The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-23 00:00:00

LEWES,

Mr. Summers Harford and Mr. Elphinstone were re-
turned as duly elected ;
Mr. Fitzrey and Lord Cantalupe being the opposing
candidates.
The state of the poll was—

Mr. S. liarKird 4ll
Mr. H. Elphinstone
Mr. Fitzroy
Lord Cantalupe 3BB
That a petition was presented against the return of
the sitting Members by certain electors, on behalf of
Mr. Fitzroy and Lord Cantalupe, which petition, among
other things, accused the sitting Members of having
been guilty, by themselves and agents, of bribery, cor-
ruption, treating.
That a Committee was appointed to try the case
of the said petition, but that its investigations were
suddenly arrested by a compromise entered into by the
agents of the sitting Members on the one part, and of
Mr. Fitzroy and Lord Cantalupe on the other.
This agreement by the agents was sanctioned and
acted on by the principals ; and the Committee beg
leave to invite the serious attention of the House to the
mode in which the stipulations of this agreement, so far
as regards the alteration of the poll, were carried out, and
as explained in the answer given to question 1,053.
The terms of this agreement were, in fact, set down in
writing, but that writing itself has not been seen by the
Committee ; by the witnesses it is described to have
been as follows : _ _ _

1. That the general case of bribery and treating should
be withdrawn on the part of Mr. Fitzroy and Lord Can-
talupe.
2. That in case the agents should be unable to place
Mr. Fitzroy in a majority by a scrutiny; then one of the
sitting Members should resign by accepting the Chiltern
Hundreds, and that no opposition was to be offered to
the return of Mr. Fitzroy,' either by Mr. ElphinstOne or
Mr. Harford. _ _

3. That all actions and indictments preferred, respect-
ing conduct at the election, should on both sides be
withdrawn.

hlr. Fitzroy and Mr. Elphinstone were placed on the
poll above Mr. S. Harford by a pre-arranged scrutiny,
and Mr. Summers Harford was unseated.

The circumstances which induced the sitting Mem-
bers to make this arrangement were, first and chiefly,
an apprehension that the accusations of the petitions
would be proved against them; their agent declaring,
" We have only fourteen or fifteen hours to decide it in"
(viz., whether an agreement should be made); " and
after all you have heard, I can only say, that it is lunacy
to continue the contest, and you had better arrange it."
The second cause for making the arrangement was the
fear of incurring a heavy expense in a hopeless contest.
The Committee also found that the number of electors
was about 850 ; and that the gross cost of the election
to Mr. Elphinstone and Mr. S. Harford, on the one side,
was 5,000/.

Of this sum, 2,000/. were expended in treating, and
about 1,200/. or 1,500/. in direct bribery.
The two Members state that they were not personally
cogizant of this bribery, either before or during the
election.

The gross cost of the election to Mr. Fitzroy and Lord
Cantalupe was, as nearly as your Committee could as-
certain, 2,0001.
The manner in which this money was expended is ex-
plained in the evidence of Mr. Fitzroy, who distinctly de-
clares that none was spent in direct bribery ; but states
that a portion was expended in keeping open houses be-
fore the test of the writ.
That the Committee think it right to add, that there
were charges of bribery made by the agents of the sitting
Members against the petitioners.
Your Committee also found that in the case of
READING,

at the last general election, Mr. C. Russell and Lord
Chelsea were declared duly elected ; that the opposing
candidates were Mr. T. Mills and Mr. W. Tooke.
The state of the poll was—
Mr. Russell 570
Lord Chelsea 564
Mr. Mills 4lO
Mr. Tooke 397
That a petition was presented by Mr. T Mills, one of
the candidates, which charged, among other things,
that "gross and systematic bribery and corruption were
practised and carried on at the said election by divers
persons, with a view to the election of the said C. Russell
and Viscount Chelsea."
That the Committee think it right to add that there
were charges of bribery made by the agents of the
sitting Members against the petitioners.