The case of the United States v. Frank F. Howe, which has occupied the attention of Judge Lobingier recently, came to a conclusion en Luesday when His Honour found the accused guilty of forgery and sentenced him to two years' imprisonment. Bowe's name, it will be remembered, was frequently mentioned in the recent trial in H. M. Supreme Court when Spence and Chalmers were convicted of running bogus insurance companies. Howe then gave evidence for the Crown. In this case he was charged with the forgery of insurance agency documents and their sale for Tls. 1,000. Mr. L. G. Husar, District Attorney, prosecuted, and accused was defended by Mr. C. F. Franklin, Tuesday Judge Lobingier clu. livered judgement as follows After the denial of his motion to dismiss, defendant took the stand on his own behalf. He admitted the visit of Moench and Jewell to his room but stated that it was purely social and denied that any papers had been signed. Two of his employees, a Chino-Portuguese clerk, aged 20, named Cruz and a Korean, claim to have been werking there when two men came whom they describe with rather suspicious similarity, and the employees, who were meanwhile occupied, did not notice either of the men' sign a paper. But there is nothing to show that this was on the same date to which Moench refers and the accused himself docs not state that Jewell never came to the room but once. Besides Moench expressly says that on the night he was present "there were only Mr, Jewell, Mr. Howe and myself."
Conrracts From Japan.
Defendant's main reliance, however, is upon the testimony of Cruz to the effect that the contracts in question were received by mail from Japan in an envelope which ho opened as accused wag then in gaol. He states that he did not read the contracts—merely glanced at them—but that he remembers the signatures thereon of Mandeville and Kelly. If this testimony is true, "that of Moench cannot be, and we must determine which is credible. Moench is the older, made a better appearance en the stand, and holds a more responsible position. His manner of testifying carried the marks of truthfulness. If his narrative is not true it la a base fabrication. Hie could not have been merely mistaken. Cruz on the other hand might easi?~ have n so. He merely glanced at the contracts. Ha remembers no other
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.