MIDLAND BANK.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18238, 24 November 1924, Page 6

MIDLAND BANK.

BOOKMAKER'S CLAIM.

SORDID EVIDENCE

All Cl HLB FBXSS ASSOCIATION—CCFIBIQHTJ UU3TS-U-lAN AND K.I. CABLE ASSOCIATION.)

LONDON. November 'JI

The hearing of the case against the Midland Bank, from winch Ernest. Robinson, an ex-Australian bookmaker, is claiming £150.000, and which in turn alleges conspiracy, was continued. The plaintiff, cro.-s-exammed by Nr John Simon, denied that there was «nv trap. He said he had never discussed the Faris incident, with his wife, and lie denied that ho ever asked Newton for proof of t.he Paris incident. Lord Darling 'the presiding Judge) said that nothing would . have induced him w> keep a man's Binie out of the proceedings stnmlv because ho was a person ot high rank"- but reasons of Mate, not connected with rank r.t all, were, responsible for this course being taken. Itwas most important, that scandal should not be caused where this potentate lived The name of the aide de-camp was also emitted, because mention ot it would permit the identification ct th SurS was caused bv Lord Halsburv re-examining tho plaantitt. -tie said he called on Hobbs t-o produce three cheques in ieferenoo to Hobbs had been subpoenaed. ana Moods said he did not have them. The Judge ordered Hoiibsto be sworn in the witness box, and Hobbs,. replying to the Judge, said he was called to produce documents, and put them in safe keening; but he had not the cheques, i Ml"his papers were stolen from the office of the solicitors. " Somebody paid 4>'>o for them. Since witness' had the documents, there had been an attempt to break into his office, and he had the documents photographed. He did nod remember ever having the cheques and a Thc°°Judge said that Hobbs must | bring the documents to-morrow, 'or explain. . Mrs Robinson, examined', said &n© and her husband began to drift apart in 1914 and later they separated. Her husband in 1919 introduced her tc. Newton, who eventually seduced her. He wanted her to sell her business and securities and go awav with him, and became violent when she refused. She described meeting the members of "Mr A's" suite. One invited her and a lady friend to meet "Mr A," with whom she became friendly, accompany - ing him to parties, theatres, and dances, and their relationship eventually became guilty. It Was arranged that she and the lady'friend should accompany "Mr A" a.nd his secretary to Paris. "Mr A" planned that they should go to India, herself as "A's" mistress and the lady friend as the mistress of "A's" secretary. Khe described the scene in Paris when Newton surprised her and "A" in a bedroom. She denied acknowledging then that Newton was her husband. . She was unaware that • Newton ' was ■ acquainted with her relations with "A." She described- the meeting in Hobbs'» office. Witness said that Hobbs threw down a parcel of £25.000 in: notes, -and her husband.igot into a temper with Hobbs. "When her husband left, he said there was nothing to worry about, but he wanted his costs, and he, took £4OOO, for which he gave her no receipt. She tools! the balance to her hotel. Newton entered her bedroom-'and saw the parcel of notes on the bed. He said, "Don't think y«u are going to keep the lot," and threw her across the room when she tried to. prevent him taking the money. She found afterwards that he had taken £IO,OOO. Witness went to Paris to meet "Mr A." At Monte Carlo a ; foreigner told her that Scotland Yard' had requested her to leaveiminediately.' She- and her friend had gone to Monte Carlo; she did not see •■A,'"' and never saw him .again,.. Witness denied that lier husband was living on her earnings, or that she led an immoral life. : Til© case was adjourned.