THE MAGONS ACQUITTED.

Taranaki Daily News, 19 August 1920, Page 6

THE MAGONS ACQUITTED.

NOT GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS. JUDGE DESCRIBES CASE*AS WEAK. The three Magon brothers were acquitted at the New Plymouth Supreme Court, where Mr. Justice Salniond was occupied all yesterday- in hearing the charges against them. In summing up his Honor regarded the Crown's case as a weak one, and the jury brought in a not guilty verdict after half-an-hour's retirement.

The accused were Albert Edward Magon, Charles Magon, and Frederick Magon, and they were ehaWed with alleged arson and with allegel conspiracy to defraud the United Insurance Company. .Mr. C. H. Weston conducted the prosecution, and Mr. A. Blair (Wellington (with him Mr. R. H. Quilliam) appeared for the defence. In continuation of the case for the prosecution evidence was given by Mr. N. A. Christensen, furniture dealer, of New Plymouth, who said that to the best of his belief lie had never had in his possession the duchess produced in Court. . He had had some dealings with Albert'. Magon, who, according to his books, had bought a duchess, a sofa, and $ washstand. '••To ,she Judge: He had not sold a (JncheSs to Fred Magon.

"• P. E. Stainton, district agent for the United : Insurance Company, produced the insurance proposal on Albert Migon's furniture, which was valued at £325, the insurance being fixed at £2OO. When Magon notified the fire and signed a proof of loss in the presence of witness and Mr. Cattley, J.P., the aihount bf loss proved was £142, and Magon accented £75 in settlement of the claim. In reply to Mr. Quilliam it was stated that no minute details as to the value of chattels were given when the insurance was effected. The company was satisfied with the insurance in view of previous dealings with Magon. A. P. Friend, adjuster and arbitrator, Auckland, gave'evidence as to "the adjustment of Magon's claim on the company. Under cross-examination the witness said that in arriving at the -value of Magon's loss he took into consideration the- fact that Magon had told him he had taken away a considerable quantity of clothing, etc., the morning before the fire.

x H. R. Cattley, J.P., New Plymouth, deposed to Magon makmg his declaration of loss before him. Detective Fitzgibbon, New Plymouth, gave evidence as to several interviews with Albert Edward Magon in regard to some property that "had come into the hands of the police which was believed to be his. He denied that all the goods were his except a cash-box. Mrs. Julian, a sister of accused, had made a claim for the other articles, Mr. Weston said he would at this stageclose the case for the Crown without calling the two remaining C'Wles Jlagon and .Mrs. Ivy Magon. Mr. Blair submitted that the witnesses should be called as were favorable witnesses for the prisoners, and had given evidence in the lower court. The Crown would not strengthen its case by declining to call witnesses which were against their side of the case. He said it was the Crown's duty to call the witnesses. •

Mr. Weston, who said lie liad no desire to be unfair to the prisoners, submitted a' ruling of the Chief Justice dn the point which supported bis decision not to call the witnesses, and his Honor, in view of the relation of the witnesses to the accused, said he was not disposed to call the witnesses by the Court, or to rule that the Crown was bound to call them. THE DEFENCf. Mr. Qtiilliam then outlined the defence in the case, which he submitted, would prove that the accused could not have set fire to the house on the night in questions Albert Edward Magpn gave evidence in his own behalf as to his movements ab<;ut the time of the fire, indicating that he and his wife and child had left home 011 the morning of Sunday, November 10, and that he had (heard of the place being burned down when at Marton, on his return from Masterton and Wellington. At the time of the fire he was in Masterton. The duchess produced in court had never belonged to witness, but was his brother Fred's property. What he got from the insurj ance cpmpany was nowhere near the value of thej goods lie lo^t. | To Mr. Weston: He thought the circumstances of his going to camp had made some enemies for him in the district. He had heard of threats to burn his motor bus in the March previous. He 'thought there might.be some connection between these threats and the lii'r.i'>i<r of his house. He .could not say hat anyone in particular had illfeeling against him. He denied the evidence for the Crown in regard to the removal of furniture from his, house on the night of October 17. He said his motor lorry was standing outside his house the might Fred met him at Momona's billiard saloon. He believed the carvers and cruets produced in court were the property of his sister. Mrs. Julian. In regard to the 14 pairs of stockings in the case he presumed they were his wife's, but he could not offer 'any explanation as to why she had so many pairs. Some of the things were taken to his father's house when witness went to camp. Tn regard to the declaration of loss after the fire, the first statement was sign'ed before the detailed list of articles was handed in. L. H. Johnson, New Plymouth, deposed to arranging with Albert Magon. to inspect a motor truck at Masterton and to goinff there with him.

