Mr. Gallop:

Explaining the defense, said that Cruze said the letters were handed to him as a security for money Mrs. Sedgwick owed him. As they were Cruze’s letters he could hand them to Crowley.

Walter William Hunt, Solicitor’s Clerk:

Walter William Hunt, Solicitor’s clerk, said that Crowley handed the letters to him a month or six weeks before the libel action came on in the High Court.

Detective-sergeant Davidson:

Detective-sergeant Davidson said a summons had been issued against Cruze charging him with the larceny of two envelopes addressed to Mrs. Sedgwick in the names of Miss Betty May and Mrs. Rickworth.

Mr. Gallop:

Mr. Gallop submitted that there was no case against Crowley, but the Judge ruled that it must go to trial. Crowley was charged with receiving four original letters and one copy said to have been stolen from Mrs. Betty Sedgwick, professionally known as "Betty May," an artist's model, of South Hill Park Gardens, Hampstead.

Mr. Stevenson:

Mr. Melford Stevenson, prosecuting, said that in 1932 Crowley became a plaintiff in a civil action for damages for libel against publishers in respect of a book in which reflections, according to Crowley, were made upon him in the name of Aleister Crowley. The letters disappeared from Mrs. Sedgwick's attaché case and were later produced during the hearing of the libel action. The letters referred to the payment of certain expenses by a firm of solicitors to Mrs. Sedgwick, who was a witness for the defence in the action, and she was cross-examined upon them.

Mrs. Sedgwick:

Mrs. Betty Sedgwick stated that she now resided at South Hal Park Gardens, Hampstead. She said she was an artist’s model, and she was usually known as “Betty May.”

Mr. Gallop:

Mr. Gallop, holding up a book, asked the witness: Do you recognize this?—Tiger Woman: My Story by Betty May.

Mrs. Sedgwick:

Yes.

Mr. Gallop:

Was it issued to the public as your autobiography?

Mrs. Sedgwick:

Yes.

Mr. Gallop:

With the intention that the public should believe it was the story of your life?

Mrs. Sedgwick:

Yes.

Mr. Gallop:

Whereas I gather you now say you had not written the story?

Mrs. Sedgwick:

No.

Mr. Gallop:

Do you regard that as fraudulent?

Mrs. Sedgwick:

I did not think about it. Mrs. Sedgwick said that part of the book was written from articles she had supplied to the Press.

Judge Whiteley:

Some of it is true, then?

Mrs. Sedgwick:

Yes.

Mr. Gallop:

But a great deal of the book is utter fabrication?

Mrs. Sedgwick:

A lot of it is. Mrs. Sedgwick explained that she was divorced.

Mr. Gallop:

Who is Captain Eddie Cruze?

Mrs. Sedgwick:

He was a friend of mine. I think he stole those papers. I know he did.

Judge Whiteley:

Where is he now?

Mrs. Sedgwick:

We cannot find him.

Mr. Gallop:

Would you be surprised to hear that somebody calling himself Captain Cruze had been telephoning Crowley's solicitors in the last two or three days?

Mrs. Sedgwick:

I do not know.

Mr. Gallop:

Did you let Cruze have these letters as some security that you would pay him some money?

Mrs. Sedgwick:

Certainly not, I had paid him so much money. He had very little money himself.

Mrs. Sedgwick:

In reply to the Judge, Mrs. Sedgwick said she had between £15 and £20 from the solicitors in expenses in regard to the libel action, in which she was the chief witness.

Mr. Mather:

The first witness for the defence was George Mather, a merchant, of Cambridge Terrace, London, who said Cruze told him that he had been advancing money to Miss May and the letters were part of the security which came into his possession. Mr. Mather said in answer to Mr. Gallop, that when he told Crowley that Cruze had these letters in his possession, Crowley said he would like to see whether they were relevant and would like copies. Witness said he obtained copies of the letters and showed them to Crowley, who then asked him to secure the original.

Mr. Gallop:

Assuming these letters were stolen, had you the slightest knowledge or suspicion that they had been stolen?

Mr. Mather:

No.

Judge Whiteley:

Had you formed any opinion at all as to how this man came to be in possession of these letters?

Mr. Mather:

By reason of their association, Cruze and Betty May's association.

Judge Whiteley:

That they were given to him?

Mr. Mather:

Yes.

Mr. Gallop:

Were they absolutely innocent or any suspicion that these letters had been stolen?

