VOYAGE ON A YACHT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 10019, 4 January 1896, Page 2 (Supplement)

VOYAGE ON A YACHT.

Mr. William Conyem Hbrrino brought an action in the Queen's Bench the other day against Mr. $. W, Japsqn.and otjUprp, underwriters, to rocovor the insurance of a yacht named the Mohioan, which was destroyed by fire. In opening the. case. Sir 1. Lcckwood said plaintiff, an American gentleman, had passed soma time in England, had studied .at the University of Oxford, and had followed to somo extent the profession pf medicine, Ho returned to Amorica,' and in 1593 inherited certain sums from lifa fattier, paving a fortune of about £1200 or £1300 a year he was anxious to try a yacht, and in 1891 purchased, the Mohican for GSOOdole., considering ho had a good bargain. Ho had the load keel taken off and sold. Subsequently he and his wife and a servant sailed to England, arriving at Plymouth on February 13 last. After a brief stay at Plymouth the yacht was berthed at Southwick. Plaintiff and his wifo came to London, leaving the servant, Letitja Thompson, in charge Qii tlio night they left for London the yacht was securo, but an hour lator smoke was seen issuing from the hold, and the yacht was burnt out. Previously the Mohican had been inured for £5000, £3000 of which was with the defendant underwriters. Plaintiff was called in support of his counsel's statement. In cross-examination ho admitted that he had been divorced from bis first wifo. Mr. Bjgham: Was this happy home on the yacht to consist of you, your own wjfe, and.your friends the Edars, and your late wifo? Witness: It was not, Mr. Bigham. We are told thab you had on board this yaoht your sorvant, Lotitia Thompson ? Witness ! Yes. Wore you accused of kidnapping the girl from hor mother ? I may havo been, not to my face. lb was suggested that I had. Was 6he to form part ot the happy homo (laughter)? I did not anticipate taking her (laughter). Did the girl's mothor come from America to get her away from you ? She did. And caught the girl at Southwick, whore the yacht w«3 lying after the fire?Yes. Whon you hoard her mothor was here you telegraphed to her to avoid hor mothor? I did. Mr, Bigham further olicitod thai there was no caretaker on board tlio yacht at the time of the fire. She burned bo tho water's edge and thou sank, so that she could not be completely examined. They took vory liltlo luggage with thorn on leaving tho yacht, and did not intoud to bo absent more than bhreo days. Thoy went to stay with the Edors atCroxtod Road, Dulwich, where the first Mrs. Horring had the furniture of her first marriage. "Your own old furniture," said Mr. Bigham, " all the household goods f Yes. And this furniture was all sold up the day after the fire on the yacht? I don't know anything about it. The witness said he had no suggestion to make to the jury as to tho way the fire arose

Mr, Bigham suggested that the internal evidences in the cabins pointed to the fact that the fire began, nob in one place, but in at least two. The witness said this had never occurred to him.

Mr. Herring, cross-examined by Mr. Bigham, denied that after ho and his wife and servant had loft the yacht, lucking up everything, ho wont back, and was on board alone for several minute?. The witness who said he was was mistaken. Plaintiff was questioned as to his relations with Mr. and with Mrs. Edor. Mr. Bigham also pressed Mr, Herring as to his pecuniary affairs, suggesting that ho was worth little more than £20, bub he maintained that if his securities paid tho interest thoy ought to do his inoome would average between £1200 and £1300 a year. The servant to whom referenco had been made came with them as his wife's maid. It was true that her mother, accompanied by a policeman, took her away from the yacht, and she afterwards ran an ay from hor mother. It was true, also, that the mother brought an action against him for abducting tho girl, but it was dismissed. In re-examination tho plaintiff said the girl was in his wife's employ bofore ho married her, and it whs not truo to suggest that be had influenced her to como to this country. Mrs. Mabel Viola Horring, wifo of the plaintiff, gave evidoneo as to the circumstances under which tho maid came with them to England. It was at her own request. She herself had nothing to do with sotting the yacht on fire. There was no partnership between Mr. Eder and her husband. Mr. Edor had married the first Mrs. Herring, from whom her husband had been divorced.

The maid whoso name has been frequently mentioned in the course of the caao was called, and bora out the statement that she begged to be brought on the yacht, as she was unhappy at homo. She was sure that on the occasion when she and Mr. and Mrs. Herring left tho yacht Mr. Herring did nob return to it.

The case was adjourned.