Cooper v Slade

CHARLES H. COOPER,-Plaintiff in Error; FEEDK. WM. SLADE,-Defendant in Error [July 3, 1857; February 15, April 17, 1858]. [Mews' Dig. vi. 142, 215. S.C. 27 L.J. Q.B. 449; 4 Jur. N.S. 791; 6 W.R. 461, and, below, 6 E, and B. 447; 25 L.J. Q.B. 324; 2 Jur. N.S. 1016. Discussed and applied, on point as to bribery, in Coventry Election Case, 1869, 20 L.T. 413; Bolton Election Petition, 1874, 31 L.T. 194; Eigden v. Edwards, 1880, 44 L.T. 193; and Packard v. Callings, 1886, 54 L.T. 621. Cf. Corrupt Practices Act, 1883 (46 and 47 Viet. c. 51), s. 3. On point as to separate counts for one act of bribery, cited in MUnes v. Bale, 1875, L.R. 10 C.P. 596.] Parliamentary Elections-Bribery-Out-Voters-Travelling Expenses- Agent-Pleading. An election was about to' take place at C. S. was one of the candidates. In the committee-room of S. the question was discussed whether paying the expenses of bringing up outvoters was legal. S. after referring to a law book, said that it was, but limited it to the payment of expenses out of pocket. A circular had been previously prepared and printed requesting out-voters to come up and vote for S. Upon S. making this declaration of his opinion a clerk to an agent of S. (without any express direction from S. or from the agent) wrote at the bottom of each circular, " Your railway expenses will be paid." A voter who resided at H. received one of these circulars with this added note: he came to C., voted for S., and afterwards received the sum of 8s., the expenses to which he had bona fide been put by his journey: [747] Held, that the words added to the circular must be treated as written by the authority of S.; that the promise and payment were forbidden by the 17 and 18 Viet. c. 102, s. 2 (21 and 22 Viet. c. 87, legalises providing conveyances for voters), and that for the purposes of that statute they must be treated as " corruptly " made. The 17 and 18 Viet. c. 102, s. 2, declares guilty of bribery " every person who shall, directly or indirectly, by himself, or by any other person, give or agree to give, or promise money, etc. to any voter, in order to induce any voter to vote, or refrain from voting, etc., or shall corruptly do any such act as aforesaid, on account of any voter having voted or refrained from voting," etc. A letter was written to an out-voter requesting him to come to a borough, and record his vote for S. A postscript added, " Your railway expenses will be 1488 COOPER V. SLADE [1857-58] VI H.L.C., 7 paid." The voter did come and vote as requested: his travelling expenses òwere paid: Held, that the promise and payment constituted only one act of bribery within s. 2 of 17 and 18 Viet. c. 102, and that consequently two counts, one for the promise to pay, and one for the actual payment, could not be supported. This was a proceeding in error upon a judgment of the Court of Exchequer Chamber pronounced on a bill of exceptions. The Plaintiff had brought an action against the Defendant for penalties under the 17 and 18 Viet. c. 102, called "the Corrupt Practices Prevention Act, 1854." * [748] The declaration originally consisted of a great number of counts. The Defendant pleaded not guilty by statute 21 J. 1, c. 4, s. 4. The cause was tried at the Cambridge summer assizes 1855, before Mr. Baron Parke, when on. a suggestion of the learned Judge all the counts except the first, seventh, and eighth were abandoned, and the cause proceeded as if the declaration contained only those counts. It is unnecessary to refer to more than the seventh and eighth counts. The seventh count alleged that the Defendant after the passing of the Act promised money to one Richard Carter,who was at the time of the said election a voter at the said election, in order to induce the said Richard Carter to vote at the said election, whereby the Defendant became liable, etc. The eighth count alleged that the Defendant corruptly gave money to Carter, he being such voter at the election, on account of Carter having voted at such election, whereby, etc. By the 15th section of the Act the returning officer is bound to appoint an auditor to investigate the whole of the election expenses, and by the 31st section it is necessary for every candidate before the nomination to appoint an agent for election expenses through whom all payments are to be made. These acts1 were done. The bill of exceptions stated in substance that in August 1854 an election of two burgesses