MAYOR’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2620, 11 July 1871, Page 2

MAYOR’S COURT.

This Day. (Before his Worship the Mayor and the Hon. Dr. Buchanan, J.P.) DRUNKENNESS. Charles Duncan and Mathew Davis were each fined ss. THE ARSON CASE. The hearing of the charge of arson preferred against F. W. Reicbelt was resumed. The last witness examined on behalf of the prosecution was Dr Hulme, who detailed the results of experiments he had made with lucine. On the morning he obtained it, it stood at44deg., and when he began his experiments, which were made in the open yard at the Hospital, it stood at 50deg. A light was placed at a distance of lij inches from the top of the vessel, but no ignition took place. Ignition took place when a lighted candle was held over the orifice ; it then burnt with a lambent flame, but very little over the top of the tin. The next experiment was made in a room with the temperature at 64deg., he then took another can in wlrich the oil was within an inch of tho top ; raised the temperature to fiSdeg. by means of a sand bath, and holding a lighted candle horizonally at a distance or a quarter of an inch from the oil, it did not ignite. The temperature was raised to 80deg., but the candle had to be brouglit into contact with th; tin before ignition took place. The noise was not as loud as that of a gas-lamp. Mr Barton had proceeded to address the Court on behalf of the prisoner, while our reporter was absent from the Court. We give a portion of his address. He said that the circumstances additional to the fire it self on which the prosecution relied as evidence of the prisoner’s guilt, appeared to be these—falsification of books, and be sending away of goods to Gohlamm ?r secretly. Mr Smith ; And the non-explosive character of lucine.

Mr Barton would explode that idea in the course of hia argument. He con!ended there had been no falsification of books ; and explained the apparent “cooking”of books in respect of the Otago’s shipment. Ecichelt had been advised of shipments by that vessel. but the outbreak of the German war had proven'ed them b in" shipped as intended. In pro-: .f of t his was to be noticed the circum--tance that his average shipment was about three or four cases, and that by the followin" vessel he received eleven, showing that the last vessel had brought a shipment intended to have been sent by another vessel. As to the transaction with Goldammer, it would be shewn to have been a perfectly open one. Evidence would be called to shew that the stock selected was such as was likely to prove most saleable in the country. That Keichelt had a kindly interest in Goldammer was proved by the evidence of Murray and Mrs Howard. When Goldammer was in difficulties it was but natural to suppose that Keichelt, who was his countryman, would assist him in obtaining a start; while at the same time he was assisting himself, inasmuch as he was getting rid of stock which was unsaleable in Dunedin. It would be further proved that not only was the transaction mentioned by Keichelt, but was ma le known to Goldammer’s friends. This fact, coupled with Goldammer’s brother’s letter, showing plainly that the transaction was entered into even beforeGoldammer’s bankruptcy, showed that it had been a perfectly fair and open transaction. He (Mr Barton) learned that the provisional trustee had made a seizure of these goods ; but he would find that he had burnt his fingers. Referring to the evidence of the witnesses Hart and Boyes as to the value of these goods, the learned counsel went on to say that he submit ;ed that the evidence of those witnesses 5 lould be discarded by their Worships. Thvb of Hart was most discreditable. His estimates were of such a nature as to lead to the belief that he was thoroughly prejudiced. Hart, after estimating the value of the goods in Hugland, put on 40 per cent, for expenses, &c., in bringing them to Otago. It would be proved by skilled evidence that instead of costing Ll2O to be brought here, Hart must have known, from the size of the cases, and from the' space into which the goods could he put, that the cost of shipment, &c., would have been only about Lls. It was utterly impossible that they should cost 40 per cent. It was a sort of transaction that he could not but blame Hart for having intentionally made a misstatemint. He should call a large number of witnesses—the most respectable men that could be got in the town —who would prove that Hart’s estimate was greatly over-estimated. Hart’s estimate could not be explained on any fair trade principles ; and they were driven to one of two conclusions —either that Hart had had no experience m the trade, or he had overvalued the stock in a manner that was not creditable to him. For the defence considerable evidence would be given as to the value of these goods. They had all put the highest price upon them; had given their value at the price they would have cost wholesale in Dunedin, which was the highest possible price ; and from their evidence these two facts would be derived—first, that Keichelt would not only he justified but wise in weeding out of his stock goods that were unsaleable in Dunedin ; secondly, that the values put on the goods by Messrs Hart and Boyes were overstated. Before coming to the origin of the fire itself, he should call witnesses to show that the value of Keichelt’s stock was over L2OOO, which fact proved, there must be an absence of all motive on the part of the accused for setting fire to bis premises. Reiclielt’s statements oh the morning of his arrest should be taken as the statements of a man who was in great pain, and was incapable of knowing what he said ; of a man whose acquaintance with English was so meagre as to leave it probable that he had been mistaken in the terms he u-ed ; and in the statements in some measure were embodied the replies of Keichelt to the questions of the police : so that they were not—what they represented to be—the actual and voluntary statements of Keichelt. Nevertheless those statements were on the whole those of a man desirous of explaining the circumstances of the fire; and not of concealing anything. He now came to the prisoner’s explanation of the origin of the fire. His office was a small, close room, about Bft. square. On the day before the fire there was a strong lire burning in it; as the remains of lire in the stove showed Gne of the witnesses (Mr Beissel) that morning purchased a lamp from him; ami understood from him that he was experimenting with liicine. The experiment was this. He had a lot of small lamps placed in a row, and these he was tilling with lu cine from a tin pot, which fortu-

