Emmerson, Richard Joynes | Day 1

James Barber Edwards testified that he received £1300 from Charles Ross Foord of Rochester who had brought £1500 in gold sovereigns to Sandwich by train. Emmerson met him with James Barber Edwards and they split the money between them. £1300 went to Mr Edwards and £200 to Mr Emmerson. Mr Emerson received two further amounts of £210 and £350. The latter was paid by Messrs Lewis and Lewis.

Witness Type: Briber, Freeman, Treater

Party: Liberal

Other Days The Witness Was Called On: Day 2 | Day 14

Witness Testimony:

  • 687.

    As messengers ? – Yes, and writers too, I think.

  • 688.

    What day would these people be employed as messengers ? There are 27 of them I see ? – The greater portion of them no doubt were only employed upon the day of the election, but the others were in constant attendance.

  • 689.

    Why should you want 20 messengers at 10s. 6d. each on the day of the election ? – They were being sent in various directions. I cannot say that they were all required, and we could have done with a less number no doubt.

  • 690.

    Are these all voters ? – No, very few of them.

  • 691.

    I should like you to tick on the list making up the 852., with a cross, those who are voters ? – I will do so ; I can get a list of them from Woodruff, the committee clerk.

  • 692.

    Then Coleman, 40L. expenses ; is that the 40L. you mentioned to us ? – Yes, and for which you have his receipt.

  • 693.

    That is the 40L. which was partly expended in paying the accounts at the public-houses and partly in rosettes ? – Yes.

  • 694.

    Now with regard to the item of 48L 17s. 3d., personal expenses at the “Bell” hotel ; of what does that consist ? – It consists of three bills, I think ; nearly the whole of that was incurred upon the day of the election ; one bill you will find was supplying refreshments to the committee room belonging to Mrs. Hunter daring the day of the election ; it was necessary to supply the staff with some refreshments.

  • 695.

    But still 50L. is a large sum ? – There are three bills you will find. One bill is for the entertainment which Sir Julian Goldsmid had upon the day of the election, and another bill was for a dinner we had – a number of us belonging to the staff in the adjoining room. It is not correct to put it, perhaps, as personal expenses, because they were not, perhaps, all personal expenses.

  • 696.

    I will ask you at the same time to tick the WATCHERS who are voters. You said, I believe, that they were nearly all voters ? – No, they were not all voters.

  • 697.

    One bill is 11L 6s. 4d. ; as far as you know, was any of that refreshment supplied to voters ? – No, not in the way of treating, or anything of that sort. You will find the largest bill is a bill for a dinner that we had.

  • 698.

    Refreshment to staff and messengers from the 7th to the 18th, 32L 12s. 5d. Is that for refreshments supplied to the committee room ? – Yes.

  • 699.

    Did they begin to have refreshments supplied before Sir Julian Goldsmid came down ? – I think very likely we did.

  • 700.

    How many were there having refreshments ? – There might be seven or eight sometimes.

  • 701.

    It is at the rate of three guineas a day every day from the 7th to the 18th ; do you think anybody went to have refreshments except the staff ? – No doubt the bills should be subject to taxation, but they are not – they are made out, and we pay them.

  • 702.

    Were all these refreshments consumed by the staff ? – Yes.

  • 703.

    No refreshments given to the voters ? – No, nothing in the way of treating voters whatever.

  • 704.

    (Mr. Turner.) Is Filmer a voter ? – Yes.

  • 705.

    (Mr. Holl.) How was it that this room at the “Bell” was charged for 17 days ? – From the time I went to him to hire the house till after the election on the following Saturday ; I suppose it was 17 days, and he charged 1L. a day.

  • 706.

    It could not be 17 days from the time Sir Julian Goldsmid came, and surely you would not take the house 10 days before he came ? – I might a week before ; immediately I saw that something was likely to arise, I went to the “Bell” hotel and took the house. I will not say it was ten days before Sir Julian Goldsmid came, because it might not be so long as that, but it was a week before.

  • 707.

    This is a charge for ten days before Sir Julian Goldsmid ever came down. Have these accounts which are certified in the return of Section expenses been paid by you ? – Yes.

  • 708.

    And this 443L. 5s. 11d, I may take it, has come out of moneys that have passed through your hands ? – Yes, they have been paid by me.

  • 709.

    Altogether you say you have received 760L, ? – Yes, that is right.

  • 710.

    That leaves a difference Of 316L ? – You have to add 50L. which was paid to Coleman.

  • 711.

    That would leave in point of fact in your hands, deducting what was paid in the election returns, and the 50L. paid to Coleman, 266L. 14s. 1d. ? – Yes.

  • 712.

    Do I understand that no part of the money that you received, except what you paid, and which is vouched in the election returns, and 50L. you paid to Coleman, has been spent by you during the election ? – No.

  • 713.

    Nor by anybody on your behalf ? – No, I am not aware of it ; and it has all been left in my hands.

  • 714.

    You have not paid any money yourself directly or through anyone else ? – No, I have stated everything that passed through me.

  • 715.

    I understand you to say that you spent nothing beyond the 443L. 5s. 11d., and the 50L. you handed to Coleman ? – No.

  • 716.

    That is all that passed through your hands directly or indirectly ? – Yes.