The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-05-31 00:00:00

ECCLESIASTICAL.

PREFERMENTS AND APPOINTNIENTs.
Rev. J. Allen, to the Curacy of Long Sutton, Cambridgeshire
Rev. 0. B. Byers, to the Perpetual Curacy of Christ Church,r
Croydon, Surrey.
Rev. F. A. Crooke, M.A., C
Rectory of that parish.
Rev. E. P. Eddrup, M.A., to the Curacy of the newly-conse-
crated Church of St. Gabriel, Warwick-square, Pimlico.
Rev. R. M. Evanson, M.A., Rector of Llansoy, Monmouth-
shire, to the Rural Deanery of Mitchell-Troy.
Rev. H. E. B. Ffolkes, M.A., Incumbent of St. Martin-at-
Palace, Norwich, to the Rectory of Broughton, Norfolk.
Rev. W, Gill, jun., 8.A., to the vicarage of Pullozhili, Beds.
Rev. A. R. Grant, M.A., Fellow of Trinity College, to the
Incumbency of St. 3fichael's, Cambridge.
Rev. W. W. Harvey, M.A., to be Domestic Chaplain to Vis-
count Falmouth.
Rev. R. H. Howard, M.A., late Incumbent r f St. Matthew's
Church, City-road, London, to the Vicarage of I).ilston, Cum.
Berland.
Rev. M. Jefferys, M.A., to the Rectory of South Thoreshy,
near Alford, Lincolnshire.
—Rev. W. G. Jervis, M.A., to the Curacy of Kingston-on-

Curate of Kingsdown, Kent, to the

Rev. G. Kemp, M.A late Curate of St. Dionis Blackchurch,
o the Curacy of St. Giles's, Cripplegate.
Rev. T. Langley, Incumbent of Landow..,
the Rectory of Ganerew, Herefordshire.
Rev. C. Lee, M.A., Incumbent of Bingfield, near Hexha,
an Honorary Canonry in Durham Cathedral.
R. H. Morgan, M.A., Incumbent of Merthyr-mawr,
lgend, Glarnorganshire, to the Curacy of Llanguick,

Monmouthshire,

SECOND EDITION.

MONDAY, MAY 30.

The committee assembled this morning at eleven
o'clock, Mr. Ingham chairman. The inquiry appeared to
excite great interest, and during the day the committee-
room was crowded to excess. A large number of influen-
tial gentlemen from Liverpool were present, and watched
the proceedings with much interest. Mr. Turner and
other members of Parliament likewise attended during
the day.

A. preliminary discussion took place with reference to
the presence in the committee-room of gentlemen who
had been summoned as witnesses. Mr. Sergeant KING-
LAKE, for the petitioners, complained that Mr. J. B.
Lloyd, Mr. William Rowett, Mr. J. Shaw Leigh, and
Mr. Thomas Bold appeared in the committee-room,
though they had been warranted: to attend as witnesses
for the petitioners. He submitted that they should
be excluded until the proper time came for calling
them for examination. Mr. JAMES, for the sitting
members, contended that the mere fact of a warrant
having been served upon the gentlemen in question
was not sufficient to authorise their exclusion i • but
Mr. Sergeant Kinglake having given a pledge that he
really intended to call them as witnesses, the committee
requested them to leave the room, which they did.
Mr. JAMES.—I hope it will be understood by the agents
for the petitioners that the gentlemen who have just left
the room are here as their witnesses, and at their expense.
Mr. Sergean't KINGLAKE : Of course, that is under-
stood. I hope, Mr. James, you are now satisfied.
Mr. JAMES : No, I am not. (A laugh.)
case Mr.
forStehr
eg epaent t
iko'nEsevrGs L, A %Hee then
—proceeded,
itno t ()bpi
se ne
atshee,
together with my learned friend by my side, in support of
the prayer of this petition. The matter which is to be
submitted to you is one of very grave and very serious
importance. It is a matter of importance, undoubtedly,
as it regards the sitting members ; it is a matter of very
great importance as it regards the borough of Liverpool ;
but I think it is a Matter of still higher interest—it is
of very vast Importance —as it concerns the true re-
presentative system of this country ; and the great
question Which is about to be submitted to you is,

whether the borough of Liverpool—whether the voice
of one of the first, if not the first, commercial communi-
ties of this country—is to be truly heard in the House of
Commons ; or whether it is to be silenced by a system
which has long continued, and which, I am sorry to say,
still continues to exercise its power and its influence in
Liverpool, to the degradation and to the destruction of the
true exercise of the franchise of the constituency of that
place ? When I state that I state it advisedly, because I
have no doubt you will find in the course of this in-
quiry that everything which I will call your attention
to will be fully borne out in evidence, and that the
question I will raise will be a question of vast
importance, and one which will require your most serious
consideration, I do not say it in corroboration of my
views, but I am quite satisfied that great public in terest
is awakened with reference to this inquiry, and I have no
doubt for the wise and sufficient reason that your decision
upon it will be likely for the future to influence and direct
what shall be the course to be pursued with refe-
rence to constituencies similarly conditioned with
that of Liverpool. Now, sir, the object of this
inquiry is to unmask before you—to lay, as far a
we are able, before you—the general system of cor-
ruption, of bribery, and of treating which has for a
long period of time existed in Liverpool, and which was in
full operation at the last election. There is no doubt that
the inquiry, as it goes on, will disclose to you not any small
nr partial system of bribery or of treating, but that there
has been bribery and treating conducted upon a regular
system—premeditated and pre-determined—and that, too,
by those who, from their position and from their high cha.
racter in the borough of Liverpool, I think ought to have
abstemiously abstained from practices of this description.
All I can trust is, that the result of this inquiry will
be, for the future, to eradicate the evil, and to enable
those who have the right to exercise their franchise
in the borough of Liverpool to know that their voice
is undoubtedly heard in the House of Commons in truth
and in fact, and not as a matter of name, and as a
matter of pretence only ; far I may say, without hesi-
tation, that, in consequence of that which at former elec-
tions, as well as at the last election, was in full operation
at Liverpool, there can be no doubt that there has been
such a check upon the true declaration of the opinion of
the constituency of that place as hat proved fatal to what
I call the true representation of Liverpool in the House
of Commons ; and it is certainly a matter of great
importance, and it will be a matter for the serious
consideration of the committee, whether the facts
which are brought before you do or do not fully
justify me in making the remarks which I have thought fit
to offer in introducing this case. The real and only

