THE CARGILL STREET FIRE.

Evening Star, Issue 7469, 13 March 1888, Page 2

THE CARGILL STREET FIRE.

An inquiiy was held to-day before Coroner Carew concerning the origin of the fire that occuned in a house occupied by Mrs Maggie Brady, in Cargill street, at 8.30 p.m. on Wednesday last.

Inspector Weldon appeared to represent the police, and Mr Mouat to watch the proceedings on behalf of those interested in the insurance—the mortgagor and the mortgagee. Before the jury were sworn Mr J. Carroll mentioned that he was a shareholder in the insurance company that had issued the policy on the furniture—the Equitable—and asked the coroner whether, under these circumstances, it was right that he should sit as a juryman. The Coroner replied that it would be better that Mr Carroll should withdraw. Messrs Dreaver and Meenan were also excused on the same ground.

The following were sworn as the jury:— John Duthie (foreman), Alexander Hardie, Robert John Gairdner, George Hindle, 'William Sherries, and Colin Jameson. Henry E. M'Donald, wool-classer, deposed that he lately resided at Mrs Brady's boardinghouse. He left there on Wednesday last. About the end of February Mrs Brady asked him if it would be convenient for him to get other lodgings, as she was about to break up the house. She asked him to leave by the end of the month. She was, she paid, going to Chiistchurch, and intended to sell her furniture by auction in Dunedin. In speaking of the furniture, witness asked her what she valued the piano at. Mrs Brady replied that she valued it at L6O, but she would take L3O for it. There was only one piano in the bouse so far as witness knew. Witness told Mrs Brady that he was about to furnish, and if anything that she had to sell was placed under reasonable offer he would be a purchaser. Several articles were offered, and witness agreed to buy them. This was on the sth inst, and he removed them about 12.30 on the 7th. The articles he bought were a sewing machine, fender, bedroom ware, and toilet ware, etc. He gave, he thought, fair value for the things. The machine and the lamp were in disrepair, Mrs Brady had three other boarders at the time she talked of breaking-up. They continued on until the 7th, to the best of witness's knowledge. To Inspector Weldon i Witness had been boarding with Mrs Brady about three months. He first went to her last December, when she was residing in Stuart street. There were four lodgers in Cargill Btreet. Witness and his brother occupied one bedroom : and the other two hoarders, he thought, had a bedroom be? tween them. There were a sitting-room and a dining-room. The sitting-room had a piano in it. Both rooms were carpeted, were two tables in the dining room; also, cane-seated chairs, hut no sofa. Besides these there were in the dining-room a cheffonier, a small chest of drawers, fender and irons, about half-a-do?en small pictures—apparc »tly water-colors— prnaments on the mantel-piece, glassware on the cheffonier; also, window curtains and brass picture rods. The furniture in witness's room consisted of two bedsteads and bedding, chest of drawers, a double washstand, two sets of ware, a chair, a looking glass, and a piece of carpet. Taking the furniture generally jt was of a common class—nothing expensive about it. The carpet in his room was removed a day or two before he left.

To Mr Mouat; Witness could not say why the carpet had been removed; it was taken away while he was absent from the house. To the jury; The caippt had not been removed from the dining-room. James M'Gill, builder,' residing in Moray place, said that he was agent for the cottage in which Mrs Brady resided. The plan produced, shows the rooms in the cottage. There were five rooms, a pantry, a closet, and a bathroom. All the rooms were on one floor. Mrs Brady was his tenant. The house was destroyed by fire on the 7th inst. It was insured for L2OO in the New Zealand Office. Mrs Brady was a weekly tenant, and paid her rent fortnightly. He had received no notice of her desire to quit. On the Saturday before the fire he called for the rent, and Mrs Brady replied that she would call over on Monday and pay it. She did not do so. There was a fortnight's rent due. Ho had never had to ask for the rent before.

To Mr Mouat: Portions of the cottage had been built about fourteen years. It was of timber and not plasteied. The partition between the kitchen and dining-room was of tongued-and-grooved boards covered with paper. The whole place was built of highly-inflam-mable material.

To the Coroner: When he said h'ghjy inflammable he did' not mean that the' cottage was different to other houses of the same sort. Sawdust and shavings had been used between some of the weatherboards.

