HOPE'S OUTLOOK ANYTHING BUT HOPEFUL

NZ Truth, Issue 1142, 20 October 1927, Page 5

HOPE'S OUTLOOK ANYTHING BUT HOPEFUL

iiiiiiiiiitimiiiiiiimnniiiiiiiiiiiiimiiiiiiiiiiuiiiiiniiiiiimiimiiiiiiiiiiitiniiiiiiiiiii SUBSEQUENT to Magistrate Hunt's adverse finding against John William Hope's plea of mistaken identity, the above exclusive information was conveyed to "N.Z. Truth's" representative by Lawyer J. J. O'SulliIvan in the presence of Hope and his wife five days after the court's decision was made public. In the face of this cable, John William Hope is either a consummate liar, an unprincipled scoundrel capable of going to the most amazing extremes to extricate himself from legal quicksands into which he has deliberately plunged — or he is one more victim of an astounding series of circumstantial coincidences which place him in the same category as those two figures of ] history, Tichbourn and Beck. Some idea of what Hope's action means in sending this cable — if Annie Hope should acquiesce and come to New Zealand — may be gained when it is realized that according to the constitution of the law Hope cannot be charged with bigamy in New Zealand unless the witnesses to prove his identity are on the spot. Hope asserts that he ia appealing. His counsel, Lawyer Sullivan, informs "Truth" that he has been instructed to appeal.

Two Famous Casts

He also announces that last Tuesday letters would have arrived in England from himself to the chief of Scotland Yard, the chief of police at Sheffield and the High Commissioner's office in London, in which all the facts were given and which contained suggestions by means of which it could be ascertained whether or not Hope is the man he says he is. Hope also said to "Truth's", representative: "One thing I am clear — that in despite of any so-called inaccuracies in my evidence I am not the man whom , Annie Hope asserts is her husband." Magistrate Hunt, however, in his /- written decision, leaves no shadow of doubt that as far as he is concerned Hope is the man. His marriage to Edith Alice Barnes on July 14, 1923, at Bolton registry office is admitted by Hope. The marriage he is alleged to have contracted with Annie Bray, then aged 32, of 36, Jenkin Road, Sheffield, took place on August 29, 1916. The story as told in court is an extraordinary one and bristles with a marvellous series of alleged incidences and coincidences, an astounding array of John William Hopes who traverse the narrative with bewildering frequency. There have been before to-day some remarkable stories of mistaken identity which have fiction beaten to a frazzle. There is the famous case of Tichbourn, the pretender, who was identified by many as being the missing heir, and will live in the annals of criminal cases for all time. And there was the story — every bit as remarkable in its way — of Beck, who was found years after of mistaken identity to be the man he said he was and not the man whom the court maintained he was. If the John William Hope, of Manchester, is found to be 'the man he says he is — and all things are possible, even if the long arm of coincidence is stretched to what may appear to be breaking point — it will certainly be but one more case to add to the collection of stories which are stranger than fiction. Annie Bray, to give her maiden name, otherwise the wife of John William Hope who married her in 1916, applied to the court at Sheffield, England, in July, 1921, under the Married Women's Act and obtained an order by which her husband was to pay her 30/- per week.

Letters To Wife

This indicates that at the time he was not living with her or supporting her. In June, 1922, her husband, John William Hope, upon fresh evidence obtained an order varying the amount to 25/-. In 1923 Annie's husband ceased his payments; they seem by then to have been much in arrears, for the following month she obtained a warrant for her husband's apprehension for arrears whieli totalled £68 odd. The warrant was never .executed. Her husband could not be found. Coincidence number one. The John William Hope, now in New Zealand, left England with his wife— who was before her marriage Edith Alice Barnes, and whom he married in July, 1923 — the next month for New Zealand. The newly-married pair wont to Auckland, where they found a home under the roof of an uncle of bis wife's named Hughes. Meanwhile, the wife of John William, Annie — that is, she of the 1916 marriage — had placed the matter in the hands of the Old Trafford (Manchester) police and the next that Annie Heard was a letter from one Annie Barnes, the sister of the wife of the John William who had married Edith Alice Barnes in 1923. Some letters were exchanged and Annie Barnes sent Annie Hope a photograph of the other wife, Edith Alice, and a description of the John William Hope in New Zealand. Annie Hope, then on oath, set out to the police that her husband had left England in August, 1923, and that there was an arrears of maintenance of £ 88. One of the letters from Annie Barnes to Mrs. Annie Hope reads as follows: "Having received your letter from Walkden police station I am writing to ask you if you are the lawful wife of John William Hope, of 103 Walkden Road, the same address as his parents.

