A treasure trove may broadly be defined as an amount of gold, silver, gemstones, money, jewellery, or any valuable collection found hidden underground or in places such as cellars or attics, where the treasure seems old enough for it to be presumed that the true owner is dead and the heirs undiscoverable. However, both the legal definition of what constitutes a treasure trove and its treatment under law varies considerably from country to country, and from era to era.

The term is also often used metaphorically A metaphor is an analogy between two objects or ideas; the analogy is conveyed by the use of a metaphorical word in place of some other word. For example: "Her eyes were glistening jewels". Collections of articles published as a book are often titled Treasure Trove, as in A Treasure Trove of Science. This was especially fashionable for titles of children's books Children's literature is for readers and listeners up to about age twelve and is often illustrated. The term is used in senses which sometimes exclude young-adult fiction, comic books, or other genres. Books specifically for children existed by the 17th century. Scholarship on children's literature includes professional organizations, dedicated in the early- and mid-20th century.

Contents

Terminology

Treasure trove, sometimes rendered treasure-trove, literally means "treasure that has been found". The English English is a West Germanic language that arose in the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms of England and spread into South-East Scotland under the influence of the Anglian medieval kingdom of Northumbria. Following the economic, political, military, scientific, cultural, and colonial influence of Great Britain and the United Kingdom from the 18th century, and of term treasure trove was derived from tresor trové, the Anglo-French[1] equivalent of the Latin Latin or sometimes Roman is an Italic language originally spoken in Latium and Ancient Rome. Although often considered a dead language, in view of the fact that it has no native, fluent speakers, Latin continues to be taught in schools and has been, and currently is, used in the process of new word production in modern languages from many legal term thesaurus inventus. In 15th-century English the Anglo-French term was translated as "treasure found", but from the 16th century it began appearing in its modern form with the French word trové anglicized Anglicisation or Anglicization is a process of conversion of verbal or written elements of any other language into a more comprehensible English form for an English speaker, or to become English in form or character as trovey, trouve or trove.[2]

The term treasure trove is often used metaphorically A metaphor is an analogy between two objects or ideas; the analogy is conveyed by the use of a metaphorical word in place of some other word. For example: "Her eyes were glistening jewels" to mean a "valuable find", and hence a source of treasure, or a reserve or repository of valuable things.[3] Trove is often used alone to refer to the concept,[4] the word having been reanalysed as a noun A noun can co-occur with an article or an attributive adjective. Verbs and adjectives can't. In the following, an asterisk in front of an example means that this example is ungrammatical via folk etymology Folk etymology, in its basic sense, refers to popularly held beliefs about the origins of specific words, especially where these originate in "common-sense" assumptions rather than serious research (compare folk science, folk psychology etc.). In historical linguistics, the term is most often used in a more technical sense, to refer to a from an original Anglo-French adjective In grammar, an adjective is a word whose main syntactic role is to modify a noun or pronoun, giving more information about the noun or pronoun's referent. Collectively, adjectives form one of the traditional English eight parts of speech, though linguists today distinguish adjectives from words such as determiners that also used to be considered trové (cognate to the French past participle In linguistics, a participle can be a verb or an adjective (participial phrase). It is a derivative of a non-finite verb, which can be used in compound tenses or voices, or as a modifier. Participles often share properties with other parts of speech, in particular adjectives and nouns trouvé, literally "found").[5] Treasure trove is therefore akin to similar Anglo-French or Anglo-French-derived legal terms whereby a post-positive adjective A post-positive adjective is an adjective that appears after the noun that it modifies. In some languages this is the normal syntax, but in English it is rare, largely confined to archaic or institutional expressions. Aplenty, galore, and the informal extraordinaire are examples of adjectives that are primarily used postpositively in modern in a noun phrase (contrary to standard English syntax) has been reanalysed as a compound In linguistics, a compound is a lexeme that consists of more than one stem. Compounding or composition is the word-formation that creates compound lexemes (the other word-formation process being derivation). Compounding or Word-compounding refers to the faculty and device of language to form new words by combining or putting together old words. In noun phrase In grammar, a noun phrase is a phrase whose head is a noun or a pronoun, optionally accompanied by a set of modifiers, as in court martial A court-martial is a military court. These military courts can determine punishments for members of the military subject to military law who are found guilty of a crime or may dismiss the charges based on the evidence and the case presented. Most militaries maintain a court-martial system to try cases in which a breach of military discipline may, force majeure Force majeure , also known as cas fortuit (French) or casus fortuitus (Latin), is a common clause in contracts which essentially frees both parties from liability or obligation when an extraordinary event or circumstance beyond the control of the parties, such as a war, strike, riot, crime, or an event described by the legal term "act of God& and Princess Royal Princess Royal is a style customarily awarded by a British monarch to his or her eldest daughter. The style is held for life, so a princess cannot be given the style during the lifetime of another Princess Royal. In particular, Queen Elizabeth II never held the title as her aunt, Princess Mary, was in possession of the title. Phrases of this form are often used either with the etymologically correct plural form (for example, "Courts-Martial deal with serious offences ...")[6] or as fully rederived plural forms (such as "... ordering court-martials ...").[7] In the case of treasure trove, the typical form is almost always treasure troves, with treasures trove found mostly in historical[8] or literary[9] works.

