The Sun.
London, England, 1859-01-05 00:00:00

Share' Railways.

SUN OFFICE, Seren o' Clock.
10 Antwerp & Rotterdam all 4; 54 1
20 Ardennes all p
20 Bah.&S.Fan.,Lim.7p.c 3 id par 21
5 Belgian East. Junction all 1 11
('ENY'RAL CRIMINAL COURT. (.?his Day.)
20 Bezters to Graissessae all 7i 8
5 Carmeaux Mine & Rail all 21 2 , O20 Dutch Rhenish
6 Eastern of France ....., all 26.1 27 OLD COURT.
20 Euphrates Valley 2s. p
20 Great Central of France all (Before Baron Martin and Mr. Justice Wines.)
20 Gt. Luxem., Con. she., all 74 71 71 1
10 Italian Junction
20 Lake Constance & Bale all Richard Roper, 29, formerly carrying on business as a
20 Lierre and Turnhout all
20 Lombardo Venetian 8 2 24 p corn-dealer, who had been remanded from last session, was
20 Lucca & Pistoja, 5 p.c.pf all placed at the bad, charged, by the first count, with felo-
-20 Lyons and Geneva
3.3. Maria Antonia all niously setting fire to his dwelling-house, certain living
20 Do. do. New
20 Namur and Liege all 91 9i
'2O Do. do. 6p. c. Pref. all 21 22 with committing an act with intent to defraud the Kent
1
16 Northern of France ... . all 39 391 341 Fire Insurance Office; and in the third count, with felo-
-20 Do. New Shares
10 Norwegian Trunk Pref all 8 9i p
niously setting fire to his house.
1
20 Ottoman, gua. 6 per cent 7 3 Ifl The prisoner pleaded not guilty.
20 Paris, Lyons, and Medit. all 341 341 341 Mr. Sergeant Parry and Mr. Giffard appeared for _ the
20 Paris and Orleans
20 j Recife& S. Fran. (Fern.) 1 9 id ip gi prosecution ; and Mr. Sergeant Ballantine and Mr. Robin-
t oma. 7p. et. (Lim.)
20 Riga and Dunaburg- 4 --
10 Rome and Frascati .... all ' ? • Mr. Sergeant Parry, in opening the case, stated that the
20 Royal Danish all prisoner formerly carried on business at 8, Royal-hill,
5 Royal Swedish
' Greenwich, and on the night of Sunday, the 12th Sept., an
4 Do. 7 per cent. Pref.
20 Sambre and Meuse all 79 8 alarm of fire was raised, when it was found that the pre-
-10 Do. 5i per cent. Pref.
20 Southern of France
liaises in his occupation were in flames. At the time of the
1 -
St West Flanders all 51 6,' r fire the prisoner's wife, who had only been confined two or
10 Do. 5} p. c. Preference
20 W. & N.W. of France all 23 241
20 Western of Austria 6 in the attic above two of his children were sleeping
20 Western of Switzerland all ' with the servant girl. The prisoner occupied another
6 Wiesbaden
6 Do 8 per cent. Pref all
apartment in the house. The conflagration so rapidly de-
-20 Zealand all strayed the oremises. that it was with oreat diffirtlltv that

