THE "FEUDAL SCREW " TN THE COUNTY DIVISIONS.
TAST week in writing of "The Disparagement of England" we had something to say about the terrorism alleged to be exercised by the landlords over agricultural voters. We asked whether details could be produced of a single case in which a voter had been turned out of his cottage or had lost his job through voting Radical. None of our readers has sent us on this subject anything worthy of the name of evidence. But we were not alone in wishing to have accurate information about what, if it were proved to be true, would be an extremely grave matter. Two weeks ago the editor of the Nation issued- the following appeal :—" We shall be glad to receive from Liberal members, candidates, and agents, accounts of bribery, treating, intimidation, the eviction of tenants, attempts to undermine the secrecy of the ballot, and other illegal and corrupt practices that have extensively pre- vailed during this election, especially in the counties." Last week the Nation printed a selection of the answers it had received. We turned to them with much interest, and, we may venture to say, with an open mind, for although we deprecate the insulting charge of general servility and cowardice which has been freely brought against the English agricultural labourer, we still think it conceivable that detached instances of improper influences might be unearthed. In the passion of a particularly fierce election it is probable that such things have happened to some extent on both sides. We pass to an examination of the letters.
The writer of the first letter is "A Liberal Candidate" who tells us that he was defeated by the forces of Tariff Reform in Essex or Suffolk. It would have been more informing if he had told us exactly which county he writes about, but perhaps that does not matter much. "In blissful ignorance,', he says, "of what was going on below the surface the last few days, I was hopeful to the end." The constituency, we are told, however, was " neglected "; there was "a very bad register," wretched railway com- munication, and so on. These things are deplorable, no doubt, but they are not intimidation. When the writer says that the constituency was "neglected," he means of course that it was neglected by his own party. Unless he alleges that Liberal speakers and canvassers were hounded out of the constituency by the bullying landlord, the assertion does not help us much further. He then goes on to say that in one town the Chief Inspector of Police was an official in the Tory club, and one of his constables was seen sticking up Tory bills. "Stern measures were taken, with the result that the Tory efforts were completely checkmated, and we polled even better than we had expected,"—from which it appears that the Liberal candidate very properly intimidated the Police Inspector and his constables with a success on which we congratulate him. "In three of the towns," we read, "there were veritable landslides, and I think half our promises voted Tory. The most extraordinary pressure was put upon timid shopkeepers and ill-paid labourers in the last few days." What strikes us in this statement is that a large number of voters— apparently the majority—had not the least hesitation in declaring their political opinions. The statement does not fit in with the complaint that the agricultural voters are afraid to say what their opinions are. If Liberals extract confessions of political faith from the voters, we cannot understand the sense of their pretending to be aggrieved that the ballot is not secret. The principle of secrecy is in fact violated on both sides, but Liberals call the violation on their own side "legitimate canvassing" or "political education," and on the Unionist side " intimidation " or corruption." The writer says that the " pressure " of his opponents was "spiritual, spirituous, and economic." In one place .a rector canvassed a large Bible-class before the poll. But will the Liberal candidate tell us how many voters there were in the Bible-class ? Unless he can do that, his statement is, of course, valueless.
Then he tells us that "the constituency had been deluged for years with rabbits and pheasants. ' This, we suppose, must have been the deluge that caused the land- slide. But as it had been going on for years, we are astonished that the Liberal candidate had not noticed it. He has told. us that he was in blissful ignorance of what was going on below the surface. This underground deluge was perhaps like the floods in Paris, which have forced themselves up- to the surface at points very remote from the river. He goes On: "Of actual money bribery, by shillings and. half-crowns (which was rife in a bordering constituency), I have not yet heard Of intimida- tion, apart from spiritual effort, there was more than can easily be imagined. by those who live in freedom." But we protest again that what we want is not what can "easily be imagined," but what is true and demonstrable. "I do not know," he says, "whether to be more astonished at the timidity of the shopkeepers in some of the towns or at the conduct of some of the vulgar and. often im- pecunious men and. women who badgered. them." Our brain reels. We had thought up to this point that it was the pressure of riches which was complained. of; but here it seems that the charge is against vulgar and. often impecunious people, and. the writer does not even satisfy our natural curiosity by telling us what, in his opinion, is the relation between vulgarity and. impecuniosity. Is there not a word. to be said for these much-disparaged shopkeepers who appear to have listened patiently to argu- ments from men and. women who, although they badgered them, were incapable of bribing them ? Our attention becomes alert again when we come upon the very charge in support of which we desire evidence. "But on the farms and in the small villages the intimidation was no joke. If the Liberal candidate is returned, you will be dismissed, your wages will be reduced, you will be a marked. man.' These and similar menaces told in hundreds of cases." As to evi- dence of the truth of this charge there is none. We do not care about "hundreds of cases" ; we should be quite content if the writer would give us chapter and verse for one. Will he ? We appeal to him while the matter is still fresh in his mind. Yet there is something we rather like about this Liberal candidate. In spite of the deluge of rabbits and pheasants and the landslide and. other portents, he keeps a good heart. "The enthusiasm of the Liberal stalwarts was magnificent," he writes, "and. I should. not be sur- prised if the verdict were reversed next time. Most of the dodges which succeeded will not succeed twice." If the feudal screw has been driven home only by dodges which cannot succeed. twice, it does not appear to be such a terrible screw after all. "The Tories, he adds, "would certainly dread, and the Liberals would certainly welcome, another contest." So perhaps the newly formed Gladstone League will finil its occupation gone in advance.
