley, that he was morally per-
suaded witness had as good a chance of success as
any candidate who might stand, and that, too, at a
smaller cost than was usual. Was not satisfied with
that answer, but asked that gentleman, " What is
your idea of a smaller cost ?" and his reply was,
" I should say between £5OO and £600." That was
the total amount which he was told he would be
required to expend from the commencement of the
canvass till the close of the election. Presumed that
that would be its total cost, supposing the contest
to be conducted on pure principles. Answered
that he did not at all object to that expenditure.
Came down to Gloucester on the day after the dis-
solution in 1857 ; met the constituency at the Bell
Inn, where he was very favourably received, every-
thing he had previously heard being fully confirmed
by the approval of that meeting, and started on his
canvass next morning. Was thus occupied 10 hours
a-day for 10 days, and in fact tired out all his can-
vassers, who were obliged to go home and get re-
lays. Believed he called on every constituent in
Gloucester. Never learnt from any one during his
canvass that it would be requisite at all to resort to
bribery ; and there was nothing whatever to inti-
mate to him that such a course would be necessary.
Was returned for Gloucester in 18.57, and after that
cross petitions were presented and tried before a
committee of the House of Commons. Before the
petitions came on he had not received any state-
ment from Mr. Lovegrove of the expenditure for
his election in 1857. Had never had a state-
ment up to the present time. had the fullest confi-
dence in his agent, and never asked him for any ac-
count. The whole sum he had paid to Mr. Love-
grove in respect to the 1857 election was £4,115
13s. That was the gross total both for the election
and for the cross petition in 1857. Paid that
money at different times. The first payment was
made on the 26th March, and amounted to £3OO.
That was for the preliminary expenses, and he re-
garded it as a portion of the £5OO or £6OO which
the election was to cost him. The first payment
was not asked from him ; he volunteered it at the
Bell to Mr. Lovegrove, not wishing that gentleman
to be out of pocket. The next payments were £2OO
on the 15th of May, £3OO on the 25th of July,
£l,OOO on the 15th of August ; and £2OO more, also
on the 15th of August. This £2OO now appeared
from his book to have been a cheque which he gave
to Mr. Bernard. He had not been aware of that
circumstance. The cheque was drawn in favour of
Mr. Bernard. The other payments were Aug. 20,
£924 18s; Ist October, £4O 155.; and some time in
December, another £1,160. These various sums
made up the aggregate of £4,115 13s. Made the
payments to Mr. Lovegrove as he required them.
Never asked him what they were for. Imagined
they were payments on account. Never asked him
for any bill of costs, and never received one. Never
asked him for any cash account. Never asked him
to distinguish between the moneys required for the
election proper and those required for the petitions.
If Mr. Lovegrove had asked him for further sums in
regard to the 1857 election witness had no doubt he
would have paid them in the same manner without
inquiry, unless, indeed,. that gentleman had called
for some excessive amount, in which case he would
have requested some information about it. Was
really not aware that he had paid the £2OO cheque
to Mr. Bernard till he was looking over his
cheque-book the other day. Supposed that Mr.
Bernard must have told him before the cheque
was drawn that ho had paid £2OO for him, but
that gentleman would be able to explain it.
Mr. Bernard was a friend of his, and he accom-
panied witness to Gloucester at the 1857 election.
The dates of his various payments for the election
in 1859 were,—April 25, £5OO to Mr. Lovegrbve ;
in the early part of May, £5OO to Mr. Bernard;
May 11, £675 to Mr. Lovegrove, and to the.same
gentleman, £7O 15s. Gd. on the Ist of July ; £4OO
on the 13th of July; and £4OO on the 4th of Au-
gust ; making a total of £2,545 15s. 6d. No in-
formation was given to him by Mr. Lovegrove as
to how these sums were to be or had been expended.
For what he knew they might have all been for
the election or all for the petition. His impression,
however, was, that the last two sums of £4OO each
were for the petition. Expostulated with Mr.
Lovegrove when he paid him the £675 on the large-
ness of the amount expended at the election.
Thought there must have been most suspicious and
unwarrantable expenditure, taking into considera-
tion Mr. Bernard's unauthorised advance. Mr.
LoVegrove said the election had been very expen-
sive, and a great many. people were employed. Be-
lieved every professional man in Glocester was en-
gaged in one way or another. Refused at first to
repay Mr. Bernard's advance. Had read in Mr.
Lovegrove's evidence that all the bills were not
paid, and was sorry to hear it. It would surprise
him much to hear that the election would cost him
about £l,OOO more than he had paid. After the
disclosures made in the court he was no longer of
opinion that his last election was a pure one. (A
laugh.) He had no doubt now that money must
have been expended in bribery, but could not say
that one man in particular was bribed.
Commissioner Vaughan—lf you did doubt it you
would be the only person in this court who clod.
(A laugh.)
Sir It. Carden—l am afraid there are too many
ha beend baeegnreaatwdaerael
ntio.o good-natured. I only wish I
recipients of the money now in this court. I have
what was done in 1857, and
then you may depend upon it I should not have been
a candidate in 1859. I wish I had not had such im-
plicit confidence in Mr. Lovegrove, and that I had
had an account of the expenditure for 1857. Be.
lieved the last election would have been purer had
it not been for the impression that a candidate was
coming down on the other 'side who was deter-
mined to carry the election at whatever expendi-
ture. If the promise I obtained in 1857 had been
kept in 1859 I should have had the majority of votes.
The witness added, in reply to questions, that he
was not aware that many of his promises in-1857
were secured by bribery. Had seen the auditoy's
return of his expenses for 1859. (This return gave
the total at £1,021.) Hoped Mr. Lovegrove would
honestly account for the whole of the money, and
had no doubt that he would. Repeated that he had
had implicit confidence in his agent. Would never
have come to Glocester first or last, if he had
thought corruption necessary to secure his return.