FIRE IN WAREHOUSE

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVIII, Issue 19940, 26 October 1934, Page 7

FIRE IN WAREHOUSE

INQUIRY BEFORE CORONER

EVIDENCE UNFINISHED By Telegraph—Press Association CHRISTCHURCH, October 25. A coroner’s inquiry into the circumstances of the fire at the premises of Davidson and Co., provision merchants, 168 Lichfield Street, on June 8, was opened this morning before the Magistrate, Mr E. D. Mosley. Chief Detective Dunlop represented the police, Mr Sim appeared for W. Davidson, and Mr Thomas for the Guardian Insurance Company.

C. C. Warner, Superintendent of the Christchurch Fire Brigade, said the alarm was received at 2.31 a.m. The Brigade was on the spot in two minutes and the fire was under control in half an hour. He held the opinion that the fire started in the rear of the building. The offices were damaged by heat and smoke. All he saw at the seat of the fire were empty packing cases. There was practically no merchandise there. Mr Thomas: Would it be correct to say there was £2OOO worth of merchandise there?—lt would be incorrect. Did you note that two bottles of turpentine had been placed at one spot, and there were paper shavings between them?—Yes. Witness added that it would be incorrect to say that £I6OO worth of merchandise was destroyed. Mr Sim said he hoped to satisfy the coroner that there was £IBSO worth of merchandise in the warehouse at the time of the fire. Counsel for the Guardian Assurance said Davidson had stated that £llOO worth was visible after the fire, so that £750 worth must have gone up In smoke. He was trying to find out whe'ner t' -t was correct. William Davidson said that on March 1 the company was registered as Davidson and Co., Ltd. Previously it had been known as Davidson and Co. He produced books to show his stock at the time of the fire. Noel L. Bowman, manager of the Christchurch branch of the Guardian Insurance Company, said a policy had been issued to Davidson and Co. in 1931, giving £SOO cover on the contents and £IOO on the office equipment. Later a policy was issued giving cover up to £1250. Davidson, after the fire, claimed, showing his loss at £2113, less salvage £95. After the report of the adjuster his company repudiated the claim.

Frederick Stewart Grant, manager q* the Union Assurance Society, said ?.at on February 8, 1932, a policy for £750 fire risk was issued to Davidson at 61 Bealey Avenue. The policy afforded 10 per cent, cover if furnishings were destroyed in certain premises away from the dwelling. In June last he received notice from Davidson making a claim for £25 for loss in respect of goods lost by fire on his business premises. Davidson said that 100 books had been destroyed, but witness did not see any trace of books partly burned, and witness did not consider the fire bad enough to destroy them totally. Davidson’s claim had not been settled.

Henry William Copley, night watchman, said that Davidson had called at his home and produced a statement saying that witness had not seen Davidson’s car outside his office from 11 to 12.30 on the night of the fire. He asked witness to sign it. Witness replied that he did not then know Davidson’s office, and would not have noticed the car in the street.

The inquiry was adjourned till tomorrow.