MIDLAND BANK CASE.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18241, 27 November 1924, Page 11

MIDLAND BANK CASE.

EVIDENCE FROM MR A'S COUNTRY. (BT CA.Br<X—PH""S ASSOCIATION—COPTBIGHT) (EE'JTEE'S TELEGRAMS.) LONDON, November 25. In the Midland Bank case, liobbs denied that an aide-de-camp told him about a. second chcquo for £150,000 which was drawn but stopped. Mr Justico Darling expressed the opinion to Lord Halsbury that he vras in. considerable difficulty about the case. Apparently the same person paid in money, gave a specimen signature, signed cheques, and drew the money. The signature was not a forgery. The bank paid out on a. signature cxact-ly like the signature of the man'who paid in the money. Where was the negligence? . Lord Halsbury said he had considered that point, but thought ■it better to argue it at a later stage. The case'for the plaintiff has closed. Sir John Simon submitted there was no'case to go to the jury. 1 _ Sir Havelock Charles, giving evidence, said the identity of Mr A. was revealed to him for the purpose of the case. He had been for some year 3 in the State where Mr A. lived, and ■was well acquainted' with the religious practices and customs of the country. Witness then answered in writing questions on paper handed him by counsel. The Judge explained to the jury that the questions related to written questions put to Mra Robinson in crossexamination. Sir John- Simon contended .that the money was taken from Mr A. by . the most terrible of all menaces. * He pointed out that under the Larceny Act a person demanding money by menaces was guilty of felony, punishable by penal, servitude not exceeding five years.

Dr. Mary Scharlieb gave evidence that she practised for many years in Mr A.'s country, and had attended native ladies. Shown the questions and answers byi Sir Havelock Charles, witness agreed both. Sir John Simon referred to the preposterous sum paid by Mr A. Mr Justice Darling remarked that he r understood Mr A. was advised by a solicitor. Sir John Simon replied that Mr A. never saw a solicitor. Mr Justice Darling said lie did not know how he got the impression. It astounded him that any solicitor, unless accustomed to deal with this kind of case, "would have allowed Mr A. to part with more than £SO. Sir John Simon, opening the case for the defence, said that Mr A. had an overwhelming reason for fearing menacing exposure. High as his position was, he was reduced to such a state of oppression and fear that lie signed two blank cheques even before he wa3 ever consulted. Tho Midland Bank would show that every one of tho six conspirators received most substantial sums. It was a terrible and humiliating reflection that a white man in Mr A.'s service was the Judas, whereas a darkskinned native secretary was faithful. He concluded by calling upon Newton. to testify.