'A Chinkiang jeweller was charged with being in possession of thirteen amber bends, the said beads having been stolen from a native complainant, from his shop, No. 10, Shanse Road, on the 27th of February, 1903, and with being unable to give a satisfactory account of his possession of same.
Inspector Wilson stated that in February last year a robbery was committed at the complainant's shop anda! considerable amount of valuable property was stolen. A large proportion of the! property was recovered, and two men/ were charged and sentenced for the: theft, but there was still some property unrecovered, included in which were) thirteen amber beads, said to be of the value of about $500. These the complainant had purchased in Peking and! set great store on them as he only required five more to make the complete set. Notices were sent round to several of the jewellers and the pawnbrokers in Shanghai, giving a description of the stolen property, and similar notices" were sent round in Chinkiang, where a considerable amount of the stolen property was recovered. A few days ago, apparently as the result of such notices, a shopkeeper in Hankow Road reported to the Police that some beads, as described by the police notices, had been offered for sale, As a consequence of this, the d fondant was arrested. At first he said the beads were at a house in Peking Road, again he said they wore at another place, but finally produced them from his sleeve. Than he admitted that he had purchased them in Chi for $76 Attention was called to the fact also that he was attempting to sell them for symonds, for the defence, argued that the defendant was a boni fide purchaser for value of the goods, and that he could not have had any knowledge that the beads were stolen property. It'
not at all likely that had he known! this, he would have come down to the town of the robbery and endeavoured to dispose of them at a shop close to the shop from which they were originally stolen. The beads might be worth $50 or $500—their value was hard to judge, but he thought he was giving good value when purchasing them for $76. Counsel contended that to substantiate their charge the Police must prove guilty knowledge, and that they had not offered any such proof. He also contended that the defendant, having bought the beads in good faith, had a right to them as against anyone else, even against the complainant.
The defendant denied that he had ever seen any notice in Chinkiang describing any such beads as stolen property.
The Court ordered the defendant to! find security in Shanghai and Chinkiang, and also ordered that the complainant should have the return of his beads upon paying to the defendant the $76 which the latter had paid for them.
Cross-Actions.
'A mafoo was charged with being concerned with another man in unlawfully, disposing of a quantity of jewellery, value $1,350, the property of Messrs, A. M. A. Evans and Ca. A compradore, Tsu Bai-teh, was also before the Court in connection with the same charge, having! been arrested ona Mixed Court warrant] for larceny and debt. In the absence of the prosecutor, the Police applied for remand, and Mr. F. M. Brooks, who defended the compradors, also desired a remand for three or four days, and asked that the defendant be allowed out on bail.
He had received a letter from Mr.
Evans, stating that the latter had no objection, The case was remanded until Friday, the compradore being allowed bail in the sum of Tls. 2,000, and the mafoo in the eum of Tls. 500.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.