The Sun.
London, England, 1862-02-24 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT—APPLEBY, FEB. 21.
Mr. Justice Mellor arrived at this ancient town
on Wednesday night, opened the commission, and
went to church. Mr. Justice Willes remained at
Lancaster to finish the criminal business.
At this place there were rumours of an important
charge of arson to be tried, on which three actions
against different insurance offices are said in some
measure to depend. This brought over an unusually
large attendance of the bar.
The calendar contains the names of only two pri-
soners—one charged with burglary in a farmhouse,
and stealing some articles of trivial value, and the
charge of arson of a flax mill. There was no civil
business.
Mr. Justice Mellor took his seat shortly after 10
o'clock.
Having disposed of the charge of burglary,
Francis M'Connell, a sharp, intelligent-looking
young Irishman, aged 19, was charged with felo-
niously setting fire to a mill and warehouse on the
14th July last, belonging to the Holme Flax-mill
Company, whereby the mill and warehouse and
large quantities of flax and machinery were con-
sumed, with intent to defraud the company, the
proprietor, and several insurance offices, the intent
being varied in different counts.
Mr. Overend, Q.C., Mr. Higgin, and Mr. Ed-
wards prosecuted; and Mr. Monk, Q.C., and Mr.
Holker defended the prisoner.
The mill and warehouse in question which the
prisoner was charged with having set fire to are
situated near Burnton, and close to the railway be-
tween Lancaster and Carlisle. The mill was five
stories high, and employed as a flax mill, and ad-
joining it, but a separate building, was the ware-
house of fourstories. Between the mill and warehouse
a communication was made by iron gangways, with
a sp4ce of 10ft. between them. In the bottom of the
warehouse was a quantity of tow ready to be spun
into yarns, and a very large stock of yarn packed
away in the top stories. The floors were of wood,
and the building was not fire-proof. A wooden door
communicated with the gangway. The three
bottom floors of the mill were partially fire-proofed
with blue slate, but the two top floors were not—
the door from the mill to the gangway was of iron.
On the 14th of July last there wus a large quantity ,
of tow on the second floor of the warehouse, and on
the third floor of the mill there was a" tow-shaker,"
and three heaps of tow left. It further appeared,
from the opening statement of the learned counsel
for the prosecution, and from the evidence of the
witnesses that the mill had formerly belonged to
and been worked by a Mr. Waithman, who getting
into debt to Mr. Finlay (a gentleman living in
Ireland) for flax supplied, Mr. Finlay eventually
became the owner of the mill. For two years
he did not work it ; but not being able to let it
he determined in 1860 to work it himself,
and he sent over hands for that purpose from
Ireland. On the 9th of July in that year be
caused the mill, machinery, and stock to be insured
in the Sun, the Manchester' and the Imperial In-
surance offices, the mill for £4,950, the machinery
for £8,350, and the stock for £6,925. The prisoner
was aware of the amount of this insurance, and of
the value of the mill which Mr. Finlay had wished
to dispose of,and had only had an offer of some £6,000
to £7,000 for it, including the machinery; and from
conversations he had with a workman named Brown,
he appeared to say that if burnt when so insured it
would be a profitable thing for Mr. Finlay. The
mill began to work in August, 1860, the machinery
was old, and from various causes the mill did not
appear to have been profitably worked. The pri-
soner, it appeared, had formerly been employed on
the Ulster Railway as a clerk and newspaper
boy, and he was sent over by Mr. Finlay to
work at the mill. He had no defined
duties, and was at first employed in affixing
tickets to the bundles of yarn spun, But he
was invested with a kind of superintending
authority by Mr. Finlay, and acted as
a sort of master, giving orders to the work-
people, although his wages were only Ms. a.week.
He had sole control in the warehouse, and appeared

to be high in the confidence of Mr. Vittlay 3 nor had
what had since transpired shaken that confidence,
as Mr. Finlay's solicitor had appeared on his behalf I
when brought before the magistrate on this charge.
After he had been some months so engaged, word
came from Mr. Finlay that some of the men were
to be discharged, and that the mill was to be worked
short time, and the wages of the men to be reduced.
This gave great dissatisfaction to the workpeople.
