Supreme Court.

Southland Times, Issue 5016, 28 August 1884, Page 2

Supreme Court.

Wednesday, 27th Aug. (Before His Honor Mr Juatice Williams.) CRIMINAL SITTINGS. His Honor took his seat at 10 a.m. ABSOtf, John Henry Clifford Christie wascharged with having on the 7th July, wilfully and maliciously set fire to a building situated at Soho creek, Lake County. — Prisoner pleaded "Not Guiity," and a jury was empannelled, Mr J. W. Smith being chosen Foreman. The Crown Prosecutor said the building which the prisoner was charged with burning dosv-n was situated at the junction of Soho and Billy streams, on the only track between Arrowtown and Macetown. IPrior to the 7ih July the building belonged to the prißooer, and up to the 29th June it was occupied by his mother-in-law, Mrs 1 Champion. On the 29th June, Mrs Champion left the house, but did not remove all her furniture. She did not, however, leave any kerosene in the building, but there was a small case of it left outside, as well as a quantity of kindliug scrub. The house was not actually occupied by anyone at the time the fire took place. Oa the 7th July the prisoner sold the house to one Jamea Hamilton, of Arrowtown, for L 7, the sale being completed about 2 p.m. on that day. On the evening of -the Bame day the prisoner went to a livery atablekeeper in Arrowtown and hired a horse, saying that he was only going five miles. After that he was seen by two witnesses riding in the direction of the house. Two persons who lived in the vicinity of the building noticed flames issuing from it about6p.m. They wentf to the scene, and one of them heard the sound of someone riding at a very rapid pace towards Arrowtown. Shortly after this two persons who were driving cattle from Arrowtown came up to the scene to see if they could help the men already there to do anythlner, but the fire had by that time obtained mastery. These two persons met Christie on the road riding towards Arrowtown at a furious pace, and it would be shown that it was scarcely possible for him to be unaware that the house was on fire. Subsequently the prisoner made several statements. He told Hamilton that he had been to Lake Hayes, which was in a totally different direction from that in which the house was that evening, and denied to the sergeant of police that he had been near the scene of the fire at all. Afterwards, however, the prisoner, probably finding that the evidence of his real whereabouts would be overwhelming, volunteered evidence at the coroner's inquest, stating that he had been at the house on the evening in question for the purpoae of taking away a three-gallon keg of whisky, and made such statements generally as were calculated to make it appear as if the fire had been accidentally caused by him during his visit. The only question for the jury to decide was : Did the prisoner wilfully set the building on fire ? If they were satisfied that he did, they must conclude that he intended the necessary consequence of his act, and the necessary consequence was that someone would be injured by the destruction of the bouse. What the prisoner's motive was he (counsel) could not tell, but it was not necessary for the Crown to prove motives. Mrs Champion gave evidence to the effect that the house had formerly belonged to her, but had been transferred to the prißonfir. Her goods in the house at the time of the fire were worth about L 35. She had had a bit of a quarrel with the prisoner, who was her son-in-law^ about money matters, but it had since been made up. — Cross-examined by prisoner : There had been a lot or scrub at the back of the building, some of which was there still. James Hamilton gave evidence as to his purchase of the house. He told prisoner when the transaction was completed that he would go up and take away the house the following morning. He and the prisoner had been on good terms. — H. B. Smith commission agent, corroborated. T. Patch eU; and George Saxon deposed as to the hire and return of the horse on the day in question. The latter stated that the prisoner, before leaving Arrowtown, changed hats with a man named Phillips, and that when he returned the horse bore the appearance of having been hardly ridden. Carl Hems and Neil McCorvie, who were the neighbors present on the scene, stated that there was a distinct blue flame which the first-named said he thought was' caused by kerosene. McCorvie had heard the sound of someone riding rapidly towards Arrowtown about five minutes before he saw the fire. Sergeant Brown had examined the site wheron the house had been after the fire. He found the remains of a kerosene tin inside the space previously covered by the front room, near thejdoor. When arrested the prisoner said to witness : " I consider it no offence, as I did not give Hamilton possession," James Cowan, M. Neylon, R. McDowall, C. D. Dagg, W. Reid, and Sergeant Brown also gave evidence in support of the Crown Prosecutor's opening statement, and the prisoner's deposition at the coroner's enquiry was put in. The prisoner said he had sold the house to Hamilton on the 7th July, and was to give possession on the following morning On the evening of the 7th he had occasion to go to the house for a jar of whisky which had been left there far him. He went in the evening because be did not wish anyone to see the whisky. While going for it ho met several persons who knew him well, but he spoke to them, and made no attempt whatever to conceal his identity. Arrived at the building he tied his horse up at the side of the road and entered the lean«to, which was of stone lined with bags. He had only two matches in his possession. He struck one, and, it burning down to his fingers he dropped it, lighted the other, got tl c jar, and went out. All the time he was in the lean-to, never being in the main building at all. He then rode at a pretty fast raffi to where he wanted go, and thence to the Royal Oak Hotel to get his own bat A great deal had been said about his changing hats, but he had done so simply because on that day he was wearing a hard beli-topper, which would not have stuck to his head while riding. On his road to Arrowtown he mot two of the witnesses but as he leut forward and had on his overcoat they could nor see the jar He heard notfoiag about the fire until next day at nqon, when he was much astonished at the occurrence, as there had been no sign of fire when he left the building. He saw Hamilton thut day, a D ,I said to him that it was a bad job, but it was not fair that Hamilton should loss all, and therefore ha (prisoner) would givo him buck ho. Ho denied bemg near the house on, the ni^ht in question, simply because he did not wish anyaae-to know about the wbjaky or to get others, fafe twitfa, Twq