question will be, whether, for the future, the representa-
tion of Liverpool shall be a piece of mockery and delusion,
or whether or not the people of Liverpool shall haye their
wishes and their wants truly, properly, and fairly repre.
sented in the House of Commons. The facts of this case
are somewhat invalid and intricate, but it is not my in-
tention to occupy much of your time in scattering your
attention over the details. First of all I will call your
attention to the peculiar position of the constituency of
Liverpool, and then to the means which have been had
recourse to, and particularly at the last election, for the
purpose of preventing the constituency of that great and
important commercial community from giving fair and
true expression to their opinion. Now, I will call your
attention, in the first instance, to the time of the last
election. The nomination took place on Tuesday, the
6th of July, and the polling on Wednesday, the 7th.
The successful candidates at the election were Mr. Forbes
Mackenzie and Mr. Charles Turner, the last being a
highly respectable and eminent merchant in Liverpool—a
gentleman undoubtedly well qualified to represent the
commercial interests of that borough, but who, when he
aspires to an honour of that kind, must take cars to attain
it through legitimate means, and not through such as may
become the subject matter of an inquiry before a Par-
liamentary Committee. The unsuccessful candidates were
Mr. Cardwell and Mr. Joseph Christopher Ewart, the
latter being also a merchant in Liverpool. The name of
Ewart must be familiar to all those who are conversant
with Liverpool. I will now call your attention to the
numbers polled at the last election, a matter of some im-
portance, as you will find by and bye. The numbers
polled were—for Turner, 6,693 ;. that gentleman standing
prominently at the head of the poll ; for Mackenzie,
6.367 ; for Cardwell, 5,247 ; and for Ewart 4,910.
And now the question comes to be at once intro-
duced to your notice, how was this majority brought
about ? how was the election conducted ? what is
the accusation to be brought against the sitting
members ? and how is it to be proved ? There is tr very
important part to which I have to call the attention of the
committee in the first place, and that is. that in the
borough of Liverpool there is a large number of free.
men. I will give you the exact number afterwards.,
but I may take them at present at between 1,500 and
1,600, in whom the right of the franchise has for many
years been vested. I think I am right in stating—
indeed, no doubt can exist on the point—that the re-
presentation of Liverpool is, I won't say materially,.
but essentially dependent upon the mode, and manner, and•
way in which those freemen may be induced to vote at the
election. When I speak of freemen to the amount of 1,500
or 1,600, I do not mean to include those freemen who may
possess another qualification, but only those who have the'
right of the franchise by means of the freedom of the
borough and nothing else—who vote as freemen, and who
form no portion of the constituency with reference to any
other qualification. The number of the latter is,. as I'
have said, between 1,500 and 1,600, so large and so strong
that I am sorry to say they have been found to make, and
to maintain, what is called the balance between the
conflicting parties in the borough ; and the result is,
that whoever obtains the favouritism of the freemen.
have, I believer at any rate established a probable chance
of success. Now. let me call your attention to the votes
given at the past elections; and they *Mut once open your
eyes—at any rate,. furnish matter of suspicion as to the
mode in which matters were arranged, and as to how a
large majority of the freemen were induced to vote in
favour of the sitting members. I do not hesitate, at this
early stage of the inquiry, to tell you that one of the sub-
stantial complaints upon the face of this petition, and one
of the substantial matters of complaint to be adduced
before you, is, that bribery and treating prevailed exten-
sively among the great body of the freemen. I do not
mean to say that bribery and treating and corruption did

one system. This was a circular, rotatory, system, as
shown by the maps, devised by the central committee, and
accomplished by the members of the Ward Committees.
By and by, I shall call your attention to the manner in
which the voters were brought together—how they were
shepherded and taken care of in the public-horses—how
they were driven in dozens to the polling-booth—and
how, finally, they were brought back to the publia-houses
and treated, and subsequently paid sums of money in con-
sideration of the way in which they had voted. Mr.
Kinglake now proceeded to state a number of casts
of alleged bribery, and the remaining part of his
speech we are obliged to compress in consequence of
the lateness of the hour at which our report arrives- One
of the committee-rooms of Messrs. Mackenzie and
Turner had been held at the house occupied by Mr.
Blundell, Scotland-road. He would shew what was done

