New-York tribune., 1874-05-07
BRIBERY IN ENGLAND.

BRIBE.Y IN ENGLAND.
| If the recent cases of contested elections IN
England arc to be taken ~ indications Of the
| corruption practiced throughout tho Kingdom,
they show degree Of immortality among voters
deserving attention not only from thoughtful
people in Great Britain, but from those III
this country also who recognize the essential
kinshp of the two nations. II is OF the great
| est importance TO us TO observe the results OF
several centuries Of constitutional liberty upon
the political conscience Of the masses, in a
country so entirely under the dominion of law
that crimes of all kinds including that Of
bribery, are reasonably sure of investigation,
and, upon conviction, of punishment The
cases recently examined in England show a
singular simplicity of procedure, which may
arise from the fact that the candidate and his
agents are 80 frequently non-resdent5 or the
district whose suttrage3 are required. Where
the asprant has no especial claims to the votes
of a constituency, it is natural that those who
are working for him should take direct means
to interest individual voters in his success by
the use of the most immediate aud powerful
agency known TO human affIirs. This neces-
sity may account for the startling Openness and
hagrancy of the bribery which has been brought
to light in a number of cases, which must re-
suit in the unseating Of several members OF
the next Parliament.
In the Wakefield election the investigation
before Mr.. Justice Grove developed the most
unbushing performances. a Liberal tailor,
John Thompson, was offered ten shillingS by
Councillor Howden to vote for the Conserva-
| Mr. RlllpI
frankly swore that he had received G2 from
Councillor Ough, another Conservative cleo
tionecrer He went with his money to a
public house, and ratified his half-sovcrcigns
with pardonable pride, saying, as Mr.. Kasson
said in the House Of Representatives,
"These are the sort to have" An Irish
laborer said he had received three
soveregns for his vote from Alderman
Iowden, the Councillors brother. One
Greenhough dealt moro in wholesale. He
contracted to deliver his own and three more
votes for eS. jeremiah Wray was a sagaclOus
voter; he got q sovereign from Seth Ber-
ridge and he suspected it was to induce
him to vote for Green. William Kinson said,
with the air of man who had a grievance,
that he was about to have 30 shillinSs for his
vote, but that a Liberal workman came in
and frightened his purchaser away. A pud-
dler named Beesley had very accurate notions
of the value of his Independent suffrage; he
got twelve shllings and sixpence for it, and
was so satisfied with his bargain that he
showed the money to Liberal cOmrade, and
thus brought himself into court.
1t is probable that there is not so much Of
this special kind of bribery in America,
though it may be asked whether the forms of
corruption prevalent among us are not equally
hurtful. Tweed. by judicious contract or
legislative subsidy, could induce local leader
to bring to tho polls solid phalanx of a
hundred or 50 with nothing paid to the indi-
vd Ial voters except their days whisky. Few
members of the South Carolina Legislature
are above bribing or being bribed, yet it is
probable that it costs them less to be elected
than the legislators of most other States.
The ignorance and the prejudices of their
constituents form n surer and more trustworthy
support than could be found even in their
avarice. 1t is true that money is sometimes
layishly used in elections in the United States,
but this il not often the .cass in important
national contests. In Presidential year the
fight is decided in local battles The Grant
Committees enriched the loaferish politicians
of North Carolina in 1872 in the effort to open
the campaign with an Administration victory,
which should make farther expense unneces-
sary. This was not fully accomplished, and
therefore Maine and Pennsylvania were sue
cessively flooded in the same way. In
November there was comparatively little
spent. 1t is to be hoped that as other States
follow the example of Pennsylvania in remov-
| ing the fruitful source of temptation which
lies in these exceptional election days, the use
of money to corrupt single voters will become
| still more restricted. Under ordinary circum-
stances our constituencies are too large to be
bought. The disadvantage of small voting
body is seen in our State Senates and Assem-
blies which are venal in inverse ratio to their
size. But at present it does not seem so sim
pie matter to buy ones way into Congress
as into Parliament, and that affords q certain
consolation, when we consider the dshearten-
ing revelations of venalty in office which are
SO frequently made. 1t is easier to detect and
punish crimes among politicians than among
people.
An active contest Is now going on for the control
of the surveys in the Western Territories The fol.
1 IA -