THE SEVERED HAND FRAUD. [BY TELEGRAPH.—PRESS ASSOCIATION.] CHRISTCHURCH, Saturday.

Waikato Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2147, 13 April 1886, Page 2

THE SEVERED HAND FRAUD. [BY TELEGRAPH.— PRESS ASSOCIATION.] CHRISTCHURCH, Saturday.

The Howard case was resumed this morning. Mr Harper, for the prosecution, said that the case did not depend upon the nonniarriage of Howard, as a seoond count charged him with an' attempt to defraud. Regarding the question of marriage,' the evidence showed the vessel oft which Howard's so-called marriage took" plan was registered and owned in Glaugoj*^ Th« question was whether a Scotoh~*lrregular marrutee was valid if performed on board ship. To make such a marriage valid in Scotland, it must be performed in Scotland, and followed by a cohabitation. He naked His Honour, if he bad any doubt, to reserve the point, if necessary, for the Court of Appeal. Mr Joynt, for Howard, submitted that a ship was part of the territory of Scotland; therefore a Scotch irregular marring* performed on board ship was valid. Mr Grainger, for Mrs Howard, adopted much the same line of defence as Mr Joynt. Mr Holmes for the Godfreys, submitted that there was no evidence whatever to connect them with the affair at alt. Mr Justice John.Bton, in summing up, occupied an hour and a-half. He was somewhat favourable to the Godfreys. At half-past six the jury retired,and after an hour and a-half returned, the foreman announcing that they acquitted the Godfreys. With regard to Mrs Howard, they had little doubt of her innocence previous to December 15, the day before the severed hand was found at Suniner, but wished to know if she would be guilty of conspiracy for the action she took with regard to the hand after this date ? His Honor replied that he thought, on the whole, be could rule that the jury might bring her in guilty if they thought she knowingly made false statements after December 16. After a abort consultation the jury found all the prisoners not guilty on the first count, that of conspiracy, and Howard guilty on the second count, the attempt to defraud. His Honor sentenced Howard to two years' imprisonment without hard labour. In passing sentence he remarked that he quite agreed with the verdict with regard to the Godfreys. He regretted that the law did not allow him to give a more severe punishment, or 1 to sentence the prisoner to hard labour. The Court adjourned at twenty n^Qtttw to nine p.m.