at this comtaittt-e-room ; how a list of voters was made
out; how there was a chairman and secretary, who re-
ported to the central committee; how the expresses,
running up every week, were transmitted to the central
committee, by them referred to the finance sub-committee.
and subsequently paid. The whole exhibiting a clear and
recognised system of union as existing between the cen-
tral committee and these ward committees. Most of the
committee-rooms were situated in public-houses; the house
being a portion of the machinery by which the freemen were
to be brought together and their support obtained on the
polling-day, after they had been debauched and shepherded.
The committee-rooms to which he had called their atten-
tion were in the house of Mr. Blondell, in Scotland-road.
Now, in the course of his experience, he had had occasion
very often to hear of kidnapping voters—he knew, tao,
that attempts were made to force them from home, or to
do what was called walking them into the country—but
he had never heard anything one half so disgraceful as-
that to which he was now about to draw their attention.
Mr. Cardwell and Mr. Ewart had issued notes upon cards
to the voters—to their political friends ; and these com-
munications were sent by the post. By some means or
another, two postmen had brought the letters to the com—
mittee-room, in Scotland-road, and in some way or an-
other the letters containing these notices to the voters,
were extracted from the bag, and that in one of
those rooms, and they were not sent to their several
destinations till the election was over. These docu-
ments consisted of cards within envelopes ; and,
while those which were addressed to Messrs. Cardwell and
Ewart's opponents reached their destination in due time,
it was a singular fact that those addressed to the parties
who were expected to vote for Messrs. Cardwell and
Ewart were abstracted and taken away. Surely that was
a most illegal and daring act of irregularity ; and he prayed
of his learned friend; the counsel on the other side, to be
ready at the right time with the proper explanation. He
then called their attention to the way in which the elec-
tion was organised and planned • supplying a few of the
many names which were involved in the case. The first
name to which he would allude was that of Mr. Wm.
B. Jones, ship-builder. And he could only give five or
six illustrations at present, although the range was a wide
one. That which was done by one was done by another.
Mr. Jones employed a good many workmen. A greal deal of
the corrupt ion which had prevailed in Liverpool at the elec-
tion, he might remark, had been among those who were in
connexion with the shipping interest. It would be proved
that Jones bought the votes of between fifty and sixty
voters—some time before the election—offering them a
certain :sum of money each if they all agreed to vote
on the same side. There was a public-house in the Tox-
teth ward called the Old Oak, occupied byan E.Jones,and
here electors were carried, some of them in the convey-
ances on the circular routes—first of all breakfasted, after-
wards getting drunk ad libitum—finally, on the Saturday
following, calling again at the house, and each receiving
from Jones the sum. of 55., for what they called their
trouble and the loss of a day's work. Some forty or
fifty freemen had been treated and bribed in the
same way by a Mr. Fisher, who was employed by
Mr. Jones in his shipbuilding yard, as foreman. Mr.
W. B. Jones being all the while one of the most antive
members of the central committee,, and one of the com-
mitteemen in the Toxteth Ward, attending the meetings
of the committee in that ward daily, and assisting to the
fullest extent of his ability. The forty or fifty freemen
managed by Mr. Fisher, Mr. Jones's foreman, had been
taken by that person to the Sefton Arms. The names of
the others involved included that of Mr. William Rowatt,
a gentleman, to whom was assigned the management of
the ship-chandlers, and who was a very active member of
the central committee, and, also, a member of the West
Derby Committee. He had taken upon him the office of
charming the ropers. Another name he must introduce
to them was that of Mr. Edward M'Keverigan, a mem-
ber of the firm of Ashley, Clayton, and Co., shipbuilders,
a member—and a most active one—of one of the ward
committees. He was assisted in the work of corrupting
by his foreman, a man of the name of Humphrey Smith,
and their labours in this work of treating and bribing, not
only related to the men in their own employment, but
also to those employed in other yards. So notorious did
the bribery become in. Liverpool, that people bad only to
go anti personate a freeman to the committees of Messrs.
Mackenzie and Turner, in order to secure five shillings,
and this was actually done. Another class of cases was
illustrated by the fact, that Jonas Gleave, the landlord of
the Derby Arms, and a plumber by trade, together with a
clerk in his own employment, named Thomas Sweetnall,
had entrusted to him the appointment of coloursman.
These men were invariably voters ; several non-electors
who applied for employment being refused ; although, ac-
cording to the stringent act of the legislature, no elector
was permitted to record his vote who accepted em-
ployment of that nature. These colourmen, he
alleged, had been put in a room, in the door of
which there was a small aperture, through which a
rosette was pushed by the hand of some invisible per-
sonage behind ; and, in the heart of this rosette, each
of the voters found a sovereign enclosed. Mr. Kinglake

not exist in other quarters ;, on the Contrary, evidence of
that will he brought before you ;. but, with reference to
the large majority of cases, to be adduced before
you, they regard the wholesale system of corruption
practised among the freemen of the borough. Now, sir, I
think it will appear to you before the end of the inquiry,
a most extraordinary circumstance that, when Mr. Card-
well, who was one of the defeated candidates, had received
promises from 294 freemen, and while Mr. Evart had re-
ceived pledges to the amount of 275, there voted for the
first 295, or an excess of one, and for the other 283, an ex-
cess of eight. On the other hand, while Mr. Turner could
not obtain any pledge or promise from a single freeman ex-
ceeding 484, and, while Mr. Mackenzie received pledges
from only 473, thus leaving unpledged 544 freemen in all,
it is most extraordinary to find that the unpledged free-
men, to the number of 544, are found voting for Messrs..
Turner and Mackenzie at the last election. Now, sir,
I contend that that f,ct is, in limine, a most extraordi-
nary circumstance. With reference to those freemen,
I will refer for a moment to the past history of Liver-
pool, as this is not the first time that the conduct
of the freemen has been impeached and accused, or
that the house of Commons has appointed a committee
with regard to theta. I find that, in 1830. the conduct
of the freemen of Liverpool became the subject matter of
investigation, and a bill was actually introduced in 1832
for the purpose of disfranchising them. I understand that
bill did not pass ; but, in the year 1833, there was a peti-
tion from the electors of Liverpool, presented to the
House of Commons, upon which an investigation took
place, a long inquiry was entered into, and the published
reports of the house disclosed a system of flagrant corrup-
tion, as regarded the freemen of Liverpool, such as was
unprecedented in any borough in the worst periods of
corruption in this country. It was stated in the Parlia-
mentary Report of 1833, that as many as. 2,64 G freemen
had actually been bribed at a former election.
Mr. JAMES c What have we to do with that ?

