8. Every person who shall, directly or indirectly, by himself Appendix. or by any other person on his behalf, make any such gift, Sect. 2. loan, offer, promise, procurement, or agreement as aforesaid, to or for any person, in order to induce such person to procure, or endeavour to procure, the return of any person to serve in Parliament, or the vote of any voter at any election: 4. Every person who shall, upon or in consequence of any such gift, loan, offer, promise, procurement, or agreement, procure or engage, promise, or endeavour to procure the return of any person to serve in Parliament, or the vote of any voter at any election : 5. Every person who shall advance or pay, or cause to be paid, any money to or to the use of any other person with the intent that such money or any part thereof shall be expended in bribery at any election, or who shall knowingly pay or cause to be paid any money to any person in discharge or repayment of any money wholly or in part expended in bribery at any election: And any person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, Penalty. and in Scotland of an offence punishable by fine and imprisonment, and shall also be liable to forfeit the sum of one hundred pounds to any person who shall sue for the same, together with full costs of suit: provided always, that the aforesaid enactment Proviso. 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 bonâ fide incurred at or concerning any election. Bribery is an offence at common law. Lord GLENBERVIE's definition of bribery at common law is as follows :"Wherever a person is bound by law to act without any view to his private emolument, and another, by a corrupt contract engages such person, on condition of the payment or promise of money or other lucrative consideration, to act in a manner in which he shall prescribe, both parties are by such contract guilty of bribery." (2 Doug. 400.) So Lord MANSFIELD, in Reg. v. Vaughan, 4 Burr. 2501, says: "Wherever it is a crime to take, it is a crime to give; they are reciprocal. And in many cases, especially in bribery at elections to parliament, the attempt is a crime: it is complete on his side who offers it." And it is clear that the offer of a bribe was always a misdemeanor, on the principle that every attempt to commit a misdemeanor is itself a misdemeanor. (See Reg. v. Scofield, Cald. 397; Reg. v. Johnson, 2 Show; Wade v. Broughton, 2 V. & B. 173.) And the asking for a bribe would seem for the same reason to be a misdemeanor also. (Rogers on Elections, 13th Ed., p. 347.) Where a person has been guilty of several acts of bribery at a municipal election, he is liable to a penalty in respect of each such act of bribery. (Milnes v. Bale; Milnes v. Lea, L. R. 10 C. P. 591; 44 L. J. C. P. 336; 33 L. T. (N.S.) 174.) Appendix. Note s. 2. Bribery further defined. APPENDIX. In that case BRETT, J., said: "I think these different acts (of bribery) are so far distinct and separate offences in kind, that to prove a person guilty of any one of them, evidence could not be given of the doing of any other of them. If a person were charged with any one such offence, I am of opinion that evidence of other such acts could not be admitted to show that he was guilty. They are by nature distinct and separate offences. The moment that one of them is committed the offence is complete, and the committal of any other of them would be a complete separate offence. "The only sensible construction, in my opinion, is that a person guilty of one of such offences is guilty of one misdemeanor, and a person guilty of several of such offences is guilty of several misdemeanors." A vacancy having occurred in the representation of a city in Parliament, the respondent and two other candidates in the same political interest came forward as candidates. It was determined by such candidates to hold a test ballot to ascertain which of the three candidates should stand. The respondent was successful; but his agents gave money and drink to voters to induce them to give their votes for the respondent in order to place him at the head of the test ballot, without, however, making any stipulation as to their votes at the election. It was held that the case was directly and distinctly within the third clause of this section. (Bristol Election Peti tion, Brett v. Robinson, L. R. 5 C. P. 503; 39 L. J. C. P. 265; 23 L. T. 188; 18 W. R. 866.) As to when a distribution of coals by a candidate by means of tickets signed for him by his political agent is bribery within the meaning of the above section, see Boston Election Petition, In re Malcolm v. Ingram, L. R. 9 C. P. 610; 43 L. J. C. P. 331; 31 L. T. 331. In the case of Simpson v. Yeend, L. R. 4 Q. B. 626; 38 L. J. Q. B. 313; 21 L. T. (N.S.) 56; 10 B. & S. 752, the defendant whilst soliciting a vote at an election of councillors, told the voter that he would be remunerated for what loss of time might occur by his going to vote. It was held that the transaction was bribery within the meaning of sub-section 1 of the above section, inasmuch as it amounted to an offer or a promise to procure or endeavour to procure money or valuable consideration for a vote in order to induce the voter to vote at an election. In order to disqualify a candidate from being registered as a voter by reason of personal bribery or bribery by an agent with his knowledge and consent, he must be found by the report of the election judge to have been so guilty. It is not enough that the judge states facts from which personal bribery or other corrupt practice might be inferred. (Grant v. Pagham (Overseers) 3 C. P. D. 80; 47 L. J. C. P. 59; 37 L. T. (N.S.) 404; 2 Hopw. & C. 384.) 