To the Jury: The house was built on piles, and was clear of the ground. John Deaker, plumber, living in Russell street, said that on the 7th, at about a quart ipast 8 p.m. he was going along George street with his younger brother, and when passing St. Andrew street they noticed a lot of smoke, and ran up to the corner of Filleul street and York place. A lady told them that a house was on fire, and asked them to go and get someone to ring the bell. Witness's brother ran to the station; and witness went up Cargill street and saw a few young men 'standing at the gate of the house. Those who were standing there told him not to go up the lane, as there were dogs there; but he went, and burst in the door on the south side of the house. He found flames in the passage, and he could not enter. He then went round to the bedroom facing the right-of-way. It was full of smoke, and witness could see nothing. He pulled the curtain up and felt a box or something very large just under the window. He eang out to ask if anyone was inside, but did not go in himself. The smoke was very bad, and the box. was an obstruction. He could not be sure it was a box; it might have been a cheßt of drawers. Witness then went to the front of the house again. The place was all ablaze by that time, and the Fire Brigade had arrived. When witness opened the door he noticed no peculiar smell. To Inspector Weldon: The most of the fire seemed to be confined to the kitchen when witness burst open' the door. It was seven or eight minutes from the time witness first saw the smoke until the bell rang. Hugh young Baird, draper, deposed that he lived in a house within 10ft of the one that was burnt. He was at home when the fire occurred. Noticing the smell of fire he ran ont, and saw an immense quantity of smoke coming from the back df Mrs B_rady's house. He went to' the back of the place with the last witress, and saw him burst the door dpen. He saw no flame then, but could not get it on account tfi the smoke. ' : '' '

"To Inspector Weldon : The flames seemed to start c.B soon as the front door was opened;' Mrs Brady came to his place after the fire. ' To the Coroner: The fire burned rather quickly. . ■ I - • • '' To Mr Mouat: It was a talm night. Had there been any wind my house would have gone too. : - '

Kate Price, wife of William Price, of George street, said that Mrs Brady was at her house on the night of the fire. She came there a littjtt before or after eight o.'clock. When the bell rang witness and Mrs Brady ran out to see where the fire was. They went to the corner of Hanover street and from there could" see' the flame. Mrs Brady remarked that sue' thought it was near her place. She Went to see where the fire was, and witness did not see her again iratil after the fire. • Mrs Brady has two children J they were both brought to witness!s place before the fire. After the fire Mrs Brady came for the children. There was no conversation as to the fire between witness and Mrs Brady- Detective Bain accompanied Mrs Brady when she returned. Witness' had known Mrs Brady as a friend for several yea»s. Mrs Brady often came to see her, and had brought the children on other occasions as late as eight o'clock. To Mr Mouat: Mrs Brady did not bring any of her things to witness's place either on the day of the fire or at any other time. She was crying when she came back after the fire."

To the Jury: Mrs Brady seemed a little excited when she found out that the fire was nea'r her house,

Maggie Brady, boarding-house keeper, said that she had been at Mrs Price's about half an hour when she heard the flrebell. It was ten minutes to eight when she left her own place. No one was left in the house. She locked the back door before leaving; the front door was latched but not looked. She left a kerosene lamp on the table in the kitchen, and a fire in the kitchen range. The door of the range was opetf. It was an ' ordinary-sized _ fire, not burning very brightly. Her furnitwe and effects were insured to the amount of L2OO. She had-had four boarders. They were all away by the day of the fire. She had given them notice, as she purposed leaving for Christchurch a week after the day on which the fire occurred. She had made no arrangements as to what she was going to do with the furniture. After the fire she had told Detective Bain that the had intended sending the furniture to the auction rooms on the Saturday, but she did not tell' the detective that she had made no

arrang.'ineiits with th? auctioneer. n '* ur " mtnn> was insured in the Equitable Othce about months ago. She bought tl»o furniture new two years and a Halt ago. She jesterday applied for the insurance, and made out a list of the goods destroyed, with their prices, on the proof of loss proddtcl. The prices were those that it would i ...t to replace the furniture. The piano she l,i 1 w.u hired from the Dresden Company j it wi- in urnl to. L2">, that sum being included in lh.« 1/JOU for which a policy was taken out in t!,,. dilutable. She had uot arranged with Mr K.idh- to insure the piano. On the day before tlir ilni witness had disposed of some of her to Mr M'Donald. She had never told anyone that the piano was her property. Mr xtiiiieluidgehada bill of sale for L7<i over her furniture.* 1 Shu had told Detective Bain that she hail >old the netting machine, but in her t'xjittinniit had forgotten to iiioutiou other thin/s that had been sold. She might liave told Mr fti'Diinald that she would take LilO for the piano. She had been r< cently sued for L 4, and on another account for Ll4 in January last. She did not consider that she was in monetary d tficaltie.i, and believed she could have carried

