ALLEGED ARSON.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XII, Issue 3805, 8 May 1891, Page 2

ALLEGED ARSON.

The Alfrs&toa lire.

Harry M'lnnes, alias Morley, was charged before Colonel Roberts, R.M., yesterday (Thursday) with wilfully setting fire to the premises of C. J. Trapp, Alfredton. Sergeant Hannan prosecuted, and Mr Pownall appeared for the defendant. Mr Beard watched the proceedings on behalf of insurance companies.

Charles J. Trapp, storekeeper at Alfredton, gave evidence similar to that given in the caje of larceny. He described the condition of his store on the morning of February 21st. His store and stock were insured in the London, Liverpool and Globe office for £l7O.

Gross-examined by Mr Pownall: I bad no conversation with tbe accused on the day before I left for Eketahona. The accused came in for some tobacco just before I left for Eketaliuna. I did not leave him in the store, but came out and looked the door. I had previously locked the back door. * All the articled stolen except the saddle were included in the goods iusured. I gave information to the police on the date of the fire. I did not tell the police where the artjcles were to be found. I ' wjll swear X never gave the keys to the accused any time before the fire. My journal was left on the desk on some letters. E went to Eketahuna to have a.tooth' drawn.- I was not a party to the fire or to what occurred. I have not seen the missiug watch since . the fire, and don't know where it is. The value"of the stock' is now £ls. I have sold goods to the value of £2B since thefire. I valued the stolen goods at £dl and those destroyed at £7 10s. Although the total amounted to LB7, the insurance was £l2O. If the store and stock had been burned Iwojjld have ft heavy loser, iecansel.CQftld only Uave 'claimed for goods, and tbe loss of my books would have meagt the loss of outstanding accounts. J was ridiqg home on the morning after the fire 1 met Godina on the road and be toldme my place had beer> on fire and that someone must have got inßide. ■ I replied that this was impossible as 1 had the key, 'which I showed him. I saw the accused on the 22nd, but had no conversation with him about the fire, I did not say, "I am sorry you made a mess of it." I did not suspect him. 1 never promised him £25.

A number of other witnesses weve called, but their evidence wa§ tlje same as that given in the laroepy case, Nothing fresh was elicited in cross examination,

At five o'clock tho Court adjourned till next day.