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:

  • 1021.

    Among those 26 messengers nine are voters; are the others sons or relatives of voters ? Yes, in all probability, or connections in some way.

  • 1022.

    All of them ? — Yes, all of them, I should say.

  • 1023.

    It strikes me, and I will get you to explain it to me, that Sandwich is a small place, comparatively, to require as many as 26 messengers ? — There is always something constantly coming up.

  • 1024.

    You have 500 voters altogether ? — Yes.

  • 1025.

    And 26 messengers. In round numbers, it is a messenger to every 19 or 20 voters. What do those people do ? — Sometimes a messenger was sent to Ramsgate, sometimes to Deal and sometimes to other places. There was always something every morning, communications between the parties, and there was always something to be done with the messengers.

  • 1026.

    These appear to have been all, with one or two exceptions, on the same day ? — I don’t know that they were the same day.

  • 1027.

    For one day they appear to have had IOs. 6d — They might have been there any previous day ; I am not able to say. At all events, the messengers appointed at the election had lOs. 6d, ; that is all they got

  • 1028.

    Some had one or two guineas apiece. I suppose they were employed for more days ? — Yes, I suppose they were in a different position altogether from the others. I do not think it was an unusual number on this occasion.

  • 1029.

    What class of men were these messengers ? — Will you mention a name ?

  • 1030.

    (Mr. Turner.) Speaking generally ? — All highly respectable ; tradesmen some.

  • 1031.

    Of what rank in life ? — Some were small tradesmen.

  • 1032.

    (Mr. Holl.) Small tradesmen and artisans, or the relatives of persons of that class ?~ Yes. I have the two canvass books here. You were speaking yesterday about the organisation, and so on. I told you then we kept two books, one for the candidate and the other for the committee. Those are the books we used on this occasion (handing the same to the Commissioners), There is nothing in them.

  • 1033.

    Which is the candidate’s book and which is yours ? — I think the large one was used very much by Sir Julian Goldsmid, and afterwards it came into our hands, and we used it in the committee. I don’t think it was left to him at all — at least, not alone.

  • 1034.

    Where there are some marks against them in the tat column, what does that mean ? — Those were for Sir Julian Goldsmid.

  • 1035.

    And those in the second ? — For Mr. Crompton Roberts.

  • 1036.

    And those in the third ? — There are no marks against those ; if there are, I don’t know what they are.

  • 1037.

    There is a mark in the third column there (pointing) ? — That must be some mistake.

  • 1038.

    (Mr. Jeune.) With regard to these persons whom you employed, was it ever suggested to them that they ought not to vote ? — No, it was not on this occasion. It has been customary in former elections to have an understanding between either party to pair off so many instead of voting — that those who are employed and cannot vote under the provisions of the Act of Parliament should not do so, but that they should pair off with parties on the opposite side who were in a similar position. On this occasion the point was never suggested, and it does not appear to have occurred to any of us that we were infringing the provisions of any Act of Parliament in Toting. I do not recollect any conversation or allusion to it at all, but I believe it was done and not thought of. We generally find that it operates about the same on either side ; there is a certain number, and if you pair them off it is a tolerably equal thing, and that is the best thing to do always, and what we have generally done on former occasions. On this occasion it was not done.

  • 1039.

    There are one or two things I am not quite satisfied about yet — that is, with regard to this money you received, but which you never mentioned to Mr. Lewis. I think it is a matter you ought to explain, and give us certainly all the information you can about it. You received 200 sovereigns ? — Yes.

  • 1040.

    Of those 200 sovereigns, you gave 50 to Mr. Coleman ? — Yes.

  • 1041.

    And those 50 you knew, of course, he was going to employ for purposes not legitimate ? — I did.

  • 1042.

    Now those 200 sovereigns you never mentioned to Mr. George Lewis, though the occasion did occur on which perhaps it would have been desirable you should do so ? — Yes.

  • 1043.

    Now that leaves in one’s mind a very strong impression that the other 150 sovereigns were to be employed in the same way as the 50 that you gave to Mr. Coleman, now, was not that so ? — I think it was.

  • 1044.

    When you got the 200 sovereigns in that way, did it not strike you it was the intention that that money should be employed in the way in which it was eventually employed ? — Yes ; there was nothing said at the time.

  • 1045.

    Of course not, but was not that what you understood ? — I did not understand anything; conversation was avoided. You must draw that inference which the circumstances will give you.

  • 1046.

    What is your idea, I suppose you have no doubt at all that there was at least 150L required to pay the things which Coleman promised should be paid ? — I have not.

  • 1047.

    Of course, I wish you really, in your own interest, to answer the questions. Having said nothing about the 200 sovereigns, persons might be inclined to draw the inference, I don*t, that you kept the 1502. for yourself. I am sure you did not ? — No.

  • 1048.

    That being so, clearly you must have intended to apply it to some purpose or another. It was, of course, the case, was it not, that it was intended to apply it to the things which Coleman promised should be paid ? — It was. At that time I did not know what they would be.

  • 1049.

    There is one question I should like you to answer from your experience. What do you think is the effect of the ballot ? Do you think it has tended to diminish corruption in a place like this ? — I think not ; I think on the contrary.

  • 1050.

    You think it tends to increase it ? — I think so.