Richard Roper, 29, formerly carrying on business as a
corn-dealer, who had been remanded from last session, was
placed at the bah, charged, by the first count, with felo-
niously setting fire to his dwelling-house, certain living
persons being therein at the time ; in the second count,
with committing an act with intent to defraud the Kent
Fire Insurance Office; and in the third count, with felo-
niously setting fire to his house.
The prisoner pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Sergeant Parry and Mr. Giffard appeared for _the
prosecution ; and Mr. Sergeant Ballantine and Mr. Robin-
son defended the prisoner.
Mr. Sergeant Parry, in opening the case, stated that the
prisoner formerly carried on business at 8, Royal-hill,
Greenwich, and on the night of Sunday, the 12th Sept., an
alarm of fire was raised, when it was found that the pre-
mises in his occupation were in flames. At the time of the
r fire the prisoner's wife, who had only been confined two or
three days, with a nurse, was in one apartment, and
in the attic above two of his children were sleeping
with the servant girl. The prisoner occupied another
apartment in the house. The conflagration so rapidly de-
stroyed the premises, that it was with great difficulty that
Mrs. Roper was saved, but unfortunately the two children,
one 7 years and the other 11 years of age perished. Great
sympathy at the time was expressed by the inhabitants
of Greenwich, but in the course of certain inquiries made
to ascertain the cause of the disaster, circumstances arose
which created a suspicion against the prisoner, and the
present indictment was preferred against him. The prin-
cipal ground of suspicion was that the prisoner had insured
his premises in the Kent Fire Office for a year for £3OO, and
in the claim sent in for loss he put down the damage sus-
tained at the amount of 1290, when it was discovered that
the prisoner had fraudulently removed and disposed of a
large quantity of furniture which he had entered in his
claim as destroyed. The learned sergeant then at some
length went into the details of the charge, and called the
following witnesses
Mr. William Emerson Sanderson, who said—l am agent
to the Kent Fire Insurance. At Greenwich, in 1857, I saw
the prisoner. He effected an insurance on his household
furniture and effects for £2OO, on fixtures, £2O, on stock in
trade £7O, and on hay and corn in' premises behind the
house £lO, making in all £3OO. I delivered the policy to
the prisoner. The original document was not forthcoming.
I produce a copy.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant Ballantine—l went
through the premises previous to completing the insurance.
I did not consider £3OO an unfair sum. I don't recollect
the position of the gas pipes in the shop.
Priscilla Wheeler—l reside at Deptford. hwas a distant
relation of the prisoner's wife. I was, in September,
nursing Mrs. Roper. She was confined on Thursday, the
9th. She occupied a back room on the first floor. I re-
member the fire taking place on the following Sunday.
On the Saturday, before going to .bed, I went into
the kitchen. It was about half-past eleven. When I

left to go up stairs the gas was burning. It was also burn.

ing in the back parlour. I let Mr. Roper and the servant
(Waterfall) down stairs. The gas was turned full on. After
I got up stairs, Mr. Roper came into the bed-room. It was
about a quarter of an hour after I left the kitchen. He
wished us both good-night, and went to the front room,
second floor, in which he slept. The children slept in the
attic. After the prisoner left the room I went to bed. After

had been there sometime Mr. Roper awoke me, and said

there was a nasty smell in the room ; but I was not sensible
of it. In a short time afterwards, Mrs. Roper again awoke
me, and said she smelt fire. In a short time after the pri-
soner burst the door open and rushed into the room. He
had his drawers and night-shirt on. He said, " There's fire
in the house, for God's sake get out of the window on
to the roof of the shed." The fire followed Mr. Roper

