Wiltshire Times, 19th February 1881

The Messrs. Cornish may breathe freely. Their conduct in connection with the last Parliamentary election in Westbury, reprehensible as the most ardent Conservative must admit it to have been, has been considered by the law advisers of the Crown, and on Monday evening the Attorney-General, in reply to a question, stated he did not propose to direct a prosecution as suggested in such strong terms by Mr. Justice Lush. Our present laws are so miserably weak and inefficient, and so "gloriously uncertain" in their operation, that, although he has no doubt of the guilt of these persons, Sir Henry James declines to initiate a prosecution and run the risk of possible failure. There could be no stronger argument for an immediate and thorough revision of the law dealing with corrupt practices at elections. Constituencies such as Westbury must be purged of the "pests" who delight in corrupting the humbler class of voters. The existing laws are easily evaded and set at naught. Westbury does not stand alone in this respect. The enquiries prosecuted by the Bribery Commissions show how utterly impossible it is to punish, much less to prevent, these flagitious acts. Happily the Government realise the evil, and are prepared to deal with it shortly and sharply. The new Corrupt Practices Act will be of great benefit if it only puts a check on the nefarious proceedings prevalent in certain constituencies during the last election.

Swindon Advertiser, 11th October 1880

ADVENTURES OF A SUPPOSED ELECTION AGENT. —The town of Westbury has been duly exercised this week by the visit of a "gentleman," who has patronised several persons and left in their debt. It seems he came from Warminster, where he had had quarters for some time at the Star Inn, but on Saturday he said he wanted a cheque for £10 cashed to pay his men, whoever they might be. The landlord, Mr George Cornish, jun., said he had not so much cash in house. The lodger then asked for a pound's worth of silver. He declined two half sovereigns :—he particularly required silver. Mrs Cornish obliged him and he left. He had previously borrowed £5 of Mr Long, and similar sums from Mr Parsons at Organ, and from the landlord of the Ship Inn, Warminster. He next turned up at Westbury, at the Lopes Arms Hotel, where he talked largely and charmed the ladies, who would not hear of the possibility of his being a swindler. "O dear no," said the lady, "I could trust him with a hundred pounds." How long he might have enjoyed the confidence and hospitality of that well-known hostelry cannot be surmised, had it not got whispered about during the week that he was a detective from London, sent down to watch Messrs Geo and W. Cornish, and get up evidence against them. As soon as this got wind the opposition camp were jubilant, and the Cornishes were jeered at. Mr George Cornish was determined to know the rights of the affair, and tracked the affable "barrister," as he dubbed himself, to the White Lion Hotel, where he thus accosted him :—"Are you looking for me? I am George Cornish. If I owe you or anyone else anything, I can pay you." The affable barrister said he was not in search of the Cornishes; but now he had the pleasure of seeing those distinguished individuals in propria persona, he should feel great pleasure in treating them. Whiskies cold were had in, and the affable barrister treated George Cornish, sen., out of the coin he had borrowed of George Cornish, jun. The career of the affable barrister was cut short by Supt. Pearce of Warminster, who took the barrister in custody.

Wiltshire Times, 28th August 1880

CORRUPT PRACTICES AT PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS.
In giving the decision of the judges on the election petition, Mr. Justice Lush said that acts of bribery so numerous and so gross had been committed by William and George Cornish that they should feel it their duty to report them to the Speaker of the House of Commons. We see that in the House of Commons on Monday Mr. Onslow asked the Attorney General whether it was his intention to prosecute the various persons especially reported by the Election Judges as having been guilty of corrupt practices at the General Election. The Attorney General in reply said he regretted that he had to deal with the subject within the necessarily narrow limits of an answer to a question. Speaking of present intentions only, his answer would be substantially a negative one. In the graver cases of corrupt practices which occurred in those constituencies in relation to which it was reported by the Judges that corrupt practices had extensively prevailed, it appeared to him that it would be not only contrary to the spirit of the Act of 1863, but also most inexpedient, as well as likely to defeat the coming inquiries by the Commission if prosecutions were now to take place, and so seal the mouths of the persons prosecuted. With regard to those cases where corrupt practices had not been reported to extensively prevail, it had been his duty to read the very voluminous evidence extending to many thousands of pages. He had nearly completed the task, and, with the exception of those persons who had received certificates of indemnity from the Judges, he did not find that the cases were of such a character as would justify a prosecution on the part of the Government. There were, however, some two or three cases of a doubtful nature which would be laid before the Public Prosecutor, and if he so advised, prosecutions would take place. The cases in those constituencies where corrupt practices have been reported to extensively prevail would have to be considered after the Commission had concluded their inquiries.

