The Sun.
London, England, 1858-09-22 00:00:00

THE LATE

'EENWICFL

ADJOURNED INQUEST.-FURTHER SUS
PICOUS DISCLOSURES.
__

Yesterlay afternoon at three o'clock, Mr. C. J.
I Carttar, coroner for West Kent, resumed the inquiry
at the Globe Tavern, Greenwich, relative 'to the
fatal fire which took place on the premises of Mr.
Roper, corn-chandler, Royal-hill, Greenwich, on the
morning of the 12th inst. In consequence of the
suspicious circumstances which have transpired as
to the origin of the fire, the utmost excitement pre-
vails on the subject, and the room was densely
crowded with respectable inhabitants of the locality.
Mr. Ingle, solicitor, of Hibernia Chambers, Lon-
don-bridge, attended to watch the case on the part
of Mr. Roper, and requested permission to cross-
examine the witnesses.
The Coroner—You arc perfectly aware that this
is a court of inquiry only ; it is not a court of accu-
sation, and does not become so until a verdict is
given accusing some person. At present no person
is directly accused. I shall proceed in the usual
course to examine evidence as to the origin of the
catastrophe, but I shall offer no impediment to a
full investigation.
The following witnesses were then examined :

Richard Pidder, an engineer in the service of the
Phoenix Gas Company, deposed he examined Mr.
Roper's premises after the fire, and found that the
main tap which supplied the house with gas was
turned on full. The handle of the tap had been
taken off and was found amongst the ruins.
A Juryman—Mr. Roper distinctly stated in his
evidence that he turned the gas three-pares off be-
fore he went to bed.

Mrs. Cowell, Church-street, Deptford, was exa-
mined, and admitted receiving at her house numer-
ous articles—comprising china, lamps, books, &c.—
the property of Mr. Roper.
Police-inspector Geo. Wilson, R division, pro-
duced a list of these articles, which he had found at
the house of the last witness. The property was
placed in a room for his inspection. At 12 o'clock
on the previous night witness went to the house of
Mrs. Cook to make inquiries respecting a writing
desk belonging to her brother, Mr. Roper, and
which had been sent from his premises on the Sa-
turday before the fire. Mrs. Cook strongly denied
having received the desk, but on being pressed ad-
mitted that she had done so, and had given the desk
to her next door neighbour to take care of. Witness
aroused the person referred to, who was in bed, and
obtained possession of the desk.
A young man, named John Abbott, residing in
the house of Mrs. Cowell, was examined at some
length, and evidently evaded many direct questions.
He admitted he had, at the request of Mr. Roper, re-
moved three papier mache trays from Mr. Roper's
house to Deptford two days previousto the fire. He
was present at Mr. Cowell's house on the Monday
following the fire, when the claim upon the Kent
Fire Insurance Company was made out. A letter
had been received from Mr. George Allwright, of
Lewisham-road, offering to make out the claim, and
this was done in the presence of witness and Mr
Roper, who observed to Mr. Allwright that when
he insured the property an inventory was made out.
By the Coroner—l knew that items were entered
on the claim for property consisting of articles of
furniture which had been removed from Mr. Roper's
premises, and were at that time in Mrs. Cowell's
house. I was a novice at these things, and did not
know that it was wrong.
Mr. George Allwright, appraiser, of Lewisham-
road, Greenwich, proved making out a claim for
Mr. Roper upon the Kent Fire Insurance Company.
He entered the various items of furniture, &c., at
the dictation of Mr. Roper, who was assisted by the
witness Abbott.

A copy of the claim was here produced, and the
amount of loss was laid at 483—the insurance of
stock-in-trade, fixtures, and furniture having been
effected at Christmas last for £3OO.
Eliza Cowell, sister to Mrs. Roper, deposed she
visited Mr. Roper's house on the Saturday night
previous to the fire in company with Mr. Abbott.
OIL leaving they took nothing away with them.
The Coroner—Why, Abbott told the jury that on
leaving the house he took three trays with him.
Witness—He must have been mistaken. Knew
Mr. Roper's female servant. On the evening of the
Saturday previous to the fire she brought a writing
desk to my mother's house. On the Wednesday
and Thursday previous Mr. R oper's shopboy brought
two boxes filled with china. Two moderator lamps
and other articles were also brought from Mr.
Roper's house. All these articles were placed in
the front room last night for the inspector of police
to take an inventory.
By Mr. Ingle—l have heard my brother-in-law
(Mr. Roger) say that he had let his business, and
had received a deposit, and he wished my mother
to take care of a portion of his furniture, which he
was afraid might be broken by moving.
After the examination of other evidence of a cor-
roborative nature,

Mr. Ingle said he proposed to call Mr. Roper,
who was able to explain the matter.
The Coroner—l must repeat that no person is at
present ac-•u ed. I shall not object to the exami-
nation of Mr. Roper.
Mr. Ingle—lt is true that no person is accused
at present. But we know what the effect of this
inquiry is. We cannot avoid reading this evidence
in the public papers.
Mr. Richard Roper was then examined by Mr.
Ingle, and deposed—He had instructed Mr. Sains-
bury, a house agent in London, to dispose of his
business, which had been advertised without suc-
cess. On the Tuesday previous to the fire a man,
who had the appearance of a farm bailiff, called and
inspected the premises, and witness asked £l5O for
the good-will and fixtures. Ultimately a bargain
was struck for £l3O, and it was agreed that the
man should take possession of the premises on
Tuesday, the 14th inst., which was the Tuesday
following the fire. No written agreement was
made, but witness asked the man for a deposit, and
he replied that he was in London on business when
he heard that the shop was to be disposed of, and
thought he would go down and inspect it. The
man then gave witness two sovereigns as an assur-
ance of good faith, and said that he would come and
pay the remainder on Monday or Tuesday. He did
not give witness his name or address.

The Coroner—And when you received the two
sovereigns did you not give him a receipt ? Do you
mean to say that you did not ascertain his name
at all ?

Witness—l did not, as I did not look upon the
two sovereigns as a deposit.
The witness was then examined relative to
making out his claim on the insurance company,
and stated that he gave Mr. Allwright a list of the
articles which were entered in the inventory when
the furniture was insured. He admitted removing
a quantity of furniture a few days before the fire.
Mr. Ingle applied for an adjournment of the case,
as he had several witnesses to call who would mate-
rially alter its present aspect.
The inquest was adjourned at a late hour.