THE FELONIOUS INTENT. ] 69 



pose of the horse." And where the indictment does not 

 charge such false pretense and the evidence shows the own- 

 er's consent, evidence of the false pretext or guilty intent can- 

 not be given.^* If the borrowing is animo furandi, the fact 

 that the accused afterwards changes his mind and returns the 

 horse does not purge the offense.^^ It is otherwise where 

 there has been no conversion at all, only an intent to con- 

 vert." 



A bailee may in many cases be guilty of statutory larceny 

 though the receipt of the property was in good faith, and it 

 has been held that where an animal hired bona fide has been 

 subsequently stolen the accused may be convicted on an in- 

 dictment of larceny as bailee in the common form : the stat- 

 ute need not be especially set out.^^ But where the owner 

 of horses placed them in the defendant's possession under 

 an agreement of sale by which the property was not to vest 

 in the latter till paid for, and the latter refused to pay or to re- 

 turn the horses, it was held that as he was not obliged to 

 return the identical property he was not bailee in such a sense 

 as to be guilty of larceny as bailee.-'® And where a man found 

 two stray heifers and took them into his possession and after- 

 wards, when he found out who the owner was, sent them away 

 to be kept for himself, having had no intention of stealing 

 them when he first found them, it was held that he was guilty 

 neither of larceny nor of larceny as bailee.^'' 



The distinction between the cases of a servant and bailee 

 is that, the possession of the former being a continuation of 

 that of the owner, the fact that the intent to steal is formed 

 subsequently to the receipt of the goods does not prevent the 

 ofifense amounting to larceny, no title having been parted 



" State V. Humphrey, 32 Vt. 569. "^ Marshall v. State, 31 Tex. 471. 

 " State V. Scott, 64 N. C. 586. 



" Reg. V. Brooks, 8 C. & P. 295; State v. Hayes, in N. C. 727. 

 ^' Reg. V. Tweedy, 23 U. C. Q. B. 120, following Reg. v. Haigh, 7 Cox 

 C. C. 403. 

 " Krause v. Com., 93 Pa. St. 418. 

 " Reg. V. Matthews, 12 Cox C. C. 489. 



