ALLEGED MARRIAGE FRAUDS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 10085, 21 March 1896, Page 2 (Supplement)

ALLEGED MARRIAGE FRAUDS.

For the sixteenth tirao Mr. Lushington sab on January 28 at Bow-street) Police Court to investigate the accusations against Mortimer Daniel Skates, alias Daniel Mortimer, manager of " The World's Great Marriage Association (Limited) John Charles Skates, alias Charles Barrington; Norman Golding Hennah, secretary to the Marriage Association; John A brums, alias John Charles Skates, alias Charles Barrington; and Anthony Maddows, stated to be editor of the Martrimoniai Herald, who were charged with having unlawfully conspired with others not in custody to obtain various sums of money by fraud. Mr. Charles Mathews, instructed by the Treasury, proseouted; Mr, E. Bennett Calvert appeared for John Charles Skates ; Mr. Warburton for Mortimer Skatos and Abrams; and Mr. (3. M. Cohen for Hannah. MacUlows again conducted his own case.

At the last hoaring tho case for the prosecution was concluded, and now it was intended to call certain witnosses for the defonco.

On being asked if thoy had anything to say in defence, all the prisoners confined themselves to pleading "Not guilty," with the exception of Maddows, who made a statement.

Mr. Wnrburton then passed in rapid review tho whole of the evidence for the prosecution, pointing out that in several of the cases the defendants had really nothing to answer.

Mr. Calvort followed in a similar strain, and pointed out that practically nothing had boen brought out to incriminate his client, John Charles Skates.

Mr. Cohon said that tho witnesses thoy desired to call hero would only be a few samples of tho ladies on the defendants' bobks, and would show tho class of evidence that) would be produced at the trial if the defendants were committod. There was, lie knew, in England, a prejudice against this kind of business, owing to tho fact that marriage was nearly always looked at from its sentimental side; but such businesses were very common and very flourishing in other countries. If the business carried on by tho defendants was considered illegal, surely no servants' registry in tho land could escape Inspector Marshall's efforts. As to the representations that had been made by the defendants, they were simply those ordinarily employed in business, and to them, as in other businesses, the advice, caveat emptor, applied. Then, as to the witnesses who had given evidence against the association, they were peoplo who might bo fitly described as " tho rejocted of women" (laughter). Many were widowers who wero acquainted wit l, the wiles and wishes of tho other sex. 't here could be no doubt that they only applied to the association as a last resource.

A lady was called into the witness-box. Mr. Warburton said that, us lie had previously announced, he should claim the same indulgence for the witnesses for the defence as had been accorded to those for the prosecution. The lady's name was accordingly not disclosed. A paper was handed to her containing the correct names of the witnesses for the prosecution, and she was invited to say if she had heard from any of them. Two nahies were identified by the witness, who was spoken of by Air Warburton us " Miss W.," and she stated that she was the daughter of a city merchant in a good position, that she possessed a private income of from £150 to £200. and that at the death of her father she would get about as much again. She had receive 1 hundreds of letters through the association, and had written about a hundred replies, but she had never becomo engaged. By Mr. Mathews: She wanted a husband with 11300 a year. A gentleman was next called. His daughter, he said, had lately been married to a military man, and he identified the descriptions of his daughter and hor husband which appeared in the association's books, and declared that they were both correct.

" Rosamond" was then called. On entering the witness-box the lady asked permission to speak, and then said that " sho didn't want to be illustrated in that sort of way," pointing to tho press artists. Mr. Cohen assured her that the sketches were never recognisable— statement which caused some laughter in court.

The witness stated that she was the daughter of a solicitor, and had £231 capital. As to her personal description, she called upon tho association, and left it to them to describo her. " Rosamond" was one of the ladies mentionod by the gentleman referred to as " Mr. X, the unknown quantity," ami the witness said that she had called at the association's premises to lmro an interview with a gentleman of his description—a doctor—but she was too late to see him. She frequently called at 5, Mecklenburgh Square to have interviews with gentlemen. Sho wanted her husband to have £500 a year, and she received about 25 personal introductions. Some of the gentlemen she met answered her requirements; some did not.

" Miss E.A.," who was next called, was one of the ladies who corresponded with the prosecutor Warrick, whom it is intended to call at the trial, illness having prevented his giving evidence at this court. The wit ness said that she held a high position as a " finishing governors," and she received an average salary of £85 as a resilient governess. She had £30 per annum private income, and £000 capital besides. Tho next witness, who one would have thought would not have had much difficulty in obtaining a husband, judging from her looks, stated, in reply to Mr. Calvert, that she only joined tho association by way of a joke. She might have described herself as the widow of an officer in tho Indian army, and as having an income of £200 a year, but she could not remember. At that time she really had means, but how much she really could not say—her receipts were so very uncertain. An application form giving this description was shown her, and she declared that the description of hersolf which sho had given there was correct. She had married Binco then. She could not remember receiving a lettor from " Nemo," but many of the letters received sho burnt unread.

Tho next lady said sho joined the association in tho spring of 1833, together with another young lady who was living with her. She bad £4000 capital, and wiilied to meet a gentleman between 40 and 50, with some £300 a year. She corresponded with about 20 gentlomen, bub thoy did nob quite suit her.

In reply to the defendant Maddows, witness said that she had receivod introductions to gentlemen who used nom-dt-plumts. " Miss Stow," tho noxt witness, stated that sho was specially recommended to Sutton, but they did nob correspond. She did receive a letter from " Physiologist" (Mr. X.). She had a email incorao, and £400 capital. Another lady deposed tbab both sho and her daughter had been on the books of tho association, and both had means. She could nob say whether her daughter had been introduced to a stockbroker.

An elderly lady was called, but she spoke not as regards hersolf, bub of her daughter, whom she placed on the association's books in August, 1894. She had corresponded with Jordan, and subsequently married a gentleman in a good position through the association, and witness wrote and thanked tho association. Her daughter had £100 a year, and expectations up to £10(10. This lady, said Mr. Warburton, was tho last witness who would be called at that court, though they would produce a large number more at the trial. He had now only to ask for a formal remand for a week, in order to prevent the case boing heard at tho forthcoming sessions, as there was much more work to be done bofore all the witnesses for the defence could be gob together. In support of this, Mr. Uavies, the solicitor instructing counsel for tho defonce, explained that he hud attended to inspect) the association's books nearly every day during the past fortnight, bub it would take quite another fortnight to complete tho case.

Mr. Lushington, however, advised him to apply to the judge for an adjournment, and committod all tho defendants for trial, allowing bail, increased in the case of the brothora Skates to two sureties in £250 each.