Saturday 13th November 1880 – Letter from Sandwich Man
THE RESTRICTED SANDWICH ELECTION COMMISSlON.
The following letter, ‘signed ” The Sandwich man,” appears in a London daily paper.
One singular circumstance in connection with this interesting inquiry has apparently passed unheeded by those whose task it has been to comment on the revelations made in this and other corrupt boroughs. I allude to the fact that not only have the Commissioners eschewed all reference to any election here save that of 1880, but that they to have been at considerable pains, and to have exercised some ingenuity, to avoid asking questions which, if I am not misinformed, it is really part of their duty to put.
I am aware that the inquiry is not closed, and therefore I ask you to give one the opportunity of drawing attention to this fact before it is too late. Mr. Crompton-Roberts states in his evidence – and I have good reason to think that he is within the mark – that as much as 23L. was spent in the interest of Mr. Brassey in two or three elections. Again, Mr Hughes tells us that he found the borough so utterly corrupted by the Liberal Party, not only during election times but in the interval that he had in self defence to bribe his own supporters to keep them from going against him.
We who live on the spot know that such enormous sums have been spent on by-gone elections that any hope of a pure contest here is out of the question. Is it not, then, a little singular that, of all the host of witnesses examined by the Commissioners not one was asked a question with regard to any election previous to 1880?
May I suggest that something ought to be done in this direction ? Lord Brabourne must be burning to go into the witness box before he takes his departure abroad, to say, if he can, a good word in favour of a constituency to which be owes all his advancement in political life. Mr. Brassey must also be anxious to explain how it came about that his contests at Sandwich were so inordinately expensive.
These two gentlemen alone could throw a great light on the political history of Sandwich and Deal during the last ten or twenty years. If I mistake not, the Commissioners. in asking their inquiries, are instructed to go back until they come to a pure contested election at least, they have the power of so doing. The task might be a rather protracted one, but I think they are bound to draw back the curtain somewhat further than they have done at present. It would be satisfactory to know that there are even ten righteous men in Sandwich and Deal; but of this we cannot be assured by the present incomplete Inquiry.”
Since this letter written Lord Brabourne has been examined before the Commissioners, and we give a report of his evidence in another column ; but, as it will be seen, the Commissioners limit their enquiry to 1880 election proceed, and do not, as other Commissioners in other tainted boroughs, enquire into previous elections. The evidence of Lord Brabourne is a mere truism.
It is not suggested that there were any corruption in the Sandwich election, when the Right Hon. Knatchbull-Hugessen and Mr. H. Brassey were returned, for there was no opposition, and there has never been the whisper of a suggestion that any intended candidate was bought off.
It has happened, however, that even in Lord Brabourne’s time there have been contests. and allegations of bribery connected with them, and not to go so far back as Sir James Fergusson’s candidature and defeat, we may refer to Mr. Capper’s election, and subsequent defeat; Baron Worms, M.P., for Greewich, and Admiral Lord Clarence Paget, the former having failed to get elected and the latter having fought several successfully, might contribute something if examined, towards the history of bribery at Sandwich Elections if the Commissioners had power to enquire into contests antecedent to 1880.