A BICYCLE FOUND.

Taranaki Daily News, 23 June 1922, Page 8

A BICYCLE FOUND.

A COURT CASE.

... On a charge of stealing a bicycle from ’Edgar Prentice in February last, John Edward Bond appeared before Mr. A. M. Mowlem at the New Plymouth Magistrate’s Court yesterday. Mr. R. H. Quilliam appeared for the accused, and Senior Sergeant M‘Crorie conducted the case for the police. P. W. Roberts, decorator, gave evidence that on the date in question he borrowed Prentice’s bicycle, rode it to a certain place, where he left it on the street while engaged in a building. Coming out, about two hours later, he dis_ covered that the bicycle had disappeared. He reported the matter to the police. Early in June Prentice reported to witness that he had seen the cycle being ridden up Devon Street. The defendant had later promised to pay for any damage done to the machine. Edgar Prentice, an employee of Roberts, said some time in February he lent the cycle to Roberts. He did not see it again till June 12, when he saw it being ridden by Bond up the Te Henui Hill.; He questioned Bond, who told witness ■ that, he had owned the bicycle for about three years, but he had not bought it. ! Later, Bond told witness that he had found the bicycle at his gate, but if it belonged to witness he had better take it. Witness asked Bond to repair the damage done to the bicycle, but Bond said, “Don't come at that, boy.” Roberts had told Bond that the police would settle the matter. Witness valued the bicycle at £5 or £6. Constable Cantian gave evidence of an interview he had with Bond, who had told him that he had found the bicycle about three months previously. He was waiting for the owner to advertise for i it, and had used it a few times in the meantime. Bond informed witness that he had told Prentice that he pretended he had had the bicycle for three years to see if Prentice would say when the cycle was lost. After speaking to Prentice, Bond b.«»d said he was convinced that it was Prentice’s machine. Mr. Quilliam submitted that there was no charge to an'swer. Bond had merely passively retained the bicycle, and had r le no attempt to permanently appropriate it. He thought by riding it about the owner would see and claim it. His Worship: And if the owner had not seen it Bond would have been riding It still, and to all eternity until it was worn out. The accused said he was a labourer living in Courtenay Street. One morning in March he was going to work at five o’clock in the morning wljen his friend, Jillett, drew his attention to a bicycle standing by the gateway. He pushed the machine just inside the gateway, making no attempt to conceal it. It remained there for about three days, and then one morning he was late in going to work and rode the bicycle. His boy had rise ridden it under instructions from witness that if anyone claim, ed it he was to refer the matter to wit- | ness. Witness detailed the interview • with Prentice and said he had only told him that he -had had the machine for three years in a joking kind of way. When convinced it belonged to Prentice he did not hesitate to hand it over. In answer to Sergeant M‘Crorie, witness said he did not keep the bicycle because his own machine was out of order. J. R. Jillett corroborated accused’s statements regarding the finding of the bicycle at the gateway. Bond was acquitted, His Worship stressing the duty imposed upon a person finding an article to make the fact 3 as public as possible and to take all 3 reasonable steps to find the rightful d owner.