KIDNAPPED OLD GRANDFATHER TO OBTAIN MONEY.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17758, 30 January 1926, Page 9

KIDNAPPED OLD GRANDFATHER TO OBTAIN MONEY.

CONSPIRACY CHARGES HELD TO BE PROVED. By Telegraph—Press Assn.—Copyright. Aus. and N.Z. Cable Association. LONDON, January 28. Henry Rowe Williams was sentenced to eighteen months’ hard labour, and Arden to six months’ imprisonment for conspiring to cheat Douglas Arden and kidnapping him. At the hearing at Marylebone Police Court of the case in which a wealthy man of eighty-one was alleged to have been kidnapped by two of his grandsons and another man and induced to sign bills to the amount of £55,000, Geoffrey James Arden, twentysix, motor engineer, of Hertford Street, Mayfair; Charles Edward Arden, twenty-four, independent, of St Martin’s Chambers, St Martin’s Street, Leicester Square, and Henry Rowe Williams, forty-nine, commission agent, of Hertford Street, were charged with conspiring with others to cheat and defraud Mr Douglas Arden, of 27, Onslow Gardens, South Kensington, S.W., of moneys and securities. Owing to the state of Mr Douglas Arden’s health, a receiver under the Lunacy Act was appointed in November, and it was in view of this appointment that a coup was said to have been planned to obtain his money. Mr Charles ITeywood, formerly Mr Arden’s coachman, said he was asked by Mrs Short. Mr Arden’s daughter, to go to 27, Onslow Gardens to look after him. On November 18 he took Mr Arden to Ilarrods to be shaved, and while there a young man brought him (Mr Ileywood) a note. In consequence of what it contained he took Mr Arden outside and found two taxicabs waiting. They drove to Charles Street Post Office, where the mysterious messenger got out of the cab. He then asked for the return of the note he had brought and entered the post office. Shortly afterwards he told him (Mr Hey wood) that he was wanted on the telephone by Mrs Short, Mr Arden’s daughter. He went inside, leaving Mr Arden with the young man. but when he lifted the receiver he found no one at the other end of the line. He went outside, and found that the cab and Mr Arden and the young man had disappeared. Mr Ileywood, cross-examined by Mr St John Hutchinson, said he had instructions to keep Mr Geoffrey Arden away from his grandfather. Mrs Dorothy Short, U pper Cheyne Road, Chelsea, said the two Ardens were sons of her brother, who was now dead. Her father’s memory had failed entirely. Geoffrey Arden had not visited Onslow Gardens for about two years. Charles Arden had a weekly allowance from his grandfather of £4, and up to November 16 he had called for it weekly and received it from an old family nurse. On the day of the alleged kidnapping she visited the United University Club at four o’clock and there found her father. He had no recollection of what he had done during the day or whom he had been with. Mrs Short said that on November 17 she was appointed by the High Court as receiver of her father’s property. Williams, cross-examining Mrs Short, asked: “Is your father a very wealthy man?” and she replied “No.” Did he not come into a very large sum of money a few years ago?—l suppose it is a matter of opinion. I should not call him a very wealthy man. He did come into money. What date was his last will made?— I have no idea. Do you benefit very largely under this will?—I don’t know. I put it to you that you know you are receiving the lion’s share of this money?—l don’t know. Cross-examined by Mr Hutchinson, Mrs Short said she knew her father’s partner left a very large sum of money, but she could not say if it was £450,000, nor could she say whether her father inherited £120,000. She knew her father had only a life interest with power to leave the money either to her or to the descendants of his son. Mr Hutchinson: I don’t put it offensively, but if he turns against his grandsons you stand to benefit?—Yes. Mrs Short said her brother was educated at Eton and Oxford, and then went to Australia, where he married the daughter of Sir James Martin, who was Chief Justice of New South Wales. Her sister-in-law died in 1901, and her brother in 1908, and Miss Martin, an aunt, was appointed the boys’ guardian. They were educated at Winchester, Mr Douglas Arden paying the whole of the cost. Mr Arden also allowed Miss Martin £3OO a year towards their keep. These allowances ceased in June, 1921, and since then the only amounts allowed them were £4 a week.

“ Not a princely sum was it for a man who inherited £120,000 for the children of his only son?” asked Mr Hutchinson.

“ It depends possibly on the record of the grandsons,” replied Mrs Short. You haven’t done much to help them?—l personally haven’t done anything.