Louisa- Macon, wife of Chas. Mason, said slip remembered the night of the fire at Alb.ert Maeon's. She was not married at that ti<ne. Chas. Magon was nt her house at Okato on the night of the fire, remainine there, till one o'clock in the morning. She remembered asking him if he had seen- anything of the 'fire that night.

Tvy Magon. wife of Albert Magon, paid that she had been married over three years, and when first married bad lived in a seven-roomed house in. New Plymouth, which was all furnished bar one room. She eonld not say how much the furniture cost. When her husband was sent to camp most of the furniture 1 went to her mother's place at Stratford, and a few things went to her father-in-law's place at Rahotu. When her husband came out of camp they went to live at liahotu, and brought only the furniture that was at Stratford. She corroborated the evidence of her husband as to what was taken from the house when she went to Stratford at the time of his visit to Masterton, and also as to the duchess produced having belonged to Fred Magon. Neither, of the cruets produced* were hers, nor was set of carvers. No claim had been

made on the iusttranco company for the cash box. AFTERNOON SITTING. Charles Magon, senr., of Warea,, the father of the accused, and Hazel Julian, a widow residing at Warea, and a daughter of Clias. Magon, senr., gave evidence concerning the furniture. Fred Hooker, carrier, of New Plymouth, gave evidence concerning a visit which he paid to Wellington with Albert Magon. They left New Plymouth on the morning of November 16, he and Magon spent that night in Masterton, the next day in Wellington, and then they went to Palmerston, showing that Albert Magon was in Wellington the night the fire took place. The accused, Charles Magon, was the ne.vt witness. He said the first he heard of the fire at his brother Albert's place was four days afterwards. He was at Okato the night of the fire, and at no time that night had been anywhere near the scene of the fire. He spent the night of the fire in his own home, which was about eleven miles from Albert's place. Fred Magon, the youngest of the accused brothers, also gave evidence. He staged that the last time he was at his brother Albert's house was about a month before the fire. '

This concluded the case for the defence, and then Mr. Blair addressed the jury for forty minutes. Counsel examined in detail the insurance policy of the house, and suggested that there was not an unreasonable quantity of furniture in any room, while the value could • not be said to be excessive. Rather than that the accused had defrauded the insurance company, counsel contended that the boot was on the other foot, for the company had bluffed Magon into accepting a reduced amount to cover the loss by fire. Coming to the question of sheeting home the actual lighting of the fire to any one of the accused, Mr. Blair stressed the evidence that on the night of the fire Albert Magon was at Masterton, Charles Magon "was mashing his girl eleven miles away," and Fred Magon had declared that liis last visit to the burned house was a month before the fire. If Fred was not believed, then the jury would have to be satisfied that he performed some herculean task by riding away from the fire with two hath tubs Ail] of crockery and other articles. The Crown's case was very briefly stated by Mr. Weston, only some five minutes being occupied in reviewing the evidence and emphasising the case brought forward by the prosecution. JUDGE SUMS UP. ■ His Honor summed up in half an hour. He thought it might be assumed that, whoever caused the fire, it was an incendiary fire, but it was only suspicion, because there was no direct evidence pointing to the cause of the fire. The case of the Crown in this respect only pointed to the accused indirectly. The suggestion that certain articles . were taken away from the house before the fire involved the suggestion that removals were made 011 two occasions, and his Honor reviewed the articles which were said to have been removed. The first occasion was about a month before the fire,-but he felt bound to say tlmt the evidence on this point did not strike him as very convincing. The other occasion was on the night of the fire, when tubs, amongst other articles, were said to have been taken away, but if they were removed it appeared that the only means were provided by a horse, and it was hardly likely that it could have been done. Coming to the finding of the mat. his Honor regarded this as a significant fact, for it suggested that there had been a removal of goods and that the mat had been dropped. His Honor went»on to refer,to "the unfortunate family history of the accused," but pointed out that the jury must not be influenced by the fact that two of the accuseed were at present serving sentences in prison, or that another accused had bfeen mixed up in trouble for not going into military service.

"I am bound to say that the case of the Crown strikes me as weak," concluded, his Honor. "Particularly is this so against Albert Magon; in fact there is no evidence against him at all." The jury retired at 5 p.m. At 3.30 p.m. the jury returned a verdict of not guilty on all counts. The Court adjourned till ten o'clock this morning.