#1 is a swindlecant (easy)
#2 is a swindlecant (being female)
#3 is an honestant (being the only honest man)
I know, it's not indicated in the original and may violate the spirit in which it was given, but isn't it logically possible?
However, if #2 were a swindlecant, #3 would have to be the honestant AND the woman in order to make #2's statement false.