Testimonies

Crompton-Roberts, Charles Henry | Day 17

Witness Type: Candidate / MP

Party: Conservative

Other Days The Witness Was Called On: Day 16 | Day 20

Witness Testimony:

• 18688.

  Look at that item in the pass book on the 4th August 1880: “Deposit £2000.” Would not that be by cheque ? — No. The gentleman taking charge of my accounts upon finding that he had got at the current account more money than was wanted, would walk into the deposit department and say, “Transfer so much from Mr Crompton Roberts’ current account to the deposit account.”

• 18689.

  Has he authority to transfer sums from your drawing account to your deposit account without any cheque of yours ? — Yes.

• 18690.

  There would be no cheque representing that £2000 ? — No. I am not quite certain whether there would not be some form that he would have to fill up to give the bank authority to do it.

• 18691.

  It is not what he has to do, but what you have to do. There would be no cheque of yours ? — No.

• 18692.

  Nor order ? — No.

• 18693.

  With regard to this £4000 put to your deposit account upon the 3rd May, was there any cheque or order of yours effecting that transfer ? — None whatever that I am aware of. It may save a great deal of trouble if I tell you that the gentleman who has charge of my private accounts is the son of a gentleman who had charge of them for over 20 years. He became a little paralysed, and the son took charge of them. He is a gentleman engaged in a solicitor’s office in the City, and carries on matters in the same way as his father did, the bank know him personally, and I believe if he were to walk in they would do anything for him the same as myself.

• 18694.

  What I am calling attention to is this: you drew a cheque for £600 in Mr Hoare’s name because you were uncertain whether you had funds to meet it, and you tell me that the bankers have a standing order to make up your account if it be overdrawn from the deposit account, and I find at that time you had £10,500 standing at your deposit account. And what I want to know is whether you were wholly ignorant at that time that you had so large a sum as £10,500 at your deposit account ? — I did not know I had any standing at my deposit account at the moment.

• 18695.

  Did it strike you that the natural thing or the easiest thing would have been to have written or telegraphed to the bank to know the state of your account before drawing the cheque ? — I should have thought the way I adopted was the simplest

• 18696.

  To draw a cheque out to another person in order that he may go and see whether your account was overdrawn ? — Allow me a moment. Supposing my account had been overdrawn, and there had been nothing on deposit. Under ordinary circumstances and with an ordinary customer the bank would refuse to honour the cheque, because there was not money enough. But supposing my partner went, who is known as my partner in business; he could say, “Look here, he has drawn this cheque, and you say he has overdrawn. Our firm will be answerable for it if there is anything wrong about it,” and that would be sufficient. And they would, under those circumstances, pay the cheque.

• 18697.

  Have you the slightest doubt if you had written or telegraphed to your bank that they would have honoured a cheque of yours to a much larger amount upon that order ? — I thought the system I adopted was the best and most businesslike.

• 18698.

  The effect was, and I am sure you will see it, that no trace whatever of that payment appears either in the pass book or in the ledger as a payment to Mr Hughes, or as a payment in connection with the Sandwich election ? — It has turned out so.

• 18699.

  That you say was not in your mind when you pursued that course ? — Yes, quite so.

• 18700.

  Have you upon any other occasion drawn a cheque to Mr Hoare in the same way which was intended for somebody else ? — I should have no hesitation in doing the same thing tomorrow as a matter of business.

• 18701.

  No doubt. But my question is, had you ever before that time done the same thing before ? — I should say I have done it fifty times.

• 18702.

  Drawn a cheque to Mr Hoare which was meant for somebody else when you had doubts whether there was sufficient at your bank to meet it. You are in the habit, I suppose, of drawing cheques for considerable amounts ? — Yes, very large sums.

• 18703.

  Had you ever before resorted to this plan of guarding your account, if I may use the phrase, that is to say, drawing a cheque to Mr Hoare in order that he might see whether the account was overdrawn ? — Yes. I have had one or two very nasty letters from my bankers saying that the account was overdrawn.

• 18704.

  That is not quite an answer to my question is it ? — I was trying to think whether I could recollect a particular instance such as you allude to, but I do not at this moment.

• 18705.

  I see this entry in your ledger on May 8^th: “To Sandwich election, Hughes, £800.” That is written over what obviously is an erasure; do you know what was written in that book before that erasure was made ? — Yes, I do know. 

• 18706.

  (The Witness) I saw the erasure in my book which I think is the first erasure that I have seen, and I was very angry with the gentleman who attends to it, and I wrote this memorandum: “Please never to scratch out in my books. Always rule through if an error is made. What was this taken out? C R.” and the answer that I got to that was £52 10s transferred to house account book, page 41.

• 18707.

  You mean that £52 10s would be the item before, and in place of it was written, “Sandwich election, Hughes, £500” ? — Yes.

• 18708.

  You went over this book I gather from that yourself, and noticed that erasure ? — I sent for my books just as I was going off to the Sandwich petition, and I saw that erasure.

• 18709.

  Was that the first time you had seen these entries in these books ? — Yes.

• 18710.

  You saw then that these items to Mr Hughes did not exhaust the payments for the expenses at Sandwich, or anything like it ? — Yes.

• 18711.

  Did you know at that time that the £1400, or whatever the sum was, had been obtained by Mr Hughes through Mr Hoare ? — At the time of the petition do you mean ?

• 18712.

  Yes ? — What was the date of the petition ?

• 18713.

  The first day was the 5th of August. Did you know then that this £1400 had been obtained by Mr Hughes through Mr Hoare ? — No, I think I did not know. I think I first knew it upon coming and talking it over with my partner.

• 18714.

  I think you said upon the last occasion that you found it out first when there was some balancing of the partnership profits ? — The partnership drawings.

• 18715.

  When do you balance ? — It is supposed to be done every time a drawing takes place.

• 18716.

  Was there any drawing between May and August ? — No. My impression, speaking merely from impression, because I cannot be positive, is that I was aware of this immediately upon my coming back from the Sandwich petition.

• 18717.

  Can you say with certainty that that was the first time you knew that this £1400 had been obtained from Mr Hoare ? — Yes, to the best of my belief, it is so.