MIDLAND BANK SUED.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18879, 29 November 1924, Page 11

MIDLAND BANK SUED.

DETAILS OF CONSPIRACY.

EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENCE.

A. and N.Z.—Keuter.

LONDON. Not. 27.

The case in which Charles Ernest Robinson, bookmaker, is claiming £125,000. the balance of a sum of £150,000 from the Midland Bank, as money alleged to have been received by defendants for his use, or alternatively as damages for alleged negligence, was resumed tp-day in the King's Bench division before Lord Darling.

The witness. Newton, continued hi 3 evidence. He said Robinson scoffed at an offer of £20,000. He subsequently accepted an offer of £25,000, which was divided between the Robinsons, Mrs. Bevan, Hobbs, the aide-de-camp and witness. The aide-de-camp received £5000 and the others £4000 each. Robinson was then under the impression that this was all the money there was to divide.

Witness and Hobbs afterwards went to Paris, where £125,000, the balance of the cheque for £150,000, was equally divided between Hobbs, the aide-de-camp and Newton.

Newton Seeks Further Payment. Witness denied having robbed Mrs. Robinson of £10,000; or that he lived by blackmailing. He admitted that he was sentenced in 1906 to 20 months' imprisonment. He was rather sorry for the part he had played in the business. He went to India to see if he could obtain a second payment on the undated cheque which " Mr. A." had given. Ho saw the aide-de-camp, who said it would be two or three months before " Mr. A." would be approachable because of the death of his wife. He denied that he had ever blackmailed the aide-de-camp. The latter appeared to be certain that'the second cheque would be paid, and paid Newton 600,000 francs for his share. Witness did not think he ought to return this money, because the cheque had not been met.

Francis Waters, solicitor, stated in evidence that the aide-de-camp called on him and told him of the Paris incident. Witness advised him to do nothing until the potentate had been served wih a petition in divorce. Oase for Defence Closed. The aide-de-camp and "Mr. A." called on witness, and told him that they had settled" the matter, and had given two cheques for £150,000 each. Witness expressed his amazement. "Mr. A." and the aide-de-camp both gave him to understand that they had paid this huge sum under pressure in order to avoid a scandal. They also told him the names of the other parties to the matter. The first cheque had already been cleared, but the second was stopped on his advice.

Witness said he interviewed Hobbs, who apparently readily acquiesced in the stoppage of the second cheque. Ho said he would advise his client to put it in the fire. Witness told Hobbs it was a regular blackmailing plot. Witness had " Mr. A's" a.uthority to reveal what he told the Court.

This concluded the evidence for the de fence.