on. . , . To Mr Mouat: The furniture was insured in consequence of the bill of sale. She was then living in Stuart street. At the time of making tho insurance witness asked the agent why he would not allow more than L 25 on the piano. Ho said that was all the value in case of insurance. She diil not explain that the piano was on hire. At the time of the fire she beliMved her debts were : LG 10s to ttrown, Ewing; IJ 10s to Mr Hardie. grocer; L 4 10s to Mr Smith, grocer; LI Tm to Mr butcher; LI 2s bd to Martin and Watson; L'i 17s to M'Fie, coal merchant; about Ll4 on the piano ; L7O with interest at 10 psr cent. or. the bill of sale ; three weeks' rent, LI It's: and LI 1 to the Dunedin Iron and Wood ware Coml'a'J'o' the Coroner: She had applied to the Union Company for an insurance some timo a>'u but had never paid anything to the company, and understood that thp policy had been cancelled. About L4O or LSO worth of new furniture had been bought from Mr Stontbndge since the application had been made to the Union Company; and she had also bought from the Dunedin Iron and Wood ware Company, and lad made some cash purchases. To Mr Mouat: The amount she had c aimed from the Equitable was L 175. Bhe had claimed the full value of the insurance, less the amount on the piano, which was insured elsewhere. J. A. X. Reidle, manager of the Dresden Tiano Company, said that nearly two years jigo Mrs Brady hired a piano fiom him at 2os a month. She had no property in the piano ; it was not bought on time payments. Some LlO or LI2 was still due for hire. Mrs Brady had cal'ed on Friday or Saturday last and asked him whether the piano was insured. He rep'ied that it was. Mrs Brady had had a piano from him somo time ago ou the time-payment system, but that instrument had been returned. There was no written agreement about this second piano; it was a casual hire without the option of purchase. At one o'clock the court adjourned for an hour.

