"MR. A.'S" CHEQUE

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 130, 28 November 1924, Page 7

"MR. A.'S" CHEQUE

.DIVIDING THE SPOILS

NEWTON COMPLETES HIS STORY

BANK'S EVIDENCE FINISHED,

{UNITED PRESS ASSOCIATION'.—COPXRIGHT.)

(ROUTER'S TELEGRAM.)

(Received 28th November, 9 a.m.) LONDON, 27th November.

In the Midland Bank case, Newton (who impersonated Mrs. Robinson's husband in the Paris episode) continued his evidence. He said that Robinson scoffed at the offer of £20,000, but subsequently accepted an offer ,of £25,000, which was divided between the Robinsons. Hobbs and Newton each got £4000, and the aide £5000: Robinson was'then under the impression that that was all the money there was to divide Witness and Hobbs afterwards went to Pans where £120,000, the balance of the cheque of £150,000, was equally divided between Hobbs r the aide and Newton. .Witness denied seducing Mrs. Robinson . and robbing her of £10 000 and also that he lived by blackmailing' He admitted that ho" was sentenced in 1905 to twenty months' imprisonment He was rather sorry for the part he had played m, the business. He went to India to see if he could obtain a second payment on the second '(undated) cheque which "Mr. A"' gave. He saw the aide, who said it would be two or three months before "A" would be approachable, owing to the death-of his wife. .He denied that he ■ ever blackmailed the aide. The latter appeared certain that the second cheque would be paid, and paid Newton 600,000 francs for his share. He did not think it was up to him to return this money because the cheque had not been met. AN AMAZED SOLICITOR Francis Waters, solicitor, gave evidence that the aide-de-camp called on him on 29fch December, and told "him of the Paris incident. Witness advised him to do nothing until the petition for divorce had been served. The aide and "Mr. A" called on him on 14th January, and said they' had settled the matter by giving two cheques,, each, for £150,-. 000. Witness expressed amazement, and "A" and the aide-de-camp both gave him to understand that they had paid this huge amount under pressure in order to avoid a scandal. They also told him the names of the other parties in the matter. The first cheque had al- ! ready been cleared, but the second was stopped, on his advice. Witness interviewed Hobbs, who professed to repre- ] sent Appleton and Co. Hobbs • appar- i ently readily acquiesced in the stoppage of the second cheque, and said he would advise his client to put' it in I the fire. Witness told Hobbs it was a | regular blackmailing plot. Witness had "Mr. A's" authority to reveal what he I had told to the Court. . |

This concluded the evidence for the bank.