3. The following persons shall also be deemed guilty of bribery and shall be punishable accordingly: 1. Every voter who shall, before or during any election, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, receive, agree, or contract for any money, gift, loan, or valuable consideration, office, place, or employment, for himself or for any other person, for voting or agreeing to vote, or for refraining or agreeing to refrain from voting, at any election: 2. Every person who shall, after any election, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, Sect. 3. receive any money or valuable consideration on account of Appendix. And any person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and in Scotland of an offence punishable by fine and imprison ment, and shall also be liable to forfeit the sum of ten pounds Penalty. to any person who shall sue for the same, together with full costs of suit. fined. 4. Every candidate at an election, who shall corruptly by Treating dehimself or by or with any person, or by any other ways or means on his behalf, at any time, either before, during or after any election, directly or indirectly, give or provide, or cause to be given or provided, or shall be accessory to the giving or providing, or shall pay, wholly or in part, any expenses incurred for any meat, drink, entertainment, or provision to or for any person, in order to be elected, or for being elected, or for the purpose of corruptly influencing such person or any other person to give or refrain from giving his vote at such election, or on account of such person having voted or refrained from voting, or being about to vote or refrain from voting, at such election, shall be deemed guilty of the offence of treating, and shall forfeit the sum of fifty pounds to any person who shall sue for Penalty. the same, with full costs of suit; and every voter who shall Voters acceptcorruptly accept or take any such meat, drink, entertainment, ing treating to be incapable or provision, shall be incapable of voting at such election, and of voting. his vote, if given, shall be utterly void and of none effect. In the Bewdley Case, 1 O'M. & H. 16, BLACKBURN, J., said: "Looking at those words, it is plain that those who prepared the Act have endeavoured to take in almost everything that possibly could be taken in, but they have very properly and wisely governed it all by the word 'corruptly.' As to this word 'corruptly,' the true construction of the Act is that which was stated by Mr. Justice WILLES, in giving his opinion in the House of Lords in the case Cooper v. Slade (6 H. L. Cas. 746; 27 L. J. Q. B. 453; 6 E. & B. 447), namely, that corruptly' there does not mean wickedly, or immorally, or dishonestly, or anything of that sort, but with the object and intention of doing that which the Legislature plainly means to forbid. In fact, giving meat or drink is treating when the person who gives it has an intention of treating-not otherwise, and in all cases where there is any evidence to show that meat or drink has been given, it is a question of fact for the judge whether the intention is made out by the evidence, which in every individual case must stand on its own grounds, although each individual case may be a mere feather's weight by itself, and so small that one could not act upon it, yet if there is a large number of cases, a large number of slight cases will together make a strong one; and consequently, it must always be a very important inquiry what was the scale, the amount Note s. 4. Appendix. and extent to which it was done. In considering what is corrupt treating and what is not, we must look broadly to the common sense of the thing. There is an old legal maxim, 'Inter apices juris summa injuria.' To go by the strict letter of the law often would produce a very grave wrong. If we were to say an election was void upon a single case of that sort, we should be going to the apices juris,' and the result would be 'summa injuria.' Therefore the inquiry must be as to the extent and amount of such cases." In the Wallingford Case, 1 O'M. & H. 59, BLACKBURN, J., said: “The statute does not say that it shall depend upon the amount of drink. The smallest quantity given with the intention will avoid the election. But when we are considering as a matter of fact the evidence, we must, as a matter of common sense, see on what scale and to what extent it was done. "Whenever also the intention is by such means to gain popularity, and thereby to affect the election, or if it be that persons are afraid that if they do not provide entertainment and drink to secure the strong interest of the publicans, and of the persons who like drink, whenever they can get it for nothing, they will become unpopular, and they therefore provide it in order to affect the election,-then I think that it is corrupt treating." Where, on the other hand, the refreshment was strictly confined to those who were actually engaged in the work of the election, and were known supporters of the sitting member, his committee-men in fact, the election was upheld. (Bradford, 1 O'M. & H. 33.) As to treating after an election, see the Brecon Case, 2 O'M. & H. 43, in which Mr. Justice LUSH said: "I do not