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:

• 18718.

  You knew at that time, of course, when you saw this book that the cheques for £500 and £600 drawn upon Mr Hoare were intended to go to Mr Hughes for the purposes of the Sandwich election ? — Yes, precisely.

• 18719.

  Seeing these items incomplete, may I ask why you did not have the extra payments completed by those two items of £500 and £600 ? — I thought it desirable to leave my book exactly in the state in which it was.

• 18720.

  You were at the Sandwich petition ? — Yes.

• 18721.

  Did you hear the trial ? — A large portion of it.

• 18722.

  Did you hear Mr Hughes give his evidence ? —Yes.

• 18723.

  Did you hear him say that £4000 was all the money he had had from you ? — I was surprised to hear it.

• 18724.

  He was asked, “How much money altogether did you have of Mr Roberts?” and his answer was “£4000.” Did you hear him say that ? — I was surprised to hear him say it.

• 18725.

  You knew it was false ? — I did not know how he could make it out.

• 18726.

  You knew that he had had, apart from the £1400, which you may not then have known about, £4600 ? — Yes.

• 18727.

  You heard him say that he had only received £4000 ? — Yes.

• 18728.

  And you say you were surprised to hear him say that ? — Yes.

• 18729.

  It struck you at the moment that that was not an accurate statement ? — I did not see how it was made out.

• 18730.

  You did not think it any part of your duty to suggest what the real fact was, and to state that Mr Hughes had in fact received more than that from you ? — I was rather muddled altogether. I could not make it out.

• 18731.

  (Mr Holl) There was a cheque that Mr Hughes mentioned as having been given to his son for £354 that was sent up to London; do you know anything about that ? — No.

• 18732.

  There is also another account which was paid in to an account, I think, at Woolwich, through Glyn’s bank upon the 12th or 13th May; do you know anything about that ? — The only items I am conversant with are those I have stated. I do not know anything about any others.

• 18733.

  When did you first become aware that there had been bribery to a considerable extent ? — Upon receipt of the particulars of the petition.

• 18734.

  Did you then learn at all to what extent it had been carried on ? — Mr Spofforth showed me these particulars, and my remark was, “How absurd,” and he said, ”Well, I do not think they would have got these particulars down without there was some foundation for them,” and I instructed him to investigate the matter.

• 18735.

  Do I understand that at that time you were not yourself aware there had been any actual bribery ? — I was not cognizant of it.

• 18736.

  Without being cognizant of it, as a fact, had you heard, or had you had any information in regard to there having been bribery very largely practised ? — No, I never heard whether there was any large or small bribery, or bribery of any kind.

• 18737.

  I understand you to say that the first intimation you had of there having been any bribery was when Mr Spofforth showed you the particulars of the petition ? — Yes.

• 18738.

  The particulars would only show what charges were made. What did he say to you with regard to whether or not it was true ? — I looked upon it as an absurd thing. I had an idea that it was a false charge altogether, and then he made this remark that I have stated, and then I said, “You must look into this,” and I said further, “If you on your investigation believe there is any truth in this, or any part of it, the seat is lost, and it is no use defending it.” I did not want him to go to the expense of defending the petition, and then he told me I knew nothing about the law, and it was necessary to defend it. I said I did not see the use of my going to the expense of defending the thing if there were any truth in the charges.

• 18739.

  You gave him instructions to investigate the matter ? — Yes.

• 18740.

  When did he first make you acquainted with the result of his inquiries ? — He was down several days at Sandwich, and I find I am charged with an amount of £1170 for his investigation and working the thing.

• 18741.

  (Mr Turner) Had you any communication with Mr Hughes when you saw these particulars in the petition ? — I told Mr Spofforth to see him. I had not seen Mr Hughes. £1171 17s 11d I find is what I have paid for the Sandwich petition.

• 18742.

  (Mr Holl) You say that Mr Spofforth was down there for some days? Upon his return, when did he first make you acquainted with the result of his inquiries ? — If I recollect rightly, the particulars of the petition were not given until very nearly the day when the petition was tried. A certain number of days must intervene, and my impression is, that directly after he got these particulars, he went down to Sandwich and investigated the matter, and upon his return from elucidating the matter, being away three or four days, he came and said, “No doubt there is some truth in it, and your seat is lost,” or, “You cannot retain your seat,” and I said, “If that is the case do not let us throw good money after bad. Why defend the thing?” He then said that there was some legal quibble or other, that a man must defend it, which I did not quite understand, and so it is that I have incurred all this extra expense.

• 18743.

  Was that the first intimation you got of there having been bribery practised ? — Yes. He returned and said there must be some truth in it, and, in fact, he said so when he read all these charges.

• 18744.

  (Mr Turner) Between that and the hearing of the petition had you no communication with Mr Hughes ? — No, not personally.

• 18745.

  (Mr Holl) Did Mr Spofforth tell you to what extent he had ascertained that bribery had been practised ? — No.

• 18746.

  He simply told you that he found there was truth in the charges, and you would probably lose your seat ? — Yes; that there had been some mess made, or something of that sort.

• 18747.

  Had you heard before that any rumour, or had you had any intimation at all that there had been bribery ? — If you speak about rumour I was met in the House by one or two people, who said, “It was a very expensive election, I suppose,” and I said, “I do not know. I think not,” or something of that kind, and they said, “We thought it must have been a very expensive election to contend against a man like Sir Julian Goldsmid.” Sometimes rumours fly quicker than your own private information, and when you ask me whether I heard any rumours, I say I heard that sort of conversation and rumour in the House.