History

Roman law

In Roman law The term Roman law denotes the legal system of ancient Rome, and the legal developments which occurred before the seventh century AD — when the Roman–Byzantine state adopted Greek as the language of government. The development of Roman law comprises more than a thousand years of jurisprudence — from the Twelve Tables to the Corpus Juris treasure trove was called thesaurus ("treasure" in Latin Latin or sometimes Roman is an Italic language originally spoken in Latium and Ancient Rome. Although often considered a dead language, in view of the fact that it has no native, fluent speakers, Latin continues to be taught in schools and has been, and currently is, used in the process of new word production in modern languages from many), and defined by the Roman jurist A jurist or jurisconsult is a professional who studies, develops, applies, or otherwise deals with the law. The term is widely used in American English, but in the United Kingdom and many Commonwealth countries it has only historical and specialist usage. In most of Continental Europe any person who possesses a degree in law and works Paulus Julius Paulus Prudentissimus was one of the most influential and distinguished Roman jurists. Paulus is also known as Paul. He was also a Praetorian prefect, who served under the Roman Emperor Severan dynasty during the Roman Empire as "vetus quædam depositio pecuniæ, cujus non extat memoria, ut jam dominum non habeat"[10] (an ancient deposit of money, of which no memory exists, so that it has no present owner).[11] R.W. Lee, in his book The Elements of Roman Law (4th ed., 1956), commented that this definition was "not quite satisfactory" as treasure was not confined to money, nor was there any abandonment of ownership.[11] Under the emperors The Roman Emperor was the ruler of the Roman State during the imperial period . The Romans had no single term for the office: Latin titles such as imperator (from which English emperor ultimately derives), augustus, caesar and princeps were all associated with it. In practice, the emperor was supreme ruler of Rome and supreme commander of the, if treasure was found on a person's own land or on sacred or religious land, the finder was entitled to keep it. However, if the treasure was found fortuitously, and not by deliberate search, on another person's land, half went to the finder and half to the owner of the land, who might be the emperor, the fiscus Fiscus was the name of the personal treasury of the emperors of Rome. The word is literally translated as "basket" or "purse" and was used to describe those forms of revenue collected from the provinces , which were then granted to the emperor. Its existence pointed to the division of power in the early era of the Empire (public treasury), the city, or some other proprietor.[12] According to Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius Hugo Grotius , also known as Huig de Groot or Hugo de Groot, worked as a jurist in the Dutch Republic. With Francisco de Vitoria and Alberico Gentili he laid the foundations for international law, based on natural law. He was also a philosopher, theologian, Christian apologist, playwright, and poet (1583–1645), as the feudal system Feudalism is a political and military system between a feudal aristocracy , and his vassals. In its most classic sense, feudalism refers to the Medieval European political system composed of a set of reciprocal legal and military obligations among the warrior nobility, revolving around the three key concepts of lords, vassals, and fiefs. Although spread over Europe and the prince was looked on as the ultimate owner of all lands, his right to the treasure trove became jus commune et quasi gentium (a common and quasi-international right) in England, Germany, France, Spain and Denmark.[13]

English common law

It has been said that the concept of treasure trove in English law English law is the legal system of England and Wales, and is the basis of common law legal systems used in most Commonwealth countriesand the United States . It was exported to Commonwealth countries while the British Empire was established and maintained, and it forms the basis of the jurisprudence of most of those countries. English law prior to dates back to the time of Edward the Confessor Edward the Confessor , son of Æthelred the Unready and Emma of Normandy, was one of the last Anglo-Saxon kings of England and is usually regarded as the last king of the House of Wessex, ruling from 1042 to 1066 (technically the last being Edgar the Ætheling who was proclaimed king briefly in late 1066, but was deposed after about eight weeks.) (c. Circa means "approximately", usually referring to a date 1003/1004–1066).[14] Under the common law Common law is law developed by judges through decisions of courts and similar tribunals , rather than through legislative statutes or executive branch action. A "common law system" is a legal system that gives great precedential weight to common law, on the principle that it is unfair to treat similar facts differently on different, treasure trove was defined as gold or silver in any form, whether coin, plate (gold or silver vessels or utensils)[15] or bullion (a lump of gold or silver),[16][17] which had been hidden and rediscovered, and which no person could prove he or she owned. If the person who had hidden the treasure was known or discovered later, it belonged to him or her[18][19] or persons claiming through him or her such as descendants. To be treasure trove, an object had to be substantially – that is, more than 50% – gold or silver.[20]

A ceremonial helmet from Sutton Hoo Sutton Hoo near Woodbridge, Suffolk, England, is the site of two Anglo-Saxon cemeteries of the 6th century and early 7th century, one of which contained an undisturbed ship burial including a wealth of artefacts of outstanding art-historical and archaeological significance recovered in 1939. The Sutton Hoo find was not treasure trove – as it was a ship burial A ship burial or boat grave is a burial in which a ship or boat is used either as a container for the dead and the grave goods, or as a part of the grave goods itself. If the ship is very small, it is called a boat grave. This style of burial was used in the Vendel era and by the Anglo-Saxons, the Merovingians, the Vikings, the Rus, the Balts ,, there had been no intention to recover the objects later.

