A CONDUCTOR’S FIND.

Otago Witness, Issue 3862, 20 March 1928, Page 25

A CONDUCTOR’S FIND.

PARCEL OF CREPE DE CHINE. CHARGE OF THEFT DIS? SSED. AUCKLAND, March 16. The finding of a parcel of crepe-de-chine by a tramway conductor named C. A. Robertson brought him. before the Police Court on summons this morning. Robertson, who was represented by Mr Allan Moody, pleaded not guilty to a charge of stealing crepe-de-chine valued at £3.

The evidence was that in October last a dressmaker, the owner of the crepe-de-chine, boarded a tramcar and had the parcel wiflh her. After baring the tramcar she discovered that she had lost the parcel. She advertised her loss in the newspapers, but received no reply. Three months later, from something she heard, she saw the accused, and he admitted having found the parcel. The matter was settled by Robertson paying the dressmaker £3. He had riven the crepe-de-chine to his wife, who had it made up into a dress. A statement which the accused made to a constable was then produced. In this Robertson stated that he picked up the parcel. It was lying on the rcrard between the footpath and the safety zone. He casually placed it by the side of his ticket box, intending to report his find to the Tramway Department. However, when he finished duty he forgot to do thig and took the parcel home in his pocket. ... , . . Mr Moody submitted that there was no charge of theft to answer. When the police came into the matter the accused was the rightful owner of the crepe-de-chine because he had paid for the material. “ Every finder has the right of possession against the whole wr ’d ex cept the rightful owner,” said counsel.

The court bad to be sure that at the time Robertson found the parcel he had some felonious intent. There was nothing on the parcel to show to whom it belonged, and it was not his duty to report the find to the Tramway Department as the parcel was found on the roadway, and not in a tram. In the advertisement which the owner inserted she stated that she might have lost the material in the tramcar or in the city. Robertson was a man with an excellent record in die past, and his honesty had never once been questioned. Mr Moody produced receipts for the lost property which the accused had found, and had returned to the department, and also a reward which he received this morning from the department.

Evidence was given by Robertson.

The Magistrate (Mr W. R. M'Kean) said that in the circumstances it would have been proper for Robertson to report his find to the Tramway Department, but he was not bound to do that. His statement that he found the material on the road had not been contradicted. In the circumstances he could not ba convicted of theft. The charge would be dismissed,