Old Bailey Proceedings Online (www.oldbaileyonline.org, version 8.0, 04 December 2023), April 1910, trial of EGGENA, Ferdinand (28) MONTAGUE, Pansy (otherwise Pansy Eggena) (24), EASTON, Percy Holland (45, engineer) (t19100426-24).


EGGENA, Ferdinand (28), MONTAGUE, Pansy (otherwise Pansy Eggena) (24), and EASTON, Percy Holland (45, engineer) , all conspiring, combining, and agreeing together to obtain by false pretences from William Edward Wood divers large quantities of jewellery with intent to defraud; obtaining by false pretences on or about November 20, 1909, from William Edward Wood a quantity of jewellery of the value of £8,280 with intent to defraud.

Mr. Horace Avory, K. C., Mr. Muir, and Mr. Oddie prosecuted.

Mr. Marshal Hall, K. C., and Mr. Cecil Fitch defended Eggena; Mr. George Elliott, K.C., and Mr. Symmons defended Montague; Sir Frederick Low, K.C., and Mr. Valetta defended Easton.

RUBY TELFER , manager to Mr. W. E. Wood, 18, Brook Street, Hanover Square, W. I saw Eggena for the first time early in 1909. At that time Mr. Wood's opinion had been asked on some emeralds by Eggena. After that we had some conversation about jewellery. He usually wanted diamonds. He wanted to know if he could have them on credit. I told him that was quite contrary to Mr. Wood's rule. Then he wanted to know if we would take part cash. I went with him in May or June, 1909, to Thames Ditton. He said he had an aunt there who had just come from the Continent. She was a collector of curios and jewellery, and price was no object if she thought the jewellery was uncommon. We went in his motor-car. When we arrived there he went in the house. I kept the jewellery. He was away 10 minutes. When he came back he said his aunt had gone to London and wished us to call at the Savoy Hotel at four o'clock that afternoon. I went there, but Eggena did not keep the appointment. I believe he said she was his father's sister, unmarried. I inquired at the hotel for Miss Eggena and failed to find the lady. A week or two after that I had a conversation with him about other jewellery. He called many times at Brook Street, but only alluded to jewellery casually. The first definite occasion was in September, when he said he was going to bring Miss Montague to select some jewellery. He asked if I would take a post-dated cheque for half the amount. I said certainly not. He then brought the lady in. I showed her, amongst others, some of the jewellery I had taken to the supposed aunt at Thames Ditton. She selected all the jewellery, the subject of the present charge, value £7,000 or £8,000. It was put on one side. Later he came and asked if he could have the jewellery if he gave security. I said he could if the security was commensurate with the payment. He then produced a receipt from the Ariel Motor Company for cars he had purchased, and asked if that would be sufficient security. I said no doubt it would. He kept the receipt. I went to see the liquidator of the company personally. I was not satisfied, and told Eggena so. After that I received a letter from him saying "Miss Montague wishes the jewellery for a specific purpose, and as I have another lot of cars, my own personal property, and which are of greater value, I am willing to let her take these in the meantime if you are agreeable to take them as security," etc. He then called at Brook Street, and I went with him to the Motor House, Euston Road, and saw Easton. Eggena said, "Show Mr. Telfer my cars." I was taken upstairs and shown at least 25 cars, all on one floor. Easton was there, and Eggena talked a good deal about the cars. When he had finished I said to Easton, "Are these Mr. Eggena's cars?" He said, "Absolutely." After that I consulted Mr. Wood, and on his instructions consulted his solicitor, who prepared three documents for the carrying out of the transaction. One of them is Exhibit 19, a statutory declaration. On November 16 I went with Eggena to

swear it before a commissioner. The other documents are Nos. 20 and 27. The latter I gave to Eggena with the understanding that he would take it to the Motor House and get them to sign it. I never saw it again. This letter (Exhibit 22) was handed to me by Eggena on November 16. He showed it to me as a reason why Wood had not received the document he required from the Motor House. He said it was all nonsense; he could make nothing of it. He gave me an order on them to deliver the cars. He wrote it the same day on Mr. Wood's paper. Mr. Wood gave me Exhibit 24 on the 17th. I then went to the Motor House. Easton was out. I waited till he came in and asked him what it meant. I told him why it was necessary that Mr. Wood should have the cars delivered to him, and explained the business between Eggena and ourselves. I told Easton we wanted a perfectly clean receipt for the cars, free from any claim upon them. Early in morning of the 18th Eggena arrived in the car at Brook Street. He came in and Miss Montague remained in the car. He made a lot of fuss; generally he did not, he was too full of apologies as a rule. He said, "Why cannot this business be carried through?" I pointed out that until we had a proper receipt for the cars we could not part with any jewellery. He said Miss Montague had been kicking up a row with him about it. I said to Mr. Wood, "Why not have her in and explain the circumstances of the case?" I went and asked her to come in. She did so. She commenced to expostulate about the difficulty about the cars and in getting the diamonds. I handed her Exhibit 21. She was very angry, and said she wanted to take the jewels away then, so that she could be photographed. I explained that until the matter was completed she could not have them. She then commenced to upbraid Eggena, and said it was all his fault, that he had not attended to it. To pacify her I told her he had done all he could and showed her the affidavit, and said now that he had this letter I supposed the matter would go through. She was then seemingly satisfied. At the time I was showing her some button pearls she was purchasing, she said she had a lot of property coming from Australia, and there would be no reason to raise money on the cars. I went to the Motor House with Eggena's order and produced it to Easton, and asked me to deliver me the 25 cars. I explained that I was not going to take them away, but if he would deliver them to me I would re-deliver them to him and take his receipt. He did not absolutely refuse, but he practically refused. He said he must consult the directors. I produced Exhibit 21, which says they have no lien or claim on the cars. I said, "In the face of that are you going to refuse upon his order to give them to me?" He said, "I do not absolutely refuse, but I cannot do it without consulting my directors. I left. Nothing was done. The same evening Eggena and Miss Montague came to Brook Street. Miss Montague came to take away the diamonds. I said, "We have not got the cars from the Motor House; they refuse to give formal delivery, and without that we cannot deliver the jewellery." She cried or pretended to cry. I was annoyed, and perhaps answered her sharply. Mr. Wood asked me to leave the matter to him. He endeavoured to pacify her, and

