If there are to be penalties for bribery at elections, they should fall solely on the candidates. It may be objected that if this were so, attempts would be made in the heat of contested elections to charge a man with bribery who was innocent of it, and it is easy to suppose that unprincipled men would sometimes attempt to main tain such a charge. But as the proof of bribery by a candidate is not easy, even when he has actually bribed, it would not be made easier if he had not bribed. And as the ease against him should be proved by most unexceptionable evidence, so the failure to substantiate a charge should be visited with costs heavy enough to deter dishonest men from making it. There remains a difficulty which arises out of the expenses incident to elections as they are now carried on, which are paid by the candidate, and are not ex penses incurred for the purpose of buying votes directly or indirectly : these are expenses of printing, of committee-rooms, and of other things which are incident to what is considered fair canvassing. If public opinion were what it ought to be, or if the system of representation were placed on a sound basis, the candidate should pay nothing. The necessary ex penses should be paid by the electoral dis trict. There are no doubt difficulties connected with this branch of the subject, which could only be satisfactorily re moved by those who are fully conversant with the nature and practice of elections. When the legislature shall take these matters in hand, and fairly grapple with all the difficulties attendant on elections, people will then believe that they really wish to put an end to the corrupt pur chase of votes ; when they shall see the legislature attempt to secure the purity of the elected as much as the purity of the electors, and not visit with equal or simi lar penalties the man who attempts to buy his way into the House of Commons by violating the Law, and the man who assists him by taking the bribe that is offered.
The effect that secret voting might probably have in preventing bribery, has been much considered of late years and with great ingenuity of argument on both sides. An Argument in favour of the Ballot,' by W. D. Christie, M.P., con tains also reference to the opinions of the late Mr. Mill, Mr. Grote, and others on this subject A pamphlet entitled Is the Ballot a Mistake?' by S. C. Denison, contains, among other arguments against the ballot, the argument against its being likely to prevent bribery, and also much valuable historical information on the subject of voting at elections.
The mode in which bribery was ma. naged at the election at Sudbury in 1841 is explained in the Report of 'the Com missioners to inquire into the existence of Bribery in the Borough of Sudbury, 1844.' It was fully proved that " Systematic and extensive Bribery prevailed at the last election of Members of Parliament in this Borough." (Commissioner? Report.) Sudbury was disfranchised in 1844 by the act 7 & 8 Viet. c. 53.
The mode of investigating alleged cases of bribery by Election Committees is explained under ELECTIONS. The House of Commons have shown on several recent occasions a determination not to flinch from investigating cases of bribery ; a circumstance which encourages us to expect that the subject will soon receive from them the consideration that its importance entitles it to. [CHILTERN HUNDREDS.]