MAY HALLET.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 97, 14 October 1911, Page 6

MAY HALLET.

BEFORE A LONDON COURT. ALLEGED FALSE PRETENCES. London, September 1. Mr. Plowden was occupied for several hours on Wednesday and Thursday at the Marylebone Police Court in hearing the charges against Mrs. Ethel May Campbell (nee Hal'lett), aged twentythree, of South Side, Clapham Common, of having by false and fraudulent pretences obtained £l5O from Mrs. Mary Elizabeth Foote, of Whangarei, with intent to defraud.

Mrs. Foote, who is now living at Hampstead, gave, her evidence a week ago. During the voyage Home from New Zealand the defendant became on friendly terms with Mrs. Foote, and is alleged to have made various statements concerning her expectations. Once she represented herself as the daughter of the late Sir Richard Hunter, of Horley, Surrey, formerly Lord Chief Justice of England, and she was going to England to take over the property that she had inherited at Horley under her father's will, and was to receive an income of £SOO a week. She. said that she owned racehorses, and that Mr. Horatio Bottomley was looking after them. Mr. I'lowden said he had had- a

letter from Mr. Bottomley, disclaiming all knowledge of the defendant, and denying that he was interested with her in racing.

.Miss Myra Foote corroborated her mother's evidence. During the voyage on the Commonwealth the defendant told her that she had two horses running in the Derby, and that (latwick racecourse stood* on the estate which, her father had J eft her, and which she was going Home to claim. The income of the estate, defendant said, was £SOO a week. On June 11 witness and her mother saw the defendant at Brighton, and went for a motor ride. On their return to the hotel the defendant complained that she had been robbed. The following day they all motored to Londan, and Saotland Yard was notified. On the morning of June 1+ defendant came to Mrs. Foote's house at Hanvpstead, and complained of a second robbery. She said thai £l5O and the remainder of her jewels had been htolen. She asked Mrs. Foote for a loan, and witness telephoned to her brother, in whose name their money stood. The next dav her brother handed defendant

a cheque for Clot), and witness accompanied her to the Bank of Xew Zealand, where it was cashed, defendant taking the numbers of the notes, because she said she might be robbed again. THE PARK-LANE FLAT. Mis.-, Foote said defendant told them she possessed a Hat in Park Lane, and if only the tenants would leave they could all use it at Coronation time. Defendant seemed agitated on the morning of June 14. and asked her mother for a loan of: £l5O with which to pay the hotel bill, j Mr. Osborn: Did she ask your mother if she would lend her £lso?—Yes. After that vour mother lent her £ 151V;—Yes. And was that loan to help her over, her troubles? —Yes. . » "IS IT NOT AWFUL?" Percy Leslie Foote, house physician at the Royal Hospital. Portsmouth, said before Wis mother arrived he received a draft for her money and paid it into his bank. After he received the telephone message from bis sister on June 14 he went to Hampstead. Defendant said to him. '-'ls it not awful?"' and suggested that her relations were responsible for the robbery; they were trying to do her out of the property. On July 15 defendant wrote him stating that she had been quite unable to obtain the money, but she would do her best to repav it. MAY HALLET AS A GIRL, Miss Annie Tavender, Police Court missionary at Reigate, said the defendant was twenty-three years of age last June. She first knew her in January, 1005. Her father was Thomas Richard Ila-Ilett and her name was Ethel May, but she was generally called May. There were throe younger sisters. 'They lived in a nice villa at Horley, and kept one servant. The mother died when defendnnt was a young girl, and the father died in November, 1906. Defendant went abroad in UJOS. Up to that tune she was under the care of her aunt, Miss King. Defendant benefited under her fathers will, and received some £llOO under her grand-uncle's will in July, lilOf). So far as witness knew the defendant had no other expectations in Hoiiev.

