THE BRISTOL EVENING WORLD

and EVENING TIMES and ECHO

TEMPLE WAY, BRISTOL, ENGLAND

24 JULY 1934

(page 11)

ALEISTER CROWLEY TRIAL:

LOST LETTERS ALLEGATIONS

ARTIST’S MODEL CROSS-EXAMINED

PROSECUTION AND A LIBEL ACTION

ACCUSED MAN IN MORNING DRESS

Edward Alexander Crowley, aged 58, known as Aleister Crowley, of Upper Montagu-street, London, described as an explorer, who was in full morning dress, surrendered to his bail at the Old Bailey, London, to-day.

He was accused of receiving four letters and one copy of a letter, the property of Betty Sedgwick [Betty May], knowing them to have been stolen. He pleaded not guilty.

Mr. Melford Stevenson, prosecuting, said that the facts of the case were short and simple.

In 1932 the man became the plaintiff in a civil action for damages for libel. That action was brought against some publisher named Constable in respect of a passage in a book published by them in which certain reflections were, according to Crowley, made on him in the name of Aleister Crowley.

ARTIST’S MODEL

It was not necessary to go into the subject matter of that libel action at all, but to say that Mrs. Sedgwick, who was also known as Betty May, an artist’s model, was a person who had given to the solicitors for the defence in that action a certain amount of information about Crowley, and she was in June, 1933, expected to be called to give evidence against him in that action.

“Later in 1934,” he said, “she did give that evidence and was cross-examined on it. She had received certain sums in respect of her expenses from the solicitors. In June, 1933, she had a number of letters in her possession which had passed between her and the solicitors who were arranging for her to be called as a witness.

“Those letters disclosed the fact that she had been receiving from those solicitors certain sums of money in respect of expenses and there was a further letter relating to her arrangement with a firm of publishers of a book she was preparing.

MISSING DOCUMENTS

“Those letters, together with a number of other documents, she put into an attaché case, and at the end of June she went to a cottage in the country and had occasion to open it and found that the documents had been completely cleared out and had disappeared. Those letters were never seen by that lady up till April, 1934, when she was giving evidence for the defence, and they were produced in court by the counsel appearing for the prisoner.”

The prosecution, he said, suggested that Crowley received those letters under such circumstances that he must have known they were stolen.

BETTY MAY’S EVIDENCE

Mrs. Sedgwick was then called and said she was known by the name of Betty May. She was an artist’s model and was now living in Hampstead.

The letters which were alleged to have been stolen were then read in court and Mrs. Sedgwick said she kept them locked in an attaché case, together with her passport, her marriage certificate, her birth certificate, the death certificate of her husband and several other private papers.

In June, 1933, she went to her cottage near Maidenhead and on opening her case she discovered everything had gone.

Asked where she usually kept the attaché case in Seymour-street, Mrs. Sedgwick replied, “I usually put the attaché case under the bed when I went to bed.”

Cross-examined by Mr. Gallop she said that her name of Betty May was her professional name.

Have you earned any money as an artist’s model?—Yes, I was sitting during the High Court action.

HER BOOK

“Do you recognize this book?” asked Mr. Gallop, “Tiger Woman, My Story by Betty May”?—Yes.

Was it issued to the public as your autobiography?—It was.

With the intention that the public should believe that its contents were true?—I don’t know.

Well, with the intention that the public should believe that it was the story of your life?—Yes.

Whereas I gather that you now say you didn’t write the story?—No.

In answer to Judge Whiteley, Mrs. Sedgwick said that parts of the book were written from articles which she had supplied to the Press and that some of it was true.

Mr. Gallop: But a great deal of the book is utter fabrication?—A lot of it is.

In further answers she said that she was divorced.

Mr. Gallop: So you recollect saying in this book that you intended to make yourself heard by the public in the future?—Yes, I do.

(Proceeding.)