Photograph From England That Formed Vital Link In Chain of Evidence Against Husband

DRAMATIC FINALE TO ASTOUNDING MATRIMONIAL TANGLE

"I am writing to ask if you will kind- j ly answer in return, having heard that you have visited Farnworth sometimes, and should you do so again will you please call at the above address and we will explain all that we. want lo know. "In answering this letter, you will hear further news concerning him from Miss Annie Barnes." Annie Hope received this letter from Annie Barnes on October 31, 1923. The address given on the note was 41 Bentley Street, Farnworth, Bolton. On November 23, 1923, Annie Hope received another letter from Annie Barnes: "Dear Mrs. Hope, I received your letter this morning. Now that I know you are his lawful wife, I am very sorry for you, as I must tell you that he has married my sister and gone to New Zealand to my aunt's. . . "They had been gone away a month before it came to our knowledge that he was a married man, so I wrote straight to New Zealand and then went to the Farnworth police. . . "On Monday of this week we had a cable from New Zealand and Jack denied it. . . "So I went to the Walkden and they told me" (she refers to the police) "he was a married man and they had a warrant for his arrest. . . "It has been a great trouble in our family and we are very sorry. I have lost my father and this has had a lot to do with it." Annie Barnes wrote to her uncle in Auckland— Hughes— and he replied by cable: "Jack denies allegations. Inform police at your end. Anxiously awaiting reply. Hughes." With that Hughes turned Hope and his wife out of his house. John William Hope's story to his counsel, Lawyer J. J. Sullivan, was a long one when in the box and he gave a detailed account of his career since 1914. It bristled with most circumstantial statements of his whereabouts during the war and covering the time during which it is alleged that he married the woman,. Annie Bray. For the purposes of the story it may be best to take the searching crossexamination of Crown Prosecutor Paterson, which brought to light 3ome very remarkable coincidences. Magistrate Hunt, in his efforts io unravel the story, at times took a hand in the examination and displayed his puzzlement at some of the things which tested his credulity. Hope said that neither of his parents were alive; his father died in 1924 — as far as he knew, at Worsley. It transpired that he meant his step-father; not his father. * Both his father and step-father's names were Hope, , but he could not tell his step-father's Christian name. With the exception of two and a-half years, he said he had not been home since 1914, and then he did not live with his people. Exactly when his mother died he could not say.

A Romantic Career

He has one brother and one sister. They live at Worsley — or his sister does — but he has not heard from his brother since the war started. He gave his sister's address as 103, Walkden Road, Worsley. That was where he was living when he married EtTith Barnes. More complications arose when Hope announced that he had referred to a woman they called mother, but not his real mother; his real mother was dead. "This woman brought me up from quite a child." Her name was Ellen Hope. "My actual mother's name was Ellen Constance Lane," he then added. "The woman who brought me up was named Mary Ackersley. She was married and her husband's name was Hope." It might be John, but he could not say; he did' not know when they were married. Her husband was a coal miner, the same as his father. He had last seen his own father in 1911, when he was living in Worsley, but his real father was not living with his own mother then. From that Hope went on to say that in 1911 he went to work at De Beers mines in the Transvaal. (Incidentally, it may be pointed out that this may only be a geographical error on Hope's part, for De Beers i.s at Kimberley in the Cape Colony.) Thence he went back to Manchester and lived at Kent Street, Trafford Park, with a man named J. Wardle. Hope returned to the British Westinghouse Co., where he had worked since 1907. Prior to this he had been with the General Electric Co. Having remained in the shops for a few months, he was sent to Christiana. Back in England, he did some outside jobs and was still working for the firm when the war broke out. With the coming of the war, Hope stated that he went to sea, having a third engineer's ticket. The shipping firm he selected was that of the Spanish company known as the Larrinaga. . His first ship was the "Marie de Larrinaga," but he could not remember the master's name. That of the chief engineer was George (surname). A private person engaged him, so he alleged, at the Partington coaling basin and he did not sign ship's papers. With this company he served for two ' and a-half years and frequently called at Liverpool, but never went to the offices of the company. His leave he spent in Manchester and on board the ship. Relatives seem to have had no charm for Hope, as he did not call on them. The masters, officers and engineers were British and the crew Spaniards who signed on at Bordeaux. His own discharge was in English, a British Board of Trade discharge. Then in succession Hope went on the "Anselm de Larrinaga," again engaged by a private individual and signing no articles. The master's name was not known to him, but that of the chief engineer was Williams; also that of the second. The ships sailed under the Spanish flag as neutrals. Next came the "Pilar de Larrinaga." Again he could not remember the master's name, though he said he was in the vessel twelve months; he could not remember the name of the ,-chief engineer. Pie asserted that he had "no particular chum." Though Worsley is onlyseven miles from Manchester, and a.