agree that treating with a view to attach the voters to the candidate and secure their future support is within this branch of the section. Treating for such a purpose may peril the future election, which it is designed to influence, but we are now dealing with a past election. Nor can it be the merely giving an entertainment as an expression of gratitude, or by way of rewarding the voters. : "The treating which the Act calls corrupt as regards a bygone election, must be connected with something which preceded the election, must be the complement of something done or existing before, and calculated to influence the voter, while the vote was in his power. An invitation given before to an entertainment to take place afterwards, or a practice of giving entertainments after an election, which it may be supposed the voters would calculate on, would, if followed up by the treat afterwards, give to it the character of corrupt treating. But when the entertainment was, as in this case, not only not mentioned, but not even thought of till after the election was over, no such entertainment ever having been given before, it cannot in my judgment be deemed corrupt treating within the meaning of the Act." It would be otherwise where a large amount of beer had been drunk and paid for by the sitting member, although subsequently to the election, where the broad and obvious state of the whole matter was, that it was expected and understood, although not expressed in absolute words, that a large sum of money would be paid for beer. (The Poole Case, 2 O'M. & H. 124.) In the Kidderminster Case, 2 O'M. & H. 170, the sitting member before the polling promised an entertainment after the election. In pursuance of his promise he prepared to give the entertainment; subsequently, under advice, he countermanded the entertainment, but he had paid a large sum for expenses incurred in the preparation. The election judge avoided the election. The corrupt payment of rates is punishable as bribery by sect. 49 of the 30 & 31 Vict. c. 102, which enacts that Any person, either directly or indirectly, corruptly paying any rate on behalf of any ratepayer for the purpose of enabling him to be registered as a voter, thereby to influence his vote at any future election, and any candi Note s. 4. date or other person, either directly or indirectly, paying any rate on behalf Appendix. of any voter for the purpose of inducing him to vote or refrain from voting, shall be guilty of bribery, and be punishable accordingly; and any person on whose behalf and with whose privity any such payment as in this section is mentioned is made shall also be guilty of bribery, and punishable accordingly. influence defined. 5. Every person who shall, directly or indirectly, by himself, Undue or by any other person on his behalf, make use of or threaten to make use of, any force, violence, or restraint, or inflict or threaten the infliction, by himself or by or through any other person, of any injury, damage, harm, or loss, or in any other manner practise intimidation upon or against any person in order to induce or compel such person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of such person having voted or refrained from voting, at any election, or who shall, by abduction, duress, or any fraudulent device or contrivance, impede, prevent, or otherwise interfere with the free exercise of the franchise of any voter, or shall thereby compel, induce, or prevail upon any voter, either to give or to refrain from giving his vote at any election, shall be deemed to have committed the offence of undue influence, and shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and in Scotland of an offence Penalty. punishable by fine or imprisonment, and shall also be liable to forfeit the sum of fifty pounds to any person who shall sue for the same, together with full costs of suit. In the Lichfield Case, 1 O'M. & H. 25, Mr. Justice WILLES, in delivering judgment, said: "The proper definition of that undue influence which is dealt with [by this section] is using any violence or threatening any damage, or resorting to any fraudulent contrivance to restrain the liberty of a voter, so as either to compel or frighten him into voting, or abstaining from voting, otherwise than he freely wills." As to what amount of violence will avoid an election, see Salford, 1 O'M. & H. 141; Nottingham, ibid, 245; Stafford, ibid, 229; Drogheda, ibid, 255; North Durham, 2 O'M. & H. 156; Sligo, 1 O'M. & H. 300. As to what will amount to injury or the threat thereof by landlords, see Windsor, 1 O'M. & H. 6; Galway, 2 O'M. & H. 54; North Norfolk, 1 O'M. & H. 237;-by employers, see the Lichfield Case, 1 O'M. & H. 28; Westbury, ibid, 50; Blackburn, ibid, 203;-by withdrawal of custom, see North Durham, 2 O'M. & H. 159; North Norfolk, supra ;-by giving up sitting in chapel, see Northallerton, 1 O'M. & H. 168;-by Roman Catholic priest, see Sligo, 2 P. R. & D. 258; Mayo, ibid, 204; Tipperary, 2 O'M. & H. 31; Longford, ibid, 16; Galway, 1 O'M & H. 305; Galway, 2 O'M. & H. 57; Longford, ibid, 14. As to what is abduction, &c., see Cockermouth, 2 P. R. & D. 166; Gloucester, 2 O'M. & H. 60. Other Forcible abduction or duress would come under this section. methods, however, equally undue, though without force, as by making a voter drunk, or by getting him away from the election on some pretence, may easily be conceived. (Rogers on Election, 13th Edition, p. 405.) |