THREE SETS OF KEYS

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 10606, 3 June 1920, Page 7

THREE SETS OF KEYS

THEFT FROM FACTORY UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES: ACCUSED GOES FOR TRIAL. At the Magistrate’s 1 Court, yesterday, before Mr B. Page, S.M., Arthur Joseph Langham, cellarman (represented by Mr A. B. Siovwright) was charged with tho theft of five packets of jelly crystals, 28lb .of baking powder, a case of custard powder, and two cases of Wood’s Peppermint Cure, of the total value of £33 10s. the property ot tho Empire Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Broadway, on Sunday. May 9th. Chief-Detective Ward conducted the case on behalf of tho police. Charles Henry ilollapd, works manager to the company, stated that by noon on the Saturday the yard was swept out and the place securely locked up. On the Monday morning accused di,d not report for work at 7.30, but his wife brought tho keys and said that ho. wdk ill. Witness noticed wheelmarks in the .yard leading to the loading and unloading platform. Tho padlock was off tho gate, and the door unlocked. He noticed accused's wife trying to , adjust the padlock on tho gate,, and she then gave him the keys. Ho examined the. store, and found the property mentioned in the charge, together with three 1401 b bags of sugar, missing. The company had some 701 b bags of sugar on the upper floor, and ono was found at accused’s house. He could not say whether a 701 b bag was missing from the store, hut one oolild have been taken quite easily without his knowing it. Accused had been in the employ of the company about -three months. Tho premises must have been entered by the use ot tho two in accused’s possession, otherwise a window would have had to be broken or a door forced. There was no evidence of that. Air C6ok, the feneral manager, had a similar set of eys, an<J there was a spare set in tho office. Accused had no right to be on the promises between 13 noon on tho Saturday and 7,30 a.m. on the Monday. HORSE AND OART USED. .Alfreda Bergh, employed at the Rialto and living alongside the entrance to the company’s premises, gave evi dence to the effect that on the Sunday morning she saw three men and a horse and cart go into th© company's yard. On© man opened the factory door. Shortly afterwards they all emerged from rho yard, aud two of the men drove away in the cart, in which there were some goods. The third closed the gate, and then walked away. Later, in the afternoon, she saw tho same three men again at tho factory. She saw them enter and leave as before with more goods in the cart. Sho did not see the face of the man who unlocked the gate and the door on the Sunday. She had seen a man unlocking tho doors on several mornings previously, but had) taken nd particular notice of him. She could riot be sure that accused was the man who opened up th© store on th© Sunday. She had never seen a cart there on a Sunday before. ACCUSED’S STATEMENT.

Detective Black read a statement signed! by Langham. in, which the prisoner said that he had been drinking heavily with a sailor off tho Renown and another man on Satuiday, May Bth nndfivas also drinking on the Sunday. Ho had no knowledge of the store having been opened on the Sunday till after his wife told him on thiv Monday morning; nor of th© keys having been out of his possession over the week-end. He had bought the bag of sugar at the Panama Hotel from a carter, whom he could not find now. In reply to Mr Sievwright, the detective said that he did! not know that, the padlock of the gate had been in accused’s possession. The accused was ill and bad to send his wife to the store to open it up early on the Monday morning, and presumably that was how the works manager saw her adjusting the padlock on the gate. Mr Sievwright submitted that the case should be dismissed on its merits. There was no evidence against the accused, who coaid produce a witness to account for his being in possession of the bag of sugar. ACCUSED AND THE KEYS.

The witness Holland, recalled, said that at the time of the robbery he had a key to the back door only. The accused had the keys -to the gate padlook and to the big doors. The general manager had a set of keys, and a similar set wag hanging in the office. Tho latter sot was hanging up in tho office at noon on tho Saturday, and he found them hanging there on tho Sunday morning. He took them down to open the padlock of the gate, but found that he did not need the key, ar, the padlock was off tho gate. The key to the hack door had not left his possession over th© week-end.

By Mr Sievwright: The storeman would also have access to the keys. There were some 30 employees, including four' Hindus, at the factory. He was certain that • the storeman had not had the keys in his possession previous to the robbery. The spare keys were hung up in the general manager’s private office, but there was not .key to that office. During certain hours there was nothing to prevent anybody entering the office and getting tho keya. After further evidence Mr Sievwright submitted that there was no evidence to go before tho jury. The accused was prepared to call a witness to account for tho 701 b bag of sugar found in his house. His Worship said that ho considered there was a prima facie ease; and the accused, who pleaded not guilty, was committed for trial at tho next session of tho Supremo Court. Bail was allowed on tho accused s own bond of £75, and a further surety of tho same amount.