SUPREME COURT, HOKITIKA.

Kumara Times, Issue 2356, 17 March 1884, Page 3

SUPREME COURT, HOKITIKA.

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION. Friday, March 14. [Before his Honor Mr Justice Williams.] ARSON. John Maloney and John Hughes were indicted for setting fire to a house at Rutherglen, on the 2nd October. The prisoners pleaded not guilty. As this trial is likely to prove of much interest, we recapitulate the incidents in connection with the charge submitted to the jury by Mr Purkiss, the Crown Prosecutor, and reported in the Guardian:— The Crown Prosecutor, instating the case, said the prisoners were charged with setting fire to a store at Rutherglen. The prisoner Hughes was at Hokitika, and left his store in charge of Maloney. The. children of Hughes were boarded with the neighbours, and Maloney was left in sole charge. The store was insured for £275, and the stock for £2OO. The case for the Crown was that Maloney deliberately burned down the stoi-e, at the instigation of Hughes. The goods had been removed before the fire, and many of them had been discovered, having been hid. Maloney’s guilt would be almost proved out of his own mouth by statements that he made in separate places. At one time Maloney said he was roused up, and left the building undressed, another time he said he slept in his trousers. Evidence would be given that when the fire occurred Maloney had on all his clothes. Maloney said he burned the house, but it would have to be proved. It would be for the jury, putting all the statements together, to point conclusively to the fact that Maloney wilfully set fire to the house. Hughes made a claim for the insurance, when he stated everything but some cheese and raisins were destroyed. In the statement he set out how the loss was made, and entered a sewing machine, &c. No trace of a sewing machine was found in the debris, but it was found in a building occupied by Mrs Hughes, and the neighbours had been asked to take charge of it. A clock was found hid away, and there was no trace of either the flour or the rice, .After the fire although it was alleged everything was destroyed, bills were found, after the fire, on the floor of the store, unscorched. The police suspicious were aroused, and a search was made, when a boiler was found, and a quantity of tobacco under it. When the boiler was unearthed, Hughes owned to it without the slightest compunction. In a butcher’s shop belonging to Hughes, and a stable, a large number of articles were found belonging to Hughes, on which he claimed the insurances. In the garden were found three boxescontaining spices, and many other articles. When the box was discovered Hughes said it contained spices, and so it did. Other boxes were taken out and Hughes told the detective one of them would contain caps. If Hughes bad not been a party to burying the boxes, how could he know what they contained. Sacks were afterwards found in a tunnel and contained drapery, also two albatross skins. The contents were shown to Hughes, when he said those are not mine, my drapery consisted of moleskin. Nearly all the articles in the sacks were ladies’ drapery. The Crown Prosecutor further stated that he would be able to show that previously Hughes had purchased drapery at Greymouth, and that he had in his possession two albatross skins before the fire. On the Thursday before Hughes went to Hokitika he was seen digging in the garden where the things were discovered. He was also seen removing books from the store which was burned down—trade books. When asked why he did so, Hughes answered, “ What have you to do with it ?” It may be set up that someone else set fire to the store, but that would imply burglary, and that afterwards the goods were secreted. Evidence was taken, and On Saturday morning the Crown Prosecutor addressed the jury in a long and powerful speech. Mr Stringer made an able speech for the defence. His Honor summed up and said he would not detain the jury longer than he could help. If Maloney set fire to the building at the instigation of Hughes, then both are equally guilty. If you think Maloney set the place on fire, then Maloney is guilty, if advised by Hughes, then both are guilty. You have to decide if the store was set on fire, as stated in the indictment. His Honor reviewed the evidence at length. The jury retired at 1 p. m „ and'’returned to Court shortly before 5 p.m., when the foreman said there was no probability of their agreeing upon a verdict. His Honour regretted that the jury were not likely to agree, as it would

cause a great deal of inconvenience. In most cases where the majority of a jury were for a certain verdict, the minority gave way. However, ho had no desire to coerce them. He could not discharge them until the twelve hours were up, and as they had retired at one p.m., they could nob be released until ten on Monday morning, unless they agreed before midnight. A juryman said it would only be waste of time to attempt to agree, for some of the jurymen would not convict on the strongest circumstantial evidence. [By Telegraph.] [from our own correspondent.] Hokitika, March 17, 3.15 p.m. The Court resumed this morning at ten o’clock, when the foreman of the jury (Mr Wm, Morris), having announced that they were unable to agree upon their verdict, a new jury was empannelled, and a new trial proceeded with. The following are the names of the second jury ;—Daniel Cullen (foreman), John Jackson, Edward J. Lewis, Lucas Markham, Richard Stewart Aguew, Edward Kearney, Charles Curtis, Patrick O’Neil 1, David Bourke, Daniel Lynch, Patrick Clare, and Andrew Dunlop.