The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1860-08-06
The Wakefield Bribery Case.
NORTHERN CIRCuIT.-YORK, JULY ~.
r. lore Mr. Barop Martin and n 4peciai Jury

Before Mr. Baron Martin and Special Jury.
nation died by the Attorney General against Mr. william
Henry Latham (ate NJ r., for Wakeiid), charging him
under the Corrupt Practices Act with bribery ana corrgp
she borough Of Wakefield, Vas Continued after our parcel
was despatched.
tended establish in due order the narrative OF facts
ssatcd by the Solicitor General
Mr. Henry Edmund Quincy In his evidence said he
was partner in the firm of overcnd, Quincy Co OF
LONDON and brother in law TO Mr. leatham ABOUT the
sth Of April last year, he received letter rom ar
He knew he was going TO stand for Wakefield be.
fore: Che letter was produced, ana put IA ana
nd after speaking Of the Wakefield cleo
sion said be should be obliged TO find some money for
vays means and rather than draw the money out of
The bank where there clerks who might talk,
aeked him II he wouli mind lending him 81 600 70 b.
sent down to wakefield In four packages to Mr.. VAIN
WRIGHT. The III 600 was sent down.
M Gilbert The election agent said he received 900
altogether from Dir. WAinwright The matter was lei
to n ne ac not a ss,S anv snd
he good judge an election agent 70 ans yer
any questions whatever II nc haa ma o sasxn
couId have disposed Of IL; it was the annual bribery a.
the municipal elections which whetted their appees
He was az close with Mr. Wainwright as he could be- as
be was anxious rot to compromise him as Mr. eatham's
legal agent. He dined shortly after the election at
than proposed his fwitness's) health in
sou with Mr.. wainwrights, and thanks for t1eir
Efficient services in the usual formal way, ne oscame
Rhodes. Witness delivered Gao in money 10 Mr.. sharp
ley with reerer Mr. John Barton Rhodes lie gave This
money few days before the poll, at snarpeys request
ehariey made another application TO him With reference
20 samuel Croft John Tower, G. Chceseborough and
Charles Carlson whose names were gn .ae ~.
money accordingly He delivered f4o to saa'pey for
Tower. There another person named William Wool,
head but there were 20 many Woodheads IN Wakefield
be could not distinguish them (iaoghter)
Nc. wainwright, Mr. 1eatham's solicitor, depcsed TO
ho he had secl II.
which there was "Yr opposite some OF the names
cyn seuined slo. He remembered three VS. opposite
one name That was the greatest number opposite any
Robert harpley proved brbipg several voters to ,o.e
FOR ssham He gave some no ao1 i0 Tue V0''''
John Barton Rhodes saic-i was voter vas eau
vsssed by sharpey, and also by Leatham voted Tor
him. I got Gao from sharpley for voting:
John Frrman Tower said--i am hardresscr. know
sharnj.v H gave me GAO for a hairorush " was
pcneiraior. / sell them cheaper no~--io. ~
Al the close Of the for the crown, VT James al
resscd the Jury for the defendant who, he sad was
charged offence which he could not neiP cn,rae'er
nny AZ one OF the degraiing character ana one ne
was justified by Mr. Leaihan ia stating, his eatire SOU
abhcrred. He though, he should satisfy them W nc va
.hagea van ms cn sSo yerv greatest credit upon the
parties who mad Instituted these mtnougu nc
admitted the solicitor General had eonduc'ei the case ne
Chr Il ian and gentleman. These proceedings we're on
a. by Of the Attorney General
having by his mere motion Thought proper TO place
The case on the fssora b ssr f n q I anam
hat was Ic nature Of the be brought against
Nm aud be asked Ss Jury :, ~e ssss ws . ss ,h Mr.
Iesaham the OBJECT with which no handed over vac
nouey and attended TO do ihat when ms SOU aoaoriel,
he csed uran them vndcatc 20, only him. but others
who might have a charge o. this nature efopgh1 against
them. 1000,
The Jury retired and after an abscn,e ei lNeaysh'es
minutes returned verdict OF guilty
[From the London Post, july Il
A the rene election OF 1859 sc. W. H. lesham AID
~, srle. sorth contested the borough Of wakedsid.
Toe former gentleman succeeded IN obtaining small ma
tority aud was due course declared sitting memeer
g. barsswcrth pctitloaed against the return, and -
Ice, committee having repor ed hat extensive bribery
had prevailed The election .o ~ corrrc nrpS
which we're alleged to have been committed oy the two
csudida,ss Both Mr. Leatham aud M chsles worth ap
srsred before the comnissoners bot neither obtained
shsf rcr,aca,e OF indemnity which the law comedies to
sartes VINO make fun ard faithful disclosure Of those
facts whish might i~psrs s,u, Ts,,,' Mr. Wines
and Mr.. wyndham siaae, anf u has been stated
that they we're not un.n mos sosr aso, ~ -, '
sessson Mr. Edwin James reproscatol that Sersaan
Fkott had differed from his brother commissioners an
that the refusal cf The corthcaie - Nr Leaiham "a
been The act of Mr. wlles Mr. Siade letter from
the learned sergeant which appeared Ia contc porary
coonsmed The view which had ocen exTessgea ~ Nc
have officially stated that the recollection OF sergcln
rsost on THIS point Mas saogc,nr5 e.rmceus ADD tha
The refusal CT The certificate the joint act OF ts hce
commissioners The report, sfer exporting history OF
wholesale CORRUPTION whch - almost without parallel IN
me, Inc two csns,es,e, h>s been SS,isy o,,sssry.
Under these circumstances, the House Of Com
rucus, influenced by regard Tor hs own
looor and purity, could not Afford 10 pass Uitncu,
notice and condemnation the Migrant msl2sses ,-N,cn
the wakefield inquiry had disclosed. Ronorsbo scDsle
The Attorney cncrs-ihe prosecutor on tic rar Of ybe
pubc-to put the law IN force lhs cSy WIS re echoed
BY ,se 1 sss cS eight s,ans ssa. asr'
s,tiding The prosecutions equally between he Hber,
Ard conservative parties The s,s Of ccmmon. acting