“MISTER A”

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 1 December 1924, Page 5

“MISTER A”

JURY’S FINDINGS. IN SENSATIONAL CASE. TWO CONSPIRATORS ARRESTED. I. [One of the most sensational cases of modern times has ended. It was known as the “Bank Case,” in which an Eastern potentate, known as “Mister A,” was involved with, an Englishwoman, who, it was suggested, had conspired with others with a view to securing a huge sum of money from “Mister A.” The verdict, which is rather puzzling, was followed by the arrest of two men.] BY CABLE—PEBSS ASSOCIATION —COPY EIGHT. LONDON, Nov. 29. The ca6© in which Charles Ernest Robinson, a bookmaker, claimed £125,000, the balance of a sum of £150,000, from the Midland Bank as money alleged to have been received by defendants for hk use, or alternatively as damages for alleged negligence, was concluded in the King’s Bench division before Lord Darling to-day. As a sequel to the case the police have detained William Hobbs, solicitor’s clerk, who has figured in the case. Hobbs was detained at Gravesend last evening, and the police are bringing him to . London. He was about to depart for Holland. < The dramatic detention of Hobbs was not unexpected, and police action in other quarters is considered not improbable. It would be inaccurate to describe the action regarding Hobbs as arrest. No warrant has been issued, and no charge has yet been preferred. Special Scotland Yard detectives saw Hobbs with a man at Gravesend, and they brought both to London. The public, whose interest in the case reached white heat yesterday, were muck puzzled at its conclusion. People expected a simple; understandable verdict, .but instead the newspapers, which were almost snatched out of the vendors’ hands, recorded merely the jury’s answers to certain questions and their failure to answer others. For the purpose of clarity the Daily Telegraph’s summary is given herewith :« The jury found that there had been a conspiracy to obtain money from “Mr A,” whoscj action - in parting with it was neither free nor voluntary. They found that neither Robinson nor his wife were a party to this; conspiracy, and the.hank, in paying out £150,000, obeyed the mandate under which it received the amount. The remaining questions were as follows: - Were the words, “Pay to the order of G. Robinson, Appleton, and Company,” appearing on the back of the cheque, written by some person as agent for Appleton and Company ? Answer: No. Had Hobbs and or Appleton and Company any intention of transferring the whole fights, if• any, in the cheque to Robinson ?YiAiiswer: No. Did Hobbs, in drawing out the money, purport to act under the same authority as that, on which it was paid in?—Answer: Yes. A . question on which the jury were unable to agree was: Were the rights of Hobbs and or Appleton, whatever they were in the cheque, ever transferred ’by either, or both, to Robinson? O : : -'' ■ The foreman announced that, the jury Was unable to agree on the outstanding question, but Mr Justice Darling said he did .not think it material enough to send the jury back. They were therefore discharged, and the judge left the bench. ( The case has excited the most intense interest during the whole week, the court being besieged by a long queue for the public gallery. The newspapers published whole pages of the evidence, and each day yielded a new sensational development; 'the case being read like', a most exciting newspaper feuilleton. • The Daily Express says the tension of, the packed court broke into a surprised gust when Mr Justice Darling read thd jury’s answers: Women leaned oyer and tapped the barristers on the shoulders, asking: , “What does it mean ? Who has won ?” The fact only .stood clear that.the jury had removed 'the names of the Robinsons out of the mire of intrigue. Mrs Robinson sat : gazing at Mr Justice Darling with a faint smile of satisfaction. - She loosed the folds of her sable wrap, and leaned oyer and whispered to her husband. Mrs Robinson, after the jury’s decision; said : “My honour and character have been cleared, and 'mv husband and myself vindicated. I do not care about the money. Nobody knows the worry and agony I have suffered during, th® past five years, with this stigma over- me. I have- been insulted right and left. Now I am satisfied that I am clear.” The-Daily Chronicle says Scotland Yard has been engaged in enquiries in the case for many months. Detectives were in the law courts throughout the trial, .and many officers were yesterday both inside and dutside the court. It is- understood that the costs are likely to amount to £35,000. The Sunday Express says a warrant has been issued for the arrest of the aide concerned in the bank case. He is believed to be abroad, but was in London recently. It is understood that the others have given undertakings to hold themselves available to the authorities. A Scotland Yard official has gone East to make enquiries. Hobbs was charged at Bow . Street under the Larceny Act with receiving, on December 27, 1919, a banker’s cheque for the payment of £150,000, which cheque was stolen from abroad. He was remanded till December 6 in custody, A Scotland Yard inspector describes the arrest of Hobbs at Gravesend as he was on the point of embarking for Rotterdam. When the warrant was read Hobbs, described is as auite absurd.