The Sun.
London, England, 1863-08-26 00:00:00

fd, SUN. LONDON, WEDNESDAY EvENING; AUGUST 26, 1863.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME CIRCUIT.—CROYDON, Aug. 25.
(Before Baron Bramwell and a Special Jury.)
WOOLLEY V. POOLE.—EXTRAORDINARY TRIAL.
This was an action to recover £4,000 from the Sun Fire
Office upon a policy of insurance against fire effected in that
office.
th el uh e defendants
were
material,
aa dneddt
hseveral
involved pleas, bquu n
et s
toiolny
of
fwvo
rye f
considerable importance, as by ono of them the plaintiff was
f
alleged to have made a fraudulent claim in respect the
property that was represented to have been destroyed, and
by
fire that
the other
was the
he was
subjectcha of thergedwith inquiry.havin
g wilfully caused
the
Mr. Bovill, Q.C., Sergeant Ballantine, Mr. Merewether,
Mr. H. James (these gentlemen being specially retained),
and Mr. Rosher were counsel for the ?laintiff.
Mr, Lush, Q.C., the Hon. G. Denman, Q.C., and Mr.
Garth were counsel for the defendant.
The cause created a good deal of interest, on account of
the amount at stake in the inquiry, which is altogether
nearly £30,000, and also on account of the pleas which the
defendants had felt themselves justified in placing upon the
re cord.
As the case was expected to last several days, the gentle-
men who had been summoned to serve on the special jury
were very anxious to be excused from being sworn upon the
jury, and Baron Bramwell excused some of them, and even-
tually the learned counsel on both sides agreed that the case
should be tried by ten jurymen only.
A very well executed model of the premises was placed
upon the counsels' table, to enable the jury to understand
the points in the case.
Mr. Bovill, in opening the case to the jury, said that they
were about to enter into an inquiry of a very long and trou-
blesome description, but when they reflected upon the very
serious character of the imputations that were cast upon the
character of the plaintiff, he was sure they would not con-
sider any amount of time ill bestowed on such an investi-
gation. The object of the present action was to recover the
sum of £4,000 upon a policy of insurance against fire effected
by the plaintiff, and when they considered the nature of
the issues that were raised by the company, they would see
that it was impossible for the plaintiff to remain under such
imputations for a single moment longer than was abso-
lutely necessary, and these had, therefore, been sent down
for trial at these assizes. The plaintiff had resided for
a great many years at Camden House, Kensington,
which was represented by the model that was on the table,
and those gentlemen of the jury who looked at the model,
and who had seen the extent of the ruins, would be able to
form a very good idea of the character of the buildings. As
he had before stated the plaintiff had resided at Camden
House since the year 1847, and down to the morning of
Sunday the 23d March, 1862, on which day the whole of
the premises,with the exception of some of the outbuildings,
and everything it contained, was entirely consumed by fire.
If the question to be decided merely had been in reference
to the insurance for £4,000, it would not have occupied an
hour in being disposed of, but he was bound to tell them
that besides this policy of £4,000 upon which the present
action was brought, other insurances had been effected that
altogether amounted to £29,000. The sum might appear to
be a large one, but he believed he should be able to satisfy
them that, large as it was, it would be utterly insufficient
to restore the building and its contents to its former posi-
tion. The learned counsel then went on to explain that the
policy for£4,ooo now sought to be claimed upon was effected
on the 16th August, 1855, in the Sun ; in 1859 another in-
surance was effected in the same office for £6,000, and ano-
ther policy for £2,000 was effected in the Hand-in-Hand,
making the total sum for which the building alone was in-
sured £12,000. Another policy was effected subsequently
upon the fixtures and fittings, in the Sun for £4,000, and in
the Hand-in-Hand for £3,000. A policy for £5,000 was also
effected with the Sun upon household goods, china, glass,
&c., and also a policy for £5,000 wits the Atlas upon pic-
tures ; so that the whole sum that was undoubtedly in-
volved in the inquiry was nearly £30,000. He had informed
them that the fire took place in March, 1862, and the whole
of the building and its contents were entirely destroyed,and
in due course the usual application was made to the insu-
rance offices with which policies had been effected. The
first dispute that would seem to have arisen between the
parties was with regard to the policy upon the furniture, and
an action having reference to that subject was set down for
trial in London ; but, owing to the pressure of business in
the courts of law there, it was found that it could not be
tried, and it was therefore arranged that the present action
should be first disposed of, as Mr. Woolley was determined
not to rest under the imputations that were cast upon him a
single moment longer than was absolutely necessary. The
defendants, as they had heard, had placed several pleas upon
the record, but it was impossible not to see that the real.
