TO-DAY'S PROCEEDING'S.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXII, Issue 152, 28 June 1901, Page 5

TO-DAY'S PROCEEDING'S.

THE HEAD WAITER'S1 EVIDENCE

When the inquest was resumed this morning Jessica Minns, the scullerymaid at the Grand, was called as a witness, but failed to appear, whereupon the Coroner (Mr. Gresham) issued a warrant for her apprehension, in order to secure her attendance at the inquest.

The examination of James Grover, the head waiter, was then continued. Witness stated that after returning to the hotel just before 11 p.m. on the night of the fire, he went back to town with Middleton, the second waiter, and had supper in town. Middleton first went to his room, and got his hat and top-coat. Witness waited for him outside the room. Middleton never struck a match wheu he went into his room; the only light he had was the gas-jet in the passage and the moonlight outside. This would be about five minutes to eleven. Witness had had no drinks at all that evening. He saw no one while waiting for Middleton, and heard no voices. Everything was still. He was standing in front of the bathroom, door, but did not notice a light inside, or hear anyone moving. He did not know anyone was in the bathroom. When. Middleton came out with his coat and hat they went out of the hotel by the back door, which was ajar. It was an unusual thing for the door to be open, after half-past ten. There was no key in the door when they went i Olit. Pulling the door to, they crossed the yard, climbed over the gate, which was locked, and went down town. After having supper they returned to the hotel about a quarter to twelve. All they drank while down town was tea. They brought no one back to the hotel with them. On returning they noticed that the light in the pantry upstairs had been turned out during their absence. This was unusual, as that light was always left burning all night. Witness remarked to Middleton that the place was in darkness, and that therefore they would not go upstairs. He never saw the pantry without a light on any previous night, but at the time he attached no importance to the fact. After the fire he remarked to Middleton that it was a funny thing that there should have been no light there. Sub-Inspector Mitchell: What suggestion would you like to make to the jury about its being "funny"? Do you connect the fact of there being no light in the pantry with the origin of the fire? Witness: No. Continuing his evidence, witness said that on entering the back-door he and Middleton at once went to their rooms. They never went _iip the pantry-stairs. Witness was reading in his room for nearly half-an-hour, and heard no noise whatever about the house.

"Did you hear anyone calling out for keys?" asked the sub-inspector, referring to the cook's evidence.

Witness: No. And did you not hear the cook's voice ?—No.

Nor Jessie's voice? —No. You are speaking positively?— Certainly. What time did Jones, the night porter, come to the door of your room?—To my door? I am speaking as distinctly as I can. What time did Jones come to your room?—He never came to my room that I know of.

Could anyone be engaged in conversation in the passage by the pantrystairs in an ordinary tone of voice without your hearing them?—lf they talked loud I could have heard them.

If Madame (the cook) could hear them could not you?—-I should have been able to, but I heard nothing.

You and Jones have never spoken about this matter since?— Not about that. We have spoken about other things, but not about Madame (the cook). I want you to tell us all you know. You may' not have seen Jones that night, but I want you to tell us what Jones told you about Madame's cvi-

deuce Witness stated that immediately after Madame had given her evidence Jones came up to the temporary bar where witness was working, and told him what she had said, adding that she must have been mistaken. Witness replied that she must have been mad. He said nothing more. Sub-Inspector: What was said about Madame opening her mouth so wide and trying to create an uproar over nothing?—l did not say anything more about it. You only Offered your opinion of Madame?—l said she must have been mad.

Are you telling the-Court all you know about this affair ?—Certainly I am.

There is no certainty about it. Are you telling all you know?—l am. Continuing, witness said he went to bed abo'tit: 12.30 a.m. '"■"•'

Sub-Inspector: Y Tou heard no noises in the room overhead? Witness: No. Madame has told us she heard persons bustling about and quarrelling overhead. What did Jones say to yon about that?— Nothing.

What did Mr. Johnston say?—l told I him that I heard nothing. 1 Did he ask you?— Yes. Why?— Because I told him I was up j late. Can you throw any light upon Ith-K- noises? —None whatever.