Frome Times, 16th February 1881

BRIBERY AT WESTBURY.
In the House of Commons, the Attorney-General, in reply to Sir Edward Watkin, said that, in consequence of the report of Mr. Justice Lush, he had carefully gone over the depositions and other evidence against George and William Cornish, who were reported as having corrupted the humbler classes of voters at the late election for Westbury. It was not desirable to institute a Government prosecution unless there was a fair certainty of a conviction, and it appeared that in this case no money, except in one instance, was seen in their possession, and that they had made no actual payments but only held out promises. Under these circumstances he did not think it desirable to direct a prosecution.

[From: Hansard]
Westbury Election
Volume 253: debated on Tuesday 22 June 1880

The Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868. The Parliamentary Elections and Corrupt Practices Act, 1879.

The Parliamentary Elections and Corrupt Practices Act, 1880.

To the Right Honourable The Speaker of the House of Commons.

We, the Right Honourable Sir Robert Lush, knight, and the Honourable Sir Henry Manisty, knight, Judges of the High Court of Justice, and two of the Judges for the time being for the trial of Election Petitions in England, do hereby, in pursuance of the said Acts, certify that upon the 14th, l0th, 16th, 17th, and 18th. days of June 1880, We duly held a Court at the Town Hall in the Borough of Westbury, in the County of Wilts, for the trial of, and did try, the Election Petition for the said Borough between Abraham Laverton, Petitioner; and Charles Nicholas Paul Phipps, Respondent.

And, in further pursuance of the said Acts, We certify and report that, at the conclusion of the said trial, we determined that the said Charles Nicholas Paul Phipps, being the Member whose Election and Return were complained of in the said Petition, was duly Elected and Returned, and we do hereby certify in writing such our determination to you.

And whereas charges were made of corrupt practices having been committed at the said Election we, in further pursuance of the said Acts, Report as follows:—
(a.) That no corrupt practice was proved to have been committed by or with the knowledge or consent of any candidate at such Election;(b.) We further Report that the following persons have been proved, at the trial, to have been guilty of the corrupt practice of bribery:— George Cornish, of Lower Road, West-bury, farmer, William Cornish, senior, of Westbury; (c.) That there is no reason to believe that corrupt practices have extensively prevailed at the Election for the Borough of Westbury, to which the said Petition relates.

Dated this 18th day of June 1880.

ROUT. LUSH.

HENRY MANISTY.

And the said Certificates and Reports were ordered to be entered in the Journals of this House.

Trowbridge Chronicle Sat 23 July 1898

SUDDEN DEATH - On Thursday morning, Mr. Geo. Cornish, an old and well-known inhabitant, residing in the Lower-road, went to his field at the Butts, and picked some broad beans to give to Mrs. Stiles, wife of a blacksmith, residing in the Lower-road (and a distant relation), whom he had asked to come for them between 10 and 11. Mrs Stiles arrived at the appointed time, and found the beans had been picked. Mr. Cornish stooped to put them in her apron, when he suddenly called out, "Oh. dear.” and fell backwards. Mrs. Stiles immediately called a man named Watts, who was at work in Mr. Deacon's garden, but before he could get across Mr. Cornish had expired. Dr. Trevor Short and was soon on the scene, but could only pronounce life to be extinct. The body was subsequently removed to the house. Deceased, who was 82 years of age, leaves a widow and grown up family. An inquest was held yesterday (Friday) by Mr. Sylvester.