ground of defence was, that the plaintiff had caused the de-
struction of the building and the property contained in it by
his own wilful act. The amount for which the building was
insured was £12,000, and to any one at all acquainted with
the nature of building operations, he said that with reference
to that part of the case it was obvious that this sum would
be totally insufficient to rebuild such extensive premises,
and, indeed, he did not believe that any dispute occurred
between the surveyors of the plaintiff and those appointed
by the company upon the point, but, on the contrary, he be-
lieved that the surveyors had arranged plans for the re-
erection of the house at the time the transactions occurred
that bad led to this action being brought. It appeared that
the first subject of discussion was as to the contents of the
teansion and the value of those contents, and the companies
insisted upon having the most minute information in refer-
ence to this subject. Some delay was occasioned in giving
this information from the fact that Mr. Woolley, who nar-
rowly escaped with his life at the time the fire broke out,
was ill, and consequently unable to give the necessary infor-
mation ; and when the information was completed, the jury
would be able to form some idea as to the extent of the pro-
perty by the fact that the inventory filled a volume of consi-
derable size, and it contained. 1,000 items. The learned
counsel went on to say that while these discussions were
going on upon the subject of the furniture, it appeared that
some rumours had got afloat about the fire, and these
umours at last got to the ears of the insurance companies,
ano they, and other persons, some of whom he believed
thought it was impossible for any fire to be accidental, at
once jumped to the conclusion that this fire at Camden House
was caused wilfully. The result of this was that the plaintiff
was required to give a full account with regard to the furni-
ture and where it was bought, and what price was givenfor it.
He was unable to give complete answers to these inquiries,
for the reason that a great deal of the furniture consisted of
old and rare articles, a great many of which had been pur-
chased abroad, and at every place where old and valuable
curiosities could be obtained. The plaintiff, however, did
give them all the information in his power—he allowed
them to examine his servants, nothing was concealed ; and
after all this the insurance companies turned round upon the
plaintiff, and said that the whole transaction was a fraud on
his part, and that he had wilfully destroyed the property ;
and upon these grounds they came forward and defended the
present action. It was impossible to conceive a more seri-
ous charge than this could be made against any man, and
it was one for which only a few years ago his life might
have been forfeited; and this being the case the jury could
easily conceive what the feelings of Mr. Woolley must be
at having such a charge made against him, and could under-
stand his determination to have the matter fully investie
gated at the earliest possible moment. If there had really
been any foundation for such a serious charge against the
plaintiff, it would have been their duty, as it appeared to
him, to have had the matter investigated by a a magistrate,
but they had not done so, and down to the present moment
the plaintiff was utterly ignorant of the grounds upon
which the Sun Fire Insurance Office and the other com-
panies, who were, no doubt, all acting in concert, felt them-
selves justified in bringing forward this serious charge. The
plaintiff (Mr. Woolley) would be called before them. He
was told that he was to be cross-examined upon every
incident of his life ; but he would be placed in the box,
and would fearlessly face a cross-examination with which
he was threatened. He had not at this moment the
slightest notion what the circumstances were upon which
the charge that was made against him was founded.
They did know that the defendants had made inquiries
in every direction, and one of those inquiries he believed
was, whether Mr. Woolley was in the habit of sleeping
in a nightshirt. (A. laugh.) He believed that in the
hurry of escaping from the fire, Mr. Woolley did -put
on a day.
shirt, and this was one of the points, so
e
far as he could learn, upon which the charge of anon was
to be supported ; but if this should prove to be the case, it
would only show what miserable expedients the defendants
were compelled to resort to. He would observe at this point
of the case that 10 months were suffered to elapse after the
fire before the slightest hint was given of any suspicion being
entertained that the fire was other than
accidental, and it
was not until the plaintiff had expressed a determination to
as they were probe-
enforce the policies that he was met by the charge that he
ni leod byLord
had wilfully caused the destruction of the property. The
a
omctecou inform the
jury
Camden. that
Camden
of his revels there, and
had
it
bly aware, was a very old mansion, built m
centuries ore than two
heldoeercions had the honour of en-
tertaining royalty. ly
as occupied
learned
House,"unFei theth placen proceeded
in
question,
healso
or
Merry
ego.i‘n severalon I
artet va m
Monarch
ohs
tafldioeri.