Mr. Mather:

Absolutely. Witness said that after Crowley had asked him to secure these letters he went and saw Cruze, and asked Cruze to loan him the letters. Cruze told him that he wanted the letters returned after the High Court Action.

Judge Whiteley:

For what purpose?

Mr. Mather:

He did not give any reason. Continuing, witness said that Cruze mentioned the subject of money, and said he wanted money to redeem his luggage which was being held for rent. I gave him five pounds and he handed me the letters and I then handed them to Crowley."

Judge Whiteley:

Where did your £5 come from?

Mr. Mather:

From Mr. Crowley.

Mr. Gallop:

Had you the slightest intention of keeping these letters for yourself?

Mr. Mather:

No.

Mr. Gallop:

Were they loaned, obtained, or procured for the purpose of being disclosed to the Judge and jury in the libel action?

Mr. Mather:

Quite.

Mr. Gallop:

With the intention that they should be disclosed when Mrs. Sedgwick was in the witness-box?

Mr. Mather:

Yes.

Mr. Gallop:

Did you see anything at all wrong in what you were doing?

Mr. Mather:

No.

Mr. Gallop:

And do you now?

Mr. Mather:

Certainly not. Witness said that he was not present at the trial of the libel action, but it came to his knowledge after the action that letters had been kept in the custody of the Court, and he endeavoured to find Cruze to tell him so.

Mr. Crowley:

In the witness-box, Crowley described himself as an author and poet, writing under the name of Aleister Crowley. This was the first time any charge had been made against him in any part of the world.

Mr. Stevenson:

Are you representing yourself as a respectable person whose word is to be trusted?

Mr. Crowley:

Yes.

Mr. Stevenson:

I want to read what Mr. Justice Swift said about you. He had listened to your libel action and the history of your activities for several days?

Mr. Crowley:

Yes.

Mr. Stevenson:

Did he say this: “I thought that everything which was vicious and bad had been produced at one time or another before me. I have learned in this case that we can always learn something more if we live long enough. Never have I heard such dreadful, horrible, blasphemous, abominable stuff as that produced by the man who describes himself to you as the greatest living poet?

Mr. Crowley:

Crowley agreed that the quotation, so far as he knew, was accurate. The reference was to his book.

Mr. Stevenson:

Have you been expelled from Italy?

Mr. Crowley:

I have, like most distinguished Englishmen.

Mr. Stevenson:

Have you been expelled from America?

Mr. Crowley:

No.

Mr. Stevenson:

From France?

Mr. Crowley:

No.

Mr. Stevenson:

Have you ever been refused permission to remain in either of those countries?

Mr. Crowley:

In France they refused to renew my permission on a technical point.

Mr. Stevenson:

Have you been expelled from India?

Mr. Gallop:

Is this the first time in your life that any charge has been made against you in any place in the world?

Mr. Crowley:

Yes.

Mr. Gallop:

You were present when I opened the case on your behalf yesterday, and you heard the observations I made about your early writings. In fairness to yourself, do you wish to volunteer anything about it?

Mr. Crowley:

The book I wrote was written in pursuance of my professional duty to professors in medicine.

Mr. Gallop:

You disapprove of my comments?

Mr. Crowley:

I think you were imperfectly informed. Crowley added that he wrote that book in 1897 and 1898.

Mr. Gallop:

Apart from the criticism justly or unjustly leveled against you for your book, has anything ever been leveled against your character in any court?

Mr. Crowley:

No.

Mr. Crowley:

Mr. Crowley said he met Mrs. Sedgwick in 1992. She was the wife of a friend of his.

Mr. Crowley:

In reply to Mr. Gallop, Crowley said the observations of Mr. Justice Swift in his libel action were the subject of an appeal.

Mr. Crowley:

Continuing, Crowley said that he was plaintiff and still was the plaintiff in the action against Constable. He had heard that Mrs. Sedgwick would be called as a witness against him, and he knew of her many years before.

Mr. Gallop:

Had you formed an opinion as to her integrity?

Mr. Crowley:

Yes.

Mr. Gallop:

In a phrase did you regard her as a trustworthy person, or otherwise?

Mr. Crowley:

Otherwise. Crowley went on to say that in December, 1933, Mr. Mather told him that Cruze knew all about Mrs. Sedgwick's plans, and would disclose the whole affair to him. Mr. Mather told him the story, which Crowley found to be perfectly clear and convincing.

Mr. Gallop:

What was it?

Mr. Crowley:

That Betty May was preparing to commit perjury. That I knew already from several sources. Mather said that Cruze's story could be substantiated, because Cruze had some letters in his possession.

