Emmerson, Richard Joynes | Day 2
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 1 | Day 14
Witness Testimony:
- 991.
Are they all of them labourers ? — They are all householders, I believe ; I think so.
- 992.
Yes, householders, but are they men of what I may call the labouring class and artisans ? — Yes; they are in tolerable positions.
- 993.
Who were the persons they were set to watch ? — They were our own friends ; parties who had promised their votes to us, and we were afraid they would be approached and tampered with, and we wished to protect them.
- 994.
What is the good of having a man outside another man’s house watching all night ? They would not be likely to go in the middle of the night ? — Yes, they would; they were wandering about all night, and, of course, it was a man in a humble position in life who was likely, perhaps, to have a call in the middle of the night, or late at night, simply to get him away from his house, or, in fact, to tamper with him and bribe him.
- 995.
Who were the 16 persons who were to be watched ? — I cannot give you their names.
- 996.
It was 16 persons who were to be watched, I suppose ? — Sixteen watchers, one or two men together. They were walking about the town; not each man to have a separate duty, but they were together, one or two in one street, and some in another, and so on. They were to protect our own voters from being approached.
- 997.
What use could two or three men be walking up and down this or that street all night ? — A very great deal. It would deter men from calling upon our voters for the purpose of tampering with them, and getting our men over to their side.
- 998.
They could not prevent anybody from calling if they chose ? — They could not prevent it, but they would not do it when they saw that they were watched. It was to have a deterrent effect
- 999.
Has this been a usual thing in Sandwich ; have you known it before ? — I have known it, and even known ourselves, the gentlemen of the committee, to go out and watch a (Articular street to take care and watch that the houses of some of the voters were not approached during the night. It has been a common thing, but not to this extent. I never recollect having 16 watchers before, but it was considered necessary on this occasion, I think it is a common thing.
- 1000.
You gave the men a pound a-piece ? — Yes ; they were parties we knew to be firm friends, those 16 men whose names are mentioned there.
- 1001.
Did you select those 16 men ? — No, I had nothing to do with that.
- 1002.
Who did select them ? — They were selected by the committee, I think. Mr. Coleman was there at the time, and their names were given into me afterwards and adopted. They were men who had promised their Totes, and could be thoroughly depended upon, who were selected for a certain duty, and that was for the protection of our friends.
- 1003.
And for the receipt of one pound each ? — They had one pound each.
- 1004.
(Mr. Jeune.) Did you hear that any attempt had been made by the other side to get at any of your voters ? — It was said so. I was told so. I snow nothing of these things. Really, my services were devoted more especially to the committee room, and so on. If anything was brought to me afterwards, of course I heard it, and so on.
- 1005.
Did you hear of any specific instance in which any attempt was made by anybody on the other side to get at any of your voters ? — Yes, I think it must hare been mentioned in the committee room. I am not in a position, as I tell you, to mention names or anything of that kind. It was simply a general statement.
- 1006.
You cannot give us any names ? — I cannot give you any names.
- 1007.
(Mr. Holl.) You cannot give the name of any person intended to be watched ? — No, possibly Mr. Coleman can do so.
- 1008.
Or any person who gave you any information as to that being necessary ? — That was admitted generally; when we met in committee, and so on, it was then agreed. I should think there were six or more there when it was resolved that these watchers should be appointed simply to take care and protect our own voters. There was no secrecy about it.
- 1009.
You cannot give the name of any person from whom you received any information which led you to think it necessary ? — It was stated in the committee room, but I cannot recollect by whom. I cannot recollect the name at all.
- 1010.
You cannot name any person ? — No,
- 1011.
Have you the list showing who, among the canvassers, were voters or non-voters ? — It was a list of the messengers. There were 26 messengers.
- 1012.
(Mr. Turner.) At Sandwich ? — Yes.
- 1013.
(Mr. Holl.) You are not speaking of the boys ? — No, those are not boys. Of the 26 messengers, you desired to know how many were voters, and how many were not. There were nine voters and 17 non— voters. That list is a copy of the one you have (handing the same to the Commissioners),
- 1014.
I see this does not include the clerks ? — No.
- 1015.
They were voters ? — They were voters.
- 1016.
There were about six or eight clerks and personation agents who were voters ? — I think there were.
- 1017.
In addition to these messengers ? — Yes.
- 1018.
Were any instructions given at the time the watchers were appointed, as to appointing voters or non- voters ? — No, not at all.
- 1019.
Did you leave that entirely to Coleman ? — It appears to have been more a matter of accident than anything how many there were of one or the other.
- 1020.
You left that entirely to Coleman’s direction ? — Yes, entirely. He was to select those whom he was sure were most fit and proper.