was even going to the extent of allowing her to have some of the jewellery. I pointed out that we had not got the matter settled. She heard all the conversation. On the 20th Mr. Wood produced the receipt (Exhibit 28). I rang up Easton on the telephone. He came. I recognised his voice. Mr. Wood was standing by. I repeated, "Is that Mr. Easton?" He said, "Yes." I said, "Eggena has handed us a receipt of yours," and I read it very distinctly, having some suspicion of the man. Some parts of it he repeated. His answers I repeated to Mr. Wood. Easton finished up by saying, "That is all perfectly right." On that receipt, I believe, Mr. Wood delivered some jewellery that day. A week or two later I went to the Motor House, on Mr. Wood's instructions, to see if the cars were all there. I had a long conversation with Easton about cars and jewellery. I think the words I used were "You saw your way to giving that receipt after making all that fuss." He explained that it was not his fault; that he was a servant of the company, that the directors were such difficult chaps to deal with, that he had made several hundred pounds out of Eggena and expected to make a good deal more. Between January 10 and beginning of February I saw Eggena several times a day and Miss Montague occasionally. They were then staying at the Hotel Russell. I did not ask for payment for the jewellery; I believe Mr. Wood did. I saw Eggena on February 3 at the Hotel Russell for half an hour or an hour, and then Miss Montague. My conversation with him was about his paying the money or returning the jewellery. He tried to stop Miss Montague talking about it, and cried to send Her away. She explained in an excited state that she had had enough of it, and was not going to be bothered; we might have the jewels back, they were upstairs locked away. I said I should be pleased to. He would not let her go on talking, and turned her out of the room. On February 4 I consulted Mr. Wood's solicitor. I then telephoned Easton saying, "I am sending up for Mr. Wood's 25 cars." He said, "We have not got any cars of Mr. Wood's they have all gone a long time ago." I asked now that was. He said, They went away on a properly-signed order of Eggena's, and I gave Mr. Wood notice of that at the time." I was indignant, and he gave me some indistinct reply; I referred to our solicitor, and he rang off. On the 5th application for process was made at Bow Street and granted.

Cross-examined by Mr. Fitch. I have been with Mr. Wood four or five years. He has been in business in Brook Street, I believe, six years. When I first went with him I had general experience in jewellery, not special. Mr. Wood was not then as frequently away as of late years. I was not aware that he has interests in other businesses. When I first saw Eggena he came to get Mr. Wood's opinion about some emeralds. I have no idea what opinion was given. The next business discussed was some Galician oilfields. That was nothing to do with Mr. Wood; it was with me. If there had been any profit in it possibly Mr. Wood would have had part; there was no arrangement to that effect. The next business was about the things I took to Thames Ditton. They amounted to more than £10,000. They were never invoiced to Eggena that I know of. They were never in his

possession; individual articles may have been. He said he had interests in India and the colonies. I had been told he had wealthy relations abroad. I made inquiries and found what he said was correct. We discussed the value of the articles we took to Thames Ditton in Brook Street early in the year. I made no note of the words used. He told me he was bankrupt; that was about June. That was one of the reasons I wanted security for the jewels. I made no inquiries to find out whether he had any occupation, as I had no intention of trusting him. Mr. Wood trusted him with the goods. I disapproved throughout of Eggena having goods without security. I did not deliver any of the goods, and they were not delivered in my presence. My name is Leviansky, but I have not used the name for 25 years.

Cross-examined by Sir F. Low. Eggena was anxious to get hold of the jewellery and Mr. Wood was not unwilling to deal. The only person who raised difficulties at the Motor House was Easton, who is charged here with conspiracy. He was not raising difficulties; they were quibbles for the female defendant's benefit. When I saw him about November 14 my name was mentioned as Telfer. Eggena simply said, "Please show him my cars." Nothing was said as to my connection in the matter, and Easton evinced no curiosity. I asked him if they were Eggena's cars and he answered, "Absolutely," or a similar word. I say the jewellery was parted with absolutely in consequence of what happened on that occasion. On the 17th I saw Easton alone. I did not have Exhibit 21 in my hand because I did not receive it till the 18th. I might have had No. 23. Dutton did not take that to Mr. Easton and bring it back to me. I may have said to Easton, "Why cannot you do this?" meaning carry this business through. He did not say it would be all right a little later, but I was a little too previous. It was on the 18th that I said, "How can you refuse in face of documents 21 and 23?" I am prepared to swear it was not on the 17th. Easton did not say on any occasion that No. 21 was addressed to Eggena and that he had not got his money yet. Part of my conversation has been worked into that. Part of it is correct, but the body of it is incorrect. He never used such a phrase as "I could not do it; it would not be regular, but I have no objection to transferring Eggena's interest in the cars." The only interviews I had with Easton before the jewels were parted with were on the 14th and 17th. He swore he only saw me once in his life. I had a good deal of suspicion with regard to Eggena and I was not willing for the receipt to be acted upon without confirmation by Easton, and I got it by telephone on the 20th. I have not seen more than two letters signed by Easton. Exhibit 21 is signed by Easton, "P. H. Easton." The other documents shown to me are signed in the same way. No. 28 being signed "Percy Easton" did not strike me. Up to the time of the receipt being handed to me I had made several attempts to get a clean receipt for the cars, but Easton always evaded it, and so far as I had a voice in the matter I had made up my mind the jewels should not be parted with. On the day the receipt was confirmed about £3,000 worth was almost immediately handed over. So far as I know,

Wood and Easton never came into contact until the police court proceedings On February 4 I telephoned Easton, saying, "This is Wood, 18, Brook Street. I am sending for my 25 cars," and emphasised "my" I may have said they were Eggena's and were in my name. He did not answer, "They are not in your name" nor "You never sent down a properly signed order."

Cross-examined by Mr. Elliott. Before I saw Miss Montague I discussed jewellery with Eggena at least a couple of months. He did not mention her name on the first two or three occasions. Before the introduction of her name the terms on which the jewellery was to be sold to him were not discussed. He gave me no idea of the age of his aunt that we were going to see at Thames Ditton. He led me to imagine she was his father's sister. He said she was a maiden lady and I assumed her name was Eggena. The articles I took there were a jewelled-handled State umbrella belonging to the King of Mandalay. It was a curio. There were some large pearls and a rope of rough emeralds. The value was between £10,000 and £20,000. The aunt was to buy the jewellery and when she selected it it would be time to discuss terms of payment. I did not ask Eggena the lady's position. At that time I would not have trusted him with £20 nor £10. When he brought Miss Montague I showed her a quantity of jewellery. I do not think I discussed with her the question of payment then. When she selected the jewels a proposition was made that she should give a certified cheque for £5,000 and have three months' credit for the balance. I declined it. The next proposition that I considered seriously was that I should accept £15,000 worth of motor cars from the Ariel Company as security. He showed me a receipt. He had bought the lot. They were Miss Montague's. Miss Montague was not in town then. I made inquiries and the people described the receipt as fraudulent; the cheque which had been given had never been met. The next proposition was the cars at the Motor House. It was not on the security of those alone that influenced me in parting with the jewels. There was the lady's position. I knew that from outside information. She made no statement as to her earning considerable sums of money. The statement she made as to property coming from Australia is false. She has no estates in Australia. I have made inquiries. She said she had large sums of money coming from her property in Australia. Apart from the statement that she had large sums of money coming she did not tell me specifically they were money coming from property. The statement was that she had large sums coming from Australia. In spite of that statement I refused to let her have the jewels without the security on the cars. Ladies are frequently impatient to get jewellery to wear. I was not surprised that she wanted to be photographed in them. She was not only angry with Wood and me, but she even abused Eggena and said it was all his fault. Mr. Wood tried to act as peacemaker. When I went to the hotel on February 3 she selected a tiara worth about £1,300. There was a discussion as to whether she should have one nearer £2,000 value. She chose the less expensive one.

Dr. WILLIAM LITHERMORE deposed that it would be dangerous to health for the witness George Freestone to attend the Court to give evidence.

(Thursday, April 28.)