Treasure trove had to be hidden with animus revocandi, that is, an intention to recover it later. If an object was simply lost or abandoned (for instance, scattered on the surface of the earth or in the sea), it either belonged to the first person who found it[18][21] or the landowner according to the law of finders Lost, mislaid, and abandoned property is a category of the common law of property which deals with personal property which has left the possession of its rightful owner without having directly entered the possession of another person, that is, legal principles concerning the finding of objects. For this reason, the objects found in 1939 at Sutton Hoo Sutton Hoo near Woodbridge, Suffolk, England, is the site of two Anglo-Saxon cemeteries of the 6th century and early 7th century, one of which contained an undisturbed ship burial including a wealth of artefacts of outstanding art-historical and archaeological significance were determined not to be treasure trove – as the objects were part of a ship burial A ship burial or boat grave is a burial in which a ship or boat is used either as a container for the dead and the grave goods, or as a part of the grave goods itself. If the ship is very small, it is called a boat grave. This style of burial was used in the Vendel era and by the Anglo-Saxons, the Merovingians, the Vikings, the Rus, the Balts ,, there had been no intention to recover the buried objects subsequently.[22] The Crown The Crown is a corporation sole that in the Commonwealth realms, as well as in any provincial or state sub-divisions thereof, represents the legal embodiment of governance, whether executive, legislative, or judicial. It evolved naturally first in the United Kingdom as a separation of the literal crown and property of the nation state from the had a prerogative right The Royal Prerogative is a body of customary authority, privilege, and immunity, recognized in common law and, sometimes, in civil law jurisdictions possessing a monarchy as belonging to the Sovereign alone. It is the means by which some of the executive powers of government, possessed by and vested in a monarch with regard to the process of to treasure trove, and if the circumstances under which an object was found raised a prima facie Prima facie is a Latin expression meaning on its first appearance, or at first sight. The literal translation would be "at first face", prima first, facie face, both in the ablative case. It is used in modern legal English to signify that on first examination, a matter appears to be self-evident from the facts. In common law presumption In the law of evidence, a presumption of a particular fact can be made without the aid of proof in some situations. The types of presumption includes a rebuttable discretionary presumption, a rebuttable mandatory presumption, and an irrebutable or conclusive presumption. The invocation of a presumption shifts the burden of proof from one party to that it had been hidden, it belonged to the Crown unless someone else could show a better title Title is a legal term for a bundle of rights in a piece of property in which a party may own either a legal interest or an equitable interest. The rights in the bundle may be separated and held by different parties. It may also refer to a formal document that serves as evidence of ownership. Conveyance of the document may be required in order to to it.[23] The Crown could grant its right to treasure trove to any person in the form of a franchise In economics, a government-granted monopoly is a form of coercive monopoly by which a government grants exclusive privilege to a private individual or firm to be the sole provider of a good or service; potential competitors are excluded from the market by law, regulation, or other mechanisms of government enforcement. As a form of coercive.[18][19][24]

It was the duty of the finder, and indeed of anyone who had acquired knowledge of the matter, to report the finding of a potential treasure trove to the coroner A coroner or forensics examiner is an official chiefly responsible for investigating deaths, particularly some of those happening under unusual circumstances, and determining the cause of death. Depending on the jurisdiction, the coroner may adjudge the cause him/herself, or act as the presiding officer of a special court . The office originated of the district. Concealing a find was a misdemeanour A misdemeanor, or misdemeanour in many common law legal systems, is a "lesser" criminal act. Misdemeanors are generally punished much less severely than felonies, but theoretically more so than administrative infractions . Many misdemeanors are punished with monetary fines[25][26] punishable with fine and imprisonment.[18][27] The coroner was required to hold an inquest An inquest is a judicial investigation, usually by a group of court-appointed people , in common law jurisdictions. The most common kind of inquest is an inquiry including a medical examination by a coroner into the cause of a death that was sudden, violent, suspicious, or occurred in prison. Inquest can also mean such a jury and the result of with a jury A jury is a sworn body of people convened to render an impartial verdict officially submitted to them by a court, or to set a penalty or judgment. Modern juries tend to be found in courts to judge whether an accused person is not guilty or guilty of a crime. (There is no such verdict as 'innocent') to determine who were the finders or the persons suspected to be the finders, "and that may be well perceived where one liveth riotously and have done so of long time".[19][28] Where there had been an apparent concealment of treasure trove the coroner's jury could investigate the title of the treasure to discover if it had been concealed from the supposed owner, but any such finding was not conclusive[29] as the coroner generally had no jurisdiction to inquire into questions of title to the treasure between the Crown and any other claimant. If a person wished to assert title to the treasure, he or she had to bring separate court proceedings.[26][30]

In the early 20th century, it became the practice of the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury to pay those finders who fully and promptly reported discoveries of treasure troves and handed them over to the proper authorities the full antiquarian value of objects which had been retained for national or other institutions such as museums. Objects not retained were returned to the finders.[19][31]

Scottish common law

Under the common law of Scotland Scots law is a unique legal system which has roots in various different sources of law. Up until the mid-tenth century, the law in Scotland was almost certainly Celtic, but after that point, feudal and canon law gradually took over. On succeeding to the throne in 1124, King David I introduced elements of Anglo-Norman laws and legal institutions,, the law of treasure trove was and still is a specialised application of the general rule governing bona vacantia Bona vacantia is a common law doctrine in the United Kingdom under which ownerless property passes by law to the Crown. It has largely replaced the doctrine of escheat, which had a similar effect in relation to feudal tenures ("vacant goods") – that is, objects that are lost, forgotten or abandoned. The rule is quod nullius est fit domini regis: "that which belongs to nobody becomes our Lord the King's [or Queen's]". The Crown in Scotland has a prerogative right to treasure trove for it is one of the regalia minora Inter regalia : something that inherently belongs to the sovereign. This may include property, privileges, or prerogatives. The term derives from Latin inter (among) and regalia (things of the king) ("minor things of the King"), that is, property rights which the Crown may exercise as it pleases and which it may alienate Alienation, in property law, is the capacity for a piece of property or a property right to be sold or otherwise transferred from one party to another. Although property is generally deemed to be alienable, it may be subject to restraints on alienation (transfer to another party). As the Scottish law of treasure trove on the matter has not changed, it is discussed in the "Present-day legal definitions" section below, under the subheading "Scotland".

