The applicant went to trial and gave evidence which was obviously disbelieved by the jury because he was convicted of the charge. He tried to inculpate another innocent person during the course of his evidence and obviously earned the considerable disapproval of the learned trial Judge in the way in which he behaved himself in that regard, as well as for his obvious dishonesty in denying the charge.

He was sentenced to four years' imprisonment with a non-parole period fixed at two years. The appeal is based largely upon the disparity in the sentences of the applicant and his wife. There are certain factors running in both directions. As against the applicant, he was substantially involved in his wife's fraudulent dealings, but having regard to the nature of the charge brought against him as compared with that brought against his wife, it is quite manifest that he was being charged as an accessory only, and in relation only to part of the profits which were made from the venture.