FREDERICK JAMES MONTFORT , assistant to Mr. C. B. Vaughan, 39, Strand, W. C. I produce a diamond bar brooch and diamond drop which have been identified by last witness. They were pledged with me on November 29 in the name of "For Miss Montague," signed F. Eggena, for £450. Eggena pledged them. We have had other transactions with him.

PERCY NEAL , manager of Messrs. Brabington, 298, Pentonville Road. Mr. Britton brought Eggena to our shop about December 12 or 15. Eggena had a large pear-shaped brilliant with him. He asked for a loan of £8,000. I offered £4,000. No business was done. Two or three days later he brought a pearl necklace on which he wanted a loan of £20,000. I offered £8,000, which he refused, saying he could not do with less than £12,000. He told me they were the property of a well-known lady. I explained that if he accepted £8,000 we should have to have a title to the goods and there would have to be a special contract. No business was done. He called again on December 24, when he pawned a diamond necklace (Exhibit 1) for £450 in the name of Barr. He gave us his address, Hotel Russell, and three other addresses, also his solicitor's. He said the jewels belonged to La Milo. He also pledged other jewels on January 12. I believe he asked £1,500; I advanced £1,200. He said they belonged to La Milo. I said I should want her authority; he had better go back and get a letter, which he did. On January 20 we advanced him £200 on two brilliants. On January 22 he called with Miss Montague to purchase a large tiara and other goods valued at £10,000. They were to call the following week to pay and take up the goods. They have not done so.

Mr. Marshall Hall and Mr. Elliott cross-examined as to the value of the jewellery.

WILLIAM EDWARD WOOD , jeweller, 18, Brook Street, W. I first met Eggena early in 1909 in connection with the promotion of an emerald mine. Subsequently other business matters were mentioned and at the completion of a business in November I had a conversation with him as to supplying him with jewellery. The negotiations Mr. Telfer has spoken of were conducted by him entirely, with my knowledge. I was in Paris in November and heard of the proposal for giving the motor cars which were said to have been bought from the Ariel Company as security. Shortly after the receipt of the letter of November 12 (Exhibit 18) I went with Eggena and Miss Montague to the Motor House. Eggena there showed me the 25 cars. He said they were his absolutely and he would hand them over to me. Miss Montague remained outside in the car. I was present when Eggena made the statutory declaration. On the same day I saw him sign the

delivery order, Exhibit 23. Eggena brought Exhibit 21 signed by Easton on the 18th, saying the cars had no lien on them. After Telfer and I had read it we said we must have a receipt showing the cars had been delivered into my name. Miss Montague was not then present; she was brought in afterwards. Telfer explained the affidavit to her and said Eggena had done all he could in the matter. The same evening Miss Montague came and was very much annoyed that she could not take the jewellery away and did not see why the Motor House should raise such difficulties. In consequence of what Telfer said I refused to let the jewellery go. On the 19th I went to the Hotel Russell in consequence of a telephone message, when Eggena handed me the receipt purporting to be signed by Easton. Next morning I gave it to Telfer. He telephoned to Easton. I was there. He said, "Is that Mr. Easton?" Apparently he got a reply in the affirmative. He read this document twice. I was standing by the telephone. As he got the reply he repeated it to me by degrees. On that I delivered part of the jewellery that day and the rest in the following week. I took receipts for it. The prices charged were all agreed by Eggena or Miss Montague. They were quoted to her. The diamond drop necklace I let Eggena have for about two hours to show his solicitor about December 15, with the ultimate idea of taking it to his father in Germany. He said his solicitors were Herbert Smith and Co., London Wall. He said Mr. Smith was a connoisseur and a collector. He returned it, saying that Mr. Smith said it was worth £20,000 to anyone who wanted such a stone. I did not let him have it again. He asked for it on many occasions. He wanted to leave it with his solicitor for two or three days. I would not allow it. I offered to deliver it myself. A similar thing happened with a large pearl necklace shortly after that. He took it and brought it back, saying Mr. Smith said it was a very fine necklace, but nothing was mentioned about price. It was worth roughly £20,000 to £25,000 to sell. He wanted to take both to his father in Germany, promising to pay me part cash and a draft on the Dresdner Bank. I said if he did that he could take them away and if they were not sold he could return the to me. The money did not come and the draft did not come. The first I heard of them being pawned was at Bow Street. January 10 was the date fixed for payment of this jewellery. I saw Eggena almost daily until the time of these proceedings pressing for payment. He simply made excuses. Something was said about returning the jewels, but nothing definite was done. I consulted my solicitor on February 3. Eggena gave me £200 on November 29 as an earnest of good faith to reopen an introduction that had been made four or six months previously with Count Ward. I introduced Eggena to him early in 1909. They had some negotiations which fell through. I had nothing to do with that business.

Cross-examined by Mr. Marshall Hall. I am the prosecutor in this case and took proceedings on my own free will. Nobody else is responsible at all. I say emphatically Telfer is my manager; before that he was my assistant. He has no interest or share in the business.

It is ray business entirely. My solicitor, Mr. Leviansky, is Telfer's brother. When I started the business I had sufficient capital of my own. I do not account to anyone in the world for the transactions which take place. I was not anxious that the dealings with Eggena should not be known by Telfer. I kept nothing from Telfer willingly. The jewellery was parted with absolutely on the faith of the security on the motor-cars. Eggena and I became acquainted first over the valuation of some emeralds. I had not seen Eggena when I made the valuation. I do not remembering valuing 851 carats of rough emeralds for the purpose of advising Mr. King whether or not they were good security for £500. (Letter handed to witness.) That is my writing. I do not remember it even now. The emeralds I valued were not worthless. (Sealed bag of emeralds handed to witness, who was asked to cut the seal and state whether they were worth 30s. or 40s. a carat or 30 or 40 pence. On the learned Judge saying that, in his opinion, it was not material the witness refused. Mr. Marshall Hall then put to the witness that owing to his valuation being absolutely unreliable Eggena was unable to carry through a good piece of business in the emerald mines.) I know nothing at all about it. It is all news to me entirely. I had nothing to do with the Galician oilfields business. I was not doing a big business on the Stock Exchange. In the spring of 1909 I introduced Eggena to Count Ward in the matter of a cold storage in South London on which Count Ward wanted a large loan. It was not my business. I left it for Count Ward to do. I knew Eggena had rich relations. Telfer let Eggena have some jewellery in May, I believe; he went out with Telfer to show this jewellery. He never did trust him with it. This invoice is in Telfer's writing; he can get what goods he likes on approbation and do what he likes with them as long as he shows a profit. I never heard that the lady at Thames Ditton was Mrs. Pearce. I was not threatened with an action in connection with my valuation of the emeralds. I did not tell Eggena I only wanted the security on the cars as a matter of form; I wanted the cars delivered to me. I did not intend to take them away. When the Ariel car transaction came along I did not tell Eggena that if he gave some sort of security that would satisfy Telfer. I did not say "Telfer will think it strange I am dealing with you as he knows you are bankrupt, and the jewellery ought to be in Miss Montague's name; therefore we had better have some security." There was no such conversation. He told me nothing about the Ariel cars. All I know was when the Receiver came in and I was not satisfied. I was in Paris a good deal at the time of the jewellery transaction. After I came back I went one night to the Hotel Russell. Miss Montague had on the jewellery and asked me how it looked. I suggested it would look better on another gown and that she had better have it stitched on. The maid got nervous as time was pressing and I stitched it on her dress. I did not say to Eggena it did not matter what the security was as long as I had got something to show to Telfer. Exhibit 28 was signed in my presence. When I asked my solicitors to prepare the statutory declaration I asked them whether a man who was bankrupt could have 25 cars and I was given to understand