United States law

Many states in the US enacted statutes that received English common law into their legal systems. For example, in 1863 the legislature of Idaho Idaho is a mostly mountainous state, with an area larger than all of New England. It is landlocked, surrounded by the states of Washington, Oregon, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, Montana and the Canadian Province of British Columbia. However, the network of dams and locks on the Columbia River and Snake River make the city of Lewiston the farthest inland enacted a statute that made "the common law of England ... the rule of decision in all courts" of the state. However, English common law principles of treasure trove were not applied in the US. Instead, courts applied rules relating to the finding of lost and ownerless items. The treasure trove rule was first given serious consideration by the Oregon Supreme Court The Oregon Supreme Court is the highest state court in the U.S. state of Oregon. The only court that may reverse or modify a decision of the Oregon Supreme Court is the Supreme Court of the United States. The OSC holds court at the Oregon Supreme Court Building in Salem, Oregon, near the capitol building on State Street. The building was finished in 1904 in a case involving boys who had discovered thousands of dollars The United States dollar is the official currency of the United States. The U.S. dollar is normally abbreviated as the dollar sign, $, or as USD or US$ to distinguish it from other dollar-denominated currencies and from others that use the $ symbol. It is divided into 100 cents in gold coins hidden in metal cans while cleaning out a henhouse. The Court wrongly believed that the rule operated in the same way as early rules that awarded possession – and, effectively, legal title as well – to innocent finders of items that had been mislaid and the owners of which were unknown. By awarding the coins to the boys, the Court implied that finders were entitled to buried valuables, and that any claims by landowners should be disregarded.[32]

In subsequent years the legal position became unclear as a series of English and American cases decided that landowners were entitled to buried valuables. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court reconsidered the rule in 1908. The case before it involved three workers who had found coins while digging on their employer's land. The Court decided along the lines of the 1904 Idaho case and awarded the coins to the finders. For the next 30 years, the courts of a number of states, including Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio and Wisconsin, applied this modified "treasure trove" rule, most recently in 1948. Since that time, however, the rule has fallen out of favour. Modern legal texts regard it as "a recognized, if not controlling, rule of decision", but one commentator has called it "a minority rule of dubious heritage that was misunderstood and misapplied in a few states between 1904 and 1948".[32]

Present-day legal definitions

United Kingdom

England, Northern Ireland, and Wales

The Ringlemere Cup, found in 2001 in the Ringlemere barrow in Kent, England, which was declared to be treasure under the Treasure Act 1996 and is now displayed in the British Museum. Made of gold, it dates to the Bronze Age, between 1700 and 1500 B.C.

Throughout the ages, farmers, archaeologists and amateur treasure hunters have unearthed important treasures of immense historical, scientific and financial value. However, the strictness of the common law rules meant that such items were sometimes not treasure trove. The items risked being sold abroad, or were only saved for the nation by being purchased at a high price. Mention has already been made of the objects comprising the Sutton Hoo ship burial, which were not treasure trove as they had been interred without any intention to retrieve them. The objects were later presented to the nation by their owner, Edith May Pretty, in a 1942 bequest. In March 1973, a hoard of about 7,811 Roman coins was found buried in a field at Coleby in Lincolnshire. It was made up of antoniniani believed to have been minted between 253 and 281 A.D. The Court of Appeal of England and Wales held in the 1981 case of Attorney-General of the Duchy of Lancaster v. G.E. Overton (Farms) Ltd. that the hoard was not treasure trove as the coins did not have a substantial silver content. Thus, it belonged to the owner of the field and could not be retained by the British Museum.[33]

To remedy the faults of the old treasure trove regime, the Treasure Act 1996[34] introduced a new scheme which came into effect on 24 September 1997.[35] Any treasure found on and after that date regardless of the circumstances in which it was deposited, even if it was lost or left with no intention of recovery, belongs to the Crown, subject to any prior interests or rights held by any franchisee of the Crown.[36] The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport may direct that any such treasure be transferred or disposed of,[37] or that the Crown's title in it be disclaimed.[38][39]

The Act uses the term treasure instead of treasure trove; the latter term is now confined to objects found before the Act came into force. Objects falling within the following definition are "treasure" under the Act:[39][40]

  1. If the object is not a coin,[41] it must be at least 300 years old[42] and at least 10%[43] precious metal (that is, gold or silver)[44] by weight.
  2. If the object is a coin, it must either be:
    • one of at least two coins in the same find[45] which are at least 300 years old at that time and are at least 10% precious metal by weight; or
    • one of at least ten coins in the same find which are at least 300 years old at that time.
  3. Any object at least 200 years old when found which belongs to a class of objects of outstanding historical, archaeological or cultural importance that has been designated as treasure by the Secretary of State.[46] As of 2006, the following classes of objects had been so designated:[47]
    • Any object, other than a coin, any part of which is base metal (that is, not gold or silver),[48] which when found is one of at least two base metal objects in the same find which are of prehistoric date.[49]
    • Any object, other than a coin, which is of prehistoric date, and any part of which is gold or silver.
  4. Any object which would have been treasure trove if found before 24 September 1997.
  5. Any object which, when found, is part of the same find as:
    • an object within head (1), (2), (3) or (4) above found at the same time or earlier; or
    • an object found earlier which would be within head (1), (2) or (3) above if it had been found at the same time.

