CHAPTER VI.

1868-1869.

The decree which banished Mill from public life and ushered Smith into it was not to pass unchallenged by the friends of the former. Before the twenty days allowed by statute for lodging petitions had elapsed, one had been filed against the Conservative member for Westminster. Under the law as it then stood candidates were much more in the hands of their agents than they are now, for there was no statutory limit to expenses, and the agent had to be supplied with money according to his discretion; and not the chief agent only, but a whole troop of assistant agents and active partisans besides.

Certainly there had been no niggardliness shown in the supply. While the published expenses of the Liberal candidates, Grosvenor and Mill, only amounted together to £2296, 2s. 7d., those of the Conservative, Smith, mounted up to the huge total of £8900, 17s. 7d. There had also been lamentable indiscretion on the part of one of Smith's warmest well-wishers, Mr Grimston, to whom, indeed, it was greatly owing that Smith had consented to come forward again for Westminster. Mr Grimston had brought up to London a tenant of his brother (the Earl of Verulam), one Edwards, in order that he might act as a sub-agent. This Edwards had already undergone eighteen months' imprisonment for his part in the malpractices which brought about the disfranchisement of the borough of St Albans. No doubt this worthy must have possessed some special qualities which caused his services to be in request, and no doubt Grimston believed he was doing his friend a good turn in securing him an indefatigable sub-agent, but in fact

A.D. 1868.]

PETITION AGAINST HIS RETURN.

91

his zeal very nearly brought about the loss of the seat. The petition was on the grounds of bribery, treating, and undue influence by the candidate and by other persons on his behalf.

As for Smith himself, he wrote to his wife on December 9 with a perfectly clear conscience as to his own actions :

:

From what I hear, I think it likely the Petition will be presented, but it is not certain yet, and I do not think they have any matter which cannot be explained honourably and to all the world. I am very much less concerned about it than I was-indeed I cannot be said to be at all so.

Parliament assembled on December 10, and Smith duly took his seat for Westminster. The proceedings on the petition against his return did not begin till February 12, when the case was opened before Mr Baron Martin at the Sessions House, Westminster, but was afterwards removed, first to the Lords Justices' Court and then to the Court of Exchequer, a change rendered necessary by the crowds of persons seeking admittance, and by the intense local excitement attending the proceedings. Mr Hawkins, Q.C., and Mr Serjeant Ballantine were counsel for Mr Smith, and Mr Fitzjames Stephen, with Messrs Murch and Littler as juniors, for the petitioners. The trial lasted for seven days, and the cross-examination of witnesses did not fail to produce instances of humour of the sort peculiar to two kinds of case-election petitions and actions for breach of promise of marriage. For example, one witness who had applied to Smith's agent for payment of certain alleged expenses and had been refused, said that he thereupon changed his politics and became a Liberal, because the Conservatives were “a nasty dirty lot."

Asked by Mr Hawkins-"Give us your notion of what a Conservative is". -a witness replied, "I think a Conservative is a rank humbug."

Well, what is a Liberal?"—" A Liberal, if he acts as a man and a gentleman, is a Liberal."

"But suppose a Conservative acts as a man and a gentleman, what do you think of him?"-"Well but, sir, you rarely come across such a one."

It was stated in evidence that at a tea-meeting in the Hanover Square Rooms, a blessing was first asked on the buns and the toast, and afterwards there was a good deal of love-making.

"But do you consider love-making a corrupt practice?"— 'Quite the contrary. I consider it highly laudable."

And so on, after the time-honoured custom by which gentlemen in silk gowns are encouraged to spend their own time and their clients' money in extracting feeble jokes in protracted cross-examination.

Though the charge against the respondent broke down, and was abandoned by the petitioners' counsel, the suspense remained intense up to the very last. Not till the closing

sentences of Mr Baron Martin's summing up did he give the slightest indication of the judgment he was about to deliver.

Having commented severely on the enormous expenditure incurred by Smith's agents, he exonerated the candidate from any dishonourable knowledge of what had been going on, and wound up by declaring Mr Smith duly elected, though he declined, after consultation with his brother judges, to make any order as to costs.

There can be little doubt that it was Smith's personal character for integrity which alone saved him from the consequences of the acts of his agents-and it was only by giving to a candidate above suspicion of corrupt intention the benefit of all doubts, that the judge was able to clear him of direct responsibility. As the 'Times' remarked in a leader on the case:

A.D. 1869.]

MAIDEN SPEECH.

93

A good character has, to Mr Smith at any rate, proved better than riches. It may be a question whether the latter won the seat for him, but there can be no question that the former has saved it.

In spite of the equanimity with which, as he had professed, he had contemplated the approach of the trial, Smith's health gave way under the anxiety of its protracted proceedings: his malady took the painful form of erysipelas, and he was unable to be in court during the summing up. It was his friend, Mr Cubitt, M.P. (now Lord Ashcombe), who had the pleasure of conveying to him the propitious news.

Once safely seated within the walls of St Stephen's, the new member for Westminster showed a disposition and capacity for practical business. Importance is sometimes attached to the maiden speech of a novice, as forecasting the field in which any influence he is to have on the Legislature is to be developed, and it is often matter of concern to his friends that he should not speak too soon, or, on the other hand, be too long in the House without "making his mark," as the phrase goes. Smith's outset was characteristic of the man. It was neither on a lofty theme of foreign policy nor some scheme of ardent philanthropy that he chose to make his essay. Choice, indeed, had little enough to do with the matter it happened simply that the second reading of a bill dealing with the valuation of property in the metropolis was moved by Mr Goschen, then President of the Poor Law Board, at the first sitting after the Easter recess, April 1, 1869. It dealt with a subject concerning which Smith was thoroughly well informed; he had something to say, and he said it. It was to no crowded senate brimming with applause or lowering with ire, that he addressed himself, but to benches sparsely filled with listless legislators, reluctantly obeying the summons.

of Government Whips, who are ever anxious to get some useful work through in the first few days after the holidays, before the Opposition shall have gathered in strength. Such was the modest opening of a distinguished parliamentary career.

During his first session in Parliament Smith subsequently spoke on two or three other subjects, which furnished him with that which Bishop Wilberforce declared makes the difference between a good speaker and a bad one - the former speaking because he has something to say; the latter because he has to say something. On May 10 Mr Gladstone gave facilities to Mr Corrance, to enable that gentlemen to call attention to the question of Pauperism and Vagrancy, and in the debate arising thereon speeches were made by Mr Peel, then Secretary to the Poor Law Board,1 Sir Michael Hicks Beach, Mr Albert Pell, and others. Mr Smith called attention to the significant increase in the amount of outdoor relief since the commencement of the new Poor Law in 1851, showing that in London alone, while the population had in the interval risen by 34 per cent, the cost of relief had doubled. He advocated withholding all relief of able-bodied poor, except it were coupled with the obligation to work, otherwise the law might be interpreted as establishing the legal right of every man who did not, could not, or would not work, and possessed no property, to food, clothing, and shelter at the cost of those who would, could, and did work, and possessed' property.

He was aware [he said] that he was touching on delicate ground, but he was not afraid of interfering with the labour market. He very much preferred the risk of such interference to the certain demoralisation which arose from giving relief as a matter of right to

1 Became Speaker of the House of Commons in 1884.