Testimonies

Cloke, Frederick Spencer | Day 4

Witness Type: Briber, Petition witness

Party: Conservative

Witness Testimony:

• 3577.

  Did they put bills in private houses or else- where than in public-houses ? — I think not ; I never observed them. Of course there are a few places where bills are put, bill-posting places, but very few.

• 3578.

  I see in this book, next to the list of the four, there is a list of several people. Is that a list of the committee ? — That is merely a list of the persons who attended. There was no formal committee ever formed or chairman appointed, but these gentlemen were called hurriedly together, and that was a list for the messengers ; they were to take notice to their places where the next meeting would be. Most of them used to attend and possibly bring one or two with them.

• 3579.

  The Liberals had only seven houses in Sandwich ? — Very likely; there was no opposition for the first week. These were all hired long before there was any opposition.

• 3580.

  If the Liberals thought it necessary to have only seven, do you still think it was necessary for you to have 18 ? — I don’t think it was absolutely necessary, and I don’t say it was absolutely wise, but I say I paid for them at the request of Mr. Hughes who would rather have taken the whole lot. The difficulty was in taking them, not in getting them.

• 3581.

  Looking at the matter now do you think it was any real good taking those public-houses ? — That would depend on the question whether it was any good having a display of bills at all. If it was any good having a display of bills then I say it was.

• 3582.

  So that to your mind the public-houses were taken for the display of bills ? — Yes, it seems to me the only justification for them. I may say this that with regard to those I paid, that I impressed upon them it was for that chiefly, we specified for them to be well displayed. Those bills calling them committee- rooms were printed long before ; I had nothing to do with it. They were sent over from Deal, and I had no hand in naming them committee-rooms. The receipt I took for them was written out by Mr. Hughes’ clerk on the night he saw me ; and you will find, with regard to the sums I paid, that some of the first receipts I took were written with the sums left blank. I intended to make arrangements according to what I considered the value and the purpose for which they were required, only afterwards, on learning one or two had been engaged with for 5L. for the election, I paid them at the same rate.

• 3583.

  You did not make a bargain with any of the houses ? — No.

• 3584.

  You found 5L. had been paid for some, and so you paid 5L. for all ? — I did.

• 3585.

  And this is the list, I may take it, of the gentlemen who interested themselves at Sandwich ? — I think you may.

• 3586.

  Then the central committee-room was the ” Fleur-de-lis ? “—Yes.

• 3587.

  Did you make any arrangement with them to pay them 10L. ? — Yes ; I paid them in the presence of Mr. Hughes the same night. I called him in and asked him what he wanted for the election ; he said “10L. ; ” I thought it a very moderate sum, and I paid him then and there.

• 3588.

  I see there is a charge here, J. Daniels, for committee room on the day of the election ; was that another committee room besides the one you took of him before ? — It occurred in this way ; on the day of the election I was anxious, if possible, to have a room where the actual work was done apart from a public-house, and he having a room which he used as a seed shop, adjoining the “New Inn,” which was also one of the committee-rooms, we engaged it, and he had to turn out the whole of the stands and trade apparatus, and fit it up as a room for the day of election, so as to be quite away from the public-house, that was for a special purpose.

• 3589.

  Who is J. Daniels ? — He is the landlord of the ” New Inn.” In that case, where the committee-room was hired, it also included the hiring of a large room fit for a public meeting, and a meeting was actually advertised to be held there, but there was some fear afterwards as to the safety of the room, and instead of using it we had the forms and other things taken out of the room, and removed to the market-room of the “Fleur-de-Lis,” which was also a large room for a public meeting, and held a meeting there ; but, of course, we dismantled the room entirely.

• 3590.

  Do you mean that besides the rooms at the 18 public-houses and several committee-rooms you wanted another committee-room for the day of election ? — Yes, at the central committee-room at the “Fleur-de-Lis ;” you had to pass through the bar ; it was somewhat difficult to get at, and I thought ii would be far better it should be a separate room, altogether distinct for the day of election, to prevent any question about supplying drink.

• 3591.

  Did you say that Daniels is the landlord of the ” New Inn ” ? — Yes ; it is a large house, and this room is separated from the rest of the house, the ” New Inn,” and there is a separate door leading into it from the street, and it is altogether distinct

• 3592.

  Was the “New Inn” one of the 18 public- houses ? — Yes.

• 3593.

  So he got his 5L. like the others ? — Yes, it was a very large public-house.

• 3594.

  And he charged you another 2L, for the one room on the election day ? — Yes. He had to turn out the room and put himself to great inconvenience. It was fitted up as a seed shop, and the whole of the things had to be taken out.

• 3595.

  Then I see “H. Cogger, additional charge,” who is that ? — He was the landlord of the central committee-rooms. We used his room a good deal, as many as 200 or 300 people meeting in the market room, and we put them to such inconvenience and expense in making straight and putting the place right that he asked me if he thought he was not fairly entitled to some extra charge, and I said I thought he fairly was, knowing the manner in which his place had been used ; it was a large room, capable of holding 200 people.

• 3596.

  And that was added on was it ? — Yes, and there- fore you may take his bill altogether to have been 12L. 2s. 1d.

• 3597.

  I see there is a charge of 22L. for refreshments for the clerks and messengers; and, then, “Perkins, wine merchant, 1L. 17s., Cogger, ‘ Fleur-de-Lis,’ 5L. 2s. 2d. ; the ‘Bell and Anchor,’ 4L., ; Hooker, 8L., Daniels, of the ‘New Inn,’ 8L., and Bushell, 3L. 5s. 6d.”; have all those bills been paid ? — Not all of them ; the bill of Daniels, about which there can be no question, has been paid ; that was for refreshments chiefly on the day of the polling. The bill of Cogger has not been paid, for the simple reason that he has left Sandwich. There is no reason why it should not be paid, and it will be paid.

• 3598.

  Did you give any order for these refreshments being supplied ? — I did for Daniels, because I took particular care about it. In the afternoon I told him he was to supply nothing except on a written order ; the people were getting excited ; he came in to know whether he should supply anything, and I said, “Supply nothing ” without a written order from me,” and I gave them tickets.

• 3599.

  That was on the day of the election ? — Yes. I am not so certain about the “Bell and Anchor.” The first part of Bushell’s bill, 1L. 2s., and something I told him I would pay. That was supplied at the meeting, and I told him afterwards he had no business to supply it without the people paying for it ; that it was contrary to orders altogether, but that, as he done it in ignorance, I would pay it ; but as to the rest, I have not paid it. In fact I have not seen him since.

• 3600.

  All these are for refreshments on the day of the election ? — Except the ” Bell and Anchor.” I judge so from the dates. I want to inquire about that. I do not think that is on the day. I gave no directions, and there was nothing incurred by my authority there.

• 3601.

  Did you order any refreshments to be supplied to anybody before the day of the election ? — No, except one or two who came in to the central committee-room from Deal, and so on.

• 3602.

  You gave no order to any public-houses, I mean, or anything of that sort ? — No. I have since heard that there was treating, but I have no personal knowledge of it.

• 3603.

  You say you believe there was treating, by that you mean treating on the Conservative side ? — I believe so.

• 3604.

  Do you know by whom it was ordered ? — I cannot say, but it will come at any rate before you; one of those who will come before you will be able to tell you, but I cannot say absolutely.

• 3605.

  Do you know at what houses treating took place ? — I have not the slightest idea at what houses, or what amount.

• 3606.

  When you say you believe there was treating, what was your reason for saying that ? — I have heard since that there was.