The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-17 00:00:00

GREAT 111ARLOW.

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday )
Mr. Sergeant MEREWETSIER then proceeded to the cases
connected with the removals.
Henry Stalwood, the returning-officer at the last election of
Great Marlow, was called, and produced the poll- book, which
had been in his possession since the election.
William Barton was the first case of removal, and
William Smith was called and sworn. He deposed that he
was one of the overseers of Great Marlow. He produced the
rate-book, and in that book William Barton was rated for a
house in West-street, at the rate of 171. ; the owner, Sir Wm.
Clayton, Bart. This was on the 25th of April, 1840.
In the rate-book, under the date of the 17th of April
1841, the house formerly occupied by William Barton, was en-
tered on the rate-book as empty.
Thomas Walker proved that in April last the house formerly
occupied by Barton was then to be let. There was a bill in
the window, stating the house was to let, and which remained
there for five or six weeks. The notice was up a few weeks be-
fore the election.

Mr. Edward Stubbs, resides at Dorchester ; was at Great
Marlow 21st April last, for the purpose of hiring a house.
Called on Mr. Tyler, in Marlow, the agent of Sir W. Clayton ;
went with him to a house in the street, leading to the Market-
place. The house was pointed out to witness a few days ago,
and it was then empty. Did not take the house in April, but
can swear that it was not inhabited then.

John Smith went with the last witness to the house in West-
street, Marlow. That was the house occupied by Mr. Barton.
Believes Mr. Tyler to be the agent of Sir Wm. Clayton.
Josiah Clarke lives in Marlow. Knew where Barton lived.
Went with the overseer when he collected the rate from Mr.
Barton in his new house.

John Hackshaw lives in Great Marlow. knows West-street
well. Barton lived in West-street till about ten days before
Lady-day last. Saw him take his furniture away. After that
saw workmen in the house. The house has never been occu-
pied since.

James Batsing worked in the house formerly occupied by Bar-
ton. Was doing repairs in the house. Mr. Tyler sent him in,
and paid him for his work. Was at work as a bricklayer's
tabourer.

Cross-examined—Has had the misfortune to have been com-
mitted to prison for stealing sausages. " But," said the wit-
ness, " I didn't have 'em."—(Laughter.) Will swear it was
Mr. Tyler that paid him for his work.
Re-examined—Has been employed in other places for Sir
Wm. Clayton, and was then paid by Mr... Howe, the keeper.
This was the case against the vote.
Mr. Cocialtrux then called the following witnesses in sup-
port of the vote.

Mr. Wm. Tyler being sworn, deposed that he collected
rents of property belonging to Sir W. Clayton. Mr. Barton
occupied the house in West-street. On the 23d June, 1840,
received a notice to quit from Barton, which expired at Christ-
mas, 1840. Barton continued in occupation up to that time
and afterwards. In 1841, he proposed to give up the pre-
mises. Witness objected to it, as he required a fresh six
months' notice. Barton acquiesced in the term ; but he com-
plained that it was a hard case. There is not a redundancy of
tenants in Marlow. Mr. Barton had taken a new house, but
he paid witness the rent up to Michaelmas, 1841. The rent
was 25/. Mr. Barton complained, and wished to state the
case to Sir William Clayton. Witness said he Would
do what he could to let the house. Witness probably
put the notice in the window. There were fruit-trees in the
garden of the house, and at Michaelmas Mr. Barton took the
fruit. The garden was highly cultivated, and he took the
produce during the summer. The house was out of repair,
and the witness thought that if it was repaired it might let
better. Witness made a proposal to Mr. Barton to have the
house repaired, which proposal was acceded to. Witness had
the key of the house from Mr. Barton, which was returned
when the repairs were finished. Mr. Barton held the key
till Michaelmas.

Cross-examined—Paid for the repairs of the house on account
of Sir William Clayton. Mr. Barton received the key back
about two mouths before the election took place. Has seen the
fa:isily of Mr. Barton gathering the fruit, and amongst the
flowers.

Re-examined—The house is not let at the present time.
Frederick Barton, is a son of William Barton, formerly of
West-street, Marlow. Remembers his father taking another house
at Lady-day.- He wished to give up the house in West-street,
but that was refused by the landlord. Remembers the
repairs being done in the house ; and also remembers 1
that the key was given up by his father to Mr.
Tyler. His father received the key hack again. Has
had the key in his ( witness's) posa ssion since, and has
gathered fruit in the garden. That was on the 2nd of Augu t.
Cross-examined—The Louse his father removed to was also
situated in \Vest-street. The fruit in the garden consisted of
apples, cherries, pea's, strawberries. &e. Will swea" it was
lull a month before the election took place that he went into
the house after they had removed to the new house.
It-examine:l.—Will swear he was in the garden before the
e'ec•ion was talked about.

Mr Cocxnuitx then addressed the Committee in support of
the vote.