I could take them as security. I do not remember Eggena telling me on February 5 the jewellery was in the hotel safe and I could have it, all back. I did not take the seal off the £2,000 necklace; it is more than I dare do. I did not afterwards replace it with Eggena's seal and say the pawnbrokers would not then know where the necklace came from. If Mr. Neal says it had not a grey seal on it and no blue ribbon then it could not have been the same necklace. I was not in the hotel when Freestone came with the money to my knowledge. I swear I did not go to Count Ward's with Eggena. That Eggena came to me and said in Telfer's presence that Telfer had demanded the money, and that I had said Eggena was to have the goods, and that Telfer said to me, "You never told me," and shrugged his shoulders and walked away, is another lie.

Cross-examined by Sir F. Low. I only saw Easton in the police court. I had no direct communication with him of any sort. I was present twice when Telfer telephoned him. I was on fairly intimate terms with Eggena, and we went to a good many places together, but never came across Easton. Eggena telephoned me to go round to the Hotel Russell for the receipt, No. 28. He did not explain why he did not come to me; he simply gave me the receipt. It was usual for him to say would I go to see him. The message came about six or seven o'clock. I saw Eggena at the top of the lounge at the hotel. He said, "I have got the receipt at last; here you are." I saw it was signed" Easton," did not read it, arid took it to the shop next morning; I did not give a thought to the signature being different; I thought I was dealing with an honest man. Next morning I said to Telfer, "Here is the receipt at last." The business up to that point had been done by Telfer. I went to see Eggena the night before because he said, "Will you come down yourself?" I went; I do not know why. There was no reason why Telfer should not have gone. I think I told Telfer I was going. I had not the slightest suspicion. Telfer is more suspicious than I am of anyone, and he suggested telephoning to the Motor House, which we did. I do not take a note of telephone messages unless they are about something which I must do at a later date. Whenever Telfer telephones and it is business concerning me he repeats the conversation to me.

Cross-examined by Mr. Elliott. I knew Eggena six months before I saw Miss Montague. I can hardly say how the jewellery transaction began; it was reported to me by Telfer. Miss Montague was never at the shop by herself. When we went to the Motor House in the car Eggena and I got out and Miss Montague remained in the car. On November 18 there were two interviews with Miss Montague at my shop in the presence of Eggena. At the one in the evening she showed considerable impatience.

SAMPSON BRITTON , jeweller, 18, Houndsditch. I have known Easton four or five years. About the middle of December he told me he had sold some cars to a gentleman, and had taken a deposit of £300, and had given a certain date that these cars should be cleared, but he believed the gentleman was short of money at that time and required a temporary loan. He said he had a terrible lot of jewellery, and

asked me if I knew anybody who would lend money on it. I suggested Brabington's. He said he expected Barr (the name I knew Eggena by) to be at his place later on, and would let me know when he was there. I believe Easton told me if Barr got the loan on the jewels it was to be used to pay the deposit on the cars. I was told Barr was at the Motor House, and went there and saw him for the first time. He took a white diamond from his pocket; he made some remark about it, and then we went to Brabington's. That was about December 15. He asked a loan of £8,000, Neal offered £4,000, which was refused. Two days later I met him again at Brabington's. He then wanted to pledge a pearl necklace for £12,000; Neal offered £8,000. No business was done. That was the last time I saw Eggena.

Cross-examined by Sir F. Low. Mr. Easton is a perfectly respectable man. He did not tell me that Eggena had offered to deposit the jewels with him. I do not recollect saying at the police court, "I believe Easton did say that Eggena wanted to deposit the jewels with him." If I said so it must be right. I remember Easton saying that was not his way of doing business, and that he did not know anything about jewels. The only jewels Eggena showed me were the pearl necklace and the diamond drop. The necklace had no clasp.

STAPLETON F. GREVILLE , Accountant's Bank Note Office, Bank of England, produced two £50 notes which came through the Union of London and Smiths Bank.

WILLIAM BROOKS , cashier, London County and Westminster Bank. I identify cheque for £450, drawn by Brabington on December 24. It was paid out by £430 in notes and £20 in gold. These are two of the notes I gave out.

ADELE FASANO ladies dressmaker, 9, Leicester Place, W. I know Miss Montague. I received these two £50 notes from her on December 24 in payment of an account she owed.

Cross-examined by Mr. Elliott. Eggena was there also. When I came downstairs the notes were on the table. I did not see who put them there. My wife told me Eggena gave them to her.

Inspector HENRY FOWLER, C Division. I was present at Bow Street when the witness Frestone was examined. His deposition was taken in the usual way and all the defendants had an opportunity of cross-examining him. (Deposition read.) I arrested Eggena on a warrant at 12.45 a.m. on February 6. I was with Sergeant Williams. I told him we were police officers. He was about to enter the Hotel Russell. I read the warrant to him. He said, "I deny it and can give my reasons." The charge was read to him at Bow Street. In reply he said, "I understand, but deny it." I searched him and found upon him a £10 note, £3 gold, a quantity of memoranda, and one pawnticket. On February 7 I saw the female defendant at Bow Street Police Court. I read the warrant to her. She said, "Yes, sir." She was charged and made no reply. I might say she was then with her solicitor.

Detective-sergeant WILLIAM, C Division. I saw Easton at the Motor House at midday on February 7. I said, 'I am a police officer

and have a summons to serve on you." He said, "Is this an information against me? I know nothing about it, except the man Eggena called here to buy some cars. I put them on one floor for him as he requested. I then told him when he next called I wanted, a deposit. He gave me a cheque for £300 drawn by Montague—you know, Milo. I will come with you now."

Mr. Elliott submitted that the evidence disclosed no case against Miss Montague.

Judge Lumley Smith. I do not think I can stop the case.


