Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1874-07-27
WHAT ARE LOST GOODSG
when Is the Finder EntitIed 10 n
Reward?
l2:.

Reward?
We find the following in the court re-
ports of the Cincinnati Commercial, and
as it will be of general interest repro
duce il:
A. s. Gould VS.. Kaufman Stern. Judge
Force decided this case. The action was
replevin. The defendant while stopping
at hotel in this city, picked up a gold
watch, having the name of the plaintiff
on it, which he saw in the water closet.
He examined the hotel record for some
days back, not finding any psrson of that
name. The fact was, that Gould had
stopped at the hotel several weeks pre-
viously. By advice of a friend, Stern
retrained from advertising Immediately,
but an advertisement appeared in an af-
ternoon paper Of that day, mentioning
the loss Of the watch, and offering one
hundred dollars for its return. The de-
PENDANT sent notice to the owner, who
then sued out writ of replevin, and
took possession Of the watch, and in this
suit the claim of the reward is set up as
lien.
The Court remarked that it was appa-
rent from the evidence Mr.. Stern acted
with honest intentions, and the question
was simply whether or not, under the
law, he was entitled TO the reward. 1t is
we'll established that where goods are lost
the finder has, the right of possession
against all the world; also, that the
finder has not any lien, either for servi-
ces or expenses. But, notwithstanding
these propositions, the Supreme Court of
Massachusetts, has held that where the
owner advertises reward there is lien;
and on this principle, that although the
finder has lawful possession against
everybody but the owner, the latter, by
by this agreement, extends that right Of
possession against himself. In 3 Met
calf, the Court Gays, "a lien by contract
arises." The Supreme Court of Penn
sylvania followed that decision, and the
Court Of Appeals of Maryland has recog-
nized it fully as sound law.
In the case at bar, therefore, the ques-
ton was narrowed down to this point
were the goods lost goods2 Property
picked up in the street, in field, or on
highway, has been held in New York
to be lost property, and he who picks
it up has the right of "a finder" In
England Il L. & Egg it was held where
man picked up roll of bank bills on a
shop floor he was the finder of lost goods;
but where q servant woman found money
in a passage way attached to house
where she was serving, it was held she
was not the finder of lost goods, but that
the money was properly in the custody
Of the occupant of the house. Where
purse was left lying on stall in a mar
ket, and the owner went off, it was held
not to be lost property and that the
keeper Of the stall who picked it up was
not entitled to the right of finder. So
the Supreme Court Of Tennessee held
ing pocketbook on the table, knowing he
had left it there, and going back for it,
it was held not to be lost property. And
so in the case reported in ii Allen,
where person CHANGING to be in a shop
saw money on the counter, it was held
he was not the finder.
In Massachusetts, where a deposition
left his pocketbook on a desk in the
bank outside of the railing, and person
having business in the bank picked II up,
the owner afterwards Offering a reward,
and refusing it when the money was re-
turned, suit being brought, the Supreme
Court held the party claiming the reward
was not entitled to it, because he was
not the finder of the lost property, the
money being properly in custody of the
officers of the bank
The case at bar was this: A watch is
laid aside and forgotten for few mo-
ments, and the owner, remembering
where he left it, returns. The place was
within an inn, and property left at an
inn, whether in a room or in the water
closet, is in the custody of the innkeeper
until the owner reclaims it; and this de-
PENDANT, though acting with honest in .
tentions, in taking the property did that
he had no authority to do. he was not
q finder of lost property; the promise to.
pay the finder was not a promise made
to pay him. The contract did not arise
because the property was not lost. Judg-
ment for plaintiff.