les elections, in _Revue des Deux Mondes_,
Feb. 1, 1910.]

*100. The Regulation of Electoral Expenditure.*--Time was, and within
the memory of men still living, when an English parliamentary election
was attended by corrupt practices so universal and so shameless as to
appear almost more ludicrous than culpable. Voters as a matter of
course accepted the bribes that were tendered them and ate and drank
and smoked and rollicked at the candidate's expense throughout the
electoral period and were considered men of conscience indeed if they
did not end by going over to the opposition. The notorious Northampton
election of 1768, in the course of which a body of voters numbering
under a thousand were the recipients of hospitalities from the backers
of three candidates which aggregated upwards of a million pounds, was,
of course, exceptional; but the history of countless other cases
differed from it only in the amounts laid out. To-day an altogether
different state of things obtains. From having been one of the most
corrupt, Great Britain has become one of the most exemplary of nations
in all that pertains to the proprieties of electoral procedure. The
Ballot Act of 1872 contained provisions calculated to strengthen
pre-existing corrupt practices acts, but the real turning point was
the adoption of the comprehensive Corrupt and Illegal Practices Act of
1883. By this measure bribery (in seven enumerated forms) and treating
were made punishable by imprisonment or fine and, under varying
conditions, political disqualification. The number and functions of
the persons who may be employed by the candidate to assist in a
campaign were prescribed, every candidate being required to have a
single authorized agent charged with the disbursement of all moneys
(save certain specified "personal" expenditures) in the candidate's
behalf and with the duty of submitting to the returning officer within
thirty-five days after the election a sworn statement covering all
receipts and expenditures. And, finally, the act fixed, upon a sliding
scale in proportion to the size of the constituencies, the maximum
amounts which candidates may legitimately expend. In boroughs
containing not more than 2,000 registered voters the amount is (p. 096)
L350, with an additional L30 for every thousand voters above the
number mentioned. In rural constituencies, where proper outlays will
normally be larger, the sum of L650 is allowed when the nu