(From "N.Z. Truth's" 'Special Auckland Representative.)

Auckland 14-10-27 "Neal, Solicitor, Sheffield. Ascertain in the event of her passage money being arranged to New Zealand, would Mrs. Hope, of six Don Road, come here to establish question of my identity ? (Signed) John William Hope, care Sullivan, Barrister. "ToJ. J. Sullivan. I authorise you to send ihe above telegram to England. These are my instructions. J. W. Hope."

tram and train connects the two, he did not go to see his relatives. "I did not feel affectionately disposed towards my relatives,"' Hope replied to Crown Prosecutor Paterson. "I respected my sister, but did not go to see her." Later he joined the "Victoria de Larrinaga," but could not say when it (was. All his papers were lost on the "Pilar de Larrinaga," which was torpedoed in 1917. Exactly what period of the year this eventful moment of his life occurred he could not say, but it was in the North sea when seven days out from Liverpool. The ship was a total loss. Whether all the crew and officers were drowned he was not able to tell, but he remembered that a half-dozen were saved. "All I knew was being laid in the bottom of a trawler's boat, which was distinguished by the letter A. How I got to the trawler I could not say. I was not injured by the explosion and I did not see the Pilar sink." Later, he continued, after other details: "I was a good few hours in. the water. It may have taken two or three >days to get to Sheerness." Asked if the captain was saved, he

replied: "I can't say; I was not interested; I looked after number one." Hope was asked aJjout his identity number and discharges; these, he replied, were with a friend of his — a seaman, who, when he left England, lived at Weaste Road, Salfond, by name Albert King, and Hope had never attempted to get his papers here. At a later stage, when much more cross-examination had been carried on concerning ships and names, Hope announced that he did not know what his wife's sister, Annie Barnes, wrote to her aunt and he did noO care what was in the letter. "I was not concerne<d about the charge of bigamy or that a warrant had been issiled for my arrest." As to the charge of bigamy, he replied: "It has not been proved." Later he said: "I took every step that was possible to vindicate my wife's honor." The reason, why he twould not communicate with England was that he considered his relations were biased. His own sister had tried td clear the matter up. This sister lived with a woman they were in the habit of calling "Mother" Hope. Though Hope visited his wife's relations, he said he had not conversed

[with them and he had not told them he was in a ship which had been torpedoed. There followed some inquiry of a very searching nature as to the other John William Hopes which the man in the witness-ibox said he had known. Hope stated that he worked at the Manchester docks with a man of the same name, who was very like himself; so much so, that a George Davies was interested in the coincidence. The man in the photograph which was ono of the court exhibits was very like him. Davies was interested, but Hope said he himself was not. He had not told the wife here (with him in New Zealand aJbout the man who so resembled him, but he had told his sister about him. This man who had resembled him had told him that his father's name was John Hope and that his father also was a coal miner. Later he heard that he lived at Swinton, that he was married and that his wife lived at Sheffield. All the time Hope was courting Edith Barnes he was living at 103, Walkden Road, Worsley, his sister had lived there for twenty years, and "Mother" Hope lived there, too. So

far as he knew, his sister lived there now. "When I left England in 1923 my sister and 'Mother' Hope both knew that I had never been previously married, so that anyone going to 103, Walkden Road in October, 1923, could have learned the truth." When Crown Prosecutor Paterson pressed the question as to the man named John William Hope who lived at that address, Hope replied: "I cannot answer the question: "Was there another person living at that address at the time I was there?' "My sister was living there in 1921, my step-mother and a brother, Thomas Hope. A cousin was also there — John William Hope, whose occupation was lhat of engineer. He was not married." None of his relatives was present when he married Edith Barnes, said Hope, and for once a Hope turned out not to be a Hope, but a Holt. This wa.s a witness to his marriage, whose name was given on the certificate as John Joseph Hope. I He was not a friend of the witness, but he might have known him for twelve months or so. Hope said that. while he was at sea

