INQUEST ON THE LATE FIRE.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 52, 20 January 1872, Page 6

INQUEST ON THE LATE FIRE.

An inquest with the object of attempting to discover the cause of the late fire on the premises of Mr Young, Molesworth street, was held on Tuesday afternoon, at Osgood’s Hotel, before Dr Johnston, Coroner for the district. The following gentlemen composed the jury Messrs Hatfield (foreman), Gibbs, Parsons, Harvey, Maxwell, Cook, Dutton, Payne, Barber, "Carpenter, Ebden, Fawcett, and Brown. Mr Brandon attended to watch the proceedings on behalf of the Liverpool, London, and Globe Insurance Company, and questioned the witnesses on any points likely to elicit information. . , ’ The Coroner informed the jury that they had been called together to inquire into the origin of a fire which was attended with some rather mysterious circumstances, and as a matter of necessity the jury would have to inspect the premises, so as to familiarise themselves with the statements and explanations likely to be given in evidence.

This was done. On the return of the jury, the Coroner said it was very probable they would think an unnecessarily long time had elapsed since the occurrence of the fire, but the course lie invariably adopted was to hold an inquest only when some of the inhabitants of the distiict interested in the fire requested him to do so, but in the present case they were some mysterious circumstances connected with the fire and he did not intend to allow the matter to pass without inquiry, and it had only been in the interests of justice, to give lime to collect facts, that the delay had taken place. However, he had on the previous day received an application from the Insurance Company to hold an inquest, and that was the immediate cause of their being called together. Mr Carpenter (a juryman) : .May I ask who was the gentleman that sent in the application. The Coroner: Mr Pearce. _ _ _ Mr Carpenter : I really think as .this is an inquiry for the benefit of the company they should hare deposited a sum of money to recompense the jury. The Coroner: There is no provision of the kind made in the act, and I cannot therefore take cognisance of your remark. I am required, in accordance with law, to make an inquiry; with the other matter I have nothing to do. It is part of the law in Victoria, I believe, that the company demanding the inquiry shall deposit £5, but then the money goes to the Government and not to the jury. Henry Davis: I am night watchman, employed to watch property on Thorndon. I remember Friday the sth January. About 2 o’clock on the morning of that day I was standing at the Galatea corner, and smelling fire as of rags burning. I went into the middle of the read to see if there was any appearance of fire. I went up to Mrs Watson’s but saw nothing of fire in that direction. Returning I heard the gate at Young’s house shut with a slam, but saw nobody near-the premises. I am positive I heard the inside gate at Young’s house shut with a slam, but that might have been caused by the wind, which was strong at the time. I went into the yard, and saw smoke coming from the window on the ground floor of Young’s house. I heard no noise of anybody about. The fire was confined to the corner of the room near the window, where there was placed a number of books. I knocked hard three or four times to arouse the inmates of the house. The window was open when I discovered the fire. Mr Young was first to appear, and asked what was the matter. I said, “Your house is on fire.” He came out immediately. He was in his shirt, and appeared io bo much flurried. I was at the kitchen door at the back, so that he would not have to pass through the room in which the fire was. When I got inside the room in which the fire was it was full of smoke. I immediately rolled the carpet on top of the fire, and jumped on it. Mr Young brought a supply of water, and the fire was extinguished. We examined the room. There is no fireplace in it. I neither smelt or saw any signs of kerosene, but there were two unbound books in the corner where the fire was; just such books as would easily burn. The window blind was burning, but there was no sign of matches, candles, or pipes, or anything that would be likely to originate a fire; therefore I can form no opinion as to how the fire commenced. On leaving the premises I noticed that the door of a safe in the back yard was wide ope”, and directed Mr Young's attention to it. He said, “ Never mind that; just shut the door.” I did so, and went away, and next mornitig Mr Young called me in and showed me that the bottom of the safe was burnt, for which he could offer no explanation. Sergeant Monaghan, in explanation of a question asked by a juryman, said there was communication between the bedroom of Mr Young and that in which the fire originated. Witness: I could not say to whom the books belonged. They were placed againßt