Mr. Serjeant KINGLAKE : It shows that bribery and
corruption are no novelties among the freemen of Liver-
pool, and that what took place at the last election was
only the continuation of an old sl stem. In 1834, a bill
passed the House of Commons for the disfranchisement
of the freemen of Liverpool, but it was lost in the House
of Lords, merely upon the ground that the Reform Bill
having then recently passed, it was hoped the extension of
the suffrage would wipe out the old blot, and that the
freemen would either learn a lesson from what had been
done with regard to them, or the new constituency
would be able to improve the administration of the repre,
sentative system in the borough.._ I mention this to show

that what wee abortive in 1833 was abortive at the last
election, and that the freemen of 1852 are found to bejust
, as corrupt as the freemen of 1833. 1 will now call your
attention to the mode and manner in which the
corruption—the wholesale bribery and corruption—
was practised at the last election. The constituency of
Liverpool amounts altogether to 17,433, of whom about
15,000 are £lO householders, thereat being freemen. By
the Reform Bill the Parliamentary boundaries of the bo-
rough were extended so. as to include the districts called
Toxteth-park, Everton, Kirkdale, and Edge-hill, embrac-
ing a very wide district, which formed no part of the old
borough. Now, let me state at once, and before going
into details, the general nature of the corruption practised
at the last election. It was not by payments of large
sums of money, but was a general system pervading the
whole borough at the time of the election. denoting bri-
bery and treating by associations and committees, for
which there is no doubt whatever the sitting members are
answerable, as can be proved by understanding and com-
munication between the parties, by previous arrangements
with them, by contracts entered into for the indiscrirci-
nate payment, after the election, of 58. to each of the
freemen who voted for the sitting members, for treating
them in public-houses, at an early period of the day
of the election, and for driving them to the poll-
, ing-booths. You will find that this system was not
I carried on in solitary instances, that the freemen were
grouped together by previous arrangement, taken to cer-
-1 tain public-houses opened for the purpose; marshalled
there by sub-committees in the interest of the sitting
members, treated in those houses, then taken to the
polling-booths, and finally,two or three days after, receiv-
ing a money payment of ss. each for what was called the
day's occupation. I believe it will appear in the course of
the inquiry that the limits to this system were only regu-
lated by the number of freemen. As far as their num-
bers went, to that extent was an attempt made to bribe
and treat them; and you will be able to form some estimate
of the extent to which the system was carried, when I
tell you that while 295 voted for Mr. Cardwell, there
voted for Mr. Forbes Mackenzie, 1,030, and for Mr.
Turner, 1,016—a very close approximation as be-
tween the two successful candidates clearly elicitting
that they sailed in the same boat, and that the same
system was pursued in the interest of both. But we now
call your attention to the mode in which this result was
brought about, and to the machinery by which the elec-
tion was carried on. On the Ist of April, 1832, a public
meeting was held in the Royal Amphitheatre in support
of Messrs. Mackenzie and Turner. Alderman Molyneux
was appointed chairman of that meeting, and a resolution
was come to that a committee be appointed for the ma-
nagement of the election. A large number of names,
amounting, I believe, to 324, were read and approved, and
a Mr. 13uckmaster was appointed secretary to the com-
mittee. I shall be able to show, with clearness and
disthiction, that the various partied who were per,

stated that, with a desire to put a stop to the pernicious
system of colours, &c., the committee of Messrs. Cardwell

and Ewart had written to their opponents to come to a
mutual arrangement on the matter, which proposal the
committee of Messrs. Mackenzie and Turner declined to

accede to, expressing themselves quite satisfied with the
proposal of the " Liberal" committee to give, instead,
£5OO to some local charity ; but, at the same time, re-

serving to themselves the conducting of the election in the
way which they deemed most agreeable to themselves. One
other case, to which he craved attention, involved bribery
by offering place and employment—the employment being
in the capacity of doorkeepers at the election. Not only
on the eve of the election, but for a long time previous,
orders had been given to freemen by numerous persons,
among whom were some of the most influential inhabi-
tants of Liverpool, including Mr. W. B. Jones, Mr.
Bishop, Mr. Thomas Inman, Mr. Robert Blagg, and also
Mr. Horstall. However, he did not place such stress
upon this as upon the other evidence of corruption—for
the freemen constituted the chief elements in the disgrace-
ful and revolting debasement which had characterised the
Liverpool election, at which, by the system of treating
and bribery, a party had frustrated the wants and
wishes of that great commercial community, and prevented
its real voice from being heard, and its truo opinions from
being developed, before be sat down there ival one cese

