Ramell, John Pettet | Day 4

Some discrepancy over the amount he received. Also his brother William Henry Ramell, raised concerns over whether putting up the flags was legal. An Act of Parliament had outlawed ‘colouring elections’ a quarter of a century earlier.

Mr Baldwin was paid for materials for flags.

Witness Type: Briber, Councillor / Alderman

Party: Liberal

Other Days The Witness Was Called On: Day 5

Witness Testimony:

  • 4023.

    Oh yes it was ; because I see here ” Designed and carried out by W. H. Ramell ” ? — No, my name is J. P. Ramell.

  • 4024.

    Let us give credit where credit is due. I thought I had to compliment you ? — I think that it ought to have been double the amount, and then it would not have been any too much.

  • 4025.

    Now the next item I see is a charge for Pockett and Houghan, 7L ? — Yes ; Pockett is a gentleman, who resides in London and he came down specially, I think, and applied to me for the money, as he wanted to go back again, and I paid him one sovereign.

  • 4026.

    Where does he live ? — He has a house in Beach Street, but he lives in London ; he comes down and stops some little time every now and then ; a week or two at a time ; his home is in London.

  • 4027.

    He came down to vote ? — Yes.

  • 4028.

    And you gave him a sovereign to take him back ? — I gave him his return ticket.

  • 4029.

    Did you pay the sovereign before or after he voted ? — I think it was the night before the election, but you will find it in the receipts.

  • 4030.

    Did he come to you the night before the election and ask you to pay him his fare ? — I think it was the night before the election, but I am not sure about it ; he wrote the receipt in my shop.

  • 4031.

    I see the receipt is, “ Received of Mr. Ramell the sum of 1L., for travelling expenses, May 18th ” ; that was the day of the election ? — I do not exactly know when it was, but he wrote that in my shop.

  • 4032.

    It was for expenses from London to Deal and back ; but you say he lived here ? — He has a house in Beach Street, at which he stops a week or two at a time, but he was not staying here at the time, and came down on purpose to vote. It is a summer-house that he has, and he was down here a few weeks ago and stopped, perhaps, three or four days, but not longer.

  • 4033.

    He did not come down actually upon the day ; he came down, did he not, a day or two before the 18th ? — That I do not know.

  • 4034.

    You just now said you thought you paid him the day before the election, and therefore probably he was in Deal the day before ? — I am not sure about it ; he wrote that receipt out in my shop when he came to me.

  • 4035.

    He came and told you that he had come down on purpose to vote, and wanted to be paid his expenses ? — Yes, he wanted to go back the same day.

  • 4036.

    Do you know whether he had voted or not when you paid him this sovereign ? — It was before the poll was opened.

  • 4037.

    Then Hougham, 6L. ? — Yes, here is the receipt (handing the same to the Commissioners). He went to Lynn, in Norfolk. I think he belongs to the Foresters, and there was a meeting he had to attend. Mr. Pockett, I may say, is a pawnbroker in London.

  • 4038.

    I see the receipt is ” 6L for travelling expenses from Lynn, in Norfolk, and back.” — Yes.

  • 4039.

    That was paid also, I suppose, just before the election ? — I sent a cheque to him at Lynn.

  • 4040.

    What made you fix upon the sum of 6L. ? — Before he went away I asked him what the expense would be. He came and told me he was going, and told me what the expenses would be,

  • 4041.

    He said that was the railway fare there and back ? — Yes.

  • 4042.

    You intended to pay him only his railway fare, and no more ? — Yes, that is all.

  • 4043.

    That was why the sum of 6L. was fixed upon as being the railway fare there and back ? — Yes.

  • 4044.

    There are some WATCHERS put down here, 11L 15s., how many WATCHERS did you employ ? — Is that my account ?

  • 4045.

    Yes ? — I think that must mean other items as well. I recollect it was not WATCHERS altogether, because there were one or two other items with it, although Mr. Edwards may only have put down that one item.

  • 4046.

    This was exactly what was handed in at the trial of the petitioner here by Mr. Edwards ? — I think these two accounts together were sent in one bill ; there was one receipt for 26L. odd, but Mr. Edwards has got it 27L. here. WATCHERS were included in that amount, but there was an amount paid to some other parties ; it was not all for WATCHERS. These two accounts ought to have been together.

  • 4047.

    Which two accounts ? — The 16L. 10s. and the 11L. 15s. ; the receipt went in for that all together.

  • 4048.

    Can you tell me how the total sum of 27L. 15s. was expended ? — I cannot exactly tell you now because I do not appear to have got the receipt. These receipts have been all handed to Mr. Edwards, and he handed them back to me the other day, and I do not know whether any of them have gone. I know those two accounts went together, and they amounted to 26L. instead of 27L.

  • 4049.

    Tell me what sums you paid ? — I know we had some WATCHERS to watch the large pole at the Prince of Wales’s Terrace.

  • 4050.

    How many WATCHERS did you have ? — About six at a time ; only they were off and on ; six at one part of the night, and six at another; because they would not stop all night. They relieved each other.

  • 4051.

    How many sets of six were there ; two ? — Yes. The pole was finished upon Friday, so that there was Friday night, Saturday night, Sunday night, and Monday night ; that was all.

  • 4052.

    These six people were to watch the pole ? — At former elections we have often had the ropes cut, and so we had at this election ; do not you see ?