1 the moulding in the corner of the room in a position favorable for burning. I saw nobody loitering about in the street, nor wa3 the window sufficiently opened to allow of a person getting out. It was about a quarter to two o’clock when I discovered the fire. Charles Young, machinist, deposed : I remember Friday the sth January, when I was called up about a quarter to two by the last witness, who informed me my house was on fire. I did not observe any smell of fire till some little time after. On going to the dining room I found that it was full of smoke and on fire in the corner opposite to the bookshelf. The watchman put out the fire with his foot while I went to get some water. We had not occupied the room after about six o’clock, when we had tea. To my knowledge the only person who had been in the room was my daughter, who was in there about ten o’clock, but she had no light. I had been at work till ten o’clock, and when I went home I had supper in the kitchen. When I came home I fastened both the street doors and the windows. It was my custom to leave the dining room window open a few inches to permit of ventilation throughout the house. I was also in the habit of leaving the dining room doov open, but have not done so since the fire. I went to bed about halfpast eleven, and was the last to retire. There were no lodgers in the house that night. About half past ten, when sitting at supper, I was disturbed by a noise in the yard, a kind of shuffling, which I supposed was caused by stray dogs. I went out, but saw nothing, and 'returned inside. Soon after I went inside I heard another noise as of something falling. I felt uneasy and went outside again. I then discovered that a box and two or three planks which were near the fowlhouse had been thrown down. This could not have been done by dogs or by the wind. I felt assured there must have been somebody about the yard, and I examined the outhouses in the yard but omitted to enter the washhouse. The window blinds were entirely burnt. I could give no idea as to how the books came into the corner where they were found. The knocking down of the planks and the box near the fowlhouse I can only account for by the escaping of some person from the yard. My furniture was insured for £250. Ido not consider that too high an amount for my property. The agent of the Royal Insurance Company had given the opinion that the furniture was not sufficiently insured. I can show bills for £6OO or £7OO for furniture. There are fourteen rooms in the house, which I keep well famished for the accommodation of members of Parliament. The only occasion on which there had been any evidence of fire was when one of the chimneys caught. My own opinion of the matter is that the fire was caused by an incendiary. I have no doubt on that point whatever ; the appearances are clearly in favor of such a supposition. One of my children heard a noise on the night of the fire as of somebody meddling with the window. I think the books must have been put into the corner where the fire was discovered by some person who entered by the window. Joseph M. Cleland, owner of the house, deposed: I knew nothing of the fire until the next morning. Mr Young has been three years tenant of the house, which is insured for £4OO. I have a further interest in the furniture, over which I hold a biil of sale for £l5O. The furniture is insured for £250 by which I am secured. Mr Young would have had about £BO to take from me had the insurance been paid. I believe he owes a good deal of money about the town, but I do not think the balance or the insurance would cover his liabilities. He has never said anything about leaving the premises. He has never consulted me about being in difficulties, or about the necessity of bis being well insured. The building next to Young’s house is not insured, neither is my shop or siock. I have £3OOO at risk which is not covered by a single shilling of insurance. I was insured last year but I am not this year. If the fire had burnt my property I should have lost £3OOO. Elizabeth Young, daughter of Charles Young, stated that no person had tea in the dining-room on the evening in question. She entered the room at ten o’clock that night but had no light. She could not account for the books being in the corner of the room wbere the fire was discovered. I cannot say where the family took tea on that evening, but certainly they did not take tea in that room, because we never have tea there unless we have lodgfers. When father came home to supper he heard a noise in the yard, but told us nothing about it till next morning. Immediately after supper I went to bed of my own "accord. The sparks from the fire lighted in the yard for washing purposes could not possibly get to the room where the fire occurred. I therefore firmly believe the fire to have been the result of incendiarism. My father entered the dining-room in his examination of the house after he heard the noise. He took no light into the room. I do not know that any person has sufficient ill-feeling against my father to induce them to do such an illnatured act. This was the whole of the evidence. The Coroner said there seemed little difficulty in deciding as to the nature of the verdict to be returned, which might either be an open one or expressed in any other way the jury might think fit. In any case it would not prevent the taking of proceedings in another, place, either criminally or by the insurance company. After some little consultation the jury returned the following verdict: —“ That the fire in the house in Molesworth street, occupied by Mr Young, was caused or originated by an incendiary unknown.” The lisks taken under the Government Insurance scheme in Canterbury amount to over £BO,OOO.