Testimonies

Cloke, Frederick Spencer | Day 4

Witness Type: Briber, Petition witness

Party: Conservative

Witness Testimony:

• 3547.

  (Mr. Jeune.) You were the sub-agent at Sandwich ? — Yes.

• 3548.

  What is your occupation ? — I am clerk to the Guardians of Eastry Union.

• 3549.

  And you were sub-agent for Mr. Crompton Roberts, under Mr. Hughes ? — Yes,

• 3550.

  When did you begin to be concerned in the business of the election ? — On the morning of the Wednesday, the 6th of May, I think it was, before I had any communication with Mr. Hughes.

• 3551.

  You mean you set to work on your own account ? — I was not aware until the Wednesday morning that the content was to commence ; I became aware of it by Mr. Crompton Roberts, Mr. Nethersole, and two other gentlemen calling upon me in the morning, and saying that they were about to commence, and what they were to do.

  I said the first thing to be done was to canvass the place, and I suggested that Mr. Roberts should be taken round the town to call upon people, and in the meantime I would get some people together of the committee, and have canvassing books prepared.

  I was also told by one of the gentlemen who came with Mr. Roberts, that several public-houses had been hired as committee rooms. I believe Mr. Roberts was taken round the town and introduced to those gentlemen who were most likely to be his principal supporters, and later during the day, I had the canvass books prepared so far as I could, and in the evening I had a committee meeting, and arranged that names should be taken by different members to canvassers.

  After the meeting was over, I think it was between 11 and 12 at night, Mr. Hughes appeared upon the scene. I had gone home, and I had a message to say that Mr. Hughes had driven over from Deal to see me. I went down to the committee room, and he told me he had been engaged to conduct the election for Mr. Crompton Roberts, and enquired if I would take the Sandwich district for him.

  I told him I had no objection to do so, but I gave him to understand that what I did in Sandwich would simply be legitimate. I told him what I should do, and if there was anything to be done beyond the legitimate expenses of the election I should decline to do it, and he told me then he should not ask me to do anything else — that if anything else was done I should not be called upon to be mixed up in it.

  I may say I had never, in any shape or way, had anything to do with Sandwich politics. I was utterly ignorant of the way elections were conducted there, but from what I heard I was afraid in such a contest there might be illegal practices, and I thought it best to tell him at once I did not wish to have anything to do with them. I may say at that time I told him I knew nothing of these public-houses haying to be hired.

  I believed a brewer in Sandwich had caused some houses to be taken, and it seemed to be the custom, from what I heard afterwards, for these houses to be taken as committee rooms and houses for bill-posting. I spoke to Mr. Hughes about them and told him these houses had been taken, that I knew nothing at all about them and never did such a thing, and asked him what he proposed to do.

  He said he had had a great many years’ experience as an election agent, and were was not the slightest doubt whatever about the legality of the hiring of the houses, and that it was a perfectly safe and proper thing to do, and you could have them for committee rooms if you required them and posting bills, that seemed to be the most legitimate use, and he said he would take the full responsibility.

  I understood I would be perfectly safe in paying for them, and it was on that understanding I did pay for them. He asked me whether it was not wise to pay at once, and I said the best thing would be to pay their bills and done with it, so that in the event of opposition coming there, and most probably there would be opposition, if they agreed to let the houses to us for that purpose and the other side went and offered them more they might possibly break their agreements, but if they were paid for and the receipt taken they could not afterwards get out of their contract.

  He then handed over 50L. for me to pay them. I had not at that time any knowledge of what me amount to be paid for the hire of committee rooms would be. I did not think myself they would be so much ad 5L. I think I paid some myself and I remember in paying them I expressly stated that the great object was to have a good display of bills, and I found then that in hiring the houses some gentleman who had hired them had fixed the sum of 5L. as the price to be paid, expecting the election would last about a month.

  Having found that arrangement, and having paid one 5L., I thought it was unwise not to pay the others the same. They were all equally advantageous for the purposes they were paid for, and that is now the 5L. came about, with the exception of one central committee room for which I paid 10L., it was a very moderate payment.

• 3552.

  The number you engaged in all was 17 ? — 18 according to the amended account.

• 3553.

  And the central room ? — Yes; it is in the amended one, I sent the draft account After the petition, on looking through the receipts, I found I had cheated myself out of one ; I had paid 5L. more than I really charged for.

• 3554.

  Eighteen and one central committee room ? — Yes ; some of those were engaged afterwards, they were not all engaged in that way, but some were engaged, and I may have known of them, but I did not personally engage any. As it was thought it would be advantageous to engage them they were engaged and paid for at once. They were engaged at all the good points of the town.

• 3555.

  Just look at that list and see whether that is a list of the 19 (handing same to the witness) ? — That appears to be the list. These red marks at the side relate to the days at which we had meetings at them.

