New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-07-03
BRITISH ELECTIONS.
SOME PICTURESQUE INCIDENTS IN PAR
LIAIENTARY HISTORY.

Tie commencement of another general election
in Great Britain occurring, too, during National
campaign in the United States suggests many
comparisons aad contrasts between the popular
political methods Of the two countries. Despite
the notion that John Bull Is conservative dign
fed and steady-gong, and that Jonathan Is " ad
vanced, hippant and giddy, it will be found that
British elections are characterized by more dec
Drum than those In America Indeed, the history
cf Parliamentary contests, both bye and general
ID so marked with disorder, trickery and vcnality
as well to rcbuhe the hacl,ncyed sneer at Yankee
politics
1t Is long story that of English Parliamentary
elections. As early az 1884 representative Far
Lament of two Knights from every shire was SUM-
moned the Parliament Of Merton met two
Fears later; the Mad Parliament" came together
In 1888; and IN 1865 the Commons first met under
Q writ confirmed representation. Borough
representation began in 1924, and in 1903 Par
lament became q legislative power, whose assem-
svas necessary 70 the enactment Of laws
In these days the Corrupt Practices act pre-
rents much use of money in British elections, save
for legitimate purposes. But years ago prollIgacy
tan riot and the cost of carrying election was
measured only by the depth Of the candidate $
pune The corrupt use Of money In electoral
contests began as long ago as 1871, when one
Thomas Long was elected 10 the House Of Com
mons by the borough of Westbury, Wits. and
afterword confessed that be paid the Mayor f4
for the honor. lie was thereup0n expelled from
The House but the Mayor was compelled to return
the ca to him, and fine OF GO was assessed upon
the borough From this very incident, it Is said,
erose the familiar saying. money makes the
Mayor GO"
Thenceforward there not much actual We
nality until the days of the Stuarts, when bribery
and other forms Of corruption. both in the con-
sfitucncies and IN the IIousc. become the rule.
Under Charles I such practices were common,
though they were not often carried 10 an eXtrava-
CANT degree Under the Commonwealth they were
continued. in rather s,ingy fashion. In l60s.
for example, John Harrington was elected al Bath.
to succeed his father, and he only spent Ga
In food drink and tobacco. With the ac-
cession OF the Merry Monarch. corruption greatly
increased The King himself levied hlackmail
upon numerous communities threatening TO take
away their charters, and often actually doing
70, unless they would return Members subservicnt
to his will. That brilliant blackguard the Earl
of Rochester thus described the House Of that
time and the Kings manner Of dealing with IL.
A Parliament Of knovcs and sots-
Members by name yOu mustn't mention
lie keeps In pay. and buys their votes.
Here with n pAcc, thcre with q pension.
James ii went further still In the degradation Of
the ballot, brbing the corporations to elect his
creatures by a restoration Of their charters Thus.
in 1855, Evelyn relates Lord Bath carried
down into Cornwall at one time less thau
fifteen charters, SO that some called him the
Prince Elector Ten years later law against
bribery AMI treating was enacted. In hope of
checking the rising tide OF vcnaty. But in
vain Each new Parliament was chosen more
corruptly than its predecessor and there sprang
up race Of corruptonists, great political leaders
who devoted their chicfcst and best attention 70
Financial elcctoneerng,' and spent fortunes In
the work. Such were the Walpolcs Pelhnms.
NIarboroughs, Warriors and GraftOns.
One of the first and perhaps the greatest Of
these was Thomas Marquis of Wharton. who has
been called the patriarch Of the fine art Of
electoneerng. His policy was TO forward the
designs of an olgarch by the attractions Of q
demagogue." He cminently successful in
this policy md also in the hnlf~ozcn durls which
It brought upon him. Nearly thirty Members
were elected through his efforts at cost to his
own pocket Of fully 10000 a much larger
sum IN those DAYS than Is now rho $500 900 il
nominally represents. But IL be was the founder
Of the system, Walpole carried il 70 completion.
He the author Of the principle that every
man has his price" and he organized vote-market
just es openly as any mcat-markct was ever con-
Quoted. Single votes were so much apiece At
Wholesale they much the dozen or the
hundred. Constituencies taken en- bloc, had
prices fixed upon them. A poet Of those times
thus pictured an election scene which might be
witnessed in any constituency in the Kingdom
Here's minon sent down 10 a corporate town,
In hopes TO be newly elected
By his prodg1l show yon may easily know
To the Court ne is truly affected.
lie has knave BY tie hand who has power TO command
All the votes IN the corporation:
shoves sum in his pocket. the D-l cries Take II,
IT'S all for the good Of the naonp
Tie general election Of 1902, which continued
Addington in power as Pitts successor, was marked
with extreme trickery and venaty. Writing OF
the struggle in Kent, the Rev. Samuel Denne said
what shall we cay Of a gentleman, turned Of
thirty. who shall cell his patcrnal estate, some say
for els,000, avowedly for the purpose Of suander-
ing the greater part Of the purchase money in q
county CONTEST though not six years before the two
winning candidates had paid above 100000 for
the honor of being humble servants to the men OF
Kent? Mr.. Honeywood acknowledged that the last
struggle cost him els 900 The amount of Sir f.
Knatchbull's expenses cannot be ascertaincd be-
cause II now appears that there are long bills in
arrear in divers parts Of the country. Had the
late Sir Francis Geary left his estate at Polesden
in Surrey In the hands Of trustees, 1t would have
been fortunate circumstance for his son. AS
ON Told, the three candidates have appeared In
cricature at the west end Of the town: one OF the
baronete being exhibited in p6orhouse, the other
In a madhouse and the squire in his coffin; but
whether the portraits bear any resemblance to the
originals my informant was not appraised So pre-
vailing is Ministerial influence in Kent that If the
two candidates named in II really join votes are
thrown away upon third man. The actual cost
Of the contest there In s02 WAS fully $4,000.
Another curious contest in that election occurred
in Middlesex, where the candidates were Mr. Main
waring, Mr.. Byng and Sir Francis Burdett Ac-
cording to The Picture Of Parliament" Ia little
work published at that time, On the first day Mr.
Byng was at the head of the poll with /, 1903 votes,