soma!), engaged in the bribery and treating which ' to which he would refer, as it referred more especially to
subsequently took place were members of this central 1 one of the sitting men:veers—Mr. Turner. John B.
committee; and it is important that the names of Mr. I Brown, a freeman, a man advanced in years, and he
Molyneux, the chairman of the committee, and of Mr. believed rather deaf, was the person to whom the inci-
Buckmaster, the secretary, should not be forgotten, for dent related. Mr. Turner saw this person's wife, and
it will appear, during the course of the inquiry, that the they talked about a vote and a place. Mr. Turner was
central committee was connected with several ward corn- most distinctly given to understand that unless some kind
mittees ; that its chairman and secretary were ex officio of situation was given to John, he would not exercise his
members of those ward committees, and that there was a franchise in his favour. Mr. Turner said he had no in-
, constant communication kept up between them. But fluence in the quarters mentioned, so that the plan pro-
there is in Liverpool what is called the Constitutional posed was not feasible. It was at length suggested,
, Association. I do not know what is indicated by the however, that there was a situation which might be
name; but I know that at the last election the association obtained for the man in the Sailors' Home. Some cor-
was converted into a political organisation. First of all, respondence passed between the parties on the subject,
the association elected a committee of 30 members, with a which would be laid before the committee. It appeared,
president, a vice-president a secretary, and a treasurer. however, that the voter had not got the situation which Mr.
Ward committees were also appointed, with a chairman Turner had promised. In his closing remarks the learned
and secretary to each. It is important to notice that the counsel insinuated that, totally independent of the purity
Chairman of the Constitutional Association at the time of fund at the hankers in Liverpool, there had been a hidden
the last election was also the Chairman of the Central fund. The question they had to decide was one of great
Committee, and you will find it an important matter for importance. It would be a serious tax upon their time.
consideration that the chairman and secretary of each No doubt they would give it that patient attention which
ward committee were also members of the Central Cora- it demanded at their hands; and he had as little doubt
mittee for managing the election. that, after all the facts had been laid before them, they
The CHAIRMAN asked if the ward committees existed would, at once, and unhesitatingly, declare the last elec.
previously to the time of the election ? tion at Liverpool to be a void election.
Mr. Sergeant KINGLAKE :I am not aware that they Mr. Nayler, officer from the Crown-office, produced
did. There were ward committees for municipal per- the poll-book, the writ of election, and the return thereof;
poses; but we cannot establish their identity with those and also proved that the petitioners in the present case
which were so active at the time of the election. What were Mr. William Rathbone, jun., and Mr. Robert
we assert, and are prepared to prove is, that upon the Wilson.
eve of the last election the chief members of the Constitu. The next witness called was Mr. Rathbone, jun., who,
tional Association were transferred over to the Central after been sworn, deposed as follows:--I am one of the
Committee appointed to manage the election • and that petitioners in this case. Mr. Robert Wilson is joint
in addition, the central committee likewise availed itself of petitioner with me.
the machinery of the ward committees, and that a corn- Cross-examined : I pay part of the expenses incurred
plete understanding and thorough communication existed in prosecuting this petition, and of course lam respon.
between the three parties. In fact, it would appear as if sible for the whole ; I have subscribed for £lOO. Ido
the staff of the Constitutional Association was transferred not know how much is subscribed for altogether ; I he-
over to the central committee, and, during the whole of lieve the sum to have been upwards of £2,000.
the election, was used for election purposes. it was found I do not, however, exactly know. The liberal
necessary to divide the central committee into sub-corn- gentlemen of Liverpool are the subscribers. I
mittees ; and, accordingly, we have acommittee for finance, understand that, with the others, I shall pay
another for printing, another for music—and it was a fact any excess of expense which may be incurred. I really do
worth notice that all the bandmasters voted for Mackenzie not know that I made a proposition to Mr. Bold that, if
andTurner,afourthforcolours,whichmiehtbecalled a mere his party withdrew one of the sitting members the peti-
sham, or colourable appointment—(a laugh)—and, fifthly, tion would be departed from. I recollect perfectly what
and lastly, a coach and car committee. I bold in my hand passed at our interview. I think it was about three
a curious document, issued by the last-named committee, months ago when it happened. I went to Mr. Bold,. and
It is headed, " Mackenzie and Turner for ever." Then told him that I had not consulted my party on the subject.
follows, " Car Committee—Special Regulations. The I had not even spoken to my own father at the time, and
present arrangement is intended toafford a constant and re- I told him distinctly twice that I was not prepared to
gular communication between the principal committee- withdraw the petition. I said to him—Do we understand
rooms, and every polling-booth, with the view to avoid ab. that this is a strictly private and confidential conversation
stracting the ward-cars from their own districts, to promote I between ourselves. and not to be used in any way prejudie
the convenience of electors, and to avoid delay and dis- cial to either party ? He replied in the affirmative.
appointment. The Car Committee beg to impress upon I then stated that the object of the petition was to endeavour
nil the canvassers the advantage of bringing every voter, to put a stop to the system of bribery and corruption,
where practicable, to the ward committee-room, as one which was a disgrace to the electors of. Liverpool, and if
great aid to the ssccessful development of the plan.— his party agreed to the retirement of one of the mem-
Plan : Two lines of coaches, &c., marked ' Atlas,' will hers whose election had been so improperly secured, I
pursue the route laid down in' red an the accompanying should do my best to sway the party to which I belong to
map, starting every five minutes from Leece-street on consent to the withdrawal of the petition. 'We had some
the one side, and London-road on the other, going the little conversation ; and I told him that I thought it ex-
circuit in opposite directions • thus uniting Exchange, ceedingly likely that if Mr. Turner and Mr. Cardwell were
Castle-street, St. Peter's, Rodney, Abercromby, Lime- elected if would be a fair representation. I told him at
street, and St. Ann's Wards. Other coaches will the same time that I was merely one of the party, and
go every five minutes along the streets marked not the mouthpiece, and one of the youngest mem-
in blue, and keep up a communication between the five bers of it. I believe I signed the petition,. partly by
outer wards, namely,—Scotland, Vauxhall, St. Paul's, accident, because I was not paid at the time. There are
Great George's, and Pitt-street, to the line of coaches no subscribers to the fund in London that lam aware of.
marked Atlas. These coaches will be marked with the It has been got up entirely by the- working- party in
names of the ward to which they run. Every canvasser Liverpool. lam not aware of any subscriptions for
on showing a Car ticket, whether on the line of route or at others than the merchants and traders of Liverpool.
any of the seven or eight committee-rooms. will be con- 112 r. ROBERT Wiesner, the second party to the
veyed by the coaches to any point along the journey ; but petition, deposed : lam a wool-broker in Liverpool. I
the drivers will not pick up any person unproviued with was an elector and voted at the last election. lam one of
one of the metal checks. Cars, fec.semployed on this the petitioners against the sitting members. I never
duty will on no account be allowed to deviate from the heard of the proposal' to Mr. Bold, made by the pe-
route laid down. Canvassers may pass a voter to the titioner, Mr. Rathbone, until this momenti—Cross-ex-
polling-booths from any place in the route, or send them amined : I pay my part of the expenses.. I and my
back after voting, on stopping the coach and showing. the partner have subscribed £23. I do not know what
tickets. The eine tickets to be carefully preserved by the is the amount subscribed. Mr. Smith Harrison, the
canvassers, to prevent their falling into the hands of the treasurer, has the management of the fund. gave a sub-
opposition. It is obvious that parties who require loot- scription, but I have never seen the list. I- do not
ing after—(laughter)—should be accompanied to the know who is the largest subscriber.
polling-place, still the committee would impress upon Mr. Rathbone here handed in a part of the stating
canvassers that as each vehicle can only convey a very that there wes no subscription higher than £100:
limited number, and has to call at seven or eight places, Mr. Rathbone's co-petitioner concluded his evidence
space should not be unnecessarily occupied. (Laughter.) by stating that he had signed the petition on one condi-
These regulations only applied to coaches and cars, but tion, and that was—that it shonid be proceeded with. - And
they shewed that all the ward committees were working lam sorry that any proposal of the kind mentioned should
together under the central committee, and according to have been made-without my consent.