• 3556.

  I was going to ask you that ? — I may say this with reference to some of them, for instance, if you go into Sandwich from the railway station there are three houses situate at the corners of streets, and but for these public-houses you would not be able to see a single Conservative bill from one end of the town to the other.

• 3557.

  Is that a list of the eight houses where you had meeting, and the dates at which the meetings were held (handing the same to the witness) ? I think there are only eight houses, the “Fleur de lis ” is put down twice ? — Yes, the ” Fleur de lis ” was the central committee room. I would not say they were the only houses. It does not profess to be an accurate list. This book, so far as I recollect, was used by the messengers in informing the members of the committee — between 30 and 40 gentlemen — altogether — where the meetings would be, and this was a note for the chief messenger to inform himself where the next meeting would be, so that he could send round to them.

• 3558.

  Then I should think it is tolerably accurate ? — Yes, tolerably accurate.

• 3559.

  It is the list on which you actually worked ? — Yes, I believe it is. I did not prepare this, but I believe it is the case.

• 3560.

  So you had meetings at eight of the houses out of the 18 ? — Yes, the election I may say came off very much quicker than we expected. We had no idea, the contest would come off so soon.

• 3561.

  Was anything at all done with the other houses, what use was made of them, if any ? — Only that we had the bills there, and took care the windows were filled with our bills, and but for those houses I do not think you would be able to find any place close by — no places where you could post bills. In other towns you have got hoardings for a good display of electioneering literature, but there is none in Sandwich. You might go through the whole of the streets and find no sign that an election was going on, but for the bills in the public-house windows.

• 3562.

  Did not you put bills in shop windows ? — Not many. I do not think there were many shops. My impression is the majority of them would be against us and would not put bills in.

• 3563.

  And as regards private houses of the poorer class, do not you put bills upon them ? — We never have ; I do not think it has ever been done ; I never heard of it being done.

• 3564.

  Not in the windows of them ? — No, not in the windows of them. Some of the poorer class of houses have had bills stuck against the house as well as in the windows.

• 3565.

  That is what I mean ? — Outside the public-houses I mean.

• 3566.

  You are putting it in this way that it was necessary to take these public-houses, in order to have a place to display your bills, but surely you could have displayed the bills in other houses than public-houses ? — No, I should not think there were six places in Sandwich where our bills were displayed, certainly not on houses. That is really the only reason I had for thinking Mr. Hughes was right in saying it was no illegal payment. It seemed to me an extravagant way of working, but he assured me there was not the slightest illegality in it.

• 3567.

  Do you live at Sandwich ? — Yes.

• 3568.

  Then you know the place well ? — Yes.

• 3569.

  You have lived there a good many years, I suppose ? — No, I have I only been there a few years ; four or five years, possibly. I have never been there at an election before.

• 3570.

  Your real idea then is that there was some use in these public-houses, in order to put the bills upon them ? — Undoubtedly, I thought, and think still, that for the purpose for which they were ostensibly hired they were worth the money. I should not do it under the same circumstances again, but I thought at the time that really they were worth the value they were paid, and I still think so. In fact, I might say this ; if I had been asked at the time of the petition if all these landlords had votes I should have said Yes. I had no reason to believe one way or the other, but I thought they had, but on going through them since I found four of them had no votes, and a fifth did not vote. He was angry at having let his house, and said he had lost more by letting his house than if he had not let it, and he did not vote at all, and in many cases after the houses had been paid for I went on canvassing the landlords themselves, not assuming in any way that in paying for these houses we got the landlords votes.

• 3571.

  Did you select these houses ? — I did not.

• 3572.

  Who made out this list ? — That was made out after they were hired.

• 3573.

  Who selected which houses should be hired ? — That I can hardly say. I believe the first that were hired were houses in Sandwich belonging to Mr. Matthews at Walmer. I believe Mr. Morley, his clerk, hired them. I believe Mr. Baxter at Sandwich caused his houses to be hired. They secured them at once to prevent the other side getting them. Then, I believe, a day or two afterwards, as the contest went on, there was a man at the “ Star Inn,” a downright liberal, and a man with no vote as it turned out, and it was thought desirable to have his house, and it was taken, so that no blue bills could be shown there. We got them in that way. It was thought desirable to get them, and they were worth the money to show bills. There may be one or two instances in which there was, perhaps, the same reason, but in no case that I am aware of was a payment made, except for that purpose, or was any suggestion made of any other consideration than that appearing.

• 3574.

  The Liberals had about the same number of public-houses ? — I don’t know what they have.

• 3575.

  In Sandwich I mean ? — I don’t know how many they had.

• 3576.

  Where did they put their bills up ? — They were in public-house windows.