FIRE IN PAINT SHOP

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 982, 27 May 1930, Page 16

FIRE IN PAINT SHOP

ARSON CHARGE FOLLOWS SUPREME COURT EVIDENCE Press Association NEW PLYMOUTH, Monday. A sequel to a fire in a car painter’s shop at Eltham on January 10 was heard in the Supreme Court today when Robert Thomson was charged with wilfully setting fire to his shop, and alternatively, with wilfully setting fire to substance in the shop, knowing that the building was likely to be set on fire. ITe pleaded not guilty. The Crown Prosecutor referred to the discovery of the fire, and said accused, who was in partnership with his brother, was in straitened financial circumstances. The brother owned property and building, but there were two mortgages on it. They had £3OO of unsecured debts and were being pressed for the overdue interest on the second mortgage, also by some of their creditors. Accused was made bankrupt about a fortnight after - the fire. The financial position was so bad that the telephone and electric light services had been cut oft' because the fees had not been paid. Counsel suggested that from the point of view of insurance a successful fire would have been a godsend for the accused. There was a policy of £560 on the building, £220 on the plant, £IOO on the stock and £IOO on the work in hand. On the. day of the fire accused had purchased a tin of benzine. After the fire an empty tin was found near the front door. Fire was discovered in several parts of the building simultaneously. The fire actually did little damage. In a statement to the police Thomson had said he had been using benzine to clean a car. He left the building but, noticing the parking lights burning on a car, he returned to turn them off. He struck a match and an explosion occui-red. The case for the defence has not yet begun.