William Dodd was then called upon, but was requested' to
withdraw,—Mr. SMITHi counsel for thesitting members, urghts
an objection to the witness on the ground that upon the regis-
ter of voters there were two persona of the name of William
Dodd,—one was No'. 14,531 on the list, and the other was 4,50.3;
The latter lived in the parish of Liverpool, and the other in
the extra-parochial district of Toxteth-park. He submitted
that there being two voters of the same name, the description-
given by the petitioners was a defective and inefficient descrip,
tion,,and could not be accepted. He did not speak without,
authority. because it had been so decided in previous cases of'
the same description.
The CHAIRMAN asked if they both voted on the same side ? •
Mr. SMITH remarked that' bribery had frequentiy no con-
nection with the voting- Indeed, not unfrequently a bribe had
been given to a party to- give an adverse vote. He then, in
support of his objection, quoted a decision in the Galway case,
and another in the case of Dundalk, the latter having taken
place in 1848.

Mr. BODKIN stated that both the cases quoted were cases of
scrutiny, in which the greatest possible accuracy was absolutely
required. It might be more convenient for them to give the
number of each voter, but it was only as a matter of con-
venience that they were re,mired to give it to the counsel for
•the sitting members.
Mr. SMITH stated that, while there were two persons
of the name of William Dodd on the register, there
might be fifteen John Jones's, and no description was given
to enable them to distinguish who was meant. The same ob-
jection applied to the bribers, as well as to the bribed.
They were -stated in the same indefinite manner. Mr. Smith
remarked further that the committee had given the petitioners
till Saturday night, at eight o'clock to prepare the list of wit-
nesses, which they were then required to place in the hands of
the counsel for the sitting members. But, notwithstanding,
the indulgence which had then been granted, the list had been
presented is a vers, imperfect condition ; and thus, were the
decision to favour the views of the petitioners in bringing for-
ward the witness, a great injustice would be- done. The prac-
tice, if they sanctioned it on the occasion, would be established
by the precedent; but he trusted that they would not do so.
They would, by sanctioning such a system, do a great injustice
to the sitting members, and Heaven knew they wanted protec-
tion, for they had difficulties enough to contend with already
without their receiving an accession to their number. In the
present instance, when tso or more of the same name occurred
in the register, and when one of them was mentioned as a per-
son bribed, and as a witness without the particular person
being distinctly specified—the sitting member, not knowing
who might be meant, was in this position, that he either
guessed et the individual summoned, and perhaps, in doing so,
found himself mistaken, or he was subjected to the inconve-
nience and expense of sending for evidence in regard to all the
persons of the name in question-.
The Committee ordered the room to be cleared, and
after the lapse of about twenty minutes, the reporters,
along with the other parties, were admitted. The Chairman
announced the decision of the committee to be, that the coun-
sel for the sitting members should read the list of witnesses
(voters) to whose designation they object,—the agent for the
petioners to identity such voters with their respective numbers
on the register, and the examination of such voters not to
proceed till Wednesday morning, or the day before the rising
of the committee.
Felix M`Leary sworn.-1 am a ship-carpenter by trade. I
am a freeman of Liverpool, and voted at the last election for
Mackenzie and Turner. At the timeof the election, and before
it, I was in the employ of Mr. Major. I know a person named
Evan Jones, who keeps a beerhouse. called the Royal Oak, in
Park-road. On the morning of the election I was at Evan
Jones's house. I saw Jones at half-past seven, in Park-road,
close to a poling booth. He told me if I came to his house I
would gat breakfast, and be paid fur my day's work. I was to
get drink. I was to get money for my day's work, or loss of
my employment. At that moment I-had not promised my vote
to any one. Evan Jones did not speak to me about my vote.
After I had got four or five glasses of ale, I was at his house by
eight o'clock. I was shown into the front room up stairs.
found a good many people there. The room was pretty full ;
there might be thirty present. Those I knew were all freemen'
We had breakfast together, I remained there about three-
quarters of an hour. I then walked up to the polling.
booth. A freeman, stained Maxwell, went with me. He also
had been in the breakfast room. We went together, and
polled. This was Wednesday. We polled between nine and
ten o'clock. I got some drink on the road and paid for it; but
we went there on the afternoon. On the Saturday I went to
receive my money, and got as. Evan Jones was there. and a
female. who appeared to be his wife. Whether he or Isar, put
down the money I cannot say. He was there at any rate in