Thomas Joseph Wilson, of the Equitable Insurance Company, received the application for insurance first, from Mr Stonebridge, asking whether he would accept the assurance in his name or Mrs Brady's. The only conversation ho had had with Mrs Brady was in reference to her transfer from one house to another. The original proposal was for L2QQ without the piano ; but as accepted, the insurance was for L2JO including the piano. To Mr Mouat: Ha had told Mrs Brady that it would be necessary to havo the roruoval from Mtuirt street to Cargill street endorteJ ci> the policy That was done, and an additional premium of fjs was paid. That was on the Bth of February last. An inspection tf tho furniture w«s made at the time of the removal. Mr Cut en made the inspection. Mrs Brady, recalled, was examined as to certain items claimed for in the proof of loss, and stated that tho details were made up from the arrangement of tho rooms in the Stuart street house, where the furniture wis when it was first insured. A sofa clamed for was not in tli j Cargill street house. She w-s not aware tint bhe hid claimed fur it. To Mr Mouat: All the furniture m the Stuait street house was brought to the Cargill street house, with the exception of the diuiugriiuin oilcloth. Tint was sold befoie wjr.ncss shifted. It was included by mi>take in the proof of loss. William Heury Cutten, inspector for the Fquitable Company, had' had a conversation with Mrs Brady at the time of the application. It took placo in the Stuart street house. She wanted L 2".0. "Witness said that the furniture wax not worth more than L2. r >(), and they could not give her more than i-200 on it. He told Mrs Biady that she must put a separate value on the piano. She »aid it liad cost her L&1, ar.:\ witness said he could only allow L 25 on it. To air Mouat: Witness took a passing glance at the furniture after removal to CaTgill street, and satisfied himself that the house was pretty full. The furniture seemed to be in fair order, and ho thought L 250 was not an extravagant valuation. The piano appeared to be a pretty fair one. Thomas Stonebridge deposed that lie had. a bill of sale over the bulk of Mrs Brady's furniture and effects to the extent of L7O. That was exclusive of the piano. Witness produced the bill of sale. To Mr Mouat: There was a clause in the bill of sale providing that the goods mu t be insured. He went to the Eqhitable Company, and said that he wanted his interest covered. To the Jury : He reckoned that the furniture was full valuo for L 250 at the time the bill of Bale was g'.ven To the Coroner: Since April, 188G, witness supplied Mrß Brady with a good few goods on a*i open account. Detective Bain deposed: I arrived at the scene of the fire between a quarter and ten minutes to nine on the night of the 7th. The Fire Brigade were thon in possession of the building. About nine o'clock I saw Mrs Brady in the right-of-way leading down from the house lately occupied by her. I took her into Mr Baird's. In answer to my questions, she said: "I left the house this evening at ten minutes to eight o'clock, taking my two children with me, and went direct to Price the fishmonger's." I asked her what condition she U-ft the house in. She said that she locked the back door of the hou e before leaving, and closed the fiont door, but did not lock it. I asked her why she did not lock the front door. She replied : " There is no latch-key to it." I asked her what lights or fire she left in the house. She replied " There was a small fire in tho kitchen grate, some clothes on a ohair in front of the kitchen grate, and a kerosene lamp burning on the kitchen table. That was all the fire or lights in the house." I asked her if her furniture was insured. She replied that her furniture and effects were insured in the Equitable Office for L2OO, and that the piano was insured for L 25. She said that she had purchased the piano from the Dresden Company on the deferred-paymerit system at a cost of L 63, and that L 25 was paid on it. She said: "I have been making arrangements for removing from here. I got rid of all my boarders to day. I had arranged with Mr Pym to sell my goods on Satufday, and then I would go to Christchurch." I then asked her if she had sold or removsd any goods lately. At first she answered "No," but afterwards replied "Yes, J have sold a sewing machirio to one of my late boarders for hV I asked her again if she was quite : certain that that was all the furniture she had disposed of, to which she replied Yes, she was sure of that. A little later on I asked her again if sho was certain Bhe had sold nothing but the sewing machine, and the said she had not. I examined the house that night, but it was too dark to see anything. I went again next morning—the hou«e having been in charge of the police meanwhile-'and in the front bedroom there was very little damage. There Were in that room two bedstead", a chest of drawers, a chair, a double washstand, a single set of ware, and the remains of a ldoking-gla3S on the chest of drawers. The chest of drawers was only a common sort of wood. - There were also a'towel-railand some bedding. In the front sitting-room there were the remains of a cheffonier, the remains ofasmallchestof drawers, thcremainsof twocane chairs, and other articles. There was no appearance of a couch. The kitchen was the place where the fire bad done the most damage. Apparently tho fire must hrvve originated there. The floor waß partly burnt. I saw the brass part of a kerosene lamp. It was in front of the kitchen fireplace. I saw the back part of a couch in one of the out-houses. It had no mark of fire on it. I saw a couch in the kitchen ; it seemed to be stuffed with straw and shavings. I saw nothing to indicate the cause of the fire. The range seemed to be a safe one. The ashi an was in position ; also the f judcr. To Mr Mouat: The house wa3 evidently very roorlv furnished. To the Jury: Judging from what I have seen of the debris I should say the whole lot of the furniture could be put in for L7O. I opened all the drawers in two chests of drawers that were not burnt. There was nothing m either of them One chest of drawers was in the boarders' room; the other cheat had been-aaved, aid was outside the house. borne ladies dresses were saved, but they had evidently been hung up, not laid away in drawers. There w" the remains of a chest of. drawers in the diuing-room. Mrs Brady told me onthefollowinldaythat.it was in these drawers that he haYkipt her wearing apparel. Rwto oneof drawerg was left, unburnt The on* debris of woollen goods were part of a quilt and gome antimacassars. Two bedsteadsjn the house had the complete bedding on them. Mrs Brady was recalled and further examined as to the number of chain that were in

the house at the time of the fire. There were, she believed, eighteen.

To Mr Mouat: As to the chest of drawers said to have been found empty, there wore some odds and ends of undirslothinpr, of some value to witness, in theso drawers when wituesj left the home. It was not true as stated by Detective Bain, that she told the detoctive she had made arrangements with Mr Fym to sell her goods. Ah to her having represented that the piano was hers, she might have said so beoiuae she did not wish to explain her business to everybody. Alexander Simpson, in the Equitable Company's employ, said that on the Bth iust. Mrs Brady told him that a friend of hers had made arrangements with Mr Bym, auctioneer, for the sale of her furniture on Saturday. She added that she intended to go away after had squared up her debts. To Mr Mouat: I am sure of the very words she used in reference to the sale of her property.

This was all the evidence. _ 'J he Coroner, addressing the jury, said that some of the circumstances disclosed were very peculiar. One was that Mrs Brady had got rid of her boarders so shortly before the fire. Then, though she had announced her intention of leaving off house'joepii g, she had male no arrangements for giving up the house. Further, she was very much involved in regard to money matters, and one would have thought that if she had intended to sell off the property she would have done so as quickly as possible. But, of course, the jury could not find anyone guilty of arson or auy other crime on mere suspicion. After about ten minutes' consideration the jury returned the following verdict:—" That the house was burned on the 7th inst., but whether wilfully cr otherwise there is no evidence to prove."