Treasure does not include unworked natural objects, or minerals extracted from a natural deposit, or objects that have been designated not to be treasure[50] by the Secretary of State.[51] Objects falling within the definition of wreck[52] are also not treasure.[39][53]

Coroners continue to have jurisdiction to inquire into any treasure found in their districts, and into who are or are suspected to be its finders.[54] Anyone finding an object he or she believes or has reasonable grounds to believe is treasure must notify the coroner for the district in which the object is found within 14 days starting from the day after the find or, if later, the day on which the finder first believes or has reason to believe the object is treasure.[55] Not doing so is an offence.[56] Inquests are held without a jury unless the coroner decides otherwise.[57] The coroner must notify the British Museum if his or her district is in England, the Department of the Environment if it is in Northern Ireland, or the National Museum Wales if it is in Wales.[58] The coroner must also take reasonable steps to notify any person who appears may have found the treasure; any person who, at the time it was found, occupied land which it appears may be where the treasure was found;[59] and any other interested persons, including persons involved in the find or having an interest in the land where the treasure was found at that time or since.[60] However, coroners still have no power to make any legal determination as to whether the finder, landowner or occupier of the land has title to the treasure. The courts have to resolve that issue, and may also review coroners' decisions in relation to treasure.[39][61]

When treasure has vested in the Crown and is to be transferred to a museum, the Secretary of State is required to determine whether a reward should be paid by the museum before the transfer[62] to the finder or any other person involved in the finding of the treasure, the occupier of the land at the time of the find, or any person who had an interest in the land at the time of the find or has had such an interest at any time since then.[63] If the Secretary of State determines that a reward should be paid, he or she must also determine the market value of the treasure (assisted by the Treasure Valuation Committee),[64] the amount of the reward (which cannot exceed the market value), to whom the reward should be paid and, if more than one person should be paid, how much each person should receive.[39][65]

Items from the Staffordshire hoard which were declared to be treasure in September 2009

In England and Wales, finders of objects that are not treasure or treasure trove are encouraged to voluntarily report them under the Portable Antiquities Scheme to finds liaison officers at county councils and local museums. Under the scheme, which started in September 1997, the officers examine finds and provide finders with information on them. They also record the finds, their functions, dates, materials and locations, and place this information into a database which can be analysed. The information on the findspots may be used to organize further research on the areas.[66] Non-treasure finds remain the property of their finders or landowners, who are free to dispose of them as they wish.[67]

On 5 July 2009 the largest single Anglo-Saxon hoard as of that date, consisting of over 1,500 gold and precious metal pieces, helmets and sword decorations tentatively dated to around 600–800 A.D., was discovered by Terry Herbert in Staffordshire, England. Herbert reported the find to his local Portable Antiquities Scheme officer, and on 24 September 2009 it was declared to be treasure by the South Staffordshire coroner.[68]

Scotland

The Treasure Act 1996 does not apply in Scotland.[69] Treasure trove in Scotland is dealt with under the common law of Scotland. The general rule that governs bona vacantia ("vacant goods") – that is, objects that are lost, forgotten or abandoned – is quod nullius est fit domini regis ("that which belongs to nobody becomes our Lord the King's [or Queen's]"),[70][71] and the law of treasure trove is a specialized application of that rule.[72] As in England, the Crown in Scotland has a prerogative right to treasure trove[73] for it is one of the regalia minora ("minor things of the King"),[74] that is, property rights which the Crown may exercise as it pleases and which it may alienate (transfer to another party).[75]

Cliffs of St. Ninian's Isle, photographed on 24 May 2006. The St. Ninian's Isle treasure, which is believed to date to about 800 A.D., was found on this island.

To qualify as treasure trove, an object must be precious, it must be hidden, and there must be no proof of its property or reasonable presumption of its former ownership. Unlike under English common law, treasure is not restricted to only gold and silver objects.[76] In 1888 a prehistoric jet necklace and some other articles found in Forfarshire were claimed by the authorities though they were neither gold nor silver. A compromise was eventually reached, and the find was deposited in the National Museum of Scotland.[13] In July 1958, a porpoise bone was found together with 28 other objects of silver alloy (12 brooches, seven bowls, a hanging bowl and other small metal work) underneath a stone slab marked with a cross on the floor of St. Ninian's Church on St. Ninian's Isle in the Shetlands. The objects were dated to about 800 A.D. A dispute having arisen over ownership of the objects between the Crown on the one hand, and the finder (the University of Aberdeen, which had carried out the archaeological excavation) and the landowner on the other, in Lord Advocate v. University of Aberdeen (1963) the Court of Session held that the bone should be regarded as treasure trove together with the silver objects.[77] Further, the requirement that an object must be "hidden" means no more than that it must be concealed; it refers to the condition in which the object was found and does not refer back to the intention which the owner of the object may have had in hiding it.[78] Finally, the requirement that there must be no reasonable presumption of former ownership means that it must not be possible to trace the ownership of the object to a person or family currently existing.[79] Even if an object does not qualify as treasure trove, it may be claimed by the Crown as bona vacantia.[80]

The Queen's and Lord Treasurer's Remembrancer (QLTR), an office held by the Crown Agent who is the senior officer of the Crown Office in Scotland, is responsible for claiming bona vacantia on behalf of the Crown in Scotland.[70] Finders of items are required to report such finds to the Crown Office or to the Treasure Trove Unit (TTU) at the National Museums of Scotland in Edinburgh. Each find is assessed by the Scottish Archaeological Finds Allocation Panel, which decides if the find is of national importance. If it is, the matter is referred by the TTU to the QLTR department at the Crown Office, which will inform the finder that it has accepted the Panel's recommendation to claim the objects in the find as treasure trove or bona vacantia.[81]

The Panel also recommends to the QLTR a reward for the find based on its current market value where appropriate, and the most appropriate museum in Scotland to allocate it to. The TTU then contacts all museums which have bid for finds to advise them of the Panel's recommendations. The museums have 14 days in which to accept or reject the proposed allocation and reward for the find. If the QLTR accepts the Panel's recommendations, it will notify the finder of the amount of any reward being paid and the museum that the find has been allocated to. The QLTR also asks the museum to pay the finder's reward.[81]

