the recent statute (a) as corrupt practices. Two of these, bribery and treating, have long been known as offences most seriously interfering with the proper freedom of elections. The third, undue influence is a new offence which the Legislature has thought fit to create, and to class with bribery and treating, as being a corrupt practice of a similar nature and equally hostile to the free exercise of the franchise by electors. As the consequences attached to the commission of each of these three species of corrupt practices at elections are the same, so far as the validity of the election is concerned, and as the penal consequences of each are nearly the same, it will be convenient to consider them together in one chapter.

Although these three offences are classified together, yet as they are very distinct in some respects, the nature and character of each will be separately considered; and the penal consequences attached to each will be pointed out. What corrupt acts will avoid an election, and by whom they must be committed to produce this effect will be the next subject to be considered. This will introduce the whole question of election agency, the principles of which will be exactly the same as applied to each of the species of corrupt practices. In the last place will be pointed out how and at what time any of these corrupt practices may be inquired into by an election. committee.

(a) Corrupt Practices Prevention Act, 1854, 17 & 18 Vict. c. 102.

1. Bribery.

Although bribery was an offence at common law punishable with fine and imprisonment, and rendered the election where it occurred null and void, still the terrors of the common law were not sufficient to deter persons from corrupting electors. Statutes have been passed because the laws already in being had not proved sufficient to prevent corrupt and illegal practices at elections (a), and further provisions have from time to time been made with the view of stopping such corrupt practices; there can be no doubt that much good has been done by these enactments, but yet the wicked ingenuity of cunning men has often. contrived to evade the sanction of these laws, and to baffle the intentions of the Legislature. In the year 1854, after all that has been done and written on this subject, we find the Legislature declaring in the preamble of an act, "That the laws now in force for preventing corrupt practices in the election of members to serve in Parliament have been found insufficient." In the hope of remedying such deficiency, and in order to make the law more clear and better understood, the recent statute has not only introduced some new provisions on the subject of bribery, but has also consolidated all the existing laws on the subject (b).

By the first section of the act, the several acts of Parliament mentioned in a schedule are repealed; among these are all the enactments on the subject of bribery and treating relating to the three divisions of

(a) 7 Wm. 3, c. 4; 2 Geo. 2, c. 24; 43 Geo. 3, c. 74; 49 Geo. 3, c. 118; 5 & 6 Viet. c. 102, s. 20.

(b) 17 & 18 Vict. c. 102, "The Corrupt Practices Prevention Act, 1854."

the United Kingdom. All the enactments on these two subjects, from the Treating Act of Wm. 3, down to those contained in the 20th and 22nd sections of 5 & 6 Vict. c. 102, are repealed, and new provisions are introduced in their place.

The second section gives a new and enlarged definition of bribery. It will be seen that the offer of reward in any shape is included in the new definition, and made as serious an offence as the actual gift of money. This section is divided into five branches, and defines bribery in so far as the acts of the corrupter are concerned.

1. "Every person who shall, directly or indirectly, by himself, or by any other person on his behalf, give, lend, or agree to give or lend, or shall offer, promise, or promise to procure, or to endeavour to procure, any money or valuable consideration, to or for any voter, or to or for any person on behalf of any voter, or to or for any person in order to induce any voter to vote, or refrain from voting, or shall corruptly do any such act as aforesaid on account of such voter having voted or refrained from voting at any election will be guilty of bribery."

2. The second branch of the definition is in all respects similar to the first, with the exception of the subject-matter of the bribe, which in the second part is spoken of as office, place, or employment, instead of the money or valuable consideration mentioned in the first.

These two portions of the section contain the description of the bribery which is most commonly practised, and which has most frequently to be inquired into by election committees. The remainder of the section will be considered a little later.

Any person guilty of any of the offences here described will be liable to indictment punishable with fine and imprisonment, and also to a penal action, in which he may forfeit 1007. to any one who shall sue for it.

The language of this section is so clear that it will not be necessary to make many observations upon it, except as to that part of each of the two heads or branches of the section, which refer to payments or rewards to a voter, on account of his having voted or refrained from voting. As to the other parts of the section, they include in plain and distinct terms every corrupt act towards a voter, and also every attempt to do a corrupt act. As has been already noticed, the offer of reward in any shape will now constitute the offence of bribery. The object of this section is to punish the evil proceedings and attempts of the corrupter. It will make no difference in his offence whether the voter agrees to the corrupt bargain, or professedly assents, intending never to fulfil his part of the transaction (a), or indignantly rejects the offer. In every case, so soon as any person has made the corrupt offer, his offence is complete. The offer, in order to become criminal, need not be made to the voter himself; if made to any person who is able, or is supposed to be able, to influence the voter, the crime will be complete, whether the proffered bribe be for the benefit of the voter himself, or of the person to whom the offer is made.

The time when the corrupt dealing takes place is immaterial, whether it be before during or after the election, before or after a voter has promised to vote.

(a) Henslow v. Fawcett, 3 Ad. & Ell. 51; Harding v. Stokes, 2 M. & W. 235.

In a recent case, Chatham, 1853 (a), a great deal of discussion took place as to whether the giving of a situation after the voter had promised his vote, and before he had voted, amounted to bribery. It appeared in that case, that a candidate canvassed the borough some time before the election, and that after he had received the promises of several voters he obtained situations for them, or for members of their families. There was no evidence that the voters had asked for these appointments before promising their votes. The case was very fully argued on more than one occasion, as the committee believed the case to be one without precedent. On the one hand, it was argued, that the independence of the voter was destroyed at the time of the election by the gift of the situation, and the language of Buller J. in Allen v. Hearn (b) was much relied upon, viz., "The law requires the voter to be free till the last moment of giving or withholding his vote." It was contended on the other hand, that as the promise of the vote was antecedent to any appointment, or promise of appointment, there could have been no corruption or bribery in the transaction. The committee decided, that such conduct amounted to bribery. Had they come to a contrary decision they would have opened a door to every species of corruption (c).

Nature of Corrupt Reward.] Various as are the devices which have been contrived for the purpose of concealing bribery, the law is now too well known,

(a) 2 P. R. & D. 35.

(b) 1 T. R. 56.

(c) Reg. v. Thwaites, 22 L. J. Q. B. 238, post.