ALLEGATIONS OF ARSON

Taranaki Daily News, 21 December 1935, Page 14

ALLEGATIONS OF ARSON

FIRES AT INGLEWOOD BURNING OF TWO HOUSES. TWO MEN COMMITTED FOR TRIAL. PLEAS OF NOT GUILTY ENTERED. Charged with arson by wilfully setting fire to two houses, two Inglewood men, D’Arcy Henry Gyde and Gordon Joseph Sattler, pleaded not guilty and were committed to the February sessions of the New Plymouth Supreme Court by Messrs. R. W. D. Robertson and J. A. Valentine, justices of the peace, in the New Plymouth Police Court yesterday. On a third charge against Sattler alone, he pleaded guilty and was committed to the Supreme Court for sentence. No application was made for bail. Gyde, who is 23, married and the father of two small children, and Sattler, who is 24, were jointly charged with wilfully setting fire to a two storeyed dwelling in Matai Street, valued at £2OO, the property of Alfred Ernest Surrey, on September 27 and with wilfully setting fire to a twostoreyed dwelling in Standish Street, the property of the estate of Joe Walker Winfield, valued at £5O, on December 11. Sattler alone was charged with wilfully setting fire to a 6-roomed dwelling in Standish Street, valued at £4OO, the property of the estate of William Marshall, on November 21, 1934. Detective P. Kearney conducted the prosecution and- Mr. L. M. Moss appeared for both the accused. The first witness was Surrey, who said he was a farmer living at Tarata. His bouse, which he bought about 10 years ago, was practically destroyed by the fire. It had been unoccupied for about two months before and was valued, before the fire, at £250. It was insured for £2OO at the time and the insurance company afterwards paid out tire amount. When he last visited the place on August 23 he found the back door open and before leaving he secured the building. The insurance money went to the mortgagee. HOUSE UNOCCUPIED. Questioned by Mr. Moss, Surrey said the house was extremely old, had been unoccupied for about eight weeks and for years prior to that had only been occupied on and off. He admitted trying to sell it for pulling down or any other purpose. The house was unI profitable, but he had received better offers than the £5O .offered by one prospective buyer. It had not been condemned by the Inglewood borough authorities. The rent he had received for the tenancy was 12s a week. Cyril Winfield, solicitor and executor : r the estate of his father, valued the building at the date of the fire at between £5O and £lOO. It was not insured. The building was tenanted once a. fortnight for military parades and the league football club used it in winter time. The upper floor only was used by each and the lower floor was vacant. ■ No one was living or sleeping in the building, witness told Mr. Moss. . Carl W. Knofflock, night watchman at Inglewood, said he was on duty on the night of September 27. About 11 o’clock, he passed Surrey’s house and observed no signs of fire. Two hours later, while standing in Matai Street near the post office, he observed smoke and flames and gave the alarm. He discovered Surrey’s building alight at the back and he remained on the spot until the brigade arrived. He knew both Gyde and Sattler but he did not see either at the fire. Dealing with the fire in Winfield’s building, Knofflock said at 1.30 a.m., he was in .Standish Street within 30 yards of the building. There was no indication of fire. An hour later, however, he went to the back of Winfield’s building and smelt fire. He looked round two or three backyards without detecting it, but when he returned to Winfield’s buildings, he looked through a side window at the front and saw fire in the flooring. He again gave the alarm, but he did rot see either Gyde or Sattler about. Constable F. Longbottom, Inglewood, said for a few months prior to the fire lie held the keys of Surrey’s building. He arrived at the fire after the brigade. The two back rooms on the ground floor were well ablaze and one window on the north side was opened. The seat of the fire was apparently in the centre of the two rooms underneath the staircase leading upstairs. Only the shell of the building remained standing after the fire. During the fire he saw Sattler and later Gyde, said the constable. A thorough examination he made of the building revealed nothing. GYDE INTERVIEWED. The police made inquiries into the two fires and Gyde was interviewed at the Inglewood police station on December 15. He. was questioned about Surrey’s fire and made a very frank statement that he and Sattler were responsible. Gyde wrote a statement in which he said he met Sattler, who suggested that there should be another fire to add to the number in the district. Gyde was not favourable, but. after they had walked about for a time, Sattler went inside Surrey’s house and set fire to it. Later that day, Sattler was interviewed and, after denying any connection with the fire, subsequently made a statement.

Detailing the fire at Winfield’s place, Constable Longbottom said he saw a smoking parcel under the front of the building. He had it recovered by the fire brigade and discovered it to be a cushion filled with flock ticking, articles of clothing and sheets of music and part of a newspaper. The remains of the' parcel were produced in court. Inquiries made after the fire resulted ir Gyde being interviewed. Questioned, he frankly admitted that he and Sattler set the building alight and he also made a statement in which he said he had had several drinks at Sattler’s home that night. He left about 12.30 a.m. and after Sattler suggested setting fire to Winfield’s building, the sack was obtained and pushed under the building. Sattler was later interviewed and after denying any connection with the offence, later admitted his part and made a statement. Sattler said the top of the sack had been soaked with benzine. Gyde did not know what was in the sack, but he must have known about the benzine. Both went home immediately it had been lit. To Mr. Moss: He had known both Sattler and Gyde nearly all their lives. Previous to the fires, they had both borne good characters. Both were industrious men who had been in regular work for a number of years and who had worked for reputable men. “I am satisfied Gyde realises his position very keenly,” said the constable in reply to Mr. Moss’ suggestion that both v ere realising their position. Detective Kearney gave evidence in support of the constable’s. The hearing of the charge against Sattler alone was then taken. Norman F. Little, New Plymouth, solicitor acting for the trustees of the estate of William Marshall, who died on April 30, 1934, said the Inglewood house was extensively damaged by the fire. He

was notified by telephone from Inglewood on November 21, 1934. The house had been vacant since August, though a new tenant was to go in on November 26. The fire appeared to have originated on the front verandah or just inside one-front room. The house w»s insured for £4OO, but Little estimated the value at the time to be somewhat larger. The insurance company after negotiation, had paid £230 for reinstatement of the house, which was constantly tenanted for some time. Tire place was empty at the time of the fire, witness told Mr. Moss. Keith H. Bendall, Inglewood motor mechanic, said on the night of the flic he spent the evening at Mr. T. Lindsay’s house in Standish Street, practically opposite the house burned. There was no sign of fire and he did not notice anybody about the street. Robert T. Ballantine, Inglewood cycle dealer, said that in November, 1934, he was living in a house in Standish Street, alongside Marshall’s and about 18 feet away. He was awakened - about two o’clock in the morning by the cracking of glass and he discovered that Marshall’s home was burning in a front room. The fire had a fair hold. When he rang the alarm for the brigade there was no one in Standish Street . Constable Longbottom said he found no sign of rubbish when he made'' an

examination of the house. The seat of the fire was in the north front room floor. Inquiries made over a long period by the police resulted in Sattler being interviewed by Constable Longbottom and Detective Kearney on December 15, 1935, and, after admitting the fire, Sattler made a statement. -In it, he admitted setting the house alight by pouring a bottle of benzine on to the floor of the front room. When the brigade arrived Sattler went back to the fire. ( Sattler’s explanation had cleared- the fire up, Constable Longbottom told Mr. Moss. j DetectivK Kearney gave similar evidence.