of the witnesses had mentioned blue flames. It Would be very strange if there were not blue flames, as the house bad. an iron roof. There were many -things to cause blue flames besides kerosene, such as sulphur, common fait, &c. He asked the jury did they thiuk that if he intended to burn down the house he would go iti the evening, at the time when there was most traffic on the road ? Did they think he would have tied the horse up at the side of the road where " everyone passing could see him ? Did they think he would commit such a crime knowing that Reid and Dagg were coming up the road afterwards, and were sure to meet him as he went back ? The reason that he bad promised to give Hamilton L 5 hack was that he thought it would only be just, as he (Hamilton) bad not got possession of the house. That itself was proof that he bad no object in setting fire to the house. By this fire he lost the house, L 5, his mother-in-law's furniture, for which hs was responsible, and his time— in all, 'about L7O. Did they think that a man with a single grain of common sense would commit a crime such as this, a crime through which he himself must lose everything, and could not possibly gain anything? That was all he had to say. His Honor summed up, and the jury retired. After an hour's deliberation they returned a Verdict of " Guilty." The prisoner said his age was 36, in ; answer to the usual' question. ; The Grown Prosecutor said the prisoner had been known to the police for a very longtime. At the September sittings of the Supreme Court in Dunedin, he being then about 15 years of age, be was sentenced to 4 years' penal servitude for rape. After that he was summarily sentenced three times in Dunedin for larceny, and subsequently convicted of horse stealing, in Christchurch, and sentenced to 18 months. Then followed three summary convictions for larceny, and in 1872, in Invercargill, he was sentenced to 4 years and 2 years each for larceny. While in custody on these sentences he escaped from the Invercargill gaol, "and for doing so was sentenced by the District Court to three years' penal servitude. Then be was summarily conTicted in 1880 at Dunedin, on two charges of larceny. In point of fact, for the last 20 years the prisoner had spent very little time out of gaol. His Honor said he would take into consideration the fact that the prisoner's act had not been attended with any danger to human life, and also that the property destroyed was of small value. At the same time,arson was a very serious offence, and, looking at lhe previous career, a substantial punishment would be inflicted. The sentence would be seven years' penal servitude.