FERDINAND EGGENA (prisoner, on oath). I was born in Germany and was taken when quite a child to America. I came to England first in 1899. I was in Burma from 1900 to 1908. I first met Mr. Wood in reference to an emerald mine about May, 1908. The matter was brought to me by a Mr. King, who wanted to raise money to develop and work the mine. Before taking any interest in it I wanted to see what the mine was worth. Several bags of emeralds were produced and a valuation which had been given by Mr. Wood. I asked Wood if he had given this valuation and was it genuine. He said "Yes." His valuation of the stones was 30s. to 40s. a carat. On the faith of that document and his assurance with regard to the emeralds I took to my solicitors the bag of 851 carats and they introduced me to Rodriquez of Hatton Garden. They broke the seal. I told Wood the result of their examination, that they were absolutely worthless. This bag that Wood declined to open is one of the bags. He said as an excuse that, of course, there was a ring of Hatton Garden stonecutters, and they would not make any sort of valuation. Shortly after that he showed me some papers in regard to Galician oilfields and asked me if I could do anything with them. He said he had many good things of that description brought to him by friends on the Stock Exchange or somewhere. I went very deeply into the matter, but was not able to carry the business through. He next took me to Mr. Marks, 5, London Wall. This was about introducing friends to underwrite an African copper mine. About the same time he introduced me to Count Ward. Evidently he had asked Wood to raise £20,000 on some cold storage building. I might have done that business if there had been anything satisfactory arranged. I had been spending money rather freely and became bankrupt. My uncle gave me a considerable amount of money; I do not know how much. I discussed my bankruptcy with Wood. Miss Montague never lived at Thames Ditton. The lady at Thames Ditton I had known a great many years. She was an absolute judge of the stones that come from India and Burma and other places. The umbrella which was supposed to come from King Thebaw was the principal part of the whole thing. The goods were all returned to Mr. Wood. I did not have the whole lot at one time in my possession. Miss Montague is my wife. I think I introduced her to Wood about February 4, 1909. I did not speak about my aunt to Wood, and certainly not to Telfer, as I looked upon him as an ordinary salesman.

Wood often suggested to me that I should buy jewellery; he was keen for me to get all the business I could for him and later to join him in partnership and get rid of Telfer. We were going to get rid of the shop and take rooms opposite the Carlton. I told him La Milo was my wife. I showed him some of her jewellery—two diamond drops. He said one of them was a coal mine, full of black spots and not worth much. He said he could replace them at a very low figure. Miss Montague was outside in the car. I would be shopping or driving in the Park with Miss Montague and would come back through New Bond Street and stop on business to see Wood. She refused to go inside. Telfer or Wood would try to induce her to come inside and look at jewellery. If she did not go they would take things to the car. I could not say they were pressing her to buy; they were pressing me to buy things to present to my wife, and this jewellery I picked out and she looked at it afterwards. I told Wood I had not any money at the present moment; he knew that I could not have very much money. He said it did not make any difference, he was not hard up for the money, I could put off any payment. He did not say what his relations with Telfer were at this time, but afterwards he said he did not wish Telfer to know what he was doing; he wanted to do things privately. Wood never came to the place we were first living at. It may have been earlier than the beginning of October that I discussed with Wood the motor cars. The Ariel Company were in bankruptcy and anxious to sell a quantity of cars at very reasonable rates. They gave me to understand I could leave them on their premises till I had disposed of them. I had arranged to pay them a deposit of £300 or £400. I found out afterwards that the liquidator had sold some of the cars; there was a dispute and the transaction fell through. I told Wood I had paid or intended to pay a deposit of £300 or £400. I never represented to him that I had bought them out and out. About October there was the Utah Bingham gamble. He said he could get these shares at about 6s. 6d. and in a very short time they would go up to £3 or £4. This was all contemporaneous with the Ariel business and the introduction to Miss Montague.

(Friday, April 29.)

FERDINAND EGGENA , recalled, further examined. Between October 21 and November 12 the Ariel deal went off. The letter of November 12 was practically dictated by Easton to me for Miss Montague because she had lent me the £300 to pay to Easton. I wished to transfer the money from the Ariel deal and Easton would not do it without the authority of the person who signed the cheque. The letter to Telfer on the same date was written because he had made inquiries and said the Ariel deal was not satisfactory. Wood came to me because Telfer was suspicious and wished me to write a letter so that Telfer could be bluffed. He practically dictated it. Telfer went to the Motor House on November 14 or 15 and had an interview with Easton. On the 16th I saw him and Wood at Brook Street. On that day I got Exhibit 22

from Easton. That morning when I saw Wood he had the statutory declaration written out. I made some remarks about it and he asked me to go across Regent Street somewhere to sign it in front of someone. I told him at the time I did not see how it could be of value as I was an undischarged bankrupt. I do not know if Telfer heard that. Wood said it did not make any difference; the whole thing was a matter of form. On the 19th Wood came to the Hotel Russell and I had Exhibit 28 in my possession unsigned. I told him Easton had refused to sign it and, as Wood explained to me, he only wanted it as a matter of form—it seemed to me everything was wanted as a matter of form—and asked me to sign it; I did so. I had been to The Motor House with this document which I had from Wood; he wrote out the exact words. It was about lunch time. Easton was annoyed at getting letters typed as a matter of form. He said his typists were out and handed me this sheet of paper and told me to get it typed out myself, which I did. I showed that document to Easton about four o'clock and he refused to sign it. I told him on the telephone that I had signed it, and in order to cover myself I asked for this receipt, showing that I had handed the document over with his knowledge. I never suggested to Telfer or Wood that I was in a position to hand over the cars; the idea is ridiculous. The jewellery was delivered by Wood personally without Telfer's knowledge; he took them out at night after Telfer left. We used to go motor rides and places of entertainment together. We went to the Gaiety on the night of the visit of the King of Portugal. Wood came late that afternoon and stayed to dinner. Miss Montague was dressing. She intended to put on a brooch. Wood came upstairs and asked about pinning on the jewellery as he knew all about pinning jewellery on ladies and the best way to do it. I believe I went down-stairs to the hotel safe, where we kept the jewels, to get a stomacher. When I came back Wood said he was annoyed that Miss Montague wore a dress with imitation pearls because it did not show off his jewellery to its full extent, and suggested the plaque should go on the neck, and as a matter of fact pinned it all over her. I was very much annoyed at his action in the matter. She wore the jewellery. It was sold and invoiced to me. Wood told me there was a big diamond drop in the market that he was desirous of getting for Miss Montague. He drew up a design showing how he was going to put it on a necklace or chain with other diamonds. Finally he brought the drop to me, gave it to me. He wanted to get money on it. This was the time the necklace thing came up or shortly after. Wood had got himself tied up on the Stock Exchange with Utah Bingham shares; they were bought at about 14s. and had gone down to 6s. 6d. Count Ward, who was supposed to be the leading spirit in these shares, could not move because he had not sufficient money, and if £1,000 or £1,500 could be put in immediately it would raise these shares up. They wanted to buy a few thousand shares out of the market. I was to have 50 per cent., Ward 25 per cent., and Wood 25 per cent, of the profits. I never told Wood I wanted jewels to show my solicitor. I could not accept Neal's offer of £4,000 because I wanted £8,000 for