The writer of another letter is a Liberal canvasser, who says that the ordinary Christmas charities of coals, blankets, pheasants, &c., in a Hertfordshire division were not given out till the General Election had begun ; and that "a tradesman doing his rounds on Monday was asked to change three sovereigns and. one half-sovereign, a thing he has not to do in a year as a rule." That is rather vague ; but once more we are all attention when we come to the following charge : "Many of the farmers here say to their men, If you vote for the Liberal candidate I am afraid we won't be able to keep you on any longer, as we shall be so short of money." Alas ! once more we are fobbed off without chapter and verse. Nor is a shadow of evidence given for the charge that "the Conservative ladies have been very- busy helping the sick and ailing lately, discharging voteless gardeners and getting married voters who have been out of work." We cannot fathom the logic of this ; what kind of regard must the Conservative ladies have for their gardens if they replace voteless gardeners by " out-of-works " who happen both to be married and to have votes ? The search for men who possessed this combination of qualifications must have been long and arduous. The next example of intimidation in the same letter is the .statement that several old-age pensioners have supported the Conservative" because it has been put into their heads that they will lose their pensions if a Liberal Government is returned." This illustra- tion comes with a charm and grace all its own from a member of the party which has condoned the statements of Mr. Ure, and argues a sense of humour which Ought to prove a ready weapon in the hands of an ardent canvasser. This writer, however, displays something of the same invincible spirit as the writer of the first letter we have examined. " The voters," he gays, "are won by money and position, but with time and, patience we may capture any moderately intelligent one among them." If time and patience can weigh down the balance against money and. position, theretis no jme4iate need to be down-hearted. The present writer remembers that some twenty-four years ago he was much impressed by charges of intimida- tion at a particular election. Having less experience then than now, he was inclined to believe them all true. And in one particular case he made up his mind—in the interests of the Liberal candidate, he may add—to expose the infamy. A certain man (name and address given) was said to have been terrorised into voting against his convictions by a certain employer (name and. address also given). The house of the voter was visited. The man was out, but his wife was there, and confirmed the charge. Pressed to disclose the facts in the interests of electioneering honesty, she pleaded that she did. not want to get herself, or her husband, or any one into trouble. But her many mysterious allusions intensified the belief that the man had been grossly bullied by one who had it in his power to deprive him of his livelihood. Urged still further to say exactly what had occurred, the woman at last replied : "Well, Mr. A. he said to my husband, he said, You bain't going to be such a damned fool as to vote for the Liberals, be you ? ' " Next emerged a "new fact" highly creditable to the voter, but hardly useful in a prosecution for intimidation. "And then my husband did tell him to go to — and. that he wouldn't be spoke to like that by nobody." And we suspect that nearly every inquiry would end in such smoke as that. The evidence of the writers to the Nation reminds us of the White Rabbit's evidence in the trial of the Knave of Hearts :— "They told me you had been to her, And mentioned me to him : She gave me a good character, But said I could not swim.
He then sent word I had not gone, (We know it to be true) : If she should pass the matter on, What would become of you ?
I gave her one, they gave him two, You gave us three or more;
They all returned from him to you, Though they were mine before.
If I or she should chance to be Involved in this affair, He trusts to you to set them free, Exactly as we were."
"That," said the Judge when the White Rabbit had finished, "is the most important evidence we have yet heard." We can truthfully say the same of the evidence provided. by the Nation.
Previous page
