New-York tribune., 1900-10-07

about 4OOOOOO0 This means that each men,
Der Of the House of Commons represents an
average of 10000 electors and of 10000 of his
fellow citizens. The average cost of his election
10 himself in expenses that are legitimate from
statutory point of view is about $4,000 OF
course, this sum by no means covers what may
oe described as the unauthorized expenses Of
parliamentary candidates, expenses which have
been justly described as blackmaH and which
comprise demands for subscriptions to every
conceivable enterprise and movement in the
constituency.
Parliament has done all in its power by statu-
tory means to put stop to this species of i'm
position. But while the legislation bearing upon
the subject has served to reduce the cost of a
general election by at least 20 per cent as COM
pared with the expenditure entaiIed by an ap-
peal to the country thirty or forty years ago.
1t has proved Inadequate TO arrest the constant
demands that are being made upon the purses
of the candidates. who, apprehensive on the one
hand OF invalidating their election by some in
| fraction of the anti-bribery laws. and on the
other fearing to impair their chances of success
by mourning the ill will of the electors. find
themselves, SO to speak, between the devil and
the deep sea.
VIEWS OF MR. CHAMBERLAIN.
Discussing the subject few years ago, Mr..
|
State for the Colonies, expressed doubt as to
whether the legislation the subject of cleo
toral bribery not too stringent, declaring
that if the judges intrusted with the trial Of
election cases administered the laws bearing on
the subject in strict accordance with the letter
of the statute instead Of tempering their inter
pretations thereof with a considerable amount
| of discretion hardly a single member of Parlia-
ment would be able to retain his seat. In illus
I
he mentioned the case of a member of Parlia-
ment who unseated at Stourbridge for the
sole reason that he had a short time before the
! election promised one of the voters the loan of
| one of his agricultural machines or implements
! The Right Hon. Jesse Ceilings, too. now Under
| Secretary Of State for the Home Department.
| was unseated on charge of bribery at Ipswich
! solely because one of his agents or committee
men had promised to pay the paltry sum Of
3s Cd, that is to say, less than 81 for the pur-
! pose Of defraying the cost of the railway ticket
/ to Ipswich of a single voter who temporarily
! absent from the borough.
The Judge before whom the case was brought
for trial." added Mr.. Chamberlain, deemed this
single circumstance sufficient to unseat
Mr. Ceilings The candidate as you will see by
/ Mr.. Couings's case, is far too dependent upon
! the honesty and actions of his committeeman.
Thus in a committee Of one hundred it is quite
/ possible that the candidate should have a secret
/ enemy who by petty act of indiscretion
whether unintentionaI otherwise and without
/ the candidates knowledge and sanction. is able
/ to bring about the annulment of the election
I In one instance even it is related though ]
! cannot absolutely vOuch for the fact. that the
committeeman Of candidate bribed certain
voters to for his opponent whose success
was already assured. in order that they might
have sufficient grounds upon which to secure
the member being unseated and deprived
of his eligibility to stand for Parliament during
a subsequent period of seven years"
EX-ATTACHE.