for the borough of Cambridge took place; that Viscount Maidstone and F. W. Slade, Esq. were candidates; that Mr. Slade appointed Peed his election agent; that Peed after his appointment signed the declaration required by the statute, and that Thirkettle acted as Peed's clerk. At the time of the election one Richard Carter was a voter for the borough of Cambridge, and before the day of the election Carter was not at Cambridge but at Huntingdon, and whilst [749] there received from the committee for conducting the election of Viscount Maidstone and the Defendant, of which one Charles Balls acted as chairman, a letter in the words and figures following: " Mr. R. Carter. " Cambridge Borough Election. " Committee Room, Lion Hotel, August 12th, 1854. " Sir,-The mayor having appointed Wednesday next for the nomination, and Thursday for the polling, you are earnestly requested to return to Cambridge and record your vote in favour of Lord Maidstone and F. W. Slade, Esq., Q.C.-Yours truly, charles balls, Chavrman. " Your railway expenses will be paid." The whole of this letter, except the words " Mr. R. Carter," and the words " Your railway expenses will be paid," was a printed circular. In consequence of this letter the said Richard Carter went from Huntingdon to Cambridge in order to vote, and * The 2d section declares that the following persons shall be guilty of bribery: " 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 other 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 any such voter having voted or refrained from voting at any election. And any person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, etc., and shall also be liable to forfeit the sum of £100 to any person who shall sue for the same, together with full costs of suit: Provided that the aforesaid enactment shall not extend or be construed to extend to any money paid or agreed to be paid for or on account of any legal expenses bona fide incurred at or concerning any election." 1489 VI H.L.C., 750 COOPER V. SLADE [1857-58] voted at the said election for Viscount Maidstone and the Defendant, they being the persons mentioned in the letter. The letter, when produced, had the following memorandum written at the foot: " Allowed 8s. for expenses from Huntingdon. William Thirkettle," and another memorandum, written under the former: " I allow Mr. R. Carter's claim to have 8s. for travelling expenses. S. Peed." The money was afterwards paid £ Carter out of monies furnished by Peed. Thirkettle, on being examined, stated that he was clerk to Peed at the election, and that there was a committee for conducting the election of Viscount Maidstone and the Defendant; that Balls acted [750] as chairman of such committee; that he, Thirkettle, saw the Defendant at the committee-room, and heard the question of travelling expenses discussed, and that the Defendant said it was legal to pay travelling expenses to bring up the outvoters, and gave such opinion for the guidance of Peed; and that he, Thirkettle, wrote the words " Tour railway expenses will be paid " at the bottom of the letter, after the Defendant had said that the payment of travelling expenses was legal. On cross-examination, Thirkettle stated that, when the question was put to the Defendant, a law-book was sent for and brought, and the opinion of Chief Justice Tindal read, and upon that the Defendant said, " I think the expenses are legal, and that nothing beyond legal expenses are to be paid." On re-examination Thirkettle stated that he thought the words used by the Defendant were, " To pay merely the expenses out of pocket.'.' Counsel for the Plaintiff below having closed their case, the counsel for the Defendant produced no evidence on his behalf, but contended that the above evidence on the part of the Plaintiff was not sufficient to entitle the Plaintiff to a verdict on the seventh or eighth counts, and ought not to be left to the jury for consideration. But the judge was of a contrary opinion, and directed the jurors, that if they were satisfied upon the evidence that the Defendant below did, by himself or any other person on his behalf authorised by him so to do, promise money to Carter, in order to induce him to vote for the said Defendant, they must find the seventh count for the Plaintiff, although the sum of money so promised was no more than the fair and reasonable expenses of Carter's travelling from Huntingdon to Cambridge on the...