ALLEGED JEWELLERY FRAUDS

Otago Witness, Issue 2929, 4 May 1910, Page 32

ALLEGED JEWELLERY FRAUDS

juONDON, May 1. Giving evidence at the Old Bailey in connection with recent jewellery frauds, "La Milo" stated that her income for three years was £SOOO annually. She was married to Eggena at the Grand (Hotel, Birmingham, in December, 1908. Wood, . one of the accused, had forced jieweJs upon her, including a diamond drop valued at £30,000, which the Kaiser was anxious to purchase. Wood also accompanied her to the Gaiety on the eccasion of the King of Portugal's visit. (From Otjr Own Correspondent.) LONDON, March 18. The defence was reached at, Bow street on Wednesday .in the case in which Ferdinand Eggena, Pansy Eggena (La Milo). and Percy Holland Easton, of the Motor House, Euston road, are' charged with conspiring to obtain upwards of £BOOO worth of jewels jby false pretence from Mr William Edward (Wood, jeweller, of. Brook street, Hanover Square. . The jewels, it. was stated, were obtained on the security of twenty-five motor cars stored' at the Motor House, which, it is alleged, were represented to be the absolute property of Eggena, but in respect of which only a deposit of £4OO had been paid. Evidence was given to show that two £SO Bank of England notes which were received by Eggena in respect of the pledging of fiome of the jewellery in question ivere ihanded by Mrs Eggena to a derssmaker in Leicester Place in payment of an account of £95 for dresses supplied from June to December last. The balance of £5 was applied towards tne payment of a sum of £lO clue to a corsetiere in Regent street. Mr Cecil Fitch said that Ferdinand Eggena would reserve his defence. When the other side of the story had been told, it would put a very different complexion on the case. Mr Synimons, who appeared on behalf of Mrs Esgena, submitted that as the case was presented against her, there was no reasonable probability of a jury convicting her. 'Assuming that theve had been a fraud committed, what was there to show that she had been a party to it? She had never negotiated-, any part, of the arrangements'by which;the cars wore'to >bei takenlas'seewrit" for payment of the Wood'and his manager, Mr Telfer, /who-.were .men of business, "both believed- that the transaction with the Motor House was a -perfectly--legiti-mate ono, and if they believed it, why Should' not Mrs Eggena have believed it? If Mrs E?gena was the wife of Ferdinand Eggena, then his submission that no jury

would convict her was all the stronger. Mr Marsham, pointed out that there was no evidence at present that she was his wife. He would not express any opinion as to the strength of the case, but the matter was essentially one for a jury to determine.

The defendant Easton denied all knowledge of a conspiracy. Mr Telfer did not tell him that Eggena was buying jewellery and giving the cars as security, and the witness did not say that the cars were Eggena's property and that there was no lien or claim upon them. Eggena gave the witness a letter authorising the transfer of his interest in the cars to Mr Wood. Upon that occasion he stated that Miss Montague (La Milo) had nothing to do with the deal. He said she was earning about £l5O a week, and that both she and he had very wealthy friends. He said his father was president of the Deutsche Bank in Berlin.