Testimonies

Goldsmid, Sir Julian | Day 6

Witness Type: Candidate / MP

Party: Liberal

Other Days The Witness Was Called On: Day 18

Witness Testimony:

• 5676.

  These expenses at Rochester, I suppose, were considerable ? — Yes ; you know that a member, I find it so wherever I have been member, and I was a member in Devonshire before, is expected to subscribe to every local subscription, school, hospital, and everything else, and I have always done it. I have always tried to behave what is called liberally in that respect.

• 5677.

  I mean at Rochester there would be considerable expenditure on that account ? — Certainly, as it is in most constituencies.

• 5678.

  So that Messrs. Foord had a running account, if I may so express it, to a very considerable amount with, you ? — Very considerable amount perhaps for a small person, and for me, but a fair amount.

• 5679.

  You practically drew upon them to the extent of 1,500L ? — They had paid 1,500L. for me on my private account before now.

• 5680.

  They had ? — Yes, they have purchased some property for me and I have not repaid them for more than a month afterwards, sometimes two or three months, sometimes six, and sometimes a year.

• 5681.

  You say you had no cheques on your own private bank down here except the one you gave ? — That is all. As Mr. Lewis reminds me I told him the day I called upon him for the petition, that my expenses included the expenditure I had made of the 1,500L.

• 5682.

  You had no other cheques except that one you gave ? — I had one on the London and Westminster, and one on the Bank of England.

• 5683.

  On your private bank you only had one ? — Yes.

• 5684.

  There were reasons why you did not wish to mix up the account of the Bank of England with your private account ? — Yes.

• 5685.

  You do keep a secretary, do you not ? — I am sorry to say I keep two sometimes.

• 5686.

  At that time you had only one, had you ? — Yes, I had only one secretary, he keeps all my accounts except my private account at the Bank of England.

• 5687.

  Of course it suggests itself to one why you did not write to him for a cheque book; was there any reason ? — I did write to him for a cheque book, bat I did not know when I should get it ; he had work out of doors and was away a great deal, he lives out of London and comes up from time to time to attend to a variety of business ; he has to go to my estates very often to do business there, I give him no instructions to do it because he has been with me for 14 years and knows my business in that way.

• 5688.

  So that you mean you could not be sure, could you, that a letter would necessarily reach him on the morning, in which in due course of post it should ? — Certainly, the bank holiday came on the following Monday.

• 5689.

  As regards Mr. Edwards there was no secrecy whatever between him and you as to this money coming down ? — I told him so.

• 5690.

  I did not quite follow you with regard to this cheque for 210L. ; it was to provide for the payments made to the returning officer by anticipation, it is a cheque I see given by Mr. Emmerson ? — Quite so.

• 5691.

  Is there any reason why that was given to Mr. Emmerson rather than to Mr. Edwards, because Edwards was your agent would not he be the natural man ? — They were both agents, but Mr. Emmerson wrote to me, he living in Sandwich, the polling being taken in Sandwich, and the mayor being in Sandwich, to ask me for money to pay the deposit to the returning officer, and I with my experience have always paid the returning officer before the election, and in consequence I sent to Mr. Emmerson the only cheque which I paid him, or the only money of any sort which I paid him for 210L.

• 5692.

  You have told us you did not know that Mr. Emmerson had 200L. out of that 1,500L. ? — He did not have it till next day, and I did not know that he had it until long since.

• 5693.

  He had it on the Friday ? — I think on the Saturday.

• 5694.

  He told us on the Friday I think. (Mr. Holl.) He came down on Friday afternoon ? I beg your pardon, it was Saturday.

• 5695.

  (Mr. Jeune.) If there was one fact which I thought was satisfactorily proved it was that it was on a Friday, because Mr. Edwards gave us a good many reasons why it was on a Friday ? — It was on a Saturday. I asked that it might be sent Friday or Saturday, and f had Mr. Belsey’s letter on Friday morning to say it would be sent on Saturday, and I went and told Mr. Edwards it would be sent on Saturday. On Friday afternoon I had Mr. Emmerson’s letter asking me for the money to pay the deposit to the returning officer, as I knew and as I had told Mr. Edwards, the money had not come I did not ask Mr. Edwards for it, but I paid Mr. Emmerson 210L. in order that he might pay, he being at Sandwich and he being applied to for the money to the returning officer. The money came on Saturday:

• 5696.

  It is of no very great consequence, but that is the one thing which Mr. Edwards was quite sure about that it came on the Friday ? — Mr. Edwards is entirely mistaken there.

• 5697.

  It is a matter which is entirely unimportant but it is quite clear that when it came to Sandwich Mr. Emmerson had his 210L. at the same time that Mr. Edwards had the remainder ? — I knew nothing about it.

• 5698.

  That is all I want to know ? — I only knew it the other day.

• 5699.

  (Mr. Holl.) What time of the morning was it when you sent it to Mr. Emmerson ? — I do not think it was in the morning at all, it was late in the afternoon on Friday.

• 5700.

  (Mr. Jeune.) I think you have told us that almost directly the election was over you put the management of the affairs into Mr. George Lewis’s hands ? — I think the election was on Tuesday, I returned to town with Lady Goldsmid on the Wednesday, by a very early train, and, I believe, it was on Thursday.

• 5701.

  So that you made no investigation whatever into the accounts, or how the money had been spent ? — Certainly not ; first of all, I had no time, and secondly I am totally incapable of doing it, because I am a very bad accountant.

• 5702.

  So that you having put the matter into Mr George Lewis’s hands, did not yourself inquire of Mr. Edwards how he had spent that 1,500L. or whatever sum he had ? — I wrote nothing to Sandwich or Deal, and have never from that day to this communicated ‘with anybody in either of those two places, except the two notes which I wrote, one to Mr. Edwards and the other to Mr, Emmerson, telling them that Mr. George Lewis had charge of the matter. I do not know whether you have those notes, or have seen them.

• 5703.

  Yes, I think we have, or we have heard of them. (Mr. Emmerson,) That letter has. been handed in. (Mr. Jeune.) Here is the letter, dated the 13th of May (that would be Thursday) of which the effect is that the whole matter was put into the hands of Mr. George Lewis. (Mr. Holl.) I think it right to say that, with the exception of the names of the gentlemen which Sir Julian Goldsmid, attending the Commission, wrote down, and with the exception of those matters which have been put to Sir Julian Goldsmid, nothing has any bearing really upon this inquiry, and we do not think it necessary to be made public, they are private matters as to which he did not wish to mention names, and so forth, publicly, and they have no bearing really upon the question of the practices connected with the last election, otherwise they would be made public. (Mr. Jeune, ) It must not be supposed, of course, that we have received and not allowed the public to hear any single thing that is relevant to this inquiry. We have been careful to get from Sir Julian Goldsmid anything on these papers which has the least bearing upon this inquiry, so that the whole of his statement and evidence will be before the public, and on the short-hand writers’ notes. (The witness.) I asked Mr. Lewis to come down, because I knew nothing about the accounts, and he could state that I gave him instructions to investigate my case and the conduct of my agents, as well as the conduct of the agents on the other side.