he received £5 per week, (but he spent it all gambling. When Chief Detective Ward interviewed him at Mount Eden gaol, Hope denied that he had. admitted he was the husband of the woman in England. No order was ever served on him in England. It would be hard to describe the demeanor of Hope in the witness-box. At times it seemed as if the Crown Prosecutor had him cornered, but the more involved the questions and answers became the more Hope seemed to rise to the occasion — and explanation upon explanation followed. When being examined by his counsel, Lawyer Sullivan, he had told ' the court that it was the "Victoria de Larrinaga" in which he was torpedoed, but this he amended when under crossexamination. At a later stage of the proceedings he said he did not know how he came to make the mistake. "My mind is a blank in many things. 1 wish to say that the ship was sunk in the North Atlantic and not the North Sea." Before Hope left the box, Magistrate Hunt tried his hand at elucidating some of the mystery of the John William Hopes. To give some of his replies to the bench's questions may — if not clearing the matter up — give some idea of the peculiar ramifications of the story. "My father's name was John Hope, my mother's, Ellen Hope. When I was quite a boy my father and mother died. Then I was brought up with an aunt and uncle; his name was John Hope, a coal-miner. "He was my father's brother. My aunt's name was Mary. The father died in 1924 or 1925, but Mary Hope is still living. "I think that my aunt and uncle had one child — a boy, but he did not live with us. He was older than me. Just opposite there was another family with a John William- Hope." When Edith Alice Hope was called she replied among other things to Lawyer Sullivan that during the two and a-half years of their courtship she had not known of anyone making inquiries about her husband — police or anyone else. Her sister, Annie Barnes, she naively said, knew less about her husband than she did. Her sister believed the woman in Sheffield and would not answer her letters or help her in any way. Referring to six months which Hope had served in gaol in New Zealand in 1924 for failing to comply with the order of the court to maintain his wife — whom, he swears, is not his wife — in England, Edith, the witness, said Hope's sister sent them £90 with which to go Home. Their great idea seems to have been to shake the dust of New Zealand off their boots and when Hope came out of gaol they paid a deposit with the P. and' O. Company to go to London via Australia. But the application for passports was refused.

What Hope Forgot

The two of them went to Wellington and it was there that Hope advertised the fact that he had changed his name from Hope to Lane. In 1925 her husband was again arrested and taken to Auckland. Whatever else Hope may be, he is a sticker, for after this they wrote to Viscount Jellicoe. A reply came to say that the matter had been handed over to the police. Edith Hope said they also approached M. J. Savage, M.P., and she knew that he' went to Sir James Parr. "I was asked to get the names of reputable people in England who knew my husband; I got them and handed them to Mr. Savage and never heard anything more about it." She had never met a cousin of her husband's named John William Hope at 103 Walkden Road, nor did she remember her husband saying that there was another John William Hope working at the Manchester docks. When confronted with some signed statements which Crown Prosecutor Paterson produced, the witness appeared to be rather dubious and denied that Chief Detective Ward had interviewed her in the real sense of the word. He had met her in the street and she remembered him writing something down, but as to putting her signature to it, she did not remember. That the writing was like her own, she admitted, but could not remember making the statement or signing it. Later Edith Hope ad- • mitted that it was her signature on a statement produced. The reason the witness gave for not having written to her relatives — and giving the information to verify whether her husband had been previously married — was because they would not answer her letters. When Hope was serving his six months in Mount Eden, Chief Detective Ward went to see him and in his evidence made it quite clear that Hope had not looked upon, him as a visiting angel. Hope's reply to the chief detective's questions and the statement that he was there to clear up the matter and discover whether Hope had been wrongly imprisoned, was that the officer was there to "push him further into the gutter" and that he had been imprisoned owing to collusion between the magistrate and Hughes, of New Lynn. Hope said he would have his case mentioned in Parliament and claim £1000 compensation. "He was very angry," stated Chief Detective Ward, "and refused to give me any information at all about himself. "I said: T see on the file that the John William Hope against whom the order was made resided in 1921 at 103, Walkden Road, Worsley. You lived there, did you not?' Hope replied: 'No.'" When told that his wife had said he lived there, Hope replied: "That's all you know about it; you find out all you want to know." The chief detective's opinion was that Hope did not want inquiries made in England. Though three expert photographers earlier in the proceedings had given evidence that the Hope in court was not the man in the photograph which had come from England, Chief Detective Ward held a contrary opinion. He considered they were one and the same man. Before the decision was left to