Continuing his evidence, witness said he was awakened by the. sound of falling glass on the back balcony overhead. On going outside the back door he found the lire was burning id that portion of the diuingrooni immediately over his bedroom. To a juryman: On going to the back door he discovered it to be wide open. He had closed it on returning from town about twelve o'clock. Sub-Inspector: Why did you not volunteer that information m your evidence. Did it not occur to you that that was a "funnier" thing than that there was no light in the pantry? Witness: There may have been others gone out of the door before me. Did you see any one in the yard -

I did not notice any one. A juryman: The door must have been' opened by someone at some time between twelve and a quarter to one.

Witness, in answer to further questions, said he had banged the door to when he and Middleton entered about midnight, but as the key was not there he. could not lock the door. This was the first occasion on which he had gone out by the back door after 8 p.m. While he was looking at the fire from the back yard, Madame appeared at the door, but ran inside again. Witness followed and went to Madame's room, where he found Jessie, the scullery maid. He dragged her out into the yard. Sub-Inspector: Who is Jessie keeping company with? Wituess: Nobody, to ray knowledge. Not with you? Decidedly not. With which of the employees then? None that I know of. Used anyone to come to the hotel to see her?

No. He r brother came on one occasion.

Witness continuing, said that after putting Jessie in the shed iv the yard he went inside again and looked through the door into the well. The flames were coming through the first floor windows that looked out on the well, from the billiard room, dining room and pantry. The other side of the well was -not burning at that time. Witness then went back to his room, got some clothing, and went out to the yard again. He helped Jessie over the fence.

Sub-Inspector: Was Jessie an illtempered girl at all?

Witness: No. She was very quiet. Anything unusual about her? Only that, she used to be up at all hours of the night. Who with?

Well, I often left her in the pantry with Dora Wallace, the housemaid, and Dora told me that she had often gone to bed and left Jessie still' in the pantry. She was always cleaning something.

A very industrious girl, then? Yes, she. was. THE MTSSING KEY.

Do you associate the missing key of the dining room door with the origin of the fire? Well, I thought it very strange, when Middleton and I afterwards put two and two togather—the pantry light being out and the key of the dining room missing. What inference did you draw from these two facts?

That the place had been burned down.

Did you think that before you had a talk with Johnston? No.

When did you talk the matter over with Johnston?

About 8 a.m. on the 31st a couple of hours after I had spoken to Middleton. Johnston did not know, until I told him, that the key had been missing. When he heard of it Johnston said, "That looks very like as if the place had been set on fire." He did not say who he thought had set the place on fire.

To the Sub-Inspector: The key was missing from the Tuesday night before the fire. The door was found locked on Wednesday morning, and the key missing, and no one in the hotel knew who locked the door. Thomas, the day porter, was supposed to have locked the door on Tuesday night, but he did not do so. Yet the door was found locked on Wednesday morning, and the key gone. Nobody knew how it came to be locked. Tuesday was Thomas' first night at the hotel," and he said he did not know about that door.

Sub-Inspector: Is it not more likely that Thomas locked the door that night aud lost the key, than that somebody outside the hotel came in and took the key?

Witness: Well Thomas told us he never locked the door.

A SUGGESTION. Do you think the place was set fire to?

I really consider that the hotel was wilfully set fire to. Though I admit that while standing in'the yard I saw flames coming out of the pantry room passage door, the pantry room window nearest that door, and the dining-room window nearest, that door, yet I also say that from the outside it looked like three separate fires. That is why I think that the. place was wilfully set fire to.

Can you suggest any reason why anyone should set fire to the hotel? No, none.

Mr McLeod: My suggestion, if I may be allowed to offer it, is this: that it was not wilfully set fire to, but that someone went in to burglarise the place, and that a lighted match caught the curtains in the dining-room, and set fire to the place. The Sub-Inspector: To cover the theft?

Mr McLeod: No; in the course of the theft; accidentally.

Witness said he pointed out to the day porter, when the latter was searching the d_bris, the three different places where the dining-room, sideboard, the what-not and tbe cheffonier stood in the dining-room. A space about 18 feet square was cleared round the side-board by the day porter. The latter found some of the smaller silver goods in the debris, but none of the large articles. That struck witness as being very strange. The space referred to was cleared right to the ground,