Mr. "Phipps stated that the Old Bailey jury sent a note to Lord Hewart to the effect that one juror would not agree to a verdict of ict "guilty" owing to his view that the woman honestly believed that the money was due to her.
Mr. Phipps submitted that in his remarks to the jury Lord Hewart was wrong in holding that, in the circumstances of the case, the woman had no claim of right to the money.
Replying for the Crown, Mr. G. G. Raphael submitted that, if there was any claim of right, it was not made in good faith.
Mr. Justice Humphreys You are saying that it would be rear encouragement to blackmailing to know that one could say honestly that was due when a demand with aces was made for it. Whether that is so or not is a question for Parliament, Mr. Justice Charles; If the jury had been told it was an agreement to regulate her life for the next 12 months, it would have been a perfectly good claim.
The case appeared in these columns on March 25. near Union Jack Club
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.