A BOTTOMLEY SWINDLE.

Auckland Star, Volume XLII, Issue 191, 12 August 1911, Page 17

A BOTTOMLEY SWINDLE.

LADY DECLARES FATHER WAS DEFRAUDED. WORTHLESS SHARES. . Mr Horatio Bottomley, M.P., Is defendant In a suit for the recovery of £57,835, said to have been obtained by alleged fraud, which has been brought in the King's Bench Division before the Lord Chief Justice and a special Jury toy Mrs Eleanor Frances Curtis, daughter of the late Mr Robert Edward Master, J.P., a retired Madras Civil Servant, says the "Daily Mail" overseas edition of July 1. The defendant denies that there had been any fraud or that fraudulent representations were made.

Mr Ritter, opening the case for the plaintiff, said that Mr Master died In November, 1910, at the age of eighty-four. He had retired from the Madras Civil Service in 1874 as a rich man. Mr Master had parted with no less a sum than £57,000 odd, and with the result that he had lost that sum. An action against Mr Hooley had been settled. The action against Mr Bottomley -was proceeded with, and the plaintiff alleged false and fraudulent misrepresentation that certain shares were valuable and worth more than the price paid for them, when In fact they were worthless. Tie action turned largely on the documents. These documents consisted of original letters, etc., signed by the defendant, and of copies of other letters including his answers. Unless he could prove the contents of these documents his case was gone. Many of the letters had been stolen, but fortunately, before they had disappeared copies had been made by a typist, and he should prove this. Much of Mr Master's money had gone into the John Bull Investment Trust and Agency, Ltd., wnieh Mr Bottomley said was different from himself, but counsel hoped to prove that it was really Mr Bottomley. The snare transactions which Mr Master had were as follows:

Sums Paid. 2000 shares at par in the John Bull Investment Trust and Agency, Limited £2OOO 10.000 shares in Carter's Deep Leads. Limited £8750 24G0 shares in the Southern Counties Stores. Limited £2460 125 Hedou Park Estates, Limited.. £125 2000 shares In the John Bull Investment Trust and Agency, Limited £2OOO 5000 further shares in the same limited company £SOOO Total £20,335 THE ALLEOED FRAUD. Counsel said Mr Bottomley was the sole director of the John Bull Investment Trust and Agency, Ltd. These people, proceeded counsel, were not satisfied with getting this £20,000 out of Mr Master; they asked him for another £37,000, and in July, 1907, Mr Masters purchased A further 25,000 fully-paid shares in the John Bull Investment Trust and Agency, Ltd., at 30/ each, and paid for them £37,500 The fraud the plaintiff complained of, counsel explained, was that 'these shares ■were absolutely unsaleable. The way the companies wer» worked showed enormous ability, but he hoped to be able to show r.hat a swindle the whole thing was. To a letter from Mr Bottomley Mx Master replied:

You are quite right in supposing that I have not been able to follow the various events connected with your group of companies; Indued, I have been bewilder-n-l by the numerous reconstructions an<i alterations which have so rapidly followed each other: in fact. I have not attempted to understand it. I cannot Bay that my in vestments In these companies have ou the whole been proOtnble, tout I must admit that they were mere speculations. I ran a risk and must not complain. Mr Bottomley„ replied: I am very familiar with your name as one of my oldest and best supporters, and it will indeed be a source of great pleasure to me to be able to Tecoup my old supporters. I wish J. could say more, but you will, of course, understand that there are many claims on me. However, my companies had the use of your capital at a time when it was Important, and in this way I feel under a moral obligation towards you. Suppose you were to come and see me here one morning thi9 week, I should, be pleased to go into this matter fully with you and see what can be done. Mr. Master called, and what happened, counsel said, was shown by a letter in which Mr. Bottomley wrote: In consideratiou of your past losses in my group I am putting to your name free of charge 500 fully paid shares in the John Bull Investment Trust and Agency, and have further secured for you 2,000 shares at par. in respect of which you have paid a deposit of £250, but on the understanding that when the next public issue is made these 2,000 shares are to bo included, you receiving the premiums on them.

Continuing, counsel said that between Mr. llooley and Mr. Bottomley this old man was ruined.

Mrs. Curtis, the plaintiff, then gave evl deuce. She said she was the wife of a bar-rlster-at-law. Her father had a serious Illness, not accident, in 1904, and it impaired his memory for a time. In October, 1909, she discovered that her father had lost about £90,0u0. He had had transactions •with Mr. llooley and Mr. Bottomley. When he died he had practically no money left. They had always been in comfortable circumstances. She went through his letters and diaries and found that he had lost his money, and seeing in them the names of Bottomley and Hooley she concluded he had lost his money through them. Mr. Bottomley (who Is conducting his own case, cross-examining): You came to the conclusion that your father had been robbed? The Witness: Yes, I came to the conclusion that my father had been robbed. He lunched with me? —Yes. and the impression left upon me, from reading the diary, was that you "did him" unnecessarily well. Mr Bottomley read from Mr. Master's diary: Came to London. Called upon Mr. Bottomley, and he took me over to a small hotel in Coventry-street, where we had an unnecessarily gorgeous lunch After discussing business with Mr. Holland, Mr. Bottomlcy's private secretary, we parted. STORY OF AN INTERVIEW.

Mr. J. Ferris, a retired medical man, who had for many years attended Mr. Masters, said that after the autumn of 1904 he became dull and stupid. Mr. H. Dade, of Messrs. Dade and Co., the plaintiff's solicitors, said he had charge of the documents in the case—the diaries and the letters—and they disappeared after they had been copied; he could not say how. Crossexamined by Mr. Bottomley: The action against Mr. Hooley had been compromised. The conspiracy action against Mr. Hooley and Mr. Bottomley was still alive. Was it Dot dismissed last week?— No. It was to be dismissed unless Mrs. Curtis was Joined, and that is being dene. If yon got £57,000 that would do?—I thought that would be as much as yon could ptjl (Laughter.)

The witness said he called upon Sir. Bottomley after the issue of the writ In the Action, at the invitation of Mr. Holland, his secretary. At that InterviewMr. liottomlej- said: "This is a serious matter." I said; "Yes, I have looked into It and appears to be serious, botu against yon and Mr. Hooley." He said: "I want you to leave me out of these proceedings, and I will help you against Hooley. I can help you to wtu your case against him. If you cannot see your way to do that, leave me alone for the present. I have had a full of litigation recently, And want no more." I .told him I could not do that without my client's permission.

Do you suggest I had anything to do with the disappearance of the documents?— No. All I say is they have gone. You don't add burglary to my other crimes?— I have not suggested it. Mr. Bottomley submitted there was no case to go to the jury. He contended:

"There must be some evidence of misrepresentation on a matter of fact made to Mr. Master before he purchased any of these shares, which representation was false to my knowledge and upon which he acted; or in the alternative there must be some wilful dishonest expression of opinion." Not one tittle of such evidence had been produced. Mr. Bottomley declared he felt so strongly about his submission that if his lordship were against him he should stani or fall on the evidence already before the jury. The Lord Chief Justice said he was quite clear that on some parts of the case it was not possible to say there was' no evidence to go to the jury. The hearing was then adjourned. [Our cables have since informed us that plaintiff was given judgment for the full amount, and an appeal by Bottomley against the judgment wns dismissed.]