ALLEGED THEFT FROM A LAUNDRY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 12468, 12 January 1904, Page 6

ALLEGED THEFT FROM A LAUNDRY.

■ o J Harry Batjx, the late manager of the New | Zealand Steam Laundry, Albert-street, was I charged at the Police Court yesterday with stealing, within the space of six months lasrt. past, £20 worth of clothing and sundries, the property of Charles Clarke. The case, which was dealt with summarily, was heard before Mr. T. Hutchison, S.M. Chief- ! Detective Grace prosecuted, and Mr. C. J. I Parr defended. | Charles Clarke, the chairman of directors of the company, deposed to accused being in their employ as manager until October last, when he took up the duties of the caretakership of the building. During the accused's managership the company had had to pay several times on missing goods that had been received in the ordinary course of business. To Mr. Parr: As far as he knew, Baux ad always done his work satisfactorily. In >jrard to "left-overs," which were unclaimed articles, he had instructed the defendant some months ago to lock them up in the office of the laundry. Reginald Wilson, the present manager, said that during the three months he had been there there had been continual complaints about missing articles. On December 30 last he was present when Detective Mcllveney executed a search warrant of the defendant's private apartments. A number of articles were then recovered, witness being able to identify them by the different I names upon them. The Union Company, along with several of the leading hotels of Auckland, were the principal sufferers, j Most of the goods were recovered in a locked box under the bed. while several ! were discovered hanging about I lie room. I Accused had admitted to him that the ar- I tides did not belong to him, but lie had no j right to have the goods in his room. j To Mr. Parr: On the three occasions | that lie had beer in the accused's apartments he did not see any of the goods- thathad been recovered. He was not aware of the fact that the recovered goods had been washed again and again in the laundry at Baux's instance, and redelivered to him. I Several witnesses were called to identify ! the goods produced a? theirs, the superin- i tendent steward of the Union Company j stating thai when lie called upon the ac- ! cused some time ago, when lie was manager I of the laundry, to see ii he had any ac- j cumulated stuff of the companv, Baux do- ' mod that he had, 01 that he ever retained : any goods. ' ; Detective McTlvoney, who, along with Dc- i tective McMahon, executed the. search war : rant, stated that the accused first denied I having any of the laundry poods there but on witness telling him that lie had a search ' warrant he conducted them into his room i where a number of marked articles were I discovered. Baux told tliem that he had I had the goods there for a long time, "as i he had intended to use them for travelling i purposes. " Cross-examined: Accused did not admit,! straight out that all the goods recovered I were his. He had produced several articles, alleging they were his, but when wit- i ness examined, and found other marks on ; them, he retracted his statements. This closed the case lor the prosecution. ! Air. Parr asked for a remand until thir | morning, so that he might confer with his client. The application was granted, bail being Allowed.