natdy had been discovered in the ruins of the fire. (The vessel was produced and internally bore evidence of a liquid havint, been burnt,in it.) He left those lamps and the pot in the place where he had been experimenting when he closed his shop that evening. That small room remaining closed for sixhours, possessed all the elements for creating what was known as fire damp ; and it was very reasonable to suppose these lamps engendered such a damp. Dr Hubne’s evidence was of no value ; his experiments wcr>made in the open air and no"; in a confined room, where, it would be proved, if tingassa from lucirue were mixed with the atmosphere in a certain proportion, there would be an explosion as inevitable as from damp in a mine. He would disprove Dr Hubne’s evidence by this. A witness would be called to show that in an experiment conducted by him, a Incirne tin had b -en greatly swollen by the mere application of a match to the oil, under certain circumstances and by the girl Perkins it would be proved that on one occasion when she filled a number of the lamps in a manner similar to that he had indicated, the oil in the vessel she was using suddenly caught fire, and injury to herself was only prevented by presence of mind. It would be abundantly proved that .lucine was a most dangerous compound in the hands of unskilful pci sons. He could not help thinking that Dr Huhne’s enquiries had been directed to ascertaining under what circumstances the oil would not explode and would not burn, and not as they should have been, to when it would explode or burn. It was easy to understand an ignorant German stating there had been an explosion, when in reality there had been a great llame suddenly starting up in his face. There was another thing which went to corroborate his story. A search of the ruins led to the discovery of a portion of a coat; and from this fragmentMr Bevcri-’ge would be enabled to swear that it belonged to one of Reicbelt’ coats, for the d-.y before the fire be had mended it; and it would be further proved that Reicbelt wore it that evening. The discovery of this piece of the cloth fully cor roborated Reidielt’a statement, that he took off his coat and endeavored to stamp out the fire. He thought he had shown—that if their Worships’c'.me to the conclusion that the witnesses he intended to call were to be be'ieved—that the stock was worth considerably over LI3OO, which was one strong element — that Reiche’t did a good business, and there was ample evidence to that effect and none to the contrary—there was very strong presumption that Reichelt’s account was true, that the fire had been accidentally caused. He did not see it possible how the Bench could come to any other conclusion, seeing that there was an absence of motive, if (he witnesses proved what he was iusti acted they would prove. Alluding to the .alleged discrepancy in Reichelt’s statement, that he alarmed the watchman, it would be proved by a witness that he saw a man without a coat rushing up the Princes Street steps before the bell rang. The man called out “ Fire ! ’ and the voice was that of a foreigner. In conclusion, he submitted, if he pr-ved fully all he had said he could prove, and under the peculiar circumstances of the case, their Worships, if they had any doubt, should not as was contended by the counsel for the prosecution, commit the prisoner, because, by such committal, if such a conviction were upon their minds, the insurance companies would, to a certainty, get rid of the claim, and he submitted honest claim, Reicbelt had against them. By dismissing the case they left him in the position of having either to give up voluntarily LI,BOO, thus submitting himself to nun, or bringing a civil action for the recovery of his insurance. Should the jury, who tried that action, return a verdict for the defendants ; it would amount to a finding that Reicbelt had wilfully burnt down his premises, in which case he did not hesitate to say a week would not elapse before he was again in the hands of the police. Very few witnesses for .the defence had been examined, when the court rose at five o’clock.