Testimonies

Hughes, Edwin | Day 19

Witness Type: Briber, Petition witness

Party: Conservative

Other Days The Witness Was Called On: Day 20

Witness Testimony:

• 19688.

  You gave somebody a cheque for £65 in lieu of cash ? — Yes, and there is a cheque in the name of Marley, in the same way.

• 19689.

  Then there is a cheque to “T H” ? — That is a cheque cashed at Woolwich, and the gold was brought down in order to augment the stock.

• 19690.

  All those cheques, so far as you believe, were cashed by Thomas and the proceeds paid to Olds ? — No, they were not all cashed by Thomas, because the cheque for £354 was cashed at Woolwich, and sent down to me.

• 19691.

  That was a cheque for £34 drawn upon the Deal bank ? — Yes; that was after the election.

• 19692.

  That cheque was drawn and sent up to London ? — Yes, and gold brought down. It comes to the same thing, but, as a matter of fact, it was not cashed by Thomas.

• 19693.

  (Mr. Jeune.) Who is “T H” ? — My son. That was a cheque that I mentioned, I think, at the time of the election petition.

• 19694.

  It was sent up to your son ? — Yes, and he got the cheque cashed and brought the money and gave it to Thomas. It came to Thomas at last.

• 19695.

  And Thomas would pay it to Olds ? — I do not say that Olds had the proceeds of those particular cheques; but I say that these cheques were the means by which £1100 was accumulated, which Olds had.

• 19696.

  You mention another cheque drawn in the same way to Marley. What was he ? — A tradesman I think.

• 19697.

  Where at ? — At Walmer.

• 19698.

  Was that £164 10s obtained from him in cash ? — Yes.

• 19699.

  And a cheque given to him in exchange ? — Yes.

• 19700.

  Why was that obtained from Marley ? — Because this £1100 was exhausting us, and therefore we had to have a balance in hand. Whit Monday was bank holiday, and the bank was shut up.

• 19701.

  Was that drawn for any particular purpose ? — No, merely for the purpose of augmenting the balance. There was no other money spent improperly, except the £2550.

• 19702.

  How was that distributed ? — It was given to Olds.

• 19703.

  It was given by Olds to whom ? — There were bringing-up lists. There were 850 Conservative promises who would require upon the day to be brought up by the parties supposed to have the most influence over them. There were bringing-up lists, and that is to say, committee-men who had some lists to bring up, and those lists contained 850 names, and besides that, there would be voters who promised, and who were of the better class.

• 19704.

  Who did not require paying ? — Certainly not. These 850 did not require paying, but they were paid.

• 19705.

  They were to be brought up; that was the object of the lists ? — Yes. If no money had to be paid they would be brought up on those lists just the same.

• 19706.

  You say there were other persons not upon the bringing-up lists, who were persons who could be relied upon to vote ? — Yes, 550.

• 19707.

  Those you could rely upon to vote, without being brought up ? — Perfectly. There was no use sending any of our people after them, because they would either come or not, as they pleased.

• 19708.

  Those people upon the bringing-up lists were people who wanted looking up ? — Yes; who had promised.

• 19709.

  And you also thought it advisable to accompany the looking up by a douceur ? — That was upon the day before the election.

• 19710.

  You provided £2500 to be distributed upon the Monday, which was paid to Olds ? — Yes.

• 19711.

  And I understand you to say that was to be distributed at the rate of £3 a head amongst 850 voters ? — Yes.

• 19712.

  Those were voters upon the bringing-up lists ? — Yes.

• 19713.

  It was intended that the persons who were on the bringing-up lists should be looked up, and and receive a douceur of £3 ? — No. When it was determined upon having bringing-up lists, nothing of the sort was arranged.

• 19714.

  I think I am quite right in what I am saying: the intention then was when this money was given to Olds, that persons named in the bringing-up lists should, in addition to being brought up, receive a douceur of £3 each ? — Yes, clearly. The object of working by that list was that no man should be paid twice, and that the whole thing should be definite and effectual.

• 19715.

  (Mr. Turner.) A great many were paid twice ? — Not by us. They were paid by both sides. This was an antidote, and therefore it must be that they were paid by both sides.

• 19716.

  How many of these 850 do you suppose would have been brought up without money ? — The whole of them, if the Liberals had not bribed.

• 19717.

  I mean under the state of circumstances that existed ? — If the Liberals had bribed these 850, and we had not, I should think a third of them would have broken their promise.