The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-05-29
MARINE COUNT.
What Constitutes Ownership ira Stolen
CcupOns-Impartant Decision.


What Constitutes Ownership in stolen
Ccupons-Impartant Decision.
Before Judge Gross.
Ralph Dawson vs. Morton. Bliss & Coin this
case-one OF considerable Importance to the bank
ing and commercial interests, and which occupied
some days in It's tria-Judge Gross has delivered the
following
ne o s each for s f a @
was n ~ tho Of Sd
q. the January 1s5s The plan, INV
SSd while on his way to obtain the money the5etor
es,hs financial II this ely Union raci!c
q lis him numbers d the coupons
Ssmsa i ns M ns
:snnF baTlinE brGGes had I'D pm p"rchase s
int eGf sH
@ SS5S %as eSen
VOLTA tds he
s n & NJ steps ayng BE, been taken y
asns The Sh January s7a paid same to Messrs
is contenled the part of plaintiff that the coupons
be- IL ceN S
ssk sd q him and paynsnts aiter made
sS TnSn r ra E ;S win
Sss Ss I e Send St @ being the due
,s On The back the words thirty dollars payable
.I MappsaTs IN Sydsncs that there due pay
SS sSa$a SsS;sHs
pLar1sT Cd %a i Ia 10 sSs
each Issued BY the oaaen and AmnSy Railroad Com
from iron safe in Lardners office Philadelphia on
s might ,h The Of o FsesTnaTy s The dis
sisisy SHsshSa & fh,laasSsl% " 3%T;
sssa through ct H. rs4ssf uiao, %s sss
M as bG b. B sssss Maas us s gave
ns h on or Mdm a in Sa been u
ioiG hpt they had narehasd Of Mr. Lard
e kno sT s Of in sr s s bS
attempt was made to verify the truth Of his state
to charge thai there were no sacS @
Murray inquiry; mat Murray %as not elarseabe
with bad faith BY any qision 70 inform himself in
used Do and the Go"rt shfrSed that The burden Of proof
sood sh e o c o e o apaT e
S% tn PFs II s sa sa
r. sfais dySs Il o nf
ane SfSe who % G OF such faith lies on
This decision was followed BY the New York Court Of
SSrreney sa'f a'
seR alleged Sa have S es s STn Of
Sc he nee 10, the pGce end nandn
given to he Treasury DspartmenE from whence planu
ba asSa, dY
S1a as % s ,n san S 9ssd bis loss ia and that
Inc morning after is oecYrrenee; There was
aa
aas '2sf sa ns oh one St t
ants e show that they nprehaed these bonds which
Sy aSyS y StF
hsIe ns given e T Of the ne n ore
SSasd tsm implied bad ,ss Tss my II
ana A.
q government bonds which pass by devepy was a con.
elusive n the question . OF s9d n unss e pn
knowledge Of the robbery or with the means OF know
'S
Ss asS Ss q ns oe
and no action could have been maintained against the
asy sss the @ a OF The purs
dssndahts stsn nsSts and pI purposss
hands q sosa tas holder he would be entitled e have
hand hs"a i' the case Miller ssa.
$Sn. a. "5s a'Sisps5 'sSs
ssS 9d and for value and without knoylsdgs that
bank payable or bearer u, was lost and bs
Justice Holt held that "A might have against
Of pUp %
the bearcr.n
These have since been followed and II well cs.
fablshcd that these coupons II they the hands
OF Canoni Darling for value. ordinary course
Of business. and without notice Of their having
been stolen then they entitled receive the pro.
eeeds thereof and unless paid could have enforced
ment against the Union Pacific Railroad Company.
The evidence OF Mr.. Barring OF The firm 81 Cantoni 4
Barring is 10 the effect that his bought the coupons
the ID OF January, lo72, stranger 100 gold
being al 1925 o9 or thereabouts that these coupons,
ny custom arg also purena,ed anu sod Ike gold, aud
in the usual ana ordinary OF business
Under these circumstances, ami the reasons stated
thore mus; be judgment for the defendants.