![\"""\"](\""https:\/\/images.immediate.co.uk\/production\/volatile\/sites\/7\/2022\/11\/GettyImages1094426696-1-5983924-e1669721268855.jpg?quality=90&resize=620%2C412"\" "\\"\"\"\\"\/")
<\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/picture><\/div>Antonia Moser stated that she had been employed to find out who had been making slanderous comments about her client. She charged a daily fee for each of her agency\u2019s detectives to work on the case, plus expenses, and a higher amount for her partner and fellow detective, Maurice Moser, to investigate \u2013 inexplicably \u2013 from Cairo<\/a>.<\/p>\n Miss Lamond thought the work was too costly, and much of it unnecessary. The case was sent to the Official Referees Court, but there is no record in the press of what was decided. However, other cases involving Miss Lamond do provide clues as to what was going on. Cordelia was 40 at the time of the Moser case, and had inherited her family\u2019s fortune. For several years, she had been living in a series of London hotels; after staying at the Hotel Cecil for eight months, in July 1897, she assaulted a porter following instances of erratic behaviour, and multiple attempts to evict her.<\/p>\n A year later, in 1898, Cordelia Lamond was the subject of a Commission and Inquisition of Lunacy held at Chancery, after her relatives alleged she was squandering her fortune in useless litigation. The case had originally been brought two years earlier \u2013 around the same time that Antonia Moser had sued her \u2013 but Cordelia had refused to attend court and was arrested for contempt. When she finally appeared, \u201cMiss Lamond declared that she was not Miss Lamond\u201d. The jury found otherwise, also returning a unanimous verdict that she was of unsound mind, incapable of managing her own affairs. Records suggest that Cordelia spent the rest of her life in private asylums.<\/p>\n The press had concerns about the private detective industry, and the Lamond case suggested that the Moser agency was unethical in its dealings with her. Antonia Moser charged Cordelia a lot of money ostensibly to prove slander; yet her client may only have been suffering from delusions of being talked about. If it was clear that she had a mental illness, and that the Mosers went along with her allegations simply to make money off her, this would reinforce press concerns about private eyes.<\/p>\n Antonia Moser was a staunch suffragist, though, and it is hard to square her views about women\u2019s equality with someone who was willing to take advantage of another woman. Perhaps Cordelia simply appeared to be a slightly eccentric client, who insisted the Mosers carry out her commission; but work was work, and ethics were possibly hard to maintain when a private detective\u2019s bills needed to be paid.<\/p>\nAn ethical conundrum<\/h3>\n