Testimonies

Brown, Edmund | Day 14

Witness Type: Councillor / Alderman, Other, Petition witness

Party: Liberal

Witness Testimony:

• 16538.

  (Mr. Holl.) Where do you live ? — 181 High Street. 

• 16539.

  I see that your name is signed as expenses agent for the returns made by the Liberal candidate for the election in May last ? — Yes. 

• 16540.

  Did the moneys that are returned pass through your hands ? — No, not a farthing of it; the accounts were exhibited to me. 

• 16541.

  When were they exhibited to you ? — At or about the date mentioned in the return. 

• 16542.

  Not long before that ? — No, probably a week before.

• 16543.

  That would be sometime in September ? — Yes.

• 16544.

  Not before that ? — I think about a week before I finally signed the papers upon the date mentioned. 

• 16545.

  The precise date is not material, but you say the accounts were exhibited to you about a week before the date when the return is made ? — That is my impression, but I have no memorandum as to the particular date. 

• 16546.

  That was in the month of September ? — Yes. 

• 16547.

  When did you hear that you had been appointed expenses agent ? — Not for some time after the election. Allow me to explain that I have acted in that capacity to oblige Mr Emmerson several times with the thorough understanding that he or the agents should really do the work; that I should give my approval to the accounts, or at least sign according to the requirements of the Statute, and that they should really do the work.  

• 16548.

  Did you not know that by Act of Parliament it is expressly enacted that no money shall be paid in connection with the election except by or through the expenses agent, and indeed that that is the very object of having an expenses agent ? — I scarcely knew that. I left all those matters to those professional gentlemen who had the confidence of the candidate and the party trusting that they knew the law and would properly advise me. 

• 16549.

  You are not a professional man ? — No. Let it be understood that I was not a paid agent, but merely a friendly agent. 

• 16550.

  You are not a professional man, and you were not aware of the requirements of the Statute ? — Not of the particulars of the law. I have no law library or Acts of Parliament to refer to, but I had the most perfect confidence in Mr Emmerson, whom I have known so many years, and lately, in election matters, Mr Edwards; and I believed that those gentlemen would keep me straight. I did not trouble myself with the Acts of Parliament, which I might misconstrue. 

• 16551.

  I understand you to say that you were not aware in fact of what were the duties, by Act of Parliament, attaching to the office you had undertaken ? — My idea was that I was more an election auditor than a person through whose hands the payments of money would literally go. 

• 16552.

  As I understand it, you did not have any money passing through your hands, or make any investigation of the accounts until recently; sometime in September ? — No, nor was I aware at the time that I was appointed. I was not informed so. I knew that there were changes in the election law, and I thought it probable that the office of expenses agent might be dispensed with. I was not anxious for the office. I did not inquire, and Mr Emmerson assumed that I should oblige him as I had done in former times. I did not really hear of it until some weeks afterwards. 

• 16553.

  You acted as expenses agent at the general election in April last ? — Yes, but I was quite ignorant of that also, and the amounts were not then laid before me until somewhere about the same time; indeed I was a little dissatisfied with those professional gentlemen when I found that they did not call up the accounts for my inspection earlier. I pressed them afterwards when I found how I was situated to do it, and they said there were difficulties, that the accounts were incomplete, and it was under those circumstances that they could not make up the accounts so soon as I wished. 

• 16554.

  You did act as expenses agent for Mr Hugessen and Mr Brassey in respect of the election in April ? — Yes. 

• 16555.

  Had you acted in that capacity previously to the election in April ? — Do you mean at former elections ? 

• 16556.

  Yes ? — I remember I was engaged in the election of 1874, and I believe even earlier. I acted as soon as the Act creating the office was passed, but I have forgotten the details of the election, though I remember 1874. 

• 16557.

  You think you have acted at each election since the Act passed as expenses agent for the Liberal party ? — Yes. 

• 16558.

  I may assume that on neither occasion did you have any money pass through your hands, nor do you have the accounts more than formally submitted to you ? — That is all. It has been my practice not to mix myself up really in financial affairs, or I may say the money part of the election. 

• 16559.

  Did you verify the accounts in any way ? — Only by a cursory examination. I passed those that appeared to me to be legitimate and proper. 

• 16560.

  Do you remember if you excluded any ? — Yes. In Mr Emmerson’s office he and I went over them, and he selected those items which were obviously legal, and he told me there were claims which he would not call upon me to sanction, such as for rosettes; and I saw upon the face of them that they were doubtful, and put them upon one side. 

• 16561.

  Were you not made aware that the expenses agent was appointed to return all moneys expended in connection with the election ? — No, I was not aware of that I knew there were poles, flags, and rosettes, but I gave no sanction to them. 

• 16562.

  Did you inquire whether such claims were going to be paid ? — No, I simply passed them by, and I said I could not include them in the accounts, nor did they press that I should. 

• 16563.

  The very object of the Act of Parliament is to compel the return of all moneys that are expended, in order to ascertain whether they are proper or not, and if you quietly passed by all those you were told were not proper, that is quite contrary to the intention of the Act. But I understand you to say you were not aware of that ? — No, I was not aware of that. 

• 16564.

  I gather from what you say that you relied entirely upon what you were told by the actual agents of the parties ? — Yes. They were both solicitors of great experience, and I relied upon their advice. I simply passed those accounts by, and made no order. I passed them by to let them take their fate, and I was not aware that I was bound to take any notice of them. 

• 16565.

  (Mr. Turner.) What are you ? — l am a retired tradesman. 

• 16566.

  (Mr. Jeune.) How far did you yourself verify any of these items which you did put into the election account ? — Not very closely; they had all been examined by Mr Emmerson or Mr Edwards, and all those accounts that appeared to be due, and appeared to be in due form, and not contrary to any law known to me, I sanctioned. 

• 16567.

  That is not quite what I was asking you. How far did you verify any of them? Look at that account (handing a paper) signed by yourself ? — This is not my signature.