the share deal. Not getting the money, I returned it to Wood. The pearl necklace came up before that, but he only received it at this time; he had to get it from somebody outside. He said it was worth £25,000. I went with it to Brabington's. It had a grey seal when Wood received it, and he told me if the string was removed he would have to pay for the necklace, and if I showed it to anyone with the object of getting money on it they would be able to trace it back to the owner. The necklace is strung on silk, there is a small knot on each side, and there is a small seal. Wood pulled the chain down a certain extent and cut the silk band; he took another piece of silk, twisted it round and somehow sewed it on to a white thing and took my ring off my finger and sealed it with ordinary sealing wax, a bluish colour. It had that seal on it when I took it to Neal. I asked £20,000 and he offered £8,000. I returned it to Wood. If I had wanted to steal it I could have gone abroad with it several times. I went to Germany with Miss Montague in December, just before Wood went to Paris. Wood wanted my address in Hamburg. I said, "Eggena, Hamburg," would find me. I knew Wood was hard up. I received a telegram from him in the morning and immediately replied to it. In the afternoon I went to Berlin and got a loan of £400 on a piece of jewellery. Miss Montague could not pawn it; she does not understand a word of German. I got it in 10 mark notes. I intended to change them into notes at Charing Cross, but it was late in the afternoon and I had to take gold. I have paid Wood altogether about £700. As to the £1,200 from Brabington's, Wood and Count Ward were very hard put to get £1,000 immediately to take the Utah Bingham shares out of the market. I told them I had not any ready money, and the only thing I could do was to take the jewellery out of the safe and raise money. I left Wood in the Hotel Russell while I went to Brabington's. I came back to get a letter of authority. I did not wish to tell Miss Montague I was pawning this jewellery I had got from Wood, so I told her I could get more money from Neal on the jewellery already pawned with Vaughan and wanted her authority to get it transferred. Wood and I drove with the money to Count Ward, to whom I gave the money. Miss Montague was very much against my handling Stock Exchange business, but Wood kept assuring her.

Cross-examined by Sir F. Low. Mr. Wood never wished for a clean receipt for the cars; he only wanted something to bluff Telfer. I had seen Easton use the rubber stamp. When I wrote his signature I had not a specimen in front of me. I did it from memory.

Cross-examined by Mr. Avory. I don't remember whose motor-car we went in to Thames Ditton or the chauffeur. The address there was "The Hollies," Somers Road. The lady there was a friend of mine. I do not see why her name should be dragged through the newspapers. My counsel mentioned it once. Mr. Telfer pressed me to go there. I do not think I paid a deposit to the Ariel Company. I do not remember telling Miss Montague what I wanted the £300 for. I might have told her I wanted it for The Motor House. I do not know how the cheque was filled up. To the best of my belief I asked for

£300 for the purchase of some cars. She was not inquisitive enough to ask what cars or where I was going to buy them. It did not interest her at all. The receipts were wanted to fool Telfer—for Wood to show Telfer he had something in return for the jewellery. I did not understand what was in Wood's brain. He wanted the thing and got it. I had some of the jewellery before the receipt was signed.

PERCY HOLLAND EASTON (prisoner, on oath). I live at "Somerlees," East Finchley, and am a director of "The Motor House," Euston Road. The company's business is the largest of its kind in England. I became acquainted with Miss Montague and Eggena early last year. Eggena called once when the Ariel Company was in liquidation and asked me to get into negotiation with them for some cars to ship to Australia. A deposit was paid, but the matter fell through. On November 11 he said he had people who wanted to buy £7,000 to £10,000 worth of cars for shipment to Australia. I understood it was a speculation for his friends. I suggested we should sell him our own stock. He thought it was a feasible arrangement, and we spent nearly a whole day selecting 25 cars. They amounted to £7,800. He offered £7,000, which I accepted. Next day it was arranged that the cheque for £300, which had been given as deposit in the Ariel matter, should be applied for the purchase of our cars, and I asked him to get a letter from Miss Montague. Exhibit 43 is her authority for the transfer. He asked me to put the cars all on one floor. I had them put in the storage department. The balance was to be paid in 14 days. On November 14, Eggena came with Telfer. I had never seen Telfer before. Eggena said, "Where are my cars?" I said, "On the first floor of the new building "; pointing to the back part of the premises. They went upstairs. About a quarter of an hour afterwards I joined them. Telfer was not introduced to me, and I had no conversation with him. I thought his name was Wood. I did not know it was Telfer until I was at Bow Street. If he had said, "Are these Eggena's cars?" I should probably have said "Yes." They were not mine. I had given an option on them for 14 days. On November 16 Eggena said to me, "My agent has got the money ready to pay the balance; before he does so I want to know are they all your property; are there any liens on them." I said they were all our property, and we could give a good title. He then produced a paper, and said, "Well, sign that then." That is Exhibit 27. As between me and Eggena there was no lien. The last clause in the letter, as I drafted it, was "and the cars will be handed over to you or your order upon payment of the balance, £6,700." He did not want that figure to appear as the agent would know the profit he was making, so it was altered to "as arranged." When we substituted "as arranged" for the figures it was suggested by me or my co-director that we had better take a letter from Eggena, so that there should be no misunderstanding, saying the cars would not be delivered until we had the balance of the money. Until Eggena brought No. 27 I had not heard the name of Wood. Eggena gave me the idea that he was the shipping agent who was going to hand

over the money to me for the cars. Later that day Eggena telephoned to say the letter I signed was no good and that Wood wanted the cars in his name. I said, "I shall be willing to transfer your interest in them if necessary." In the evening he came up and I wrote that letter, No. 22, and gave it to him. Next day he telephoned saying everything was ready and the money would be paid over and Wood was sending his man down to get the receipt for the cars. On the 17th Telfer came and handed me an order from Eggena saying, "Please deliver the cars over to Mr. Wood." Eggena had previously telephoned to say he would settle in the afternoon and somebody from Wood's would come down. Telfer called; I took out all the documents and read them again. I said, "They are all right, only you are a little too soon." He said, "Why read the documents; you cannot object; there is no lien or claim." I said, "That letter is addressed to Eggena, nothing to do with you. As a matter of fact, I have not got my money. It will be all right; don't be alarmed." He said, "I can tell you one thing; it is a matter of £20,000 between Wood and Eggena, unless I get the transfer." I said, "You will not get any transfer till I get my money." As to Telfer telling me that Eggena was buying jewellery and giving the cars as security, he must have dreamt that part of it; he did not tell me. We discussed as to the cars being free of claims or lien, and I said even after I had been paid for them I should have to look to somebody for the work done on them, and he would have to stand in Eggena's place and be responsible for that. At that time I looked upon Eggena as a good customer and did not want to offend him. I consulted my solicitor and wrote the letter of the 17th in accordance with his advice. I gave the letter to Dudden to give to Telfer. The letter to Eggena I posted. On November 18 Eggena called. He said the agent was putting obstacles in the way and the cars must be in the agent's name. I said I would transfer his interest in them. He then wrote the letter of November 18: "This authorises you to transfer my interest in the 25 cars to Mr. Wood, but this will not interfere with our arrangement." At that time I did not know Mr. Wood was a jeweller. I told Eggena I could not possibly give a receipt in full for cars he had not paid for. I did not see Exhibit 28 till I got to the police-court. The signature on it is not mine. I did not give Eggena the paper for the purpose of getting it typewritten outside. Eggena never telephoned me that he had signed a receipt in my name and I did not reply, "All right, old chap." On the 19th Eggena called about 6.45. He started by saying he must have a clean receipt. I said I could not possibly give him one. He said he was tired of Mr. Wood and would have to make other arrangements—run over to Germany and get the money from his father, and that would settle the whole thing. He had produced jewellery before this. He produced a lot of jewellery then from almost every pocket. He said, "Give me a receipt, as I want to show it and clear up the deal somehow." I said I could not do it. He said, "Are you afraid to trust me." I said, "As a matter of fact, I am." He said, "If you are afraid to trust me I am not afraid to trust you." He said the jewellery was his wife's and worth £20,000. I would not have it in the safe a moment. I told him to

take it away. When I got the summons I remembered Mr. Wood in connection with the cars. I thought, "Good gracious, he is a jeweller."

