Olds, Samuel | Day 2

In total Olds received £2,500, purely for bribing Publicans and voters.
He secured and paid for committee rooms in 88 public houses – 71 in Deal & Walmer, according to testimony by Daniel George Frederick Simmons, plus 17 in Sandwich. Each was paid £5 a-piece. Well over the odds when their annual rent was on average £12.

In November 1881 he was found guilty and sentenced to six months hard labour. Released in May 1882.

Witness Type: Briber, Councillor / Alderman, No Indemnity

Party: Conservative

Other Days The Witness Was Called On: Day 3 | Day 14

Witness Testimony:

  • 1655.

    Did any others ask for 10L. or 20L. ? — The “Queen’s Hotel ” told me 5L, was not sufficient.

  • 1656.

    Is that the “Queen’s Hotel” in Deal ? — Yes, I did not engage it ; they said it was not sufficient.

  • 1657.

    Is there any other that you can remember who asked for more than you offered ? — The “Cinque Ports ” Arms at Walmer refused to take the 5L.

  • 1658.

    Did you take that house ? — No.

  • 1659.

    You did take a room at the “Lord Warden “— Yes, because they came down to the 5L. afterwards.

  • 1660.

    Was there any other case like that ? — At the “Queen Adelaide.” They refused it, and accepted it afterwards.

  • 1661.

    Is there any other case of the same kind ? — No, I do not remember any more.

  • 1662.

    At how many of these houses are you prepared to say that you ever actually had any meetings ? — It happened to be fine weather during the election, and we had a great many out-door meetings, otherwise we must have gone to the rooms.

  • 1663.

    At how many of these houses will you actually say you had any meetings ? — I really cannot say, but I think it was 14.

  • 1664.

    You think there were meetings at 14 of the houses ? — Yes. At many of them the voters in the neighbourhood, seeing that it was a committee room, went there and chatted amongst themselves. Many of the houses are very small, with small rooms not sufficient to hold very many.

  • 1665.

    You say, for meetings of the party 14 of these houses were used ? — Yes, I think that was the number given, but some were used a great deal, some were used continually every day.

  • 1666.

    Some of the 14 ? — Yes.

  • 1667.

    It is only some of the 14 that were used continually ? — Every day a man or a boy went round and changed the bills. He would take down the bills and replace them, and there were pens, ink, and paper placed in the rooms all ready in case any of the committee should drop in.

  • 1668.

    (Mr. Jeune.) How many meetings were there during the election altogether. How many meetings did Mr. Crompton Roberts have ? — I really could not say ; three or four of a night. Sometimes there would be a meeting at Deal, another at Walmer, and another at Sandwich, and another at Upper Deal as well.

  • 1669.

    (Mr. Holl.) The real truth is that in the case of the great majority of these houses the rooms were much too small to have a meeting in ? — Yes, and being fine weather we had open-air meetings. We had open-air meetings at Upper Deal, and so we did at Walmer.

  • 1670.

    At these houses do you say you placarded bills upon the outside ? — At many of them. The “Roxburgh Castle” was placarded with bills.

  • 1671.

    Which of the houses will you undertake to say were placarded outside ? — I should think nearly all of them had a bill or a couple of them on the outside. Some of the bills had a large blue cross with o-u-t written under, crossing Mr. Roberts out with blue paint.

  • 1672.

    How many do you say of the houses you engaged were actually placarded outside with Conservative bills ? — I really cannot say, but I should think nearly all of them ; even the large hotels were plastered with bills.

  • 1673.

    I am not speaking of bills in the windows, but outside ? — Yes ; even the large hotels had bills plastered outside.

  • 1674.

    You think that the great majority of them had one or two bills upon the outside as well as inside ? — Yes. We had the liberty to do so if we felt inclined.

  • 1675.

    I wanted to know to what extent you had availed yourselves of that privilege, and whether it was really more than a small number that were actually persuaded with bills outside ? — Being all exhibited in the windows the rain would not wash them off and they would not get torn. It was better than posting the bills upon the outside of the houses.

  • 1676.

    That may be ; although you had the bills in the windows at most of these houses, is it not the fact that only at a few of them bills were placarded upon the outside of the house ? — I really could not say to what extent bills were placarded upon the outside, but I should think at nearly all of them.

  • 1677.

    You and Mr. Simmons between you managed, as I understand, the whole of the engaging and paying for the houses ? — Yes, I paid for them, and Mr. Simmons wrote the receipts.

  • 1678.

    Altogether you received what for houses ? — I really cannot recollect now. The receipts are all returned.

  • 1679.

    I want to know how much money you received ? — I could not say.

  • 1680.

    Did you not make any memorandum of the amounts that you received from time to time ? — I did have some lists, but when the election was over I destroyed them all. I really had very little to do with it, because Mr. Hughes had the whole control. All bills, and so on, were returned to him with the receipts.

  • 1681.

    I am not speaking of receipts or bills ; this was money that you distributed. Did you receive the money that you paid the houses with in cash ? — Simmons first gave it to me. The receipts will tell you what money I had.

  • 1682.

    How much money did you receive for the payment of the public-houses ? — I really could not say.

  • 1683.

    What money did you receive altogether ? — I received it from Simmons and I paid it out of the bag until it was all gone. We had a certain portion every day given to us, and receipts were returned to show the amount of money expended.

  • 1684.

    Did you take the money in gold ? — Yes.