189
might have a very different value to tell, but
he couldn't say. The facts in the case were simple and clear. The defendant was for-
merly in the Royal Engineers, stationed at Hongkong. He joined the Engineers in 1885, and was attested in March, 1885. The second marriage was not till December, 1908. Therefore, it was fifteen years after he joined the Engineers that he made the second marriage. He was married in England on the 14th of July, 1890, that was to say five years and three months after he had been attested. He didn't know at what age they took people into the Engineers, but he should imagine that having joined the Royal Engineers and been attested in 1885, when it came to July, 1890, he must have been certainly not a minor at all.
Prisoner-I was under sixteen years of age when I joined the Engineers, my Lord.
The Attorney General, continuing, said prisoner left Hongkong in February, 1898, and, at that time, he was still in the Royal Engineers. His wife left along with him. While they were in Hongkong, they lived at the married quarters at Lyeemun. He returned alone to Hongkong in November, 1900. He was met by a comrade, a Warrant Officer in the Royal Engineers, who recognized him and inquired after his wife, and he told the comrade that she was dead. On 1st December, 1900, he went through the form of marriage with a woman here, who was, at the time, a teacher in St. Francis' College, Wanchai. In the marriage certificate, he described himself as twenty-eight years of age. His age must be considerably over that, because he joined the Engineers in 1885, more than fifteen years before this second marriage, and must have been considerably over thirty when the second marriage took place. That was the only way he (the Attorney General) had of testing the Prisoner's statement and knowing that he was not speaking correctly as to his age.
His Lordship --Of course he is not.
The Attorney General said the man must have been a very foolish person who told him
that it was legal for him to marry again, and, as to his being a minor at the time of his first marriage, the records were absolutely against that. In the depositions at the Magistracy, the age he had put down was thirty-five, which brought them nearer the correct age. He (the Attorney General) did not wish to say anything in aggravation of the crime at all. The man had pleaded guilty, and he did not wish to press for severe punishment.
His Lordship said he had listened to these statements, and he was of opinion that Prisoner had said a great deal too much which should not have been said. Half of his statement he (His Lordship) could not believe, and Prisoner must have lied one way or another. According to the dates given, the Prisoner must have joined the Royal Engineers at thirteen years of age. He had no pity for him at all. He had ruined two women in this way, and the sentence of the Court was that he go to prison for two years, with hard labour.