the room. They asked me if I. was one of the men who had
voted from their house. I understood from Evan himself that
I- would be paid. It waz.between five and six o'clock when I
went to be paid. I saw no list or book. I had seen drink, but
was not tipsy. There was no person in the room but.Thnes and
the woman whom I supposed to be his wife. I cannot say that
she was really his wife; however, I had more drink in the house
after I was paid. When I went to be paid I saw William Dodd
there: he was there when I went. I cannot say of William
Dodd anything but this, that we had some drink together—not
in the room where the money was paid. I got the loan of half-
a-crown from Dodd, I saw Wm. Dodd in some other part of the
house than that in which we drank together. There was like-
wise near that part of the house where money was paid a voter
named Crofts. 1 stayed with Dodd and the other person for
some time. Some other men, freemen, who were working with
me at the Dock, told. me to go to the room in which the money
should be paid. I have voted twice before at Liverpool ; voted
on the Liberal side on both occasions. I know William Buck-
ley Jones, master shipper. I saw him at Jones's house during
the election—twice, bringing up men in 'busses. I cannot tell
how many he took in the 'bus. The vehicle appeared to be
full, and a Liverpool 'bus can hold 12.. He was in the break-
fast-room,.and he carried off cargoes of voters twice.
Cross-examined.—My wages at last election were Is. a-day ;
now they are 6s. Two days I did no work in consequence
of the election. Twice before I voted for the Liberals, and
got nothing for the loss of my time. I lost one day at the
election before this one. I am working for Mr. Major now.
I was only occasionally in the employment of Major at that
time ; four or five days at a time. Evan Jones only asked me
to come and have some refreshment ; he did not mention any,
shout my vote.
In the beginning of his evidence, this witness was asked,
what party he belonged to?, Was he a Liberal'? To this he
answered, he did not much care which of the two parties he
adhered to. In the cross-examination, the following conversa-
tion took place :
Mr. SNI ITU Which party do you agree with ?
Witness: I scarcely care which side I have. (Laughter.)

Mr. SMITH : What motive had you in Vol
the Liberal side ?

ing previously on

Witness : Well,. I suppose I voted to please myself.
so
oJofohr thirty John Breck°
Major, shipwright. I know a company of shipwrights Ashley,
freeman
working
no f
g at last for Mr.
Liverpool,
election and have been
Clayton, and Co. Mr. Kennigan is a member of that firm. I
know Humphrey Smith, foreman of that company. I met him
before the election, He promised me my day's pay if I polled
along with him. I was to poll far Mackenzie and Turner.
yne.—arls. am I
a was
When I met him he asked me if I had polled. I said not. He
said if I went with him, he would give me my day's pay. He
did not mention the sum. I did not understand what sum I
was to get. My 'stab wages were then 6s. Smith was stand..
up at the bar along with me when I polled for Mackenzie and
Turner. I did not get the money then. I was a week
before I got it. Mr. Humphrey Smith promised my missis
that she should get the money. I did not hear that conversa-
tion. She went down to Mr. Smith's house. I sent her there
to see him in Mr. Kennigan's yard, where he was foreman. I
sent her there because it was the most likely place to see the
overseer. In consequence of something the wife told me, I
afterwards sent her to Humphrey Smith's. I sent her twice
afterwards, but on no occasion did she return with anything.
Mrs. H. Smith afterwards came to me, and told me that some
one had come, and, in my name, received the money. At the
same time Mrs. Smith gave me the ss. I did not mention that
my wages were Gs. I had been so much troubled with it
previously.

Cross-examined : I was out of work for two days, and lost the
rest of the week, but that was my own fault. I have voted for
the same colour, red. I had promised my vote a fortnight be-
fore, and getting my day's work paid; ss. was not mentioned as
connected with my vote.

Margaret, the wife of the witness just examined, was sworn,
and corroborated the evidence of her husband. She deposed :
I saw Mr. Humphrey Smith at the yard. I did L,Qt Ask Igiti

plump. I said, "Is there anything for John." He said not
then—it was too soon. I was requested by him to call agains
but no name was mentioned. I went next Saturday, and re-
quested him to keep it for me. When I went I saw one of the
masters; I did not know him, but I believe it was fir.
M`Kinnegan. I saw him in the building-yard, and I asked
him for the five shillings. He said I must see HumpbreY
Smith. I called at Smith's house several times, without seeing
him ; and at length I saw Mrs. Smith, and asked her for it.
She did not give it me; but she and her husband came to our
house that same evening, when she said that she had previ ouslY
paid it to another person, who had represented himself to be
my husband, and that it was an imposture ; she gave us the !S.
My husband, I think, must have spent, in the election weel‘,
two guineas of his own money, and all he got was 55*
(Laughter.)

