| Show proprietorship IN DRIFTWOOD ta till utah journal of december ord contains an account of a case that occasions some surprise A young man named henry lamoreaux who bears A god tod reputation for honesty was waa of larceny in the justices urt u ol oi 01 a jury trial and last hist saturday N as liae elat d to and costs making a total t speas to him hlin exclusive of trouble aad oad shame of ij the offence offense iv with ith which he was charged consisted of hauling from the mouth ef logan t anon anton two loads of drift wood claimed to be the property a ol 01 neils hansen hansen ano purchased it from the U 0 al and Q B co the wood was of very small value regarded by some as near worthless as it could be because it ridd lidd nad been in the stranded mass of io los logs ios s and wood since last july but bat but bat the value of the woodis of little consideration in view of the principle involved this wood came down with the I 1 drive of timber and lodged with it atthe at the companas comp anys b boom oom and when the waters receded mosi of it was wag scattered along the river banks for taree luree quarters of a mile the company compan pany sold this driftwood drift rif t woo wood in a body to ila lla llan lian sen seu en but it had not been removed or even piled up to denote ownership and it has been a focal custom established dished by common understanding for a long period and formally recognized in public of the citizens twenty years ago that drift driftwood wood is public property prop t tha the ry U 0 0 had certainly some color ot el claim a im to the driftwood drift wood as it came down and was mingled with their timber although much of it would have drifted no doubt independent of their drive but as it had not been piled aldno evidence appeared to the public that it had been appropriated it was natural that it should be taken for tor public property particularly considering 91 si 91 dering its long neglected condition the young youn man who ao hauled the wood expressed Ms his nis willingness to settle for it a as soon as he learned that it was cl claimed by hansen but the complaint was lodged and the case went on evidently evid d e antly for the purpose of protect i irig t the he interest slot tile tiie U 0 more than the vindication of public justice for there was no evidence ot at intent to do wron wrong witnesses of undoubted veracity tes tined tided to tiie tile recognized public proprietorship in driftwood dris drift t wood and the absence of intention to commit a 3 public offense offence or to interfere with known private rigg nights rights lits was patent the conviction ot of the accused coupled with the heavy under th the circumstances imposed upon him reflect upon him greatly to his injury A A stain is put upon u on him which appears to be unde undeserved serveN the rights ot at the U 0 ought to be protected if it was necessary to that protection that a verdict should be rendered against the defendant it looks as though that could have been done in a way to relieve the defendant of the obloquy which attaches to him and the line nine could have been made nominal in the sam same spirit espirit if there was any auy evidence that the young man intended to steal th the thy e wood that he was a aware ware it was private property that he took it in a bleaking or secret manner indicating ane cirit of larceny it would have been to punish him severely but the evist evict evidence ence euce as reported points in an 1 opposite I p 1 1 direction i ruction and the defendant appears i 1 p 3 rs as s the injured party ile he is poor and aven wo are re in informed ormed had to part with one of his horses thus breaking up his team in order to settle the A tilie le and costs preferring i ng this to risking further trouble and expense by appeal the complainant paid pala 5 3 of the fine thus indicating his own belief in the moral innocence of the accused there is a question ot ol public right associated with this luat matter ler ter that is quite q important apart irom the reputation rel rei u of at the tile young man mau which is damaged by a conviction for larceny it is not clear that an individual or a company can lawfully claim as private proper property tX driftwood drift wood that by common custom is regarded as public property simply because it becomes I 1 mixed and mingled with logs in a drive or is stopped by a boom I 1 fhe the timber owner has in our opinion but an equal claim with the rest of tile the public to that common property until lie ne by somo some act that can be publicly reco recognized gives evidence ox oi appropriation while it remains remal ils its on the public domain without such sueh evid evidence nce it looks unfair to deem it appropriated and eif unjust st to punish one who considers himself elf a common proprietor for taking it and to blas blasl this his reputation for au an act done without guilty intent thes the question ought to be competently tested and set at rest for the benent benefit of of the co community in compa company ny interests of coure corre being beung considered cr d aud and guarded aswell as well weli as to tc public welfare |
