Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-01-01
'y Raymond S. Spears

THERE is vast amount of treasure of one
J. sort and another buried and hidden
away in secret places. Discovering and
taking possession of such forgotten hoard
is one of the greatest delights known to the
greed of mankind. The joy of the find is
sometimes open for all the world to see, and
sometimes it is secreted and the fact of
treasure trOve is never known outside the
immediate family of the lucky man.
There are reasons in law why people do
not tell of their luck. If the world hears that
a man has made find of buried treasure,
some claimant is likely to bob up and all the
luck 60 into satisfaction of attorneys. 1t is
possible to get up very pretty lawsuit over
find of coin or other thing of value. The
fact is, finding is not keeping. Keeping of
find may be, in fact, larceny. Thus, if
some one discovers the hoard of a miser
hidden under a stone or in tree stump, and
confscates the silver and god, the miser, as
prosecuting witness, may send the finder to
prison for larceny. So, too, the miser is
dead and his next of kin are known to the
finder
In England the one who unearths pot of
coin is not only not entitled to his find, but
he must turn it over to the crown, or else he
is guilty of crime. Although there have been
ages of hiding of treasure in England, the
discovery of pots of gold is not reported with
great frequency, although it may be sup
posed number are discovered yearly. From
time to time, however, when treasure trove
appears, the finders have falling out and
60 to court. Neither the finder nor the
owner of the soil where it is found can main
tain possession against the crown of England,
the crowns right to the find being absolute.
However, finders have commonly received
reward. Of course the owner, or, if he is dead,
the Oyparfc ro0racapfa five hac claim S11Oa.
rior to finder, soil owner and crown.
In the United States, however, the finders
claim is usually superior to that of all
others, except the owners or the owners
representatives. Yet there are exceptions.
The Cheeseboroueh Case
THE appellate division of thesNew York
Supreme Court has held that personal
property buried in the ground and forgotten
by the owner, if living, and lost to the heirs
if the hider is dead, belongs not to the finder
but to the owners of the land as it passes
from owner to owner. The courts ruling is
as follows:
IF personal property is deposited beneath
the surface of the soil and so left until the
place where it is so deposited is forgotten
and the owner thereof, if living, OF his per-
sonal representatives, if he is dead, cannot
be found, such personal property so in
possession of the owner of the soil becomes,
as a part of the soil, the property of the
owner of the real property, and such per-
sonal property passes by gift, sale, descent,
of said real estate as a part thereof. When
it is discovered and removed from the soil
as against everyone but the owner, it be-
comes the personal property of the finder
thereof"
This holding was at the end of litigation
over set of dishes which were plowed up
on the Burdick farm, near West Edmeston,
in the spring of 1904. Marion Cheesebor-
ough, the farm tenant, was following his
pillow one day, when the point went into a
cache of chinaware. He opened up the hid
ing places and found sixty-eight perfect
pieces, and twenty-nine pieces were broken
by the plow.
Cheeseborough Immediately told of his
find, and as the china and glass were of rare
and beautiful design the unbroken pieces
were worth several thousand dollars. The
story of the dishes was learned in due course.
Originally the land belonged to Lord Ed
meston, and his representative was Percifer
Carr. Carr, in Revolutionary times, found
himself menaced by warriors; so he buried
his valuables. There was hoard of gold
amounting to ten thousand dollars, as yet
,,rd;ccOVarod en- for .knou1 and the