FIRE AND THEFT

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 10614, 12 June 1920, Page 11

FIRE AND THEFT

A PECULIAR CASE STARTLING EVIDENCE: MAGISTRATE DISMISSES CASE. A case pre-sen ting some unusual cix - - cumstances was heard before Mr E. Page, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court yesterday when a young man named Jaimes Neil was charged with the theft of £2O, the property of William Lancelot Holmes. Chiof-Dcitectivo Ward conducted the prosecution on behalf of the police, and Mr H. F. O’Leary appeared for the defendant. William L. Holmes, an employee at Macarthy's brewery, said that he resided at 39, Majoribanks street. Accused was his brother-in-law. The defendant lived with witness for three months, and during that period had done no work. Witness had housed and fed him, and Neil sniokod the tobacco and cigarettes that witness provided for liimsclf. On April loth witness informed Neil that he would have to find other lodgings! as witness had decided to give the premises up. On April 16th witness went to work early in the morning, leaving the accused in the house. He returned soon after midday. Neil was in the scullery cooking himself a meal. Between 1.30 and 1.45 the same afternoon, while at workthe accused came to tho brewery in a more or less intoxicated condition and said that .the house was on fire. Witness hurried home, and on arrival found that the fire had been put out, and the Fire Brigade just leaving the premises. TWENTY POUNDS STOLEN.

Witness had left the sum of £2O in a wardrobe—£ls in a. cardboard bos, and £5 in a coat pocket—and on making an investigation, he found that the money was missing. Tho wardrobe, which had been locked, had been broken open and the coat which had continued five single one-pound notes was discovered in accused’s bed. Tho top and front of the wardrobe was burnt to a considerable extent, but the contents escaped. According to the firemen the. fire started in tho wardrobe. On a Stetson hat that was on the floor of the wardrobe was an odour of kerosene. Tho accused infonnod witness that a blue suit of his had “gone west.” DISCOVERED THE FIRE.

James Ward, tailor, stated that he was proceeding down Majoribanks street when he observed smoke coming from No. 39. He - knocked at the front door, and getting no answer, he tried the windows, which appeared to be nailed. Eventually ho burst tho front door in. There was nobody on the premises, and the fire appeared to be in tho wardrobe or in the lining between the partition behind it.

BOARD MONEY IN ADVANCE. Raymond Allen, proprietor of White Hall Boairding-house, said that pii April 16th accused saw witness at about 10.30 o’clock in the morning and asked for a room. Witness agreed to take him in, but requested payment in advance. The accused said ho would go to the Post Office and get some money, and an hour later he returned with a bag and paid- for a week’s, board, which amounted to 27s 6d. The money tendered - was two single one-pound notes, which the accused detached from five or six he had in his hand. DETECTIVE’S EVIDENCE. Detective Holmes said that in company with Chief-Detective Ward be interviewed the accused, who was asked if he had any money. Neil replied that he had a little, and upon being asked where he got it from no refused to answer. - The chief-detective told him to remove certain suspicions in 'respect to money that was missing from tho house in Majoribanks street, but ho still refused to say where he had obtained the money. When searched Neil was found to have three one-pound notes in his possession and 0s 3d in silver. The accused also had a bank-book, which showed that ke drew £l2 from the Post Office on December 24th, 1919, and there was a credit of 5s loft. At the police station the defendant made a statement to tho effect tha t he was a, barman,’ and had. been out of work for about two months. He was in tho City Hotel when ho heard of the fire, and on going to the premises the’ firemen would not let him in, so he went and informed his brother-in-law, who had been housing and feeding him for tho past two months. AN OBLIGING FRIEND. The defendant said he borrowed the money with which to pay his hoard from a friend whom ho had known in Dunedin, . and that the statement he had made to tho police was true. His reason for not telling the detectives where ho obtained tho money was in order that he might havb a hold over Holmes in respect to defamation of character. To Chief-Detective Ward; His father loft him. a form which ho sold for £9OO. Tho money was invested in a confectionery business with a. man named Soarlo. It was true that a fire took place and that tho insurance companies . refused to pay tho loss. Ho was not then actively engaged in tho business, although he was financially interested- More, recently he was seen by oho police in connection with a cornet which he took from his sister’s liouso and pawned, but he was not aware that the instrument was stolen. He had been out of work for about two and a half months, and on leaving his last employment had about £ls. William Hollick, fireman, employed on tho New Zealand Railways, said that the accused was a friend of his. On April 15th Neil met him in Manners street and asked for n loan in order to pay his hoard. Witness had not the money on him at the time, and by arrangement, the accused mot witness -at the Post Office the following afternoon, whore witness gave him £5 which ho drew from his account in the Post Office. Tho Magistrate said that there was a certain amount of suspicion in respect to the accused, but the evidence was not sufficient to warrant a conviction being entered. The information would therefore bo dismissed.