Olds, Samuel | Day 2

In total Olds received £2,500, purely for bribing Publicans and voters.
He secured and paid for committee rooms in 88 public houses – 71 in Deal & Walmer, according to testimony by Daniel George Frederick Simmons, plus 17 in Sandwich. Each was paid £5 a-piece. Well over the odds when their annual rent was on average £12.

In November 1881 he was found guilty and sentenced to six months hard labour. Released in May 1882.

Witness Type: Briber, Councillor / Alderman, No Indemnity

Party: Conservative

Other Days The Witness Was Called On: Day 3 | Day 14

Witness Testimony:

  • 1865.

    Who were they ? — Mr. Hughes was one.

  • 1866.

    What is his Christian name ? — I do not remember his Christian name. ‘

  • 1867.

    What is he ? — A grocer.

  • 1868.

    In what street does he live ? — Strand Street, I think.

  • 1869.

    Who were the other two ? — Hooper was another.

  • 1870.

    Where does he live ? — He is a corn factor at Sandwich.

  • 1871.

    Who was the other ? — Giles.

  • 1872.

    What is his Christian name ? — I do not know.

  • 1873.

    What is Giles ?— I think he is a builder at Sandwich.

  • 1874.

    How much did you pay to each of them ? — They had 10L. a piece.

  • 1875.

    This sum comes to 32L and you say they had 10L each, or was it that one of them had 12L These are different, I suppose, from the 41 canvassers ? — No, they are part of the 41.

  • 1876.

    We have already got 6L. being paid to each of the 41 out of the 246L. ? — Yes, I think the 41 does not include these three from Sandwich.

  • 1877.

    I particularly asked you whether the 41 was for Deal, Sandwich, and Walmer, and you said Yes two or three times over ? — I supposed they were ; perhaps Mr. Hughes has omitted to enter those.

  • 1878.

    What is your present impression, are these three included in the 41 or not ? — I think not.

  • 1879.

    You had 41 for Deal and Walmer, and three for Sandwich besides ? — Yes,

  • 1880.

    You paid these three 10L. each ? — Yes.

  • 1881.

    What became of the other 2L ? — I gave it to Mr. Hughes, and I do not know what he did with it.

  • 1882.

    Are you sure you returned him 2L. ? — I do not mean Mr. Hughes the agent, but Mr. Hughes at Sandwich.

  • 1883.

    Then Hughes had 12L, Hooper 10L., and Giles 10L. ? — Yes, 10L. each. The money was paid to Hughes to pay the others.

  • 1884.

    Hughes had the whole 32L ? — Yes.

  • 1885.

    Do you say that that was paid to them for canvassing ? — Yes.

  • 1886.

    Now, was not that money given to Hughes to distribute as he might think most advisable for the election ? — No, it was given to pay the canvassers.

  • 1887.

    (Mr. Turner.) You mean the other two men and himself ? — Yes.

  • 1888.

    (Mr. Holl.) Were there any other canvassers besides these three ? — They might have employed some, but I do not know ; there was a committee there with nothing to do.

  • 1889.

    Did you get any receipts ? — I had a receipt for the money.

  • 1890.

    From whom ? — From Mr. Hughes.

  • 1891.

    Have you got it here ? — No, I have destroyed it. I destroyed all the papers at the end of the election.

  • 1892.

    You do not mean seriously to tell us that ? — The receipt Mr. Hughes would have, but I say all the accounts I destroyed.

  • 1893.

    I ask you about the receipt ? — The agent would have that.

  • 1894.

    Do you mean positively to tell us that you returned to Mr. Hughes a receipt for 32L. from Hughes at Sandwich ? — Yes, Mr. Hughes would have the receipt for that, 12L, at one time, and 10L. on two different occasions.