A PEARL NECKLACE.

Otago Witness, Issue 3881, 31 July 1928, Page 70

A PEARL NECKLACE.

RETAINED BY FINDER FOR REWARD.

. AUCKLAND’, July 28. ; Un June 4 a woman residing in Re- ■ muera .road lost a string of 160 graduated : pearls in the form of a beautiful necklace with a diamond clasp at the Ellerslie Racecourse.. Tlie man who . found the necklace, Michael Maher, apfearc* l at the f£ T - oUrt tllis before Mr W.I. M Kean S.M., charged ’with stealing pearls worth £990. Defended ’"by"' Mr Allan Moody, he pleaded not guilty. The woman who owned the pearls in eividcnce. said that she left the’ course just before the last race, and on arriving at her home she discovered that tlie necklace was missing. The following day she advertised her loss, and also on later days, offering a substantial reward to the finder for their return. She received several replies by telephone, but the necklace was never described. Ou June 6 she again .went to the riteesr. Mr Moody: On that day, while you •were at the races, I believe someone telephoned you, and a servant told the. person that you were out?—ies. A domestic then stated . that about 1 p.m on June 6 a man rang and inquired for her mistress. He stated that he had jus‘ posted the pearls. He would not give witness his name and address, exp uining that it was in the box containing the pearls. • Z

Richard James Derrons. a jeweller said that early in June Maher brought the string of pearls tojiim and asked if \ they were valuable. Witness replied } that they were worth between £2OO and £3OO, but he now admitted that they were worth £990. Mr Moody: Did he ask you if they were worth a reward?—Yes. I told him I thought they were worth a good reward. How much did you suggest?—l suggested £lO. The next witness was Detective Hunt, who said that he interviewed Maher at the detective office on June 25. Maher admitted finding a string of pearls near the entrance gates at the racecourse and putting them ip his jockc-t. * In. a statement which the accused wrote himself he said that he forgot all about the? pearls until two days afterwards, when he saw the advertisement. He then telephoned the owner's house, and was told that unless pearls had a diamond clasp there would he no use in bringing them ; to her house. The accused added that he was waiting for a few days in ant ; cipation of the reward being increased. The accused took witness to his home, o.nd -■ there handed over the pearl necklace; - To Mr Moody: Detective Hunt admitted that Maher had been quite frank about the whole affair'. Maher occupied a pro. Biinent position it a city business, and had a good character and reputation. Witness said that it was not deemed prudent to offer a high reward for the lost pearls. ’ Mr Moody submitted that oh the question of law there could be no doubt that the whole point was whether Mabe? in : tended-to deprive the owner of the pearls. Counsel further suggested that the casa was not one that should be sent to the Supreme Court.. Maher was welbknown, and held a responsible position. He nierely held the pearls for the purpose of getting as large a reward as he could, and had no intention of keeping the necklace. “ I trust that hope deferred will ' not make the heart sick,” said Mr Moody. Mr M‘Kean: I think it will in this case, Mr Moody. Mr Moody: I hope not. The magistrate said that it was for a -jury, and not for him, to say . whether there was a casi,to answer. It was dishonest for Maher to have kept the pearls. If he was a man. in a responsible position he should : have handed them back ’ Without worryiny about the reward. Counsel then quoted several cases in which, in similar circumstances, learned judges had held that to keep possession, of goods found did tot amount to theft, because the finder had no intention of depriving the owner of the property. The accused was committed for trial at the Supreme Court. - ; • Maher. ■ who appeared voluntarily, was allowed bail in/oue sure x y of £2O.