RECOVERY OF STOLEN HORSES. 67 



This enactment applies to cases of false pretences as 

 well as felony, and the fact that the prisoner parted with 

 the goods to a bond fide pawnee will not disentitle the 

 original owner to the restitution of the goods {n). It also 

 applies to property received by a person knowing it to 

 have been stolen or obtained by false pretences. The 

 order of restitution is strictly limited to property identified 

 at the trial as being the subject of the charge ; it does 

 not, therefore, extend to property in the possession of 

 innocent third persons, which was not produced and 

 identified at the trial as being the subject of the indict- 

 ment (o). 



Where stolen cattle were sold in Market overt at about 

 10 o'clock in the morning, and later on in the day resold 

 likewise in Market overt, both purchases being bond fide, 

 it was held, that, upon the conviction of the thief, the 

 judge had jurisdiction at the trial to order restitution to 

 the rightful owner [p). 



And by the 30 & 31 Yict. c. 35, s. 9, provision is made 

 upon conviction of the thief, and restitution of the goods, 

 for the payment to an innocent purchaser from the thief, 

 out of any moneys taken from the thief on his apprehension, 

 of the price such purchaser has paid for the stolen goods. 



Under 2 & 3 Vict. c. 71, the Metropolitan Police Ma- Order of 

 gistrates have power to order that any goods stolen or ^.^lH^ Magis- 

 f raudulently obtained be delivered up to the owner {q) . 



And if the order is immediately complied with, no Where no 

 special damages can be awarded for the detention. Thus, ^^^^^l. 

 in the following case, A. hired a Horse and gig of B., be awarded, 

 and the same day pledged it with C, an innocent party, 

 for value. After some inquiries made, B. demanded the 

 restitution of them from C, who offered to restore them on 

 being satisfied of B.'s right to recover. A Magistrate's 

 order was then obtained by B., under 2 & 3 Yict. c. 71, 

 s. 40, compelling C. to deliver the goods to B., which 

 order was immediately complied with by C. A. was, 

 subsequently to this order, tried and convicted on the 

 evidence of B. and C of stealing the Horse and gig, and 

 after such conviction B. entered a plaint in the Sheriff's 

 Court against C. for special damage arising from the de- 



(«) Eeg.y.Stancliffe,llGoi!.,G.G. [i)) Reg. v. Uomn, G Ir. R., 0. 



318. L. 293. C. C. E. 



(o) Beg. V. Goldsmith, 12 Cox, C. (?) See 2 & 3 Vict. c. 71, ss. 27, 



C. 594 ; Reg. v. Smith, 12 Cox, C. C. 40. 



697. 



f2 