(Saturday, April 30.)

PERCY HOLLAND EASTON , recalled, further examined. Up to the time I had the rubber stamp made I was in the habit of signing my name "Percy Easton." About December 13 he brought some jewellery. He said he had £20,000 worth, and would be quite willing as the option time was expiring to get a loan on it and pay me off. He asked if I know somebody outside the pawnbroking business who would lend money. Mr. Britton occurred to me. I saw him, told him, of our transaction with Eggena, and that he wanted me to see if I could find somebody to advance money on a large lot of jewellery. I subsequently introduced Britton to Eggena. They afterwards went to Brabington's, but no business resulted then. On February 4 I was telephoned by somebody from Woods. He said, "Have you got Mr. Eggena's car?" I replied, "He has taken it away." He then said, "I mean the 25 cars." I said, "Who are you?" He said, "I am Wood." I said, "I have not got any 25 cars of yours." He said, "What do you mean; they should be in my name." I said, "No, you never let me have a properly signed order transferring them to your name." He said, "Yes, they are in my name in your place." I said, "No, they are not," and we interrupted one another. He finally said, "We will see about that; you will hear from my solicitor."

Cross-examined by Mr. Marshall Hall. There is a good market for the sale of second-hand cars in the Colonies. At the price Eggena bought from me he could have made a considerable profit. I first saw Wood at Bow Street. I did not know Eggena was bankrupt. I am surprised Telfer did not tell me. Had I known it I should not have entered into this transaction. Miss Montague had nothing whatever to do with it. Eggena was going to borrow money on the big stone to pay me for the cars. He told me he had a £40,000 deal on in the City, and expected to borrow £18,000 or £20,000. He asked me for the note to take to Wood saying, "With regard to the receipt handed to you." That is a tricky letter, and I was had. Eggena is charging me with fraud in order to clear himself.

Cross-examined by Mr. Avory. The first I heard of Eggena signing my name to the receipt was in the cell at Bow Street. He told me. I asked him what he meant by doing such a thing. He said, "I did not really do it with the intention of doing any harm, but that fellow Wood said he must have it." He did not then say that he had telephoned to tell me he had done it. He told me he had signed the document in the presence of Wood. Wood made him do it. He did not say Wood had telephoned to me to know if it was all right. In November he offered to deposit jewellery with me for two hours. That was for the purpose of inducing me to give a receipt showing the cars were paid for, and he had a clear title. I did not look in a directory to see if Wood was a shipping agent. I had the greatest confidence in

Eggena. He said he had cabled to Australia; the principal was already in London with the agent, and when the agent received a cable from Australia to pay the money over the agent would pay me the cheque. I never expected to get the money from Eggena. I understood Wood was the agent. Telfer gave me Wood's address. On November 17 somebody from Wood telephoned, "The letter is not good enough for us"—something like that. On November 19 Eggena drafted a receipt in pencil and said, "This is the kind of thing Mr. Wood wants." I signed Exhibit 21 on November 16. I understood Eggena wanted that to confirm a guarantee I had given him verbally. He wanted to show it to his agent, so that he could send me on the money. It is addressed to Eggena and says, "We beg to say that these cars have no lien or claim whatever upon them." That was as between Eggena and me. Nobody else had a lien. On November 22 Eggena said, "When are you going to give me an order transferring the cars to Wood?" I said I had not transferred the names in the books. I have no recollection of a telephone message from Wood or Telfer on November 20. Telfer did not see me about November 27. I did not speak to him after the 17th. On two or three occasions subsequently I saw him wandering about the premises.

CATHERINE LYNCH , Holborn Institute of Typewriting, Etc., 117, High Holborn, proved typing Exhibit 28 at the request of Eggena.

PANSY MONTAGUE (prisoner, on oath). I am a native of Australia. I came to England in 1906. I had then already earned considerable gums of money in my profession. I was introduced to Eggena at Marseilles. He boarded the ship at Aden, but I did not see him till we got to Marseilles. He travelled to England over land, and I saw him at Tilbury on my arrival. I came over with my manager. My income has been nearly £5,000 a year. I have a current engagement at the Pavilion Music Hall, which is suspended owing to these proceedings. I went through a ceremony of marriage with Eggena at the Grand Hotel, Birmingham. I do not know where Thames Ditton is. In October last I was living at the Hotel Russell. Eggena was staying with me. I think I paid the expenses there. I had £3,000 worth of my own diamonds. At the beginning of October, 1909, I was up at Leicester and Eggena asked me if I would come down to see Mr. Wood. I went to Wood's shop with Eggena and my maid. Wood and Telfer showed me some emeralds, which I thought were glass beads. They said they were worth £500. I said I did not want them. They were shown me out of curiosity. Mr. Wood had a large ornament for the neck, the price of which was £8,000. He said, "I should like to make you one like this." I said, "I did not wish the thing." I returned to Leicester and came back the same week. I went to Mr. Wood's again. On both occasions he showed me two tiaras and one or two corsage ornaments. Mr. Wood came to the hotel frequently and brought every time rings or something from out of his pocket to show me. I thought he wanted me to buy his whole shop. I had not bought anything from him up to that time. I never mentioned my business to either Wood or Telfer. On November 10 I gave Eggena a cheque for £300 to pay Easton as a deposit on some cars. I had

seen Mr. Easton once then, when I took a friend to see a car, and then I saw him once afterwards. After I had given Eggena the £300 he said Easton would like me to see over the showrooms. I went. t that time I knew nothing of the arrangement between Easton and Eggena as to cars. I do not know what it is all about now. On November 13 I was outside Mr. Wood's premises. Eggena had gone inside. I think Mr. Wood was in Paris. Telfer came out and asked me would I go inside. He showed me some ornaments which he said were wanted for the King of Portugal, but he wanted me to have them. I said nothing. I never spoke a word about anything to Telfer. I never selected anything from Mr. Wood. No value was ever mentioned of any jewels shown to me. Telfer and Wood have said many wicked things. I was not cross on one occasion, protesting about the delay in delivery of the jewels. I did not want the jewels; they were just thrown at me. I have never had any invoice or bill. I would not understand what an invoice meant. I have not been asked for payment by either Wood or Telfer. I remember Wood calling on November 20 with a diamond heart. My maid brought him upstairs. He would not give this to Eggena. He wished to hand it to me personally. Eggena said, "Will you give Mr. Wood a receipt?" Wood said, "Do not bother about the receipt," but I think I wrote out on a small card a receipt. Then Wood said, "I do not like the chain on it. I must change it." The diamond heart was left with me. Eggena had charge of my jewels and used to lock them up in the safe. I trusted him with everything; there was no reason why I should not. I had no key of the safe. On November 22, between 6 and 7 in the evening, Wood came to the hotel with several articles of jewellery. I gave him receipts. He told me to put them on. Mr. Wood said he wished to see the tiara on. I had my hair dressed specially for it. He said it was beautiful. When he handed it I said to him, "Oh, how good of you," or some little remark like that. He said, "It is not good of me; it is Mr. Eggena. It is a business transaction between Mr. Eggena and myself," or words to that effect. One day Eggena told me he was going to transfer some jewels of mine he had pledged from one shop to another, as he could get more money there, but he could not do so without an authority from me. I gave it to him. Eggena said Wood was pushed for money. I lent him my diamond neck chain and he told me he war giving the money to Wood. After he had pawned it we went to Wood's shop. Mr. Eggena pulled out the £200 in notes and handed it to Wood. I have not seen the German pawnticket before. Eggena never told me about it. Just before Christmas I remember being outside Wood's shop. Wood said he was sick and tired of Telfer being sick; that he was going to get rid of him after Christmas. Then I think he brought out a large diamond drop and two pearl necklaces. He said he would like me to have the diamond drop, but I did not particularly wish it. I thought it would look vulgar. Eggena said, "You ought to take this." I said, "It is no good to me." Wood said, "I want to send it over to the Kaiser; you had better decide whether you have it or whether I send it." Wood said the diamond necklace was worth £30,000. I think I laughed and said, "Well, I think I prefer the £30,000." He said the drop

