EECOVERY OF STOLEN HORSES. 



59 



this rule of public policy applies only to proceedings 

 between the plaintiff and the felon himself, or at the most 

 the felon and those with whom he must be sued (d), and 

 therefore it is not applicable where the action is against a 

 third party, who is innocent of the felony. 



Thus, it was held that an action of trover was maintain- 

 able to recover the value of goods which had been stolen 

 from the plaintiff, and which the defendant had inno- 

 cently purchased, although no steps had been .taken to 

 bring the thief to justice (d). Thus, too, in a case where A. 

 had bond fide purchased a stolen horse at a public auction 

 (not being a market overt), and had sent it for sale to a re- 

 pository for horses kept by B., and there it was found by 

 the owner, who demanded it of B. in the presence of A., 

 and B. refused to give it up without the authority of A. ; it 

 was held, in an action of trover against A. and B., that in 

 this case it was not necessary in the first instance to prose- 

 cute the felon, and that there was sufficient evidence of a 

 joint conversion ; inasmuch as, though a servant or agent, 

 who has received goods from his master or principal, may, 

 on the demand made by the true owner of the goods, give 

 a qualified refusal to deliver them up, without being liable 

 to an action of trover ; yet when a bailee sets up or reHes 

 upon the title of his bailor, in answer to such demand, his 

 refusal is evidence of a conversion by him (e). 



If goods be stolen from any common person, and he 

 prosecutes the offender to conviction, he will be entitled, 

 under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 100 (/), to an order of 

 restitution from the Court before whom the trial took 

 place, and this notwithstanding any intervening sale in 

 market overt {g). 



Or the goods may be recovered in trover from the 

 purchaser of them in market overt, upon a conversion by 

 him subsequent to the conviction of the felon, without any 

 order for restitution having been made. For the effect of 

 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 100 (/), is to revest the property in 

 stolen goods in the original owner upon conviction of the 

 felon (h). 



we have to consider how it is to be 

 enforced: per Cockburn, C. i., Wells 

 V. Abrahams, L. E., 7 Q. B. 557; 

 41 L. J., Q. B. 306. 



{d) White T. Spettigue, 13 M. & 

 W. 606 ; Stone v. Marsh, 6 B. & C. 

 551 ; Marsh v. Keating, 1 Bing. N. 

 C. 198; per Crowder, J., Lee t. 

 Bayes, 18 C. B. 602 ; and see Osborn 



"Where the 

 action is 

 against a third 

 party. 



Evidence of 

 conversion. 



Order for 

 restitution. 



Or action of 

 trover. 



V. GilUtt, L. E,., 8 Ex. 88 ; 44 L. J., 

 Ex. 53. 



(e) Lee v. Bayes, 18 C. B. 599. 



(/) Taken from 7 & 8 Geo. 4, 

 c. 29, s. 57. 



(g) 2 Steph. 124. 



\h) Scattergood v. Sylvester, 19 

 L. J., Q. B. 447. 