Magistrate Hunt to consider, Lawyer Sullivan told the court that he had made every effort, in justice to himself, to. get Hope to make a clean breast of things if he was the man and throw himself on the mercy of the court, but Hope had stoutly maintained that he was not the man who was accused of marrying two wives. A cable to England had resulted in a reply to the effect that there was another John Hope working at one of the places where Hope had worked, but there was a difference in the- ages. That, in effect, is the principal evidence, but from the magistrate's decision an even clearer notion of the remarkable circumstances of the case may be gained. Having reviewed the earlier portions of the story, his worship goes on to say: "On April 3, 1924, Hope called at the Magistrate's Court and saw Mr. McKean, S.M. The latter, having the photograph sent from England before him, decided that he was the man. "Hope was then summoned to appear before the Magistrate's Court at Auckland on April 15, 1924, for disobedience of the order. He did not appear and Magistrate Poynton sentenced him to; six

Six Months' Gaol

months' imprisonment. This Hope served.

"On April 21, 1925, Hope came once again before the court, being represented this time by Lawyer Sullivan and charged with disobedience of the order. "In a written judgment Magistrate Poynton convicted him and he was sentenced to two months, warrant to be suspended so long as he paid the current order and 2/6 a week arrears. "When arrested Hope had on him £25; this was applied to the reduction of the money due and he was not imprisoned; He went to Wellington and changed his name. "Hope ignored the order, until in July, 1927, he owed £160. Another information was laid against him; he was arrested and brought to Auckland. "Lawyer Sullivan applied for. ,a. rehearing, being satisfied that Hope was not the man alleged and had further evidence to produce." Magistrate Hunt goes on to say: "I thought that probably in the two years that had elapsed since the case was last .before the court this might be so. "A cablegram has been received from the manager of the docks. This does not bear out the defendant's story. There was a John Hope born in 1879 and another born in 1887. . . . "In his evidence before me, defendant mentions this John William Hope at the docks, and also tells me of two more; one; he said, actually lived at 108 Walkden Road and was a cousin. He never told Mr. Poynton about him." Referring to the evidence of the photographers, Magistrate Hunt says: "I agree with Mr. Poynton, who had similar evidence brought before him, when he said: 'It is for the jury or judge to form opinions on such obvious matters of fact, not the witnesses.' . . . "The man stood opposite me for hours and the photograph was on my desk. He was standing as in the photograph. His stature, figure, features, style of dressing his hair, even his coat buttoned with one button as in the photograph (although that is nothing) are all identical with the photograph. I have no doubt that he is the man. "Hope gave very lengthy evidence and he gave it in a very unsatisfactory and unconvincing manner. It was very difficult to understand his account of his early days. "As far as I can understand, he and his brother and sister went at an early age from his own parents to live with his uncle, a brother of his father. "This uncle's name was John Hope,

Cable From Home

so that two brothers had the same Christian name. This uncle seems to have evicted his own children to make room for his brother's children." In regard to the service of the summons at 103 Walkden Road, which Hope denies, his worship says that to account for the service there was another John William Hope, a cousin, not the son of his uncle, John, but of another uncle, Thomas. "This is the first time this cousin is mentioned. Mr. Poynton refers to the cousin at the docks as a purely imaginary person invented' by the accused." That Hope cannot remember one name of the five of his shipmates who were saved by the trawler strikes the magistrate as peculiar and he remarks: "He does not appear to have been sufficiently interested to have ever made any enquiry!" That he had an identity disc and number, but could not remember the number, is another instance of his peculiar memory. Regarding his mind being a blank about many things, this comment by. jthe S.M. is terse: "I think he has done his best to fill up these blanks — and more — out of his imagination. There is so much of his evidence that could be commented on. "In my opinion the defendant is the John William Hope named in the order of the Sheffield court. The photograph is sufficient, in my opinion, to prove it, but I should come to the same conclusion even if there was no photograph at all. ... "He has made no effort for four years to clear himself, which he could easily have done if he were not the man." ine bench sentenced Hope to six months' imprisonment, which will' be suspended so long as he keeps up the current order and pays 10/- off the arrears. Costs against him £5/5/-, ,