BRIBERY. The corrupt practices known by the term B. might well form the theme of an extended essay. Here we can point only to a few of the more conspicuous feat tures of this grave social disorder, and chiefly as concerns B. at elections.
Election .73., a well-known form of corruption, may be called the canker and disgrace of constitutional government. Individuals, with little to recommend them but wealth, and it may be some local distinction, wishing to be elected representatives in the legisla ture, do not scruple, through various devices, to buy the votes of the meaner order of electors by bribes. B. at elections is perhaps more openly and audaciously practiced in various parts of the United States than it is in England; nor are base influences of this kind unknown in connection with the more meager constitutional forms of some conti nental states. But in the eye of the world, England had the unenviable notoriety of being the country in which B. was reduced to a regular and continuous, though covert, system. It had been demonstrated by parliamentary inquiry, that.masses of the popula tion in certain towns—more particularly the class called freemen—look upon the fran chise as a privilege which, for personal benefit., entitles them to exact so much money for their votes. Public considerations had no weight with them whatever. It seemed to them to be alike their duty and their interest to sell their votes to the highest bidder, The earl of Dundonald mentions in his Autobiography, that when, as lord Cochrane, he offered himself as a candidate for Honiton, he was barefaeedly told by one of the elec tors, "that he always voted for Mister Most;" and not choosing to bribe, he lost his election. The amount of bribe ordinarily paid at elections in this venal class of boroughs, varied from £1 to £10, according to circumstances; as high a sum as £20, and even £50, had been known to be given in the extremities of a contest. For these corrupting and disgraceful practices, the law threatens certain penalties; but to avoid incurring these, as well as for the sake of decency, the candidates employed a mean class of agents, or were in some obscure way assisted by confederates, of whose proceedings it was difficult to substantiate any guilty knowledge on their part. The agents more immediately con
cerued did the business of bribing in private, sometimes in darkened apartments,•where no one could be seen. Formerly, the treating of voters in taverns was added to other varieties of corruption, and the demoralization that ensued on occasions of this kind. amounted almost to a universal saturnalia. The law having interposed to check this gross form of 13., the evil had latterly subsided into a common-place routine of secret money-dealings. Of course, by this illegal expenditure, along with the necessary out lays which the law allows, the cost of an election was in many cases enormous. Few seats of English borough members cost less than 21800; but double and triple this sum was a common outlay. It is a well-known fact, that for certain boroughs any man—no matter what be his political opinions or private character—might be returned by advanc ing 24000, and asking no questions as to what was done with it. As the 13, was on both sides, it may be safely averred that the money spent at some contested elections amounted to 210,000. As regards electioua for counties, the influences brought to bear are ordi narily of a different kind; but though morally wrong, they do not come within the scope of the present article. The Scotch have some reason to boast that their country is com paratively exempt from this social disorder—that their representatives are not so depraved as to offer, nor the electors so weak and needy as to accept, money-bribes. Such may be said as a general truth. Unfortunately, however, the national integrity is in this respect not quite unblemished, for the member returned for the Falkirk burgles, iu 1857, was unseated for bribery. To avert every form of corrupt influence, the ballot (q.v.) was long vehemently urged; and an act to secure the use of the ballot in parliamentary and municipal elections throughout Great Britain and Ireland was finally passed in July, 1872. So far bribery seems to have been almost unaffected by the ballot act. Tlie improved mode of trying election petitions by judges has worked well_ See Connurr PRACTICES ACT, and PARLIAMENT.