Testimonies

Spofforth, Samuel | Day 2

Witness Type: Other

Party: Conservative

Other Days The Witness Was Called On: Day 1

Witness Testimony:

• 764.

  Was it your impression that all the persons whose names were ticked were paid by John James Ralph ? — No, only certain persons whose names I have there in the brief. I do not see anything in the brief which enables me to earmark the particular persons who received money from Ralph, nor have I any recollection to enable me to earmark them in any way, it is a general statement.

• 765.

  It certainly would appear from that sentence as if there were some red marks in some particulars which specially indicated the men that Ralph had bribed ? — No.

• 766.

  Then there is this sentence, “Where no money was paid the word ‘No’ is written.” Those are, I suppose, these “Noes” that I find here time after time ? — Yes.

• 767.

  Then, a little later in the particulars, besides the word “No” other words are written, for instance there is “No” then the word “Liberal,” what does that mean ? — I suppose that it means that he was a Liberal.

• 768.

  “No” means that he was not bribed, and “Liberal” means that he was a Liberal and not likely to be bribed ? — Yes.

• 769.

  Then I find “No, had money for canvassing,” that means, I suppose, that he was not bribed, but that he had money for canvassing ? — Yes.

• 770.

  Then a little later on I find “No, colourable,” what does that mean ? — It means that he had other employment.

• 771.

  That he had employment which in your opinion was colourable employment ? — Yes.

• 772.

  Then later on there is the word “No, committee,” what does that mean ? — Perhaps he was on the committee. I think that was the reason of it.

• 773.

  Then I find this sentence, “All the persons charged as bribers it is believed were entrusted with money, but only in three cases” (I will not mention the names but the names are given) “are the names of the bribers and bribees coupled in the particulars.” I do not quite understand that sentence, does not it mean this, that only in those three cases are the particulars correct in charging the right bribee and the right briber ? — No, it does not, I am certain of that.

• 774.

  (Mr. Holl.) It cannot mean that there are only three cases where the names are coupled at all because there are many cases where they are coupled ? — It does not mean correctly coupled I am certain.

• 775.

  (Mr. Jeune.) Then I see it goes on “These three men are considered by the Conservatives to be very doubtful, and may possibly have split.” I suppose, therefore, what was passing in your mind at the time was that those three persons had in fact bribed somebody or another ? — Yes.

• 776.

  Or rather I should have said been bribed, because the three persons named are put down in the particulars as having received bribes ? — Yes, that is so.

• 777.

  Then comes this “All the men alleged to have given bribes are staunch, and all their men are the same,” that means, I presume, all the men whom they had in fact bribed ? — Yes.

• 778.

  Then there is this, “Ralph says that one or two of his men are rather afraid of Elliot’s turning up, because it was understood he was gone to America.” Elliot has in fact gone to America has he not ? — I do not know.

• 779.

  At the time you wrote that, was it your belief upon the subject ? — Yes.

• 780.

  Then you say, “All the men alleged to have given bribes are staunch, and all their men are the same” ; I suppose you had ascertained at that time upon your inquiries, that there was ground for supposing that those men had given bribes ? — Yes.

• 781.

  Are these red marks in the particulars the result of your personal inquiries upon the spot ? — The observations in the margin in contra-distinction to the red marks, are the result of my personal observations.

• 782.

  The red observations in the margin are your observations and the result of your personal inquiries, but the red ticks are the result of whose observations ? — They are from information I received.

• 783.

  Now I come to those notes in the margin with regard to the particulars of bribery, and I see opposite one man here is put “Never did anything,” that means, I suppose, that you ascertained upon inquiry that in point of fact he had not bribed ? — Yes, certainly.

• 784.

  Then I see opposite another name “Never bribed” ? — Yes, I give the same answer.

• 785.

  Then in another case I see put down “At sea,” that means that he could not bribe and had not bribed in fact because he was at sea. Then with regard to another I see put “Dead,” then another “Liberal,” and another “Dead some months before the election.” All these things were things that you ascertained yourself upon your inquiries down here, and inserted as the result of those inquiries ? — Yes, just so.

• 786.

  In the same way those notes that I read, such as “No,” “Liberal,” and other things of that kind, are matters that you had ascertained upon your inquiries down here ? — Not down here.

• 787.

  For instance a man is charged with having been bribed, and you have written opposite his name “No,” how did you ascertain as a fact that the man had not been bribed ? — I was told by a third party that he had not been.

• 788.

  I suppose with regard to the note “No, had money for canvassing,” “No, colourable employment,” I may take it that the third party told you in each case that it was a mistake to suppose that the person had been so employed, in other words, from the information of the third party you made the notes in red ink which appear upon the particulars ? — Yes.

• 789.

  I suppose it was from the information of that same third party that you made the ticks which also appear in the particulars ? — Yes,

• 790.

  Who was the third party ? — I would rather not give his name.

• 791.

  I am afraid we must have his name ? — Will you allow me to write it down ?

• 792.

  Yes, certainly. (The witness writes the name upon a piece of paper which is handed to the Commissioner.) You went through, with this third person, these particulars, and he gave you the information which practically we find upon these particulars ? — Yes.

• 793.

  He told you opposite to whose names to put ticks, and he told you opposite to whose names to write, “No,” “Dead,” and “Liberal,” and all the rest of it ? — Yes, quite so.