While a treasury order of 1886 made provision for the preservation of suitable objects in various national museums and payment of rewards to their finders,[13] the Crown is under no legal obligation to offer any rewards for treasure trove objects it has claimed. However, it usually does so, using the objects' market price as a guide. A reward may be withheld or reduced if the finder has inappropriately handled an object, for instance, damaged it by cleaning it or applying waxes and varnishes to it.[82] Finders may elect to waive their rewards. Rewards are not paid for finds occurring during organized fieldwork.[81]

United States

The law of treasure trove in the United States varies from state to state, but certain general conclusions may be drawn. To be treasure trove, an object must be of gold or silver.[83] Paper money is also deemed to be treasure trove since it represents gold or silver.[84] On the same reasoning, it might be imagined that coins and tokens in metals other than gold or silver are also included, but this has yet to be clearly established.[85] The object must be concealed for long enough so it is unlikely that the true owner will reappear to claim it.[86] The consensus appears to be that the object must be at least a few decades old.[87][88]

A majority of state courts, including those of Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, New York, Ohio, Oregon and Wisconsin, have ruled that the finder of treasure trove is entitled to it. The theory is that the English monarch's claim to treasure trove was based on a statutory enactment which replaced the finder's original right. When this statute was not re-enacted in the United States after its independence, the right to treasure trove reverted to the finder.[89]

In Idaho[90] and Tennessee[91] courts have decided that treasure trove belongs to the owner of the place where it was found, the rationale being to avoid rewarding trespassers. In one Pennsylvania case,[92] a lower court ruled that the common law did not vest treasure trove in the finder but in the sovereign, and awarded a find of US$92,800 cash to the state. However, this judgment was reversed by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania on the basis that it had not yet been decided if the law of treasure trove was part of Pennsylvania law.[93] The Supreme Court deliberately refrained from deciding the issue.[94]

Finds of money and lost property are dealt with by other states through legislation. These statutes usually require finders to report their finds to the police and transfer to their custody the objects. The police then advertise the finds to try and locate their true owner. If the objects remain unclaimed for a specified period of time, title in them vests in the finders.[95] New Jersey vests buried or hidden property in the landowner,[96] Indiana in the county,[97] Vermont in the township,[98] and Maine in the township and the finder equally.[99][100] In Louisiana, French codes have been followed, so half of a found object goes to the finder and the other half to the landowner.[13] The position in Puerto Rico, the laws of which are based on civil law, is similar.[101]

Finders who are trespassers generally lose all their rights to finds,[102] unless the trespass is regarded as "technical or trivial".[103][104]

Where the finder is an employee, most cases hold that the find should be awarded to the employer if it has a heightened legal obligation to take care of its customers' property, otherwise it should go to the employee.[105] A find occurring in a bank is generally awarded to the bank as the owner is likely to have been a bank customer and the bank has a fiduciary duty to try to reunite lost property with their owners.[106] For similar reasons, common carriers are preferred to passengers[107] and hotels to guests (but only where finds occur in guest rooms, not common areas).[108][109] The view has been taken that such a rule is suitable for recently misplaced objects as it provides the best chance for them to be reunited with their owners. However, it effectively delivers title of old artifacts to landowners, since the older an object is, the less likely it is that the original depositor will return to claim it. The rule is therefore of little or no relevance to objects of archaeological value.[32]

Due to the potential for a conflict of interest, police officers[110] and other persons working in law enforcement occupations,[111] and armed forces[112] are not entitled to finds in some states.[113]

