AN AMAZING MARRIAGE.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXVI, Issue 10478, 14 October 1912, Page 3

AN AMAZING MARRIAGE.

MOCK CEREMONY IN SUSSEX. London, August 21. A most remarkable narrative involving an alleged mock marriage was told to the Lewes Bench of Magistrates this week. Miss Evangeline Healey was the “bride, ” and Mr Francis Mannering the “bridegroom” ; while George Alfred Crawley and Laurence Brisco Graham, the professed minister and solicitor respectively, have been committed for trial on ehttrges of solemnising a marriage in a dwellinghuose at Seaford, on Jliiy 13th, and also with inducing Francis S. Mannering and Evangeline Healey to sign a certain paper in order that it should afterwards be irscd as a promissory note with intent to defraud.

The alleged oifence is novel, and the indictment is based upon an Act of George IY’s reign. Mr Lawson Lewis prosecuted on behalf of the police. He described the charges as very grave, and under the first count the accused were liable to a term of fourteen years’ imprisonment. For some time during Jane and July, Mr Mannering. was staying in a convalescent home at Seaford. There he became acquainted with Miss Healey, a relative of someone in charge of the home. As was admitted on all hands, a genuine attachment sprang up between Mr Mannering and Mis Healey. A little before July 13th, Mr Mannering met the prisoner Graham spoke of his engagement to a lady, and said they were going to the Continent, and expressed a wish to be married in England. Grraham said he could arrange that. Mr Mannering and Graham put themselves in commuuciation with the Roman Catholic Convent at Seaford, but were told that the marriage could only take place there in certain circumstances. They went to the registrar, but on hearing what the cost would be of a. speedy marriage they abandoned the idea., Immediately afterwards Graham told Mannering that he had obtained somebody who could solemnise the marriage. “ That Graham knew he was embarking on a criminal proceeding there can be no doubt,” said counsel. Mr Mannering was perfectly frank. He said he had no money at all and Graham replied that he himself gwould pay all expenses. “That,” said Mr Lewis, “is strange, unless he had some ulterior motive; I suggest that Graham had a very serious object in J view.” |

On the morning of Saturday, July 11th, Mr Maunering and Miss Healey met opposite the Seaford Post Office, and went into the house Ho. 16 Bast street, where Graham and his wife occupied rooms. The two prisoners were waiting in a room on the ground floor. Graham was introduced to Miss Healey as MiManner ing’s solicitor. Crawley was introduced as “the registrar,’’ but Mr Maunering at once substituted the word “minister.” The unfortunate girl, having complete faith in Mr Maunering, had no reason to disbelieve the statements. Crawley, a prayer book in his hand, went through a large part of the marriage service, and at the appropriate moment a ring was placed on the girl’s finger. As far as she could believe a ceremony of marriage had actually taken place. Immediately after the ceremony Graham produced two papers and asked for the signatures of Miss Healey and Mr Maunering to both, leading them to believe that the documents were marriage certificates. The signatures were given. “Miss Healey’s share in the transaction,” said Mr Lewis, “is a cruelly unfortunate one. lam not going "to .suggest that Maunering is free from, blame. With regard to his beliefs and what he thought he will have an opportunity of speaking for himself when ho gets into the box. Yevy fortunately, in the interests of the unfortunate girl, the couple separated after the “ceremony,” and therefore the deplorable disaster, which would in ordinary circumstances follow upon a mock marriage has been escaped. ’ ’ Mr Lewis suggested that, so far from being certificates of marriage the papers were promissory notes for the payment of money. One had been destroyed. The other was in the hands of Mr Fuller, Graham’s representative. Immediately after the “wedding” Mr Mannering was in company wi th the two prisoners, and Graham demanded money with threats. Mr Maunering had no money. Graham suggested that the girl might have some, or, failing that, that they could get possession of her jewels. That very day, probably impelled by nervousness, Mr Maunering asked Miss Healey for £3. She soon discovered that the whole thing had been a fraud. ‘ ‘ The consequences of this, ’ ’ concluded Mr Lewis, ‘ ‘might have been the ruin of any respectable woman or girl. Fortunately that had not occurred ; but the gravity of the offence remained. ”

During the police court proceedings, Crawley declared that Mannering was the principal conspirator in the whole piece. He said that Mannering brought the prayer book and scored out the parts of the service not to be read.

In cross examination by Crawley the “bridegroom” admitted that on July 10th he was introduced to Crawley by Graham as a friend of his who was hard up. Crawley: You put it to me that you wanted a mock marriage? Yes. I was very reluctant to have anything to do with it?—You showed hesitation.

You obtained reluctant consent from me to read this service.—Yes.

You knew that I was not a minister?—Yea.

From beginning to end I was trying- to get you not to carry it through?—All you said was that you were in a bad financial position, or you would not have had anything to do with it.