s()
The plaintiff after he became possessed
of it took a pride in fitting it up in the most splendid and
bundle g, which was dedicated to the purposes of amateur
magnificent manner. There was theatre attached to the
performances and concerts, and he might state that the
to charitable purposes,
whole of the proceeds were deveted
and that between £3,000 and £4,000 had been expended in
this manner. The place was so beautifully fitted up, and
contained so many rare, extraordinary articles of art and
vertu, that it was considered a most interesting exhibition,
and it was visited by persons of the highest rank and sta-
tion, many of whom were induced to take drawings of some
of the more remarkable portions of it. (The learned counsel
here exhibited co the jury a number of the drawings to which
he referred.) He then said the jury would be enabled to
judge from these drawings what the character of the build-
ing and its decoratiens really were. and they would at the
same time be able to form their own conclusions as to
whether the amount for which the property was insured
wt
haast ai nt
wunreasonable
ery
sn
hextravagantif otnhee.y
ITt
kheed fat
oc tt
ewr was
it se, his folly, to decorate this place in the most extrava-
gant and gorgeous manner, and his brother-in-law,

Captain Cope, and his sister seemed also actuated
by the same views. He might mention, as an in•
stance of the lengths to which Mr. Woolley went to gratify
his feelings in this respect, that upon one occasion being de-
sirous to purchase some rare carving work that was in en
aolldlowfairtmthoobuesereimnoEv se sde, x,
he fianc dt
ui na that h
y boughtt e
the
owner
le estatew o
iunl d
ordern t
that he might obtain possession of it, and having done so it
was taken out and placed among the other curiosities in
Camden House. In fact he was justified in saying that Mr.
Woolley was a very extraordinary man. Although pos-
sessed of considerable wealth ho kept no horses or carriages,
and even the servants wbo were dressed up in silver and
blue lively on great occasions were not his own servants,
but waiters and persona living in the neighbourhood who
were hired for the purpose. In fact
he spent all the money
he could get in beautifying and decorating Camden House
in the way he had stated, and he had borrowed a large sum
of money of his brother and sister-in-law upon mortgage of
the property, the whole of which was devoted to the pur-
poses he had alluded to. The learned counsel then pro-
ceeded to state that it appeared that in November, 1861,
Mr. Woolley took a house at Brighton, and he believed an
attempt would be made to show that he had removed a por-
tion of the property from Camden House to Brighton ; but
he should be able to prove to them by the most satisfactory
evidence that there was not the slightest foundation
for this suggestion. With regard to the supposition
that the property had been destroyed wilfully, he
should be in a position to prove that, although the
amount of the insurance which was effected was
certainly very considerable, still that in point of fact, if
the whole sum were paid, the plaintiff would in reality
obtain little or no benefit, for the £12,000 for which the
building was insured would not cover the expense of its re-
erection, and nearly the whole of the remainder would go
to the mortgagees. He might also state that the surveyors
of the fire office had had the fullest opportunity for looking
over the property and ascertaining its value, and that they
took pretty good care of their own interest in the matter by
declining to take the risk except upon a double and hazard-
ous premium, which was 4s Gd per cent., and the amount
of the annual premium was £l3O. Mr. Bovill next pro-
ceeded to state that the plaintiff had at one period occupied
Tunbridge Castle, and during his absence his wife was un-
fortunately drowned. It was supposed that she was feed-
ing the swans, and that she fell into the water; but it was
never known how the accident actually happened. To show,
however, the course that had been taken with regard to the
plaintiff, and the unfounded assertions that were made re •
specting him, he might state that " they " had actually
circulated a report, founded upon the fact to which he had
alluded, that Mr. Woolley had murdered his wife.
Mr. Lush said he did not know who his learned friend
meant by " they ;" but on the part of the defendants he
most positively denied that they were any parties to such a
suggestion.