But before the time arrived when this reduction was
to be effected the mill was burnt dew n. The mill
stopped working at 2 o'clock on Saturday, the 13th
of July, at which time everything was left safe. On
Sunday afternoon, the 14th of July, Mr. Aiken, the
manager, saw everything safe. The iron door of
the mill leading to the gangway was bolted on the
inside, and the key of the wooden door of the ware-
house leading to the gangway was left in the
door outside, the door being locked. No one could
enter without getting into the mill, the key of which
was in the possession of a man named Constantine,
whose duty it was to lock it up, There was a win-
dow at the back of the mill, by -which an entrance
could be obtained into the mill by those who were
aware of it, and the prisoner was; and once in the
mill, access could be got by the gangway to the
warehouse. The mill was seen safe by a workman,
who was with his children in the mill yard adjoin-
ing his cottage at 11 o'clock that night. About
that time a workman named Templeton saw a man
coming in a direction from the mill and warehouse on
the premises, whom he took to be the prisoner, but
would not swear to him. Another workman named
Brown, also saw a man coming along the railway
bank near the mill, who, on seeing him, went across
the land to a wall, over which he got into a road
leading from the mill. This man, from his dress, he
believed to be the prisoner, but he would not posi-
tively swear to him. About 11 o'clock a workman
living near saw the warehouse on fire from his
cottage, and ran to the alarm bell of the mill, which
he rang. At that time there was a large fire in the
warehouse, and also in the mill. A great number
of persons were assembled to try and put out the
fire, but the mill was gutted, and the warehouse
burnt down. An examination led to the conclusion
that the premises had been set on fire wilfully, as
both mill and warehouse were on fire at the same
time, and the fire had evidently not communicated
across by the gangway. The loose tow in the second
floor of the warehouse, and also that on the third
floor of the mill, were each on fire. No one could
enter those floors because of the fire, and yet it was
observed that the trap doors in the floors of the
warehnttse, which had all been closed on Saturday,
were all open, and fire fell through them to the
bottom storey ; and a subsequent examination
showed that the iron door of the gangway, which
had been bolted, was found open. While the fire
was burning a workman coming to assist saw a man
crouching in a corner of the wall in the road adjoin-
ing the mill, watching the fire, who ran away at
his approach, and who he believed to be the pri-
soner from his dress. It was found also when a fire-
engine, kept on the premises, was attempted to be
worked that the hose, which appeared all right on
Saturday, had the part which affixed it to the
engine removed, which must have been done by
some one on the premises. On that Sunday the
prisoner had been invited to a christening by the
workman Brown, but he said he could not attend
it and gave no reason why; and it appeared that
from 7 o'clock on Sunday night till 5 o'clock next
morning the prisoner, without giving any reason,
had been absent from his lodgings. On the part of
the prosecution it was suggested that he was the
man who had been seen about the mill on the Sun-
day night, and that he had been in the mill and
warehouse, and had set fire to both. He did not
come near the fire till 5 o'clock next morning, and
never offered to render any assistance, In conse-
quence of these various circumstances suspicion
attached to him, and he was questioned as to where
he had been that night, and he gave three different
statements, one of which was that he bad walked to
Morecombe to take the steamer for Belfast, and
found it had started and come back ; that he walked
about Hestbank all night, as he could not go into a
publichouse without money. When asked how he
would pay his passage he said he would mention
Mr. Finlay's name, and he would see it paid. He
had left money with his landlady at his lodgings
which he had not asked for, It was a very rainy
night, and his clothes were not wet or dirty. The
other accounts of where he had been were inconsis-
tent with this, and one of them was proved to be
untrue. In consequence he was closely questioned
by gentlemen named Bond and Thomas, connected
with one of the insurance offices. To Mr. Thomas
on one occasion he said " I am determined to make
a clean breast of it." Mr. Thomas said " Well,
what is it ?" He then turned round and said " No,
I wont tell you any more." The prisoner left some
weeks after the fire for Ireland. Subsequently a
reward of £250 was offered to find out the incen-
diary, and when told of this reward by one of the
insurance agents the prisoner said " Och, it is a
small sum. Sure I know what the mill was in-
sured for ; if you go home it will get bigger." The
reward was doubld, but elicited no further facts
than those stated, on which the prisoner was taken
into custody and committed for trial. On the part
of the prosecution it was contended that there was
strong evidence to show that the mill and ware-
house were fired by design, and that there was rea-
sonable ground to come to the conclusion that the
prisoner had done it.
On behalf of the prisoner it was contended that
the evidence against him amounted to nothing more
than vague suspicion, and that the hope of the re-
ward had prompted a good deal of it.
The case occupied all day till near 8 o'clock, and
was then adjourned to this morning.
The learned Judge, in summing up, directed the
attention of the jury to two points—first, whether
the evidence satisfied them that the fire was not the
result of accident or natural causes, bat must have
been the work of an incendiary ; and secondly,
whether, if they believed it was the act of an in-
cendiary, the prisoner committed that act. The
prosecution were bound to satisfy them on both
these points, and if they failed in either the prisoner
ought to be acquitted. On the first of these points
the evidence was clear, and rendered so by the testi-
mony of numerous witnesses, who from early obser-
vation demonstrated that each fire must have
had a separate origin. On the second the evidence
was not so satisfactory, and the statements, charac-
ter, and conduct of some of the witnesses were
liable to observation. The prosecution had been
under the cruel necessity of suggesting some motive
for the act imputed to the prisoner, and in doing
so had cast some reflexion on Mr. Finlay, no party
to the trial, which had been borne out, After
carefully commenting on the evidence of the various
witnesses who spoke to having seen the prisoner
on the Sunday night near the mill, and to the pri-
soner's account of his absence from Holme during
that time, and to his previous character, the learned
judge left the case to the jury, who retired, and
after a short absence returned a verdict of not
guilty:
This case, which lasted till 2 o'clock on Friday,
concluded the business of the assize.