Peter Rice: I am a freeman of Liverpool, and voted at leg
election for Mackenzie and Turner. I had always voted before
on the Whig side. I know a person named William Callard.
He was in my company on the morning of the election. A Mail
named W DAllister, Arthur Davis, and others were there. a
is one of Mr. M'Keverigan's foremen. When I met Davisheaskn
us if we had get our names booked. Callard is a freeman. He d"'
not say he wanted our names. We said we were going to vote
for Mackenzie and Turner. We were in a house at the time,
and I do not know who began the conversation. I said vrg
, had not got our names "booked." He said we were to go and
get " booked " at the house of Jones, called the White Lion,
in St. James's-street. I never answered him at all at the time,
but I went down in the latter part of the day to search fat
Davis. All of us went together to the White Lion. Davisi
brought a book from his pocket, and put down our names. ,L
understood that it meant we were to get ss. for our day 8
wages. Davis entered our names, and likewise told us that We
should be paid ss. I was paid the following week at Mr.
Keverigan's yard. We were out of work, and thought we
would go and ask for the cash. Mr. M`Keverigan paid lee'
When we went to put our names down on the book, the
parties who were with me were the two whose names hale
been already mentioned. I attended a meeting of the rope'
makers the week before the election. We arranged the bannereo
at least as to how they were to be carried. Mr. Wm. Rowatt
did not interfere in those meetings. The meetings were called
by the chairman of the club. We had a meeting the previous
week about the Navigation Laws. Mr. Rowatt was there.
Cross-examined.—l was a little interested in the Navigation
Laws, and after the meeting I resolved to vote for Mackenzie
and Turner: I was off work on the nomination and polling daYe•
Those have been holidays among the shipwrights and rope'
makers of Liverpool ever since I remember. Four
day is my regular day's pay. When Davis spoke to me, I said
I meant to vote for Mackenzie and Turner, and when he talkeet
to me about having my name "booked," he did not say any'
thing about my Vote.

By Mr. Box:num:. I lost two days at the election.
By the CHAiroirax:- The Ropemakers' Association is a burial
club, and not at all a political one.
Robert Talbot sworn :. I voted for Mackenzie and Turner.
I know Mr. Birchall. 1 am. a brasamonger. I recollect sotOt
time before the last ekttion meeting Mr. Birchall, and we hal
a conversation. He said,• who are you going to vote for. I
said I was going to vote on the old aide. He replied that was
right, and asked me what ward I lived in: I told him,- and he
directed me to go to the Pontack public-house, in Christian.
street, kept by Mr. Clegg. I remarked to him that I under-
stood' that a day's wages were to be given. He replied—df
there was such a thing I might depend upon it that he would see
that I should be paid. I said, so far snood, and I leave it tayon6
I went up to the public-house, and saw Westmoie there, as 11
he was a doorkeeper. There was-another person named Jobs'
Brown. We sat there for about an hoar. I went awart
leaving Birchall there. Next day, along with Westmore,'
and Broom, I went and voted. We proceeded from the pub-.
lic-house in a coach. The coach• came np to the door, and
we were desired to take our place in it.; by whom [ did not
know. Isan, Mr. Birchall carrying off voters to the polling
booth. Next thing I went and saw Birchall, and he gave me
12s. 4s. for Westmore, 4s. for Brown, and the same for myself.
Cross-examined I should have voted, for Mackenzie and
Turner although I had never seen Birchall., I had madeuP
my mind. I have always voted red. At the former election
I voted4or Mr. Cardwell.

By Mr. KINGLAKE, I do not think I•should• have got the
ss. had snot voted as I did. Birchall was very particular to
know that we really did vote for Mackenzie and Turner before
he would give me the money.

John Westmore was next sworn and examined. He deposed
I do not remember whether I saw Birchall before I went to the
Pontac publicliouse:- Talbot and Brown went-there withime.
It was seven or eight o'clock when we arrived there. There
was a room there into which I went, but I did-not see a man at
the door. Weremaiiled there about an hour, and-returned.. I
went to the poll from that house. I went from the Pont at 10,
a coach, but Mr. Birchall was not along with- us. He bad
plenty to do without looking after me. He was-walking about,
I was there about an hour.. I saw two or three omnibuses going
away from the house. After I had polled I received 4s. It was
quite a surprise to me. I had voted three or four times before
for the red side: I always voted for the red side.-
Cross-examined : I had intended to vote for the red. I had
Made one promise only before the election, and- that was- to
the Reform canvassers, that their men should not have MI
vote. (Laughter.) I had no promise of money fortmy vote.

As it was now -quarter to four o'clock, the further hearing
of the case was adjourned till to-morrow, when the committee
will resume their sitting at n o'clock.

It appears that the Observer of Sunday professed to give in
anticipation some of the particulars of the alleged bribery and
corruption at the lan Liverpool election ; and, previous to the
meeting of the committee to-day, this report was the subjec!
of general conversation in the lobbies of Westminster Hall;
and especially among the sons of the Mersey now, assembled
in London.

LIST OF PERSONS CHARGED WITH HAVING
BEEN, AND BY WHOM ALLEGED TO, HAVE
BEEN, BRIBED.

BY WHOM

Dom], William

Evan Jones, 5.1.11-sa-nn-ab Jones,
William Buckley JOrtesi Jobs
Story, Wm. Joseph Horsfall,
Henry Buckmaster;and•Jobry
Peacock.

Cook, Robert
APLeavy, Felix
Harris, William
Burrows, Charles
Willetts, James
Newton, Edward
Benjamin, Thomas
Jones, George
Jones, Owen
Underwood, Joseph
Poulds, John
Richardson, Richard
Crat,Simon
Maxwell, Charles

The same
The same
The same
The same
The same
The same
The same
The Sal."
The same
The same
The same
The same
The same

The same