Mr. Gallop:

Was nothing said by Mather as to the way these letters came into possession of Cruze?

Mr. Crowley:

He told me the same story as he told the court.

Mr. Gallop:

Had you any reason to doubt the truth of it?

Mr. Crowley:

None whatever. I believed everything I was told. Crowley was answering another question at length when the judge interposed and said "I don't want long speeches."

Mr. Crowley:

In reply to further questions, Crowley said that it was quite clear that the letters in question were addressed to Miss Betty May and that he paid £5 for them.

Judge Whiteley:

At the time that you had this conversation with Mather, had you instructed the solicitors in this libel action?—Yes.

Mr. Crowley:

Yes. Crowley said that he showed the copies of these letters to the partner in the firm of solicitors and he recounted to him exactly what Mather had told him. The solicitor discussed the usefulness of these letters, and a lengthy discussion ensued as to whether they should or should not use these letters if they could get them. The solicitor advised him that they might be useful.

Mr. Gallop:

Whether he was right or wrong, did your senior counsel at the libel action take the same view?

Judge Whiteley:

Did your senior counsel know the circumstances in which you obtained possession of them?

Mr. Crowley:

I cannot say, my Lord. Crowley said that he asked Mather to obtain the originals. Mather was paid £5 in his (Crowley's) presence by a friend of his whom he had authorized to pay. Crowley said he did not desire to disclose the name of that acquaintance in Court, but said he would write it down if the Judge desired.

Judge Whiteley:

I don't know why there is all this secrecy.

The name was not mentioned in Court.

Mr. Gallop:

Did you at any time suspect that these letters had been stolen?

Mr. Crowley:

No.

Mr. Gallop:

Did no legal advisor of yours ever suggest to you the possibility that they might have been stolen?

Mr. Crowley:

No

Mr. Gallop:

Did you think it likely that the lady would consent to them passing into your possession?

Mr. Crowley:

I did. Asked why he did not approach her for the letters, Crowley said that her consent would no doubt have been dependent upon some compensation. He did not know her address at the time, and he had never seen Cruze in his life. Crowley added, "Mather was a friend acting in the interests of justice. Every honourable man is always willing to act in such a manner as Mr. Mather had acted."

Mr. Stevenson:

Is every honourable man prepared to take part in a transaction of the sale of letters to be used by one party against another in cross-examination in an action?

Mr. Crowley:

I don't know.

Mr. Stevenson:

Did it not cause you to wonder when you were engaged upon this transaction?

Mr. Crowley:

No, I wanted to make the truth clear.

Mr. Stevenson:

Have you ever in your life heard of letters from solicitors arranging for the attendance of a witness in court being offered as a security for a loan?

Mr. Crowley:

I have no commercial experience.

Judge Whiteley:

Did you believe that these letters were offered as a security for a loan?

Mr. Crowley:

Yes, my Lord. Mather told me a straight story and I believed it. I repeated it to the solicitor and he believed it.

Mr. Gallop:

Are the observations of Mr. Justice Swift, in your libel action, subject to an appeal?

Mr. Crowley:

Yes. Crowley then left the witness-box and went back into the dock.

Mr. Gallop:

Addressing the jury, Mr. Gallop said that in his submission it was a thoroughly silly prosecution from beginning to end.

Judge Whiteley:

In his summing-up Judge Whiteley said that it had been said that these letters were for security for a loan. He could not imagine any person advancing a farthing for any of them. After a summing up lasting an hour the jury retired.     

The jury found Crowley Guilty.

Judge Whiteley

Judge Whiteley said that it was the first time a case of that kind had come before him. It was a very useful prosecution, as it made it quite clear that this sort of thing could not be done. These letters ought not to have been used, ought never have been in your possession, or handed to your solicitor at all. However, they were used, and no harm had in fact been done; therefore I am not going to send you to prison.

Crowley.—Thank you, my Lord.

The Judge.—I understand this litigation is still going on, and if anything of this kind occurs again you will be brought here and receive six months. You understand that?

Crowley.—I do, my Lord; it won’t occur again.

Mr. Crowley:

Thank you, my Lord.

Judge Whiteley

I understand this litigation is still going on, and if anything of this kind occurs again you will be brought here and receive six months. You understand that?

Mr. Crowley:

I do, my Lord; it won’t occur again.

The defendant was then bound over, and was ordered to pay a sum not exceeding 50 guineas towards the costs of the prosecution.