By the Archaeological Resources Protection Act 1979,[114] finds more than a hundred years old on government land belong to the government. There is analogous state legislation. Special rules also apply to grave goods from Indian burials discovered on Federal and tribal lands under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act[115] enacted on 16 November 1990.[116]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ That is, the dialect of French that developed in England following the decline of the Anglo-Norman language.
  2. ^ "treasure-trove", OED Online (2nd ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50256952, retrieved 10 April 2008 .
  3. ^ See, for example, the following news articles: Rebecca Morelle (16 May 2007), Antarctic 'treasure trove' found, BBC News, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6661987.stm ("An extraordinarily diverse array of marine life has been discovered in the deep, dark waters around Antarctica."); Helen Briggs (11 March 2008), Cosmic 'treasure trove' revealed, BBC News, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7288463.stm ("A Nasa space probe measuring the oldest light in the Universe has found that cosmic neutrinos made up 10% of matter shortly after the Big Bang. ... Scientists say it is collecting a 'treasure trove' of information about the Universe's age, make-up and fate."); "The Titanic historical treasure trove discovered in a shoe box after death of last living survivor", Daily Mail, 28 March 2008, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=547450&in_page_id=1770 ("The moving story of one of the last survivors of the Titanic can be revealed for the first time after touching letters and documents were discovered after her death.")
  4. ^ "trove", OED Online (2nd ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50258855, retrieved 11 April 2008
  5. ^ "trove", Online Etymology Dictionary, archived from the original on 5 October 2007, http://web.archive.org/web/20071005104132/http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=trove, retrieved 8 July 2010 .
  6. ^ Courts-Martial, British Army, archived from the original on 8 July 2010, http://www.webcitation.org/5r49GEKOW, retrieved 8 July 2010 .
  7. ^ Clancy Sigal (19 June 2010), "Obama's liberal critics find their voice", The Guardian (London), http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/jun/17/barack-obama-liberal-critics .
  8. ^ For example, the case of Talbot v. Lewis (1834) 5 Tyr. 1 at 4, 149 English Reports 1175 at 1176, Court of Exchequer Chamber (England). The version of the case in the English Reports uses treasure-trove rather than treasures-trove.
  9. ^ For example, James Joyce (1993), Ulysses (The World's Classics ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 347, ISBN 9780192828668, http://books.google.com/books?id=WVofz29Hx9UC&pg=PA347 . This example has been considered by some later editors to be one of many errata present in divergent copies of the text; they prefer the singular treasure trove: see Philip Gaskell; Clive Hart (1989), Ulysses: A Review of Three Texts: Proposals for Alterations to the Texts of 1922, 1961, and 1984 [The Princess Grace Irish Library series; 4], Totowa, N.J.: Barnes & Noble Books, p. 35, ISBN 9780389208747, http://books.google.com/books?id=D_eVGERJmbcC&pg=PA35 .
  10. ^ Digest, 41. I. 31, 1: see Justinian I; Thomas Collett Sandars, transl. & annot. (1859), The Institutes of Justinian (2nd ed.), London: John W. Parker and Son, p. 190, http://books.google.com/?id=7LkLAAAAYAAJ .
  11. ^ a b R.W. Lee (1956 (2007 printing)), The Elements of Roman Law: With a Translation of the Institutes of Justinian (4th ed.), London: Sweet & Maxwell, p. 139 (§211: "Thesaurus (treasure)"), ISBN 978-0-421-01780-1 (pbk.) .
  12. ^ Institutes of Justinian, bk. II, tit. i, para. 39: see Sandars, Institutes of Justinian, p. 190; Lee, Elements of Roman Law, pp. 139, 145.
  13. ^ a b c d Hugh Chisholm, ed. (1910–1911), The Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press , 29 vols.
  14. ^ Lord Denning M.R. in Attorney-General of the Duchy of Lancaster v. G.E. Overton (Farms) Ltd. [1982] Ch. 277 at p. 285, C.A.
  15. ^ "plate, n.", OED Online, Oxford: Oxford University Press, March 2008, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50181027, retrieved 9 April 2008 .
  16. ^ "bullion2", OED Online (2nd ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50029165, retrieved 9 April 2008 .
  17. ^ In Attorney-General of the Duchy of Lancaster v. G.E. Overton (Farms) Ltd., p. 288, Lord Denning said: "'Coin' is a coin of gold or silver, 'plate' is something manufactured of it; 'bullion' is a lump of it. Anything which is not a gold or silver object is not treasure trove."
  18. ^ a b c d Edward Coke (1648), The Third Part of the Institutes of the Laws of England: Concerning High Treason, and other Pleas of the Crown, and Criminall Causes, London: M. Flesher, for W. Lee, & D. Pakeman, pp. 132–133 .
  19. ^ a b c d Lord Simonds, gen. ed. (1954), Halsbury's Laws of England, 7 (3rd ed.), London: Butterworths & Co., p. 540 , paras. 1161–1163.
  20. ^ Attorney-General of the Duchy of Lancaster v. G.E. Overton (Farms) Ltd. at pp. 291–292.
  21. ^ Henry de Bracton; Samuel E. Thorne (transl.) (1968–1977), Bracton on the Laws and Customs of England, Cambridge, Mass.; London: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press in association with the Selden Society , book 3, ch. 3, folio 118; Armory v. Delamirie (1722) 1 Stra. 505.
  22. ^ Rupert [Leo Scott] Bruce-Mitford (1975), The Sutton Hoo Ship-burial: Vol. 1, Excavations, Background, the Ship, Dating and Inventory, London: British Museum Publications, pp. 718–731, ISBN [[Special:BookSources/9780714113340, 9780714113319|9780714113340, 9780714113319]] .
  23. ^ Attorney-General v. Moore [1893] 1 Ch. 676 at 683; Attorney-General v. Trustees of the British Museum [1903] 2 Ch. 598.
  24. ^ John Rastell (1624), Les Termes de la Ley: Or, Certaine Difficult and Obscure Words and Termes of the Common Lawes of this Realme Expounded. [By John Rastell.] Now newly imprinted, and much inlarged and augmented, London: Company of Stationers, p. 565, OCLC 222436919 ; Joseph Chitty the Younger (1820), A Treatise on the Law of the Prerogatives of the Crown; and the Relative Duties and Rights of the Subject, London: J. Butterworth & Son, p. 152, OCLC 66375255 , cited with approval in Attorney-General v. Moore, p. 683, and Attorney-General v. Trustees of British Museum, p. 608.
