Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE LAW OP THEFT.

A stago coach/ ono dark Tenter's night in the year of graoe seventeen hundred and sixty-nino of thereabouts, was approaching London filled -with passengers and mails. Jnflt &b the former wore congratulating themselves upon the chance of arriving •-safely at their , destination, they wore startled by an order issuing from the dark/fceee requesting them to " stand and deliver." The driver of the coach thought the best thing he could do would bo to comply with the mandate, and the passengers thought that, under the circumstances, they would follow his lead. Claude Duval — no, it could not have been Mm, for he had been, like Shakespeare, " dead ever so long ago," but some other local celebrity in tho same lino of business —then proceeded to inter alia cut open the mail bags and appropriate to Ma own use all and sundry tho fetters and packages thorein contained. Among the oontonts, our light-fingered friend found a bill of exchange for the sum of eight hundrod pounds, which had been Sent by a gentleman living in the country *to a friend of bis residing in London, for the purpose of obtaining the cash for the came. Tho day after tho robbery the document in. question was presented for discount in the usual course of business to one of tho banking houses in the city by a respectablo firm, who roceived the money for it as the bank did not know that this bill had been in the mail which had been robbod. In ft very short time the bank became awaro of tho fact that the document thoy held had been stolon, and application was made to them by tho real owner for the restoration of his property. The bank manager, however, could not soe the force of giving up what he had paid for; tho ownor, on the other hand, i determined not to abandon his claim upon the note without a struggle ; find tho oonsequence was that, instead of trying to settle the matter amicably, they fought it out, with tho result that the owner of the bill determined ever afterwards not to en- ■ trust any more documents of a similar ■"-■ nature to tho care of His Majesty's mail— at least, as long as Dick Turpin or any one like him was in the habit of examining the contents of the bags at his own sweet will and pleasure.; The Court decided against the owner of the bill upon the ground that a negotiable instrument such as a bill of exchange, a promissory note, or a cheque i is good in the hands of anyone who has become possessed of it without fraud—that is, if & cheque is stolen and af tonvards cashed at the shop of someone who is innocent of any knowledge of the theft, such innocent holder accroires a good title to it against everyone. We remember a case, which \ occurred in Christchureli two or three years . Hack, In which an hotolkeepor hung his; Wup in the hall of his houso. Before !' doing so he omitted to remove from it his pocket-book, which contained among other things, a cheque for fifteen pounds. A gentleman coming into the hotel a lew minutes after saw the pocket-book, and thinking that someone might steal it put the cheque in his own pocket. Tho same. ': afternoon the gentleman in question cashed the cheque with a clothier in payment of a euitof dotes, butnoxt day he f oundhimsolf in custody upon tho-charge of stealing the cheque. After he was oonviejied the publican said he wanted his cheque; the clothier said the cheque was his own, and defied the 'other to take it away from him.* A small law suit ensued, which ended disastrously for the hotelkeeper, who lost his case, and was informed by the Bench that it was his own gross carelossnes/i which had caused thetheffc. Tho illustrations we have given show tho exception to the rule of law that a person disposing of a chattel cannot confer a better tifio to it than ho himself has. If a thief Steals a horse and sells it, the purchaser : cannot hold it against the rightful owner, because, as the latter never parted with it '■■•' willingly the stealing it had np.title, .'■■■ : 'and'&erefoiwniii not give one. For ttoa rcjiio'feJikStenpKiiwttyJcanbo seized"whero- ".■;; «afci&ft '6wnflr ofjii/recover it. We are '••'■■■■' Ira&king of course law as it exists in but; in England there is a If goods are -odd in market fr (-overt, that ia in mariot properly constated &£ ZtondMb*j<*™ good against all the *sfcSfflj'WdoesV mat W h ™ « 10 .y° n^ r & >VlS> ppsaossed of the goods he sells, tho safo'in p>chasmg, always any has been practised.-M.

' Weakness and sickness changed to health ■'. and strength with Hop IMtcifa always li Jioaei Made by American Co.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DTN18870127.2.18

Bibliographic details

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 4825, 27 January 1887, Page 3

Word Count
798

THE LAW OP THEFT. Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 4825, 27 January 1887, Page 3

THE LAW OP THEFT. Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 4825, 27 January 1887, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert