DIAMOND DEALING

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 74, Issue 139, 15 June 1931, Page 12

DIAMOND DEALING

i FALSE PRETENCES CHARGE NEGOTIATIONS THAT FAILED. ’ For over a day and a half the jury at the Old Bailey listened to remarkable details loncerning a pendant cross set with stones, and the negotiations for its purchase, and at the conclusion failed to agree whether or not an at tempt had been made to defraud a South Loudon jeweller and diamond dealer. A charge of false pretences and con spiracy was preferred against two jewel lers, James M’Avoy, aged sixty-eight, and Arthur Jameson, aged thirty-eight. Mr. R. E. Seaton, for prosecution said that on December 18 M’Avoy went to the shop of Air. Henry Woods, jeweller and diamond dealer, of Clapham Road and showed him the pendant cross, which, he stated, ho wanted to sell, mentioning £2OO as the figure he would take for it. He went on to say that his father was a general and had fought in the Crimean War, and afterwards went to India, and brought the cross home from there to England, and it had been in his family for fifty years.

Out of sight of M’Avoy, Mr. Woods removed one of the eleven stones from the cross and found that instead of being old-fashioned cut it was modern cut. Ho told M’Avoy he should retain the cross and send for the police, and M’Avoy rejoined indignantly: “You must not detain my goods; 1 am going to the police myself.” He then left the shop. Later he returned with a man who, he stated, was his solicitor and Air. Woods explained that the matter was then in the hands of the police--2k detective was in waiting at the shop. Purchase in Hatton Garden. M’Avoy produced a letter-card he had written to the man from whom he declared ho obtained the cross and threatened Air. Woods with an action. He insisted that he bought the cross foi £2OO from a man at Hatton Garden, named Jameson, and he paid £25 on account of the purchase money. His soli citor had the receipt. Air. Woods reminded him. that he had stated that hi* father brought the cross from India, and M’Avoy admitted that that story was untrue, adding, “But it is not a crime—it is business.” The following day Detective-Sergeant Hawkridge saw Jameson, who made a long statement. He told the officer he had advice and ho would say nothing beyond that M’Avoy bought the cross from him for £2OO and gave him £25 on account. If he did not sell the cross he was to receive his deposit back. He added that he was sorry there had been trouble over the cross, as “it had all been settled in court before.” "When M’Avoy was charged with conspiiacy he remarked: “I am absolutely innocent of any fraudulent intent o r conspiracy, and I honestly believe that the cross is worth between £2OO and £300.” Suspicions Aroused. The Crown, observed counsel, believ cd that both men knew the cross was worth only about £5 or £lO. When Woods was giving evidence he was asked by the judge what right he had to take stones out of the cross. “1 had a suspicion,” replied Woods, who added that the stones at the back of the cross were imitation. Ho would not. call himself an expert, but he had had experience of handling precious stones for over twenty years. He subjected the setting of the stones to an acid test and found it was not pure platinum. If the stones were real diamonds ami the setting pare platinum, the cross might be worth £l6O, but £l4O would be the market value of it. Al’Avoy was told that the stoucs con sisted of thin shells of diamonds pasted on to common stones. Witness form ed the opinion that the cross was made to defraud the public, and that was why he took out the stones to examine. He felt it his duty to sec that the public was not robbed. “I would not have given any price for the cross; I would not have given live shillings for it, declared the jeweller. Expert Alleges Fake. Experts in diamonds were called, one of whom declared that the stones in the cross were faked, and they were “doublets,” a very clever imitation of diamonds, consisting of very thin layer of diamonds on the top of W’hito sap ■ [»hires. He valued the cross at abou* no. Al’Avoy’ in the witness-box, asserted that he obtained the cross from Jameson. The arrangement was that he should have it for £2OO, and he paid £25 on account. He thought it. cheap at £2OO, and he tried to get as much more as he could for it. He told Woods the cross belonged to his father merely a< proof of possession. He had known Jameson as a dealer in jewellery since 1922, and had had other deals with him. but this was the first big deal. After a protracted absence the jury announced that there was no prospect of reaching an agreement. Remarking that it. was a great, pity to involve an other trial, the judge held the case ovei to the next session and granted accuse' 1