ARSON AT WAIHI

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1026, 17 July 1930, Page 12

ARSON AT WAIHI

“DELIBERATE ACT OF UNKNOWN PERSON”

OILED PAPER IN WALLS From Our Own Correspondent WAIHI, Wednesday. Arson committed by some person unknown was the verdict returned this afternoon by the district coroner, Mr. W. M. Wallnutt, at the inquiry concerning the gutting by Fire, of an unoccupied four-roomed wooden dwelling in ITaszard Street, Waihi, on the night of May 14. The house was the property of Mrs. Elizabeth L. Lyndon, who lives with her husband and family near by. Sergeant D. L. Cal well appeared for the police, Mr. W. Wallace, of Auckland, for the State Fire Insurance Company, which held a policy for £125 on the premises, and Mr. J. B. Beech© watched the interests of the owner.

The evidence showed that the fire had been discovered by a miner going on night shift, and the prompt arrival of the brigade prevented the total destruction of the building. An examination by the fire brigade superintendent, Mr. W. E. Roberts, and Constable A. R. Rimmer showed that there had been two distinct seats of fire. KEROSENE AND MATCHES

Further examination a .day or two later by Mr.* Wallace and Sergeant S. G. Clist, of Auckland, who was relieving in Waihi at the time, revealed three lots of newspaper screwed up and placed in the lining of the wall, about two feet from the nearest seat of fire. These balls of newspaper smel* strongly of kerosene, and when one of them was picked up a number of live wax matches fell out. One of the newspapers bore the date of the day before the fire. The board that had been removed in order that the papers be placed in the wall had been carefully replaced, and if the fire had not been noticed all traces of its origin would have been destroyed. Edward Walter Lyndon, husband ot the owner, said that so far as he knew no members of the family had been near the house for some considerable time before the fire, and no unauthorised persons had been seen about tho property. He did not think anyone bore him a grudge, and could not think of anybody who would be likely to set tho house on fire. It carried a State Advances mortgage, which had been paid right up to the time of the outbreak. Both Mr. Wallace and Sergeant Cltst stated that in their opinion there was no doubt that the fire had been caused deliberately. “CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE”

“The circumstances in this case are quite easily summed up,” said Mr. Wallnutt. “The evidence is not merely suspicious, but proves conclusively that arson has been committed by some person. Tho date of the paper and th' - - circumstances in which it was fount! showed that it was not a case of refuse accumulating. It must have been placed there either on the. day before or on the night of the fire. There were two seats of fire, and had it not been for a passer-by having noticed the flames and summoned the brigade all traces of the origin of the outbreak would have been obliterated.” He was not prepared to cast suspicion on any person or persons, as the evidence was purely circumstantial. His verdict would be that the fire was caused by a deliberate act of arson by somo person unknown.