THE KAIAPOI FIRE.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 11498, 3 February 1903, Page 3

THE KAIAPOI FIRE.

RESULT OF THE ENQUIRY. The enquiry as to t?ie origin of the fire in Mr Egan's brewery, on January 3rd, was resumed at the Kakpoi Courthouse yesterday, before Mr H- W. Bishop, coroner, and the jury, of which Mr Carl Hansen was foreman. J. A- J. Murray, medical practitioner, said he was called to attend F. Q. Htmpteimin, at his residence, at 3.45 a.m. He was in bed, and mentally he seemed agitated. He gave an account of what he said had happened about an hour previously. He said he told hie wife about it and got into bed. She sent for .witness. Witness examined Hempleman. On the centre of his fortdiead tivtre was a swelling an inch and half long and half as broad. /Over this the outer skin was red and abrased. The direction of the swelling was jrfiightly perpendicular. Over the left cheek bom-, and at the external angle of the left eye, there was a sligihtiy swollen and red condition of the skin, and of the pairt under it. The left eyo was bloodshot at the external angle. On his right forearm, on the extensive there was a bluish and swollen spot, about the sizj of half a orown. On tlie anterior aspect of the left thigh there was a similar spot. There were no oth«r discoverable injuries. His general condition was good. Tα poiice: The injuries gave me the impression oi having resulted from blows. Though slight, ha was not prepared to say they would not have rendered Hempleman unconscious. The bruisgs appeared rather slight to cause unconsciousness for over an hour. It was not impossible, but rather improbable. The marks on arm and thigh had nothing to do with unconsciousness. Tho unoonsctousnees would have to be caused by the blows on forehead and face. The blow on the forehead might have knocked him down. To Coroner: Should say that Hempleman'e condition was consistent with the account of the assault now read from Hemp'.emon'a evidence. To police: Unconsciousness should have taken place immediately, and Hempleman would, in that case, not recollect anything afterwards on receiving the blow on the foreheadJamea Stevenson, brewer at Kaiapoi Brewery, eaid, with his family be resided on the premises. The office was part of, and under the same roof as his house, but there was no direct communication except by going outside. There is a door from the office to the house, but it was fastened. On January 2nd Hempleman and witness ceased work at the brewery at 5 p.m. Hempleman was in the office part of the day, and he kept the keys of the office and strong room. The hitter key was on a bunch, that of the door was occasionally loose. On that night witness, 'his wife, and family slept in tho house. He was awakened by his wife at 2.40 a.m. She had been attending ia boy with the toothache, and she found the 'place full of smoke. Witness went outside and found the office was on fire; he saw the flame through tho window, and caned out "Fire" and ran for assistance. They got buckets and extinguished the fire. The office door was open. He sent for the { police. The door of the strong room was wide open, and a fire was burning in it. j The books of the brewery were burning. Witness knew the cash book, which was burning. It was more burned than- the other books. The office key was in the door. There was a strong emell of kerosene. It was on the shelves in the strong room, and upon, the desk. On the desk there was some burnt waste paper or ashes of burned paper. Witness would not swear kerosene was put there, as they used s a lamp which had been newly filled. It was a swing lamp, and if overfilled it would letk. They teed-this lamp to examine the pre-) miees. Before the fire the lamp was in his bedroom and lighted, and he brought it from hie house outeid-e and left it on the ground while he went to give the alarm. On coming back he went for water with the lamp in his hand, and Mallasch threw water, and witness also threw water, on the fire. The office was. very full of smoke. Witness laid the lamp on the desk where this kerosene was noticed. He could not swear where they laid the lamp in the strong room, but he laid it on the spot where he j afterwards found kerosene. The lamp was laid on the right-hand side of the shelf as you go into the strong room. Would not be surprised that there was no kerosene on the right-hand side. The whole ot the shelves in the strong room smelt of kerosene. The place must have been burned down in a few mimrtes beyond hope of saving it if witness had not discovered it when he did. It took two or three minutes to call Mallasch, a fireman who lived three chains away. Mallasch threw water on and got the fire under i control wMe witeess held 'the lamp, and then botili threw water in. Witness had nothing to do with the office. Moneys, in absence of Hempleman, were handed to him, and for rales of beer money was received toy him, for which he took no receipt from Hemplemaa. Did r.ot see any-1 thing auspicious on the day before the fire. Witness 'hod £75 insurance on his own furniture and effects. If they had been destroyed lie would have suffered loss. It was daylight when the fire was wholly put out at ,5.20. Witness was the first to notice t'tie state of the cash-book, delivery register, ana ledger after the fire. They were lying open in the strong room. These were the books in regular use. Witness did not find any other books open. With Constable Wildermoth they examined the premises, and found a Ibunch of keys, of | which the strong room key was one, at the back corner of the brewery, leading on to the road. Witness and Hempleman j were busy in Christmas week. Could not say it Hemplaman would have time to go to the bank io deposit the money. j To Coroner: Went to bed at 10.30, and was not disturbed during the night. Frank Egan, proprktor of Kaia-poi Brewery, residing at The Oaks, Opawa, said up <o January 3rd F. Q. Hempleman was in his employ as clerk at the brewery, and ac also had to delh«r beer and assist generally. It' was his duty to keep the books and collect and ttonk money. He had imperative instructions, verbal and written ,to pay all moneys received into the banking account at Kanpoi. He had instructions not to pay ««»unts. Hempleman had been in his service since June, 1900, and was discharged since the fire. Had occasion to find fault with -him as to rrrejrularities, commencing in May last. On the last Monday of December, witness told" Hempleman be intended to get, the book* ; audited in the following smooth. Witaee* usually visited the breraery about once a week. On examining tflie accounts to the extent he had gone, he fonnd Hempleman had received in cash about £250, and of that sum he only accounts for about £71. On M»y 12th irregularities oooanred in the ! cash book of £23 7s 9d, and on September Ist £11 6s 9d, which witness rectified and cautioned Hemploman. 13ie ascertained de- j fkiency of ca*h was £180< according to wit- J ness s caJoulat'ce, out tat police had) made farther enquiries. Heatpleman, in reply to I witness, in presence of Detective Herbert, Mid 2m ttagU he bad iISQ is cub ia tfa»J

