Testimonies

Foord, Charles Ross | Day 16

Witness Type: Other

Party: Liberal

Witness Testimony:

• 17971.

  I want to know which is the largest account, which is your principal banking account ? — The London Joint Stock.

• 17972.

  (Mr. Holl.) Was any suggestion made by Mr. Belsey or by anyone that you should draw the money in London ? — No, certainly not ; who would dare to ask a man where he should draw his own cheques ; certainly not.

• 17973.

  You say nothing of that kind took place ? — No, certainly not ; I have told you the exact fact.

• 17974.

  Who would know best how it came that this cheque was drawn upon the London bank instead of the Rochester bank, you or your brother ? — My brother ; he told me that it would be more convenient for us to draw upon the London Joint Stock bank.

• 17975.

  As far as you are concerned, it was your brother’s suggestion to draw upon the London Joint Stock bank ? — Such a cheque as that I should not think of drawing, because I never draw any large cheques, except for the wages at Sheerness ; he manages all the financial part. There are four members of the firm.

• 17976.

  Are you in the habit of drawing cheques for as much as 1,200L. at times upon the Rochester bank ? — I should think not as a rule, unless it has been paid in for any special purpose which might have required it, but mind you, I do not commit myself by saying that we have not done so, because a few years ago our wages were above 1,000L. a week, though they are not so heavy now.

• 17977.

  Do you know whether you or your brother told Sir Julian Goldsmid that Mr. Edwards came to the station to receive the money ; did you say whether it was Mr. Emmerson or Mr. Edwards that came ? — I have not seen Sir Julian Goldsmid.

• 17978.

  You are not Alderman Foord ? — No, my brother.

• 17979.

  Do you remember what Mr. Belsey said to you with regard to whom to give the money ? — Mr. Emmerson.

• 17980.

  Did he give you any name in writing, or was it verbal, do you remember ? — It was in writing.

• 17981.

  Do you remember whether you had any memorandum ? – Yes, there is the address in Sir Julian’s own handwriting (producing a small piece of paper).

• 17982.

  Do I understand you to say you know of no reason for this money having been drawn in London except what you have told us ? — Quite so; I would just as soon have drawn it at Rochester, and so saved a journey to London, if it had been convenient to do so. If my brother had said it was handy for Rochester, it would have been done. He knew there was a good balance at the London Joint Stock bank, and that was the reason that he took it out there.

• 17983.

  As far as you are concerned, you know of no reason for its being drawn in London, except that your brother suggested it ? — No, none at all. It would put us to a little more inconvenience, but a large portion of it we could have taken from our own money in hand. I have told you already we had got 300L. in the house.

• 17984.

  Was that in the house in gold or in notes ? — In gold.

• 17985.

  Do you generally keep as much as that in gold ? — Yes ; it happened to be Thursday, and my brother had got a surplus over and above what we required for wages.

• 17986.

  Of course, I do not understand these business matters as well as you do, but do you usually have as — much as that in gold ? — Yes, upon Thursday a good deal more than that.

• 17987.

  You draw gold to pay your wages with ? — Yes.

• 17988.

  And this was the gold over and above what you would require upon Saturday ? — Yes, we had got 300L. more than we should require.

• 17989.

  Was that in your strong box in gold or in notes ? — In gold.

• 17990.

  It was in gold at the time ? — Yes.

• 17991.

  It was not in notes, and then changed into gold ? — No. I may tell you that some years ago there was a great run upon the banks, when everybody was fearful of banks, and my father took it into his head that he would always keep more than enough for one week’s wages in the house, and we have always kept a fair amount, and if our bank were to break to-morrow, our men would not go without their wages. It is what my father did, and we have continued to do it, so that we have always got some money in the house.

• 17992.

  You went down upon the Friday ? — Yes, and came back upon the Friday.

• 17993.

  I think you said something to the effect that it was not certain whether you would get off upon the Friday or Saturday ? — Mr. Belsey said, would I come down either Friday or Saturday, but Saturday I said I could not possibly go, because it was my day at Sheerness, and I had my workmen to pay, and I said I would go to London at once. I had to leave a little after one, to get up to London within banking time.

• 17994.

  Then you came straight down from London to Sandwich ; you came to London on Thursday ? — Yes.

• 17995.

  You went back to Rochester, and left Rochester upon the Friday ? — I came up to London by the 1.48 train ; I arrived at Ludgate at 2.52, and returned by the 4.27 train from Ludgate upon Thursday, and the next day I left Chatham by the 8.40, arrived at Canterbury at 9.56, left Canterbury lit 11.56, and arrived at Sandwich at 12.38. Then I left Sandwich at 4.09, and that was my day’s work.

• 17996.

  Mr. Belsey asked you to take it down either Friday or Saturday ? — Yes.

• 17997.

  And you took it down upon the Friday ? — Yes.

• 17998.

  As I understand you you have told us as far as you can recollect everything that took place between you ? — Yes, the conversation was merely in regard to taking down 1,500L. Mr. Belsey said they wanted 1,500L., and I was to take it down to Mr. Emmerson for Sir Julian Goldsmid.

• 17999.

  Was there any conversation at all with regard to its being taken down in gold other than what you have told us ? — No, certainly not.

• 18000.

  (Mr. Turner.) You took this gold in the 10 bags that you have mentioned ? — Yes, and there is Mr. Emmerson’s receipt for it (handing a paper).