into the room. He assisted Mrs. Roper and myself out of
the window on to the shed. He then left us. When he
came into our room he called out to the servant, " Lizzy I
Lizzy I" up stairs. In a short time after we had got on the
roof of the outbuilding Mr. Roper left us. Ile was absent
about 20 minutes, and then returned. The bed was in a
different position to that it usually occupied.
Cross-examined—The bed was placed where it stood
by my suggestion about a month previous to the fire. Mr.
Roper was a kind and affectionate husband. He always
appeared very much attached to his children. The gas was
left burning in the shop for my convenience. The burner
was covered with a globe. I don't remember whether it
was broken. I never remarked any alteration in the fur-
niture of Mrs. Roper's room. The house was altogether
very respectably furnished. I recollect Mr. Roper
saying on one occasion it was rather unfortunate that
she should be confined at that time, as he had let the shop.
George Allright—l am an auctioneer and valuer, residing
at Greenwich. I knew Mr. Roper previous to the fire. I i
heard of the fire on the Sunday morning. After the fire I
offered my services to make a valuation. I saw him on the
following Monday morning, at Mr. Cowell's, his father-in-
law, at Deptford. After some conversation about the hiss
of his children, I said, " You had better try and give mo an
account of the loss of your property." He said he did not
want anything. Although he had lost everything, nothing
could compensate him for the loss of his children. He
appeared very much distressed in mind. He asked me what
had better be done, and I told him I should require an
inventory of the whole of his goods. He then said he had
prepared an inventory when he had insured. He
asked me if it was usual for the surveyor of a
'fire office to see if the goods were worth
the amount insured for. I said no ; they generally leave
it to the agent. I told him as he had an inventory of his
goods, it would be very useful in making out his claim.
asked him if he was properly insured, and from his manner
I ascertained he was. He was insured for £3OO. I asked
him to give me a list of things destroyed, and he told me a
number of things. He said he had lost an Arabian bed-
stead, two beds, two mattrasses, two pairs of blankets, two
pairs of sheets, and a counterpane. He told me there were
six chairs, fender and fire-irons. There were 209 items.
The claim was sent into the fire-office. I recollect Roper
mentioning that he had a Brussels carpet. I asked him the
size, and he said it was a large one, and ho had formerly
had it in use when he occupied a larger house. I imagined
by his description that there 'might be about twenty
yards in it. I went through all the furniture in
the house. I was with him from ten o'clock
in the morning. I recollect 'a set of tea-trays.
He said they cost £2 10s. Another item was a large
bouquet of wax flowers, £2 2s. How this was mentioned
was owing to me asking him if had any sort of ornaments.
I asked him if he had any books, he said yes ; I asked him
if they were worth £lO, he said yes. There was a long
dinner service ; it comprised 150 pieces, and ho said he
thought it cost from £8 to £lo—l put £lO for it. There
was a tea and coffee service put down at 7 guineas. There
was a large quantity of glass and dessert service charged
for as destroyed. There was also a suit of black clothes
charged £G; a black dress coat, lined with silk, £4 ; another
black coat, lined with silk and quilted ; a maroon
velvet mantle, and a quantity of other things. I
wrote the letter accompanying the claim. Roper never
saw the letter after it was written. I sent in the claim.
Roper signed the document. I told him I had claimed for
the full amount, £290, and I was very sorry he was not
insured for more money. The reason the £3OO was not
charged was owing to the shed adjoining the house not
being destroyed. A proposition was made by the fire-office
to give £255 and the salvage in lieu of the claim for £290.,
and it was accepted.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant Ballantine—When I
first saw Mr. Roper ho said he should not make any claim
—for what amount of money could bring back his poor
children ? I told him he ought to consider the living as
well as the dead, and ultimately the claim was made out. I
went over the ruins the morning after the fire. I believe
the furniture in the house was fully worth the amount
charged. From all I saw after the fire I was fully
convinced the claim was a correct one. I should say I
saw articles lying about the rooms not included in the
claim, worth about £2O or £3O. In the attic I found nine
articles out of 11 charged for in the claim. In the bedroom
21 out of 26. In the front parlour. 11 pieces, and in the
ground floor everything specified in the inventory.
Re-examined—l had no chance of looking amongst the
ruins for traces of glass or books. I was not allowed to
search. All I saw was lying on the surface. The fireman
would not allow me to touch a thing.
Mr. William Sitgrave—l am employed by the appraiser
to the Kent Fire-office. The claim of Mr. Roper was put
into my hands. I visited the ruins on the Thursday fol-
lowing the fire. I found the remains of some of the articles,
but of others I did not discover any vestiges. I found
nothing like a dinner service, or dessert service, or
tea service. I only found a few pieces of common
blue ware. I have been engaged in valuations for the lasik
30 years, and I always have discovered the remains of any
large quantity of china that had been destroyed during a fire,
I found no books. It is exceedingly difficult to burn a
book. Seine part of it is sure to remain. I found no
traces of .the 14 sacks of flour. I found no remains of
wearing apparel. I reduced the amount of the claim from
£290 to £255 with the salvage, as I thought there had been
an overcharge in two or three articles.
Mr. James Denham, corn factor, said—l stocked the
prisoners's shop in July, 1857. It amounted to about £5O
or £6O. It was a general stock. In November of the same
year he owed me £llB 10s. I spoke to him about the debt,
and afterwards I said I should not give any more credit. I
have supplied him with articles from time to time since that
period. He used to use about five sacks a week. When
the fire took place. the £llB was still owing. He offered
me his business, but I declined to take it.
Cross-examined—Before this affair I never heard a breath
against him. I have known him since he was a lad. He
was a good father. I was anxious he should get on, and I
supplied hi,s shop liberally.
Mr. Robert Murrell, corn dealer, of Deptford—On the

all
all
all
15s.
all
all

211
50 50
78

10 32

38 71 81
21 207

581 9

122 3

62
131}