The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-11-18

her, told her OF the loss Of the ring and
fatty accused her of having stolen it. final
ly saying that unless the ring was returned
at once detectives who had been assigned
TO the case" would be instructed to make
an arrest.
The woman went her way. the jeweler
having no authority to detain her and be-
ing unable to prove her guilt. He knew
neither her name nor her address; but the
bluff went and next day the ring was
returned, together with a note, in a dis
guished handwriting and mailed from st.
Paul, in which the writer said that she had
discovered the ring in a package contain
ing other purchases made at the store, and
returned it. 'as it had evidently been IN
cluded in her bundle by mistake"
ANOTHER CASE OF Z
Another instance in which a strong bluff
was responsible for the return of stolen
property was the case of a young high
school girl who distracted a ring from a
tray which was being shown her and con-
cealed it in her mouth. The theft was dis
covered before she left the store, but when
accused of it she stoutly maintained her
innocence, and only returned the missing
bauble when the threat was made that she
would be taken to the police station and
there searched by the officers in charge.
The girl was unaware that such searches
are Away made by the police matrOn, and
the prospect of the threatened indignity
proved too much for her equanimity, so
she shamefacedly took the ring out of her
mouth and returned it to it's owner.
Some years ago, when earrings were more
in vogue than now, a ~well-knOwn society
girl entered the store of Weld & Son and
remarked that she wanted the setting in a
diamond earring fixed, as the stone was
loose and she was afraid she might lose
it. She raised her hand to her head TO
remove the earring, and then found that
the stone had disappeared. 1t had fallen
out of its setting after she had left home.
1t was in the spring, and the walks out
side were covered an inch deep with slush.
However, the young lady determined to
search for her missing gem, and began by
retracing her steps, carefully scanning the
walk as she went. When some little dis
lance from the store she discovered the
lost stone, lying in full view on the walk.
While it was there hundreds of people had
passed and repassed, but the valuable gem
remained unnoticed, until found by its
owner. 1t was uninjured.
Another peculiar instance of the recov-
cry of a lost stone was the case of a wom-
an whose husband had presented her with
a pair of valuable earrings as a Christmas
present. Before the holidays were over she
had lost one of the costly trinkets; but,
unwilling that her husband should know
of the loss. she went to a jewelry house and
ordered a duplicate of the earring still in
her possession, which she ultimately paid
for and took TO her home.
The next spring, while getting into her
carriage in front of the house, the woman
noticed something glistening in the gutter.
She stopped down and picked up her lost
earring. Evidently it had lain there for sew
eral months, probably having been pounded
down into the winter snow by passing
SleighS, there to remain until washed out
of its hiding place by the spring thaw.
This peculiar incident would never have
been known had it not been for the fact
that the woman took her third earring back
to the jeweier from whom she had bought
il. and asked to have her money refunded,
as she had found the earring which was
lost and had no further use for the one
which had been made to replace il.