Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-04-22
As TO STOLEN PROPERTY.

sharp Letter From Petersburg Attorneys
and MsA Moore's Response.
An interesting question has come before the
Commissioners concerning the right Of pawn
brokers to dispose Of property which has been
stolen.
MessrA French French a attorneys for w.
c. Flynn Of Petersburg, Va, recently called At
tention to the fact that their client lost val
liable diamond pin on the train in the vicinity
Of Richmond, and the same had been pawned
in this city. Maj. Moore caused an investiga-
ton to be made through the detective
corps, and the pin was located. according
to the letter Of Messra French, in the
pawn shop Of one Burnstein. Flynn came to
the city and identified the pin. but before being
allowed to take bis property he was told he
the amount alleged to have BEEN ad-
vanced on the pin. An effort was made
to obtain the pin by . replevin suit, but
the dealer refused to give it up. Messrs.
French say they have asked the police depart
ment to get the pin, but are met with the ex-
cuse that they cannot recover 1t, - the pin was
stolen from nonresident Concluding their
letter. Messrs French say:
sit seems to me that IL such Q practice has
been allowed to maintain itself in this District
the sooner it be strangled the less the induce
ment will be for the thief to bring his booty
here Certainly the pawnbroker cannot be
censured il he advertise in large letters
Thieves take notice! Plumber brought to this
city will receive liberal consideration. run
no risk, consequently can offer you extraor-
binary Inducements.
MAI. MOORE 8 REPORT.
The matter was referred to Major Moore for
report, which he submitted today, and il as fol-
lows: The statutes relating to the District. in
providing for the care and disposition Of such
property as shall come into the custody of the
police, recognize three classes-property lost
property abandoned and property stolen
(see sec.' 400, Rel. D. CO.. They
also provide a method by which such property
shall be returned to the owners; stolen property
to be delivered on the order Of the Police or
Criminal Court (see sec. 414, Rel D. c..
Stolen property must, therefore, be proven to
be such in one court or the other before the
owner could obtain such order, and the
theft must have taken place in the Dis
trict OF Columbia or the case could not be
brought before either Of said courts. To take
a case into court there must be an arrest. II
no arrest, an owner requiring the use of his
property may obtain it upon giving bond in
twice the value OF the property, with two real
estate sureties resident in the District of CO.
lumbia. the bond to be approved by the Com
missioners. There is no other method by which
property alleged 10 nave Deen sbOien can Dc
disposed of in the District.
thief and the goods it is alleged he has
stolen may be taken into another jurisdiction
on requisition, as the accused and the
evidence against him must 60 together, and
that would be on the order of the Supreme
Court of the District. 1t is charged that this
pin was stolen in another jurisdiction. There
was no arrest and no call for the evidence by
any court to prove it stolen.
The junk law was made for and applies to the
District of Columbia, it is fair to presume, and
does not take cognizance Of interstate matters.
1t seems but proper in this case that the
claimant should bring the purchaser Of the pin
before the Police Court on = warrant charging
him with buying stolen property, which would
enable the court 10 take cognizance Of the case,
and to give an order Of restitution; otherwise
it is a civil case between the owner Of the pin
and the pawnbroker, to be determined by the
courts.
suggest, however, that the matter be re-
ferred to the attorney Of the District OF Column
bia for his opinion.