ARSON OR ACCIDENT?

Auckland Star, Volume LVIII, Issue 109, 11 May 1927, Page 10

ARSON OR ACCIDENT?

NEWMARKET FIRE SEQUEL. CHARGE AGAINST RESIDENT. WIFE GIVES AN EXPLANATION. i _____ The eeqiiel to a fire in a dwelling louse at Newmarket was heard in the Supreme Court to-day when, before Mr. puatico Stringer, a young man named Stanley Keeble Clark (Mr. Singer), was charged with arson. He pleaded not guilty. Mr. S. L. Paterson, prosecuting for the Crown, said accused and hia wife lived in a four-roomed house at 43, [Victoria Crescent, Newmarket. On the evening of March 29 a neighbour heard & good deal of noise in Clark's house, and got out of bed to investigate. She eaw a man whom she thought to be accused with a lighted candle in his Jiand. He was apparently talking to someone in the back room, for she heard Jiim ehout, "If you don't come out I'll > set fire to the place." He lit a curtain, but beat out the names with Jiis hands. Subsequently fire broke out, and the. house was damaged to the extent of £150. Superintendent T. J. Watts, of the Newmarket Fire Brigade, said he had great difficulty in getting Clark out of the burning building. A little later accused re-entered the house, being evidently under the erroneous impression that liia wife was inside. Accused was very drunk, and Mrs. Clark also showed Signs of liquor. Margaret Froggatt, the neighbour referred to, gave evidence in support of (Counsel's statements. The defence was that the fire was caused by Mrs. Clark entirely by accident. Mr. Singer said that the evidence would prove that there was no insurance on the house, and he submitted that there was no likelihood of jßte place being set on fire deliberately. Clark, who had been gassed during his jfcrar service, was a man of excellent jcharacter, but liquor upset him badly. Mary Clark, wife of accused, said her husband came home very drunk on the evening referred to and would i_» have any tea. Eventually he to an hotel and returned with a half-gallon bottle of beer. There was a row, but it was not accused who set the house on Are. It was witness herself. When turning out the gas she had a lighted candle in her hand, and it accidentally pet lire to the mantelpiece hangtajl, m»ey flared up at once, and I screamed, *oh, I've set the house on fire I" , \ Mr. Singer: Was there any insuranceT Witness: None at all. Wβ have Nothing. ij "A Remarkable Coincidence." I Summing up, his Honor said It wan for the jury to decide whether or not it was likely for Mrs. Clark to set fire to the house in the manner she had described. It was certainly a remarkable coincidence that the husband should set fire to the curtain* with a lighted candle, and then, a few minutes later, fLbe wife should start the conflagration also with a candle. However, accident* 'Hid happen, and it was for the jury to yecide the merits of the ease. ' The jury retired to consider their |fcerdict.