Mr. Bovill said that the statement had come round to
them, and the plaintiff was well aware of the source from
which it emanated. He then proceeded to give a detail of
the circumstances under which the fire occurred. The per-
sons in the house at the time were Mr. Woolley, his butler
Crozier, and a man named Temple and his wife and son.
Mr. Woolley slept in one portion of the house, and his
butler occupied a room not far from it. He was awoke
by some noise, and upon his opening his bedroom door he
round the house was in flames. He awoke his butler, and
he at first attempted to give an alarm to the man Temple
and his family, but the fire prevented him from doing so,
and he and Crozier were compelled to make their escape
by a back staircase. They then proceeded to give the alarm
to the other inmates of the house, and Mrs. Temple in her
fright jumped out of the window and was seriously injured,
and her husband and son got out of the burning mansion
by means of the fire-escape. Mr. Woolley had nothing on
at this time but his shirt, and he was removed to a neigh-
bouring house, and in consequence of his exposure to the
cold and wet—for it was raining at the time the fire hap-
pened—Le was rendered seriously ill, and this to a certain
extent prevented him from giving the information that was
required by the insurance companies so quickly as they
wished it.
Baron Bramwell asked the learned counsel whether he in-
tended to give the jury any information with regard to the
origin of the fire.
Mr. Bovill said they
had no information whatever upon
the subject; all they knew was, that no one was in the
house but the persons he had mentioned ; but the man
Temple had stated that on the evening previous to the fire
he had been engaged in frying sausages, in what was called
the green-room of the theatre, for his sapper, and this might
account for the fire, as the flue of the chimney of that room
communicated with a beam that had been found to be on fire
on a previous occasion. In these old houses, however, it was
very difficult to tell how a fire happened, and he was not in a
position to give the jury any further information as to how
the fire in question originated. He added that the whole
family were examined, everybody about the premises was
subjected to a searching inquiry by persons connected with
the insurance companies, and be submitted, therefore, that
if there had really been any ground for supposing that Mr.
Woolley had been guilty of the serious crime hirputed to
him, the course they should have adopted would hive been
to have given him into custody, and have had the matter
fully investigated by
a magistrate. They had not ventured
to do this, and it was clear, in his opinion, that having got
hold by some means or other of the knowledge of some cir-
cumstances which in their opinion amounted to something
like suspicion, they had resolved upon defending the present
action, in the hope that they might induce the jury to give
them a verdict. _Ube learned counsel then proceeded to nar-
rate some of the other circumstances he proposed to give in
evidence, and concluded a most clear and able speech by
only issue the jury had to decide was,
whether the plaintiff, without the slightest motive, had observing that the
wil-
fully destroyed that property which it appeared to have
ten
withadduced the
been the sole object of his life to obtain possession of,
The following
and I am evidenceacquainted
was
h
plaintiff, and ;
Miss Anne Barker said—l am the sister of the late Sir
G .
Barker,
be-
came so shortly after the death of his first wife, in the winter
of 1858. Miss Cope, the sister-in-law of the plaintiff, and
her brother, Capt. Cope,
were living with Mr. Woolley. I
had heard that some drawings of portions of Camden House
had been taken and sold for charitable purposes, and I my-
self made some drawings which were sold for the same pur-
pose. Some of the drawings that were pe•duced were made
by me, and some by Lady Belcher. Very little furniture
appears in my drawings, and my reasons for leaving out the
furniture from them
was that the drawing would have ap-
peared confused dif the furniture had been introduced ; for
the same reason I left out chandeliers and vases in some of
the drawings. I was well acquainted with the house, and
it was so extremely beautiful that it was a pleasure to go
over it. There was a large quantity of statues, pictures,
and beautiful carving and gilding all over the house. There
were also a Lumber of old pictures, and a great many were
in panels in the drawing-room and library. The furniture
was very rich, and all in character with the decorations of
the house. There was a great deal of very rare and valu-
able embroidery in some of the rooms, and the carp As were
also of a most valuable description. There was a theatre at
tee back of the house. I played there a great many times.