Mr Sergeant MEREWETIIER replied.
The Committee then adjourned is II o'clock to-morrow..

BOROUGH OF CLITHEROE. .
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Mr. Witaxciraar, in opening the case for the petitioner,
said that the borough, although an old one in name and his-
tory, was in reality a new one. It had been a borough before
the Reform Bill, when the fianchige was by burgage tenure;
but now there was not one of the old burgesses in the con-
stituency. The number of voters at the time of the last regis-
tration was 387, of whom 175 voted, at the election on the 6th
of July last, for Mr. Wilson, the sitting Member, and 170 for
11 r. Card Nell, the petitioner ' • so that there were upon the registry
42 who did not vote at all. Some time before the election a requi-
sition was presented to Mr. Cardwell, inviting him to stand, and
pledging the requisitionists to support him with their votes.
Phis requisition was signed by a considerable majority of the
electors, and there were a number of others, who though they
did riot put their names to that document, yet supported
Air. Cardwell at the election. Under these circumstances he
might !airly have expected success without being too sanguine.
But the fortune of the day was otherwise, and tie was in a mi-
nority of five instead of a majority of five times that number.
What were the causes which induced no less than 25 of the re-
quisitionists to Vote fur his opponent, and what induced five
others who signed the requisition to violate their p (nuke arid
to abstain altoge her from voting, would be one main branch
of this inquiry. The petitioner, in the first place, prayed for
he seat, and, tailing to establish les right to that upon the scru-
tiny, that the election be voided on the grounds of Lribery
and corn option. He would not go into a detail of
the law of bribery, nor into an exposition of the vari-
ous kinds of arts which constituted bribery. These
points were well understood by every member of the Commit-
tee—of course he meant not by their personal expel knee. If
the result of the scrutiny should not be, as he had reason to be-
lieve it would be, to place the petitioner at the head of the
poll, he (Mr. IV.) would feel it hie duty to show that the sit-
ting Member hail been guilty of acts of bribery, not
only by his agents but by his nearest relations, and by
his own direct acts. In discharging this duty, if it should come
to be necessary, he would have to do much violence to his own
feelings, and to implicate in practices of more than ordinary
corruption several gentlemen. hitherto of respectable character,
one of them a magistrate of the county, and another
a member of the most sacred profession—a clergyman
of the Church of England. He should show that sonie
of those who had signed the requisition to Mr. Cardwell
were carried off to the seat of the sitting Member's
father, the Reverend Jeremiah Wilson, at Eshton Hall, and
others to places in the neighbourhood of that seat; that
there they were feaste,), intoxicated, and even drugged--
that is, not simply intoxicated, but intoxicated with
liquors having something put into them more than the
usud ingredients. Whatever was the influence exercised over
those persons at Eshton Hall, the result was, that, with one
exception, they voted against the petitioner, whom they had
invited to become a candidate, and pledged themselves to sup-
port. This much would be shown that a system of extravagant
revelry %vas carried on at Eshton Hali, and the Committee
would be enabled to judge what other inducements were
brought to influence those voters, when they saw
what were the inducements brought to bear in other
cases in which 'that of bribery was applied readily,
loosely, and lavishly. Of the persons carried away to the Rev.
Mr. Wilson's. seat, one remained-tree to his promise. No in-
ducement could shake his resolution, and if he could by any
means go to the poll he would have done so. But when his
companions were sent to Clitheroe, it was not deemed prudent
to let him go with them, although he entreated the Rev.
Gentleman to release him. But he was sent to a distant place,
from which it was impossible for him to reach the town in time
to give his vote; and when he was seen after an absence of four
days, he wore a hat, which was certainly not his
own, but belonged to the Rev. Jeremiah Wilson, whose name
was written in it in his own handwriting, as would be proved
to corroborate the other evidence that would be adduced.
'1 he elector he spoke of had been taken forcibly away from
Clitheroe ; whilst they were dragging him into the coach to take
him to Eshton Hall, his' hat fell off, and wal lost. In the mean
time there, was enough going on in the town to show the
Committee what else besides mere revelry was going
on at Mr. Wilson's. Here the Reverend Gentleman
figured again ; and many were the ingenious devices
resorted to to disguise the real character of the trans-
actions, and to escape, if not detection, at least punishment.
Old claims were trumped up, and under pretence of dis-
charging them, money was paid that never was due. A man
named Benjamin Swales had made a claim for 271. against the
Committee of the Clitheroe Schools for jobbing work, which
they refused to pay on account of the extrava-
gance of the demand. Upon this he brought
an action against three of the members, Messrs. Anderton, An-
derson, and Hopwood. There was on the Committee a gen-
tleman named Garnet, one of the chief supporters of Mr. Wil-
son, and he was, though not directly, a party to the action
brought by Swales, one of the most strenuous in resist-
ing his claim. But when Swales saw what his neighbours
were getting by their votes, he declared that he would only vote
for the candidate who paid him the alleseddebts and costs of the