William lilvthe, of the firm of Paine, Blythe and Constable, of St. Helen's Place, said that defendant's father, Thomas Ilichard Hallet, was one of the trustees of the will in which his firm was interested. On June 2, 100!), he paid to defendant's attorney in England the -am of £llli(i, 'her share under her grand-uncle's will. Her father, T. R. ilailuM. left gross estate sworn at '•_' li'.'ni. There nas no X'.Xil) a week inV(,iv. d. A DISIHTED LECACY. "S\v. n-eoru Niibmiiled- that no case had hern made nut (ill which t'lm dc leiidanl. could he comiu'ittod for trial. He did not di-pute that defendant, had made foolish and ridiculous statements, hut this iva.s not with the intention of committing fraud. She boa-rowed t-he money to nay a debt. She discharged her debt, but incurred a HaWrlitv with Mix Eooto. The defendant, had n»t received the money under her graud-um-le's will (although it bad been propony ]Kii,l over liv Mr. J'-lythe) and she contended that .-ho wa.- still entitled to participate in the property. AIJ she export, d was I'SIO. not (j.-vlio n week. DKFEN'PANT'S VERSION". M.x (iim],bo|| entered thfc wiln-ess-bo.\ >. e-ierdny morning .and in reply to Mr. n-hern -aid she married Donald Samuel Cainplie!!. formerly purser of the Commonwealth. 'They were married hi-I. y. in-, and it was decided they should '■•■'">' Home to - iboiil her a'll'airs al ■' ! -' ;.. Th--\ jollied the boat on April I-. ■■•!.! became on friemllv terms with '■':' ■■ IV-'le. In r daughtii-. am! niece. n ■■■:■■: wa- Thomas liicliard flallel. „|' H- --:■ :. '-'ho deniid lha! -.he slid he »;'■ I.■•!-!! i hbi' diisiiee of England, but Mr. i'l.c.v,!n: That j s a irememiwu.-; drop!

Defendant told Mrs. Foote that she was going to Harley to take over her I own home. Her 'two aunts, Miss King ) and Mrs. Hallet, met her at the boat,/ and she introduced them to Mrs. Foote. On landing, defendant, with her husband and nurse and child, went to the Hotel j Victoria, Northumberland Avenue, and Mrs. Foote. with her daughter and niece, were her guests for one day. Afterwards witness left for Brighton. THE ROBBERY. Defendant, continuing, said that after the motor drive they all returned to her room and it was then that the robbery was discovered. Sho notified the hotel manager and local police at once. Defendant stoutly denied that she ever mentioned anything about a second robbery. She went to llampstead and asked Mrs. Foote for a loan in order to pay the hotel bill. Later Mrs. Foote wanted the money repaid, and witness made various untrue statements to he>r, but sho never suggested a second robbery. IN NEW ZEALAND. On August 0 she received a letter from Mrs. Foote's solicitors, asking for an explanation and threatening proceedings. She replied that the money was borrowed from Dr. Foote and not from Mrs. Foote, and that she would pay it back in a few weeks. In I!H>!>, defendant stated, she consulted Messrs Field, Luckie and of Wellington, for the purpose of obtaining money from Messrs Paine, lJlyt'he and Constable, and later on she received from £3OO to £+0(0. She also believed she was entitled to property under her father's will. Defendant said | she told Mrs. Foote she expected to get £soo—not £9OO a week. Never at any time did she make false statements to Mrs. Foote for the purpose of obtaining money. NO LIMIT TO HOPE.

■Cross-examined bv Mr. Paley Scott (for the prosecution): What did you expect from .your father's property?— Some money. What did you hope for? Mr. Plnwdim': There is no limit to hope. (Laughter). Defendant stated that slie expected more money in New Zealand than she received. Mr. Scott: You became friendly with the Foote's?—Yes; they were perhaps the best people on hoard. Did you think they were in pretty good circumstances? —No, but they had a yacht and a motor car. Mr. Scott (to defendant)': At any rate, you knew they were comfortably off? — In New Zealand everybody owns yachts and motor ears. A PENNILESS ADVENTURESS." Mr. Scott: My contention is that defendant was a penniless adventuress coming to England, and that she selected those people on board who would be most likely to help her at some future date. Further cross-examined by Mr. Scott, defendant denied all the statements which the prosecution attributed to her. After the loan she sent wires to Mrs. Foote. They were incorrect and were "simple, excuses." Defendant said that when she reached England she had a draft for £250 011 the Bank of Adelaide. She cashed it the day after their arrival, which was at the end of May. I Mr. Scott: By June 14 you were borrowing £loo. You must have ilved in a very extravagant manner. I submit that von never possessed the draft for £250.' THE MAGISTRATE'S COMMENTS.

Mr. Plowden said, after reviewing the facts, that the question was whether, when the defendant obtained the money, she meant to repay it or appropriate it for her own uses. Although he had grave doubts about it, lie thought in the interests of justice, he was taking the wiser course in. allowing that one point to be decided by a jury—what was defendant's intention when she obtained the loan? Defendant was then committed for trial at the North London sessions, bail being allowed in one surety of £SO or two of £25,

A cable message Ims since told lis that the defendant was sentenced to seven months' imprisonment. The name "May Hallet" will ho familiar to most people ns having figured prominently in a Wellington court case of a somewhat similar case, which attracted much interest. Her borrowing powers were outstanding features in tile evidence then adduced.