strong room on the night of the fire. Wit* 1 ness rananded him of an unexpended amount.for jpetty oath- and wages of £17. and Hempkaoao admitted there -would alao ! be that amount. Witness asked if that covered che loss. Hβ mid that fee had I moneys on account of & society. Witness asked Hempkmea if £80 or £90 would cover the Joss on ■witness's account. He ' said lie thought it would. Witness aeked ! him if i.o wae certain it was under £100, but Hempkanan would not fix a. sum. On January 4th, -when witness arrived, the cash book and ledger were partly destroyed. In absence of HempWnaD, or when be delivered beer, Stevenson would take cash,'out would hand it to Hem pieman. To Coroner: Hempfeman was paid two guineas per week. Had some reason to suspect Hemrpleman'e irregularities before the fire, particularly in regard to a deposit slip and cheques, which latter he had kept in hand. Told him of intended audit in ajij outspoken way, in consequence of deficiencies in stock between the brewery accounts and bottling stores. Theodore Ma&aach, employed in the woollen factory, said on January 3rd, at 3.15 a.m., he received an alarm at bis house, 500 yards from the brewery. On going out he caw the witness Stevenson, and his little boy. Hβ said tiho brewery wae on fire, and witness went with him. Witness could see the smoke, and reaching the office could see the flame through the open window. He closed the window, and found the door also open. He was in front of Stevenson, and saw two fires on the desk and another in the strong-room. At the tap, near the office door,' got water, and threw about a dozen buckets in. Stevenson held the lantern. Hie attention wae drawn by Stevenson to the fact that office and etrong-room doors were open. There was a key in the office door, but not in that of the strong-room. To jury: I>id not notice a smell of kerosene. Saw Mrs Stevenson and family outside. Stevenson had the lantern when he called the witness. To Coroner: Stevenson did not throw water on t<he fire. He held the lantern. To jury: If would take Stevenuon two minutes to go from the brewery to witness's house. "* Constable M. J. Wildarmoth stated he was caJ ed on January 3rd to the brewery fire, and examined the premises, which he described. Hβ located the spot on the desk wJterw kerosene had been, which was charred with the fire. HewenttoHemplenian's later, and the latter made a statement substantially the same as given by him at the inquest. Witness produced the cashbox, he also found the keys as stated by Stevenson.

little boy. Hβ said the brewery •Wβ* on fire, and witness went with him. Witness could see the smoke, and reaching the office could see the flame through the open window. He closed the window, and found the door also open. He was in front oi Stevenson, and saw two firea on the desk and another in the strong-room. At the tap, near the office door,' got water, and threw about a dozen buckets in. Stevenson held the lantern. Hie attention wm drawn by Stevenson to the fact that office and strong-room doors were open. There was a key in the office door, but not in that of the strong-room. To jury: I>id not notice a smell of kerosene. Saw Mrs Stevewson and family outside. Stevenson had the lantern when he I called the witness. To Coroner: Stevenson did not throw water on t<he fire. He held the lantern. To jury: If would take Steveneon two minutes to go from the brew«ry to witness's house. "* Constable M. J. Wildennoth stated he was caJ ed on January 3rd to the brewery fire, and examined the premises, which he described. Hβ located the spot on the desk wHiere keirosene had been, which was charred with the fire. HewenfctoHemplenian's later, and the latter made a jfttutement substantially the same as given by him at the inquest. Witness produced the cashbox, he also found the keys as stated by Stevenson. H. Gough, engineer to the Kaiapoi Borough Council, knew Hempl«nan intimately. Hβ remembered the report of his haying been assaulted. Witness went to see him in bed, propped up with piHowa on the evening of January 3rd. He was smoking a cigarette. About five or six monti* before the fire Stevenson, the brewer, asked witness to make him a duplicate bey for the office door, as they had broken theite. Hβ made it and fitted it to the door, and gave it to Stevenson. Hempleman since the fire, on the day he was dismissed, said he thought Mr Egan had treated him harshly, and if he could see the ftooks he could explain that everything was correct. The Coroner said he would leave the evidence to the consideration of the jury. He then referred to the improbabilities in Hempleman's evidence, and observed that steps would be taken in respect, of the irregularities referred to. It was for the jury to decide as to the origin of the fire, and they could also say how in their opinion it was caused, if the chain of evidence was sufficiently clear to enable them to do so. The jury retired for 23 minutes to consider their verdict, which they returned as follows: —In the opinion of the jury the fire was caused by some person or persons who had a strong motive in destroying the books, but there is not sufficient evidence to show who those persons were.