Please wait. Contacting image service... loading

Article text

FINDING OF £50 NOTE
Larceny Charge Dismissed
Albert John Brown, laborer, of Rose
water, was charged before Mr. Sander
son, SJM., in the Port Adelaide Police
Court yesterday, with having on Febru
ary 7, at Port Adelaide, stolen a £50
bank note the property of Charlotte
Gillatly.
Mr. c. T. Gun represented. Brown.
wno p^eaoeti not guilty.
Plainclothes Constable P. Reidy, wiio
prosecuted, said that the charge was
one which was commonly known as
larceny by finding- About 250 pjn. on
February 7, Miss Gillatly, an elderly
woman, went to the Savings Bank at
Port Adelaide and drew a sum of
money, including a £50 note, she left
;he bank and went to her nonxe at Bir
kenhead by the ferry. Later in the af
ternoon she discovered that the £50
note was missing. She immediately
returned to tiie bank, obtained tne
number of the missing note, and re
ported the matter to the police, who
circulated the number of the note to
sZl banks hi the district. On the follow
ing morning the defendant entered the
Port Adelaide branch of the Bank of
Adelaide, and tendered the missing
note for change. Brown was questioned
oy ine manager until sergeantDetec
tive P. J. Donnellan arrived. Brown
frankly told the police officer that he
had found the note in Commercial road.
Port Adelaide, on the previous after
noon, and that he had faTed to at
tempt to ascertain who the owner was.
In evidence. Miss Gillatly told the
court that she was certain she had lost
the note. There was no suggestion that
it had been deliberately taken from her.
Brown told the court that he was
25 years old and was married witn one
child. He had been almost continually
out of work for some years. On one
occasion, with a friend, he walked
nearly to Melbourne in search, of em
ployment. On the afternoon of Pebru
ray 7 be saw some blue paper on the
roadway In Commercial road. He
picked it up and discovered that it was
£50. There was a temptation to keep
the note, but he went home and strug
gled with the position as to what to
do. On the following day he decided
to cash the note.
Mr. Gun said that the law was not
clear on the point at issue. There was
certainly nothing that said that the
finder of lost property should take it
to a police station, nor was there any
onus on the finder to advertise for the
legal owner. To prove the charge
against Brown it was necessary to chow
that there was felonious intent at the
time he gained possession of the money.
The magistrate said that he did not
blame the po'ice for instituting the
charge, but after having Investigated
It he had to discharge the defendant.
$