The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1896-06-25
Money in English Politics.

/ come now to the question of the ex-
penditure OF money. This possesses "A
double interest, because it not only shows
us the English practice, but II also throws
a great deal of light on the charge SO
freely made of late years in this country
that protection was not only bad economi-
cally, but that 1t led TO great corruptio d,
owing 10 the lavish expenditure in the
campaigns of the protected interests
The example Of England will enable ns
to see not only the practice there as 70
election expenses. Tut also what the rffe 4
of a free-trade system Is In keeping down
the amount of money expended for cam
paign purposes.
The corrupt practices act in England
fixes the maximum amount which each
candidate can spend in each division uf
the United Kingdom. e. The candidates
are required by law 10 make return Of
all their expenses, and these returns are
published officially. In 1892 the oiiicisl
returns show that there we're go seats and
/ OF candidates. tifIy-six seats were ur-
contested, and the expenses, therefore,
81 those cases were little or nothing. he
ofscial returns include all the seats, al
thGYgh, of course, il these So seats wore
deducted ii would increase the average
expenditure for the others. The, 1907
candidates in 1892 spent 05S,53 pounds
lin round numbers, "a, 792, $500, lnclnd-
ing the returning officers charges,
and 76l, ,05S pounds, or S3,S05, 290 sxclu-
sive of the returning officers chafges-
that Is, for purely political purposes.
The total number of votes polled was
4,605, 442, and the amount of money
spent per vote was four shillings one
penny. or just about one dollar head.
The official returns for 1896 have not yet
been pugblished, and 1 am Obliged 10
take my Dgures for this last election
from careful article which appeared in
the Sundey Times, giving an estimate OF
the 1926 figures, and putting the total
expenses of Great Britain at $50, 200
pounds, trifie more than was spept in
1892. As election expenses have been
declining in England, 1t Is pro ba bic that
the expenses of 1895 will be less rather
than more, especially as there were more
uncontested seats In 1895 than IN 1897. But
for our purposes the official figures OF
1892 are sufficient, assuming, as we may,
that those of 1895 do not differ from them
materially. From them we lind that the
average expenditure OF a candidate for a
county seat was a trifle over 1901 pounds,
aud for a borough seat 5S2 pounds, and
the cost per voter, as has been already
stated, was four shillings one penny.
1t must be remembered, however, that
there are only the official returns OF the
expenses allowed TO each candidate by
the law. The central committees of the
two great parties ana other political COM
mittees interested in special objects of
legislation, such as bimetallism or the
liquor traffic, spend great deal OF mon
ey for political purposes OF which no re-
turn is made. was told by good judges,
including leaders of both the great par
ties, that the election expenses o, one
general election In England. exclusive OF
returning officers charges and OF the ex-
penditures by organizations interested in
special subjects, would reach at least q
million pounds. The central conmit-
tees, whose funds are very large, furnish,
Of course, a great deal OF the money TO
the candidates which appears IN the
official returns, put they also necessarily
spend good deal OF money which does
not appear In the returns. Nor dois the
expenditure OF money cease here. 4 was
told, for instance, that in the Newman
ket division, where two very rich men
we're running, n great deal OF money
was being spent on both sides. asked
how this could be done unoer tho COR
rupt-practices act, and was informed
that in this case one OF the candidates
gave employment to ell the unemployed