The performances were amateur ones, and got up for the
purposes of charity, The first I played at was got up by
Lord Raynham. Upon one occasion £B9 was received, which
was devoted to charitable purposee,
the proceeds of one per-
formance being given to the Warehousemen and Clerks'
School. There was plenty of scenery for the purposes of an
amateur theatre. Mr. Woolley took very great interest in
his house. I never saw any one
take so much interest in an
establishment. It was all the amusement he appeared to
have, and he and Miss Cope were constantly engaged in
making alterations in the different rooms. There was no
alteration in the furniture or anything else at the time the
fire happened. lam quite sure none of the furniture that
was in Mr. Woolley's house at Brighton had been brought
from Camden House. There were two very large looking-
glasses in the ball-room and the drawing-room. There was
a profusion of valuable looking-glasses all over the house.
I last saw Camden House in November, and at that time I
did not miss anything,

Cross-examined—if the large glass in the drawing-room
had would have been missed immediately.
Ifi enrsbtewenrtemto°Cvead itmden House about three or four years ago.
Everybody who went there was always shown all over the
house, at least over all the show rooms. I was introduced
to Mr. Woolley by Mrs. Milner Gibson. In the year 1861 I
was constantly at Camden House. A great many of the
pictures were portraits. They consisted of portraits of
saints, Madonnas, and Holy Families. I should think there
were three hundred pictures altogether. I think that the
chandeliers in the drawing-room were intended for candles.
I have seen so Easily as 500 persons present at some of the
parties that were given at Camden House. The guests had
supper, wine, and the usual refreshment. The season at
Camden House lasted so long as the London season ; but
it was no use to give parties when there was no one to
go to them. I was aware that Mr. Woolley was in town at
the time the fire happened, but I did not see him at Camden
House. I met him at Mr. Milner Gibson's three or four
days before the fire happened, and he told me he was only
going to stop in town a few days. It had boen arranged that
there should be an amateur performance at the time the fire
took place. I knew Crozier, the butler, as one of the servants
of the family.
Re-examined—Mr. Woolley's sight is very bad, and he is
obliged to have some one to accompany him when he goes
out after dusk.
Lady Belcher said—l have been acquainted with Mr.
Woolley since 1848, and I knew his wife before she was
married to him. I was in the habit of going to Camden
House down to the period of the fire, and I concur in what
was stated by Miss Barker as to the character of the furni-
ture and the decorations. The house was crowded with fur-
niture. Some of the pictures were very good, particularly
the portraits, and many of them were by old Italian masters.
Lady Belcher then identified some drawings of different
pictures of the mansion, as copies of drawings she had her-
self made, and said they ware quite correct.
Cross-examined—The pictures I considered the most
valuable were those by the old masters, and there were,
perhaps, about twenty of them. I heard Mr. Woolley say
that he brought some of those pictures from Florence.
Sir John Burgoyne said—l am a general officer in the
army and Inspector of Engineers. I have known the
Plaintiff, and have been on what I call terms of friendly
intimacy with him for a great many years. I have been
frequently to Camden House, and I agree with the two last

witnesses that it was most magnificently furnished. It ap-
peared to be quite a mania on the part of Mr. Woolley to
have everything in his house of the most recherchd cha-
racter. Everything was most beautiful.

Cross-examined—l have been to the theatrical perform-
ances at Camden House upon several occasions.
Count Mellor de Woelze said—l have known Mr. Wool-
ley 11 or 12 years, and I have Flayed at Camden House on
several occasions. I agree with the last witnesses as to the
magnificent character of the furniture. I remember Mr.
Woolley going to Brighton in November, 1861. At that
time there was no difference in the state of the furniture.
Mr. Woolley was to have breakfasted with me on the morn-
ing after the fire—but I received a letter from him and
saw him the same morning at Dr. Hamilton's, in Grafton-
street, and that gentleman was attending him. He appeared
to be very ill.
Cros,;-exawined— I was at Camden House three or four
days before the fire. 1 only saw Temple the man who had
charge of the house. Mr. Woolley wag not at home.
It examined—When I saw Mr. Woolley at Dr. Hamil
ton's he appeared in a very excited state.
Colonel Alexander Macdonald said—l have known Mr.
Woolley eight or ten years, and I frequently used to go to
Camden House formerly, but I have not done so for the last
two years because I have been engaged. Everything in the
house gave me an idea that they were articles of great
rarity and value. There was abundance of furniture; in
fact, the house appeared crowded.

One or two Other witnesses Were examined, who gave
evidence to the same effect.

The Court then adjourned.