was worth £15,000; he could get it for £10,000. They were never left in my possession and I never had them. Eggena never mentioned to me the pawning of the tiara. A day or two before Christmas I went to pay a bill to my dressmaker, nearly £100. I had promised Madam Fasano a Christmas cake. I took the cake along and asked for my bill. I had my cheque-book with me. Eggena said, "Do not bother about the cheque." He took two £50 notes out from his pocket and handed them to Madam. I think she went upstairs for her husband to write out the receipt. He came down afterwards. I did not know where the notes came from. Early in January Eggena said to me, "I am awfully sorry for Wood. He is in a bad state of finances." I said, "Why does he not go to his rich friend, Lord Northcliffe?" He represented that Lord Northcliffe was a particular friend of his. Eggena said, "All right; I will tell him about that." I said to Wood, "Why do you not ask Lord Northcliffe?" He said, "You know, although Lord Northcliffe is worth eight millions he cannot put his hand on £1,000 now." I thought it was awfully funny that a man with eight millions could not put his hand on £1,000. After that Eggena said to me, "I am disgusted with Wood, what do you think he wanted me to ask you?—to raise money on your contracts or give a discount bill." I do not understand discount bills. I said, "I cannot raise money on my contracts. My manager has those." I disliked Wood after that. I do not know that as the result of the authority I wrote transferring my jewellery that other jewellery was pledged for £1,200. Mr. Eggena came up one morning about 10 o'clock in a great hurry. He said, "I am bringing a gentleman up; I want you to sign a document. It is all right, and I am in such a hurry because Wood is waiting downstairs for me in a taxi." I was not dressed. My maid was there, and brought this gentleman to the door. Eggena handed me the paper, and being flustered and excited I just signed my name. I said, "What name shall I put," and he told me to sign "Mrs. F. Eggena." One day in December, Eggena said, "I want you to come down and see some things." He took me to Brabington's. I am fond of going round shops and looking at pretty things. Mr. Neale was there. He showed me a very fine tiara, and some other handsome articles. I only just looked at them. On February 2 I was staying at the Hotel Russell. I had made up my mind to leave there as I was getting tired of Wood and his friends coming. I did not wish people in the hotel to know I was "La Milo," and I thought I would go to a more quiet hotel. I had arranged to leave on the following Monday. I was waiting to go out. I said to my maid, "See where Mr. Eggena is." She went, and returned saying, "The page told me Mr. Wood is downstairs." I went down, and found Telfer there. I said, "I cannot wait any longer, and I want to go out." Eggena said, "Go upstairs and wait; I am talking business with Mr. Telfer." I went upstairs. Nothing else was said to Telfer. At the time I left the Hotel Russell and went to Hans Crescent Hotel I had no idea there was any trouble connected with Eggena and Wood or Telfer. Until I went to Bow Street I had not the slightest idea there was any charge against myself.

Cross-examined by Mr. Marshall Hall. I knew Eggena became bankrupt. His stepfather sent him £2,500. That was paid into my banking account as he could not have one of his own. The suggestion that I have paid Mr. Eggena is positively disgusting. I objected to Stock Exchange speculations which Wood suggested to Mr. Eggena. I quarrelled with Wood, and one day said I would not have him in my car.

(Monday, May 2.)

PANSY MONTAGUE recalled (cross-examined by Mr. Avory). I knew Eggena was passing in the name of Barr. When Eggena asked me for £300 he said it was to pay a deposit on some motor-cars. He said nothing about how many cars. I did not trouble myself to ask. He told me nothing. Mr. Eggena dictated the letter to me, "As stated by Mr. Eggena yesterday the delay with the Ariel Co. is unsatisfactory," etc. I thought Mr. Wood was forcing the jewellery on me. He explained it had nothing to do with me at all; it was a business bargain between him and Eggena. If I wanted the jewellery I could have paid for it myself. I know nothing about who was going to pay for it. I did not know what Wood's motive was, but I think I know now. Mr. Wood was pushing this jewellery on me. I do not know what a pawnbroker is. It would have been better for the witness Freestone to have come here. I had no chance at Bow Street to defend myself. It is untrue that Freestone handed me £1,200. I contemplated leaving England about January 14. I do not know if Eggena contemplated leaving with me. In February, 1909, I had a flat in Maida Vale. I was living there with my mother and sister. The furniture from that flat was stored with the Old Times Furnishing Co. by myself. I have an action now pending with them. In that action I made an affidavit that I intended going to Australia, and wanted my evidence taken on commission, which was refused. I only saw Telfer once at the hotel. I did not hear Wood or Telfer ask Eggena for payment for the jewels. On February 3 when I came downstairs Telfer, Wood, and Eggena were laughing together. Eggena said he would not be very long, would I please go upstairs and wait a little while. Nothing was said about jewels. I did not ask Eggena what Telfer was there for. I was never at Brook Street twice on the same day. I never mentioned about being photographed in the jewels. Jewels do not come out well in photographs. Eggena never said anything in my presence about photographs.

COUNT WARD , 6, Moorgate Street. Mr. Wood introduced me to, Eggena. The two documents produced are genuine, and signed by me. On January 12 I received £1,200 in notes. I afterwards informed Mr. Wood of the interest that was reserved to him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Avory. I had no idea the £1,200 had come from pawning jewellery obtained from Wood. Prior to that date I had no arrangement with Wood to the effect suggested in the letter. The document was drawn up on Eggena's suggestion and mine. I was selling to Eggena, Utah Bingham shares at a certain price, which he was to realise if possible at a profit. He subsequently purchased more

of those shares. He has not paid for them. Wood was under no liability to pay. The shares went up in price, about 2s. each. Wood had no benefit from the sale that I know of. I did not get from Eggena 25 per cent, of the profits. The reason a letter from me to Eggena is addressed to Barr is that I inquired from him one night at the Hotel Russell, and could not find him. He afterwards told me he was known there as Barr.

Verdict, Easton and Montague, Not guilty; Eggena, Guilty. Sentence, 21 months' hard labour.


(Thursday, April 28.)