es, W. Wallace Currie, W. Earle, jun., Hall
(barrister), Captain Colquitt, Rev. Wm. Shepherd, etc. The processions
were both got up in admirable style; splendid and costly banners and
flags of all descriptions were displayed, while ribbons, of which
Denison's were scarlet, and Ewart's blue, fluttered in the wind in all
directions. The following was the result of the polls. I give it to
show how remarkably close the contest was carried on, and how the tide of
favour ebbed and flowed: 1st day--Denison, 260; Ewart, 248. 2nd
day--Denison, 583; Ewart, 568. 3rd day--Denison, 930; Ewart, 918. 4th
day--Denison; 1320; Ewart, 1308. 5th day--Denison, 1700; Ewart, 1688.
6th day--Denison, 2020; Ewart, 2008. 7th day--Denison, 2186; Ewart,
2215. The number of freemen who voted was 4401.

If ever a borough deserved disfranchising, it was Liverpool on that
election. The conduct of the freemen was atrocious. I speak of them as
a body. The bribery on that occasion was so broad, barefaced, and
unblushingly carried on, as to excite disgust in all thoughtful men's
minds. Sums of money 3 to 100 pounds were said to have been given for
votes, and I recollect that after the heat of the election had subsided,
a list of those who voted was published, with the sums attached, which
were paid to and received by each freeman. I have a copy of it in my
possession. Whether true or false who can tell? Where there is fire
there will be smoke. It is a well-known fact that many of the canvassers
never looked behind them after that memorable time, and numbers of
tradesmen signally benefited by the money that was spread about with such
liberal hands. In some cases money was received by freemen from both
parties. In one case I find a man (among the H's) voting for Mr.
Denison, who received 35 and 10 pounds. Amongst the C's was a recipient
of 28 and 25 pounds from each side; and another, a Mr. C., took 50 pounds
from Denison and 15 pounds from Ewart, the said voter being a
chimney-sweeper, and favouring Mr. Denison with the weight of his
influence and the honour of his suffrage. In looking over the list I
find that the principal recipients of the good things going, were ropers,
coopers, sailmakers, and shipwrights. Yet the name of "merchant" and
"tradesman" not unfrequently occurs in the descriptions of borough
voters. Amongst the W's there appears to be scarcely a voter that
escaped "the gold fever." Amongst others who declined taking an