  25. ^ R. v. Toole (1867) 11 Cox. C.C. 75; R. v. Thomas & Willett (1863) Le. & Ca. 313, 12 W.R. 108.
  26. ^ a b Lord Simonds, gen. ed. (1954), Halsbury's Laws of England, 8 (3rd ed.), London: Butterworths & Co., pp. 543–544 , paras. 1039–1040.
  27. ^ R. v. Thomas & Willett.
  28. ^ De Officio Coronatoris (Office of Coroner Act) 1276 (4 Edw. I, c. 2), which was declaratory of the common law. This statute was repealed by the Coroners Act 1887 (50 & 51 Vict., c. 71), s. 45, Sch. 3, but the coroner's jurisdiction as regards treasure trove was preserved by ss. 36 and 45(5) of the same Act. See also Bracton, book 3, ch. 6, fol. 122; John Britton; Francis Morgan Nichols, ed. (1865), Britton: The French Text Carefully Revised, with an English Translation, Introduction and Notes, Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 8, 18, 66, OCLC 25061529 ; Michael Dalton (1670), Officium Vicecomitum: The Office and Authority of Sherifs: Gathered out of the Statutes ... to which is Added an Appendix ... containing a Collection of the Statutes Touching Sheriffs made since Mr. Dalton's Writing ... With a New and Copious Table, wherein the Defects ... of the Old Table are Supplyed, [etc.], London: Printed by John Streater, James Flesher, and Henry Twyford, assigns of Richard Atkins and Edward Atkins, and are to be sold by George Sawbridge, [etc.], p. 376, OCLC 12414543 .
  29. ^ Edward Umfreville (1761), Lex Coronatoria: Or the Office and Duty of Coroners, [etc.], London: [s.n.], p. 536, OCLC 79529094 , 2 vols.; Attorney-General v. Moore, p. 683; Attorney-General of the Duchy of Lancaster v. G.E. Overton (Farms) Ltd., p. 287.
  30. ^ Attorney-General v. Moore; Attorney-General v. Trustees of British Museum.
  31. ^ Home Office Instruction 159308/14 dated 30 June 1925; Home Office Instruction 159308/47 dated 12 June 1931.
  32. ^ a b c Richard B. Cunningham (7 February 2000), "The slow death of treasure trove", Archaeology (New York, N.Y.: Archaeological Institute of America), ISSN 0003-8113, http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/trove/, retrieved 18 January 2008 .
  33. ^ For comments on difficulties caused by the law relating to treasure trove, see Roger Bland (1996), "Treasure Trove and the Case for Reform", Art, Antiquity and Law (Leicester: Institute of Art and Law): 11, ISSN 1362-2331 .
  34. ^ Treasure Act (1996 c. 24). See also the (PDF) Treasure Act 1996 Code of Practice (2nd Revision) England and Wales, London: Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 19 March 2007, archived from the original on 3 August 2007, http://web.archive.org/web/20070803211656/http://www.culture.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/85462661-3E18-470E-A889-20F892B87A26/0/TreasureAct1996CodeofPractice2ndRevision.pdf .
  35. ^ Treasure Act 1996 (Commencement No. 2) Order 1997 S.I. 1997/1977), art. 2.
  36. ^ Treasure Act, ss. 4(1), 4(4).
  37. ^ Treasure Act, s. 6(2).
  38. ^ Treasure Act, s. 6(3).
  39. ^ a b c d e Lord Mackay of Clashfern, ed. (2006 Reissue), Halsbury's Laws of England, 9(2) (4th ed.), London: LexisNexis Butterworths, pp. 623–629 , paras. 1077–1100.
  40. ^ Treasure Act, s. 1(1).
  41. ^ "Coin" includes any metal token which was, or can reasonably be assumed to have been, used or intended for use as or instead of money: Treasure Act, ss. 3(1), 3(3).
  42. ^ An object which can reasonably be taken to be at least a particular age is to be presumed to have been at least that age, unless shown not to be: Treasure Act, ss. 3(1), 3(6).
  43. ^ The figure of 10% was chosen because if an alloy has more than 10% gold or silver, it shows that one of those precious metals was deliberately added to the alloy. It also excludes objects which are merely plated with gold or silver: House of Commons Official Report SC F (Treasure Bill), 17 April 1996, cols. 10 and 11.
  44. ^ Treasure Act, ss. 3(1), 3(3).
  45. ^ An object is part of the same find as another object if (1) they are found together; (2) the other object was found earlier in the same place where they had been left together; or (3) the other object was found earlier in a different place, but they had been left together and had become separated before being found: Treasure Act, ss. 3(1), 3(4).
  46. ^ Treasure Act, s. 2(1).
  47. ^ Treasure (Designation) Order 2002 (S.I. 2002/2666), art. 3.
  48. ^ Treasure (Designation) Order 2002, art. 2.
  49. ^ An object is of prehistoric date if it dates from the Iron Age or any earlier period: Treasure (Designation) Order 2002, art. 2.
  50. ^ Under the Treasure Act, s. 2(2).
  51. ^ Treasure Act, s. 1(2). As at 2006, no designation had been made.
  52. ^ The term "wreck" includes flotsam (floating debris from a shipwreck), jetsam (goods thrown overboard from a ship in distress to lighten its load), lagan (goods found or left on the sea floor) and derelict (abandoned goods) found in or on the shores of the sea or any tidal water: Merchant Shipping Act 1995, s. 255(1), made applicable by the Treasure Act, ss. 3(1), 3(7).
  53. ^ Treasure Act, ss. 3(1), 3(7).
  54. ^ Coroners Act 1988 (1998 c. 13), s. 30.
  55. ^ Treasure Act, ss. 8(1), 8(2).
  56. ^ Treasure Act, s. 8(3).
  57. ^ Treasure Act, s. 7(4).
  58. ^ Treasure Act, ss. 9(2), 13(b).
  59. ^ Treasure Act, s. 9(3).
  60. ^ Treasure Act, ss. 9(5), 9(7).
  61. ^ Under the Coroners Act, s. 13, or by way of judicial review.
  62. ^ Treasure Act, ss. 10(1), 10(2).
  63. ^ Treasure Act, s. 10(5).
  64. ^ Treasure finds, Department for Culture, Media and Sport, archived from the original on 7 June 2007, http://web.archive.org/web/20070607003532/http://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/Cultural_property/the_treasure_act/treasure_finds.htm, retrieved 12 April 2008 .
  65. ^ Treasure Act, s. 10(3).
  66. ^ "The Scheme's history", Portable Antiquities Scheme, Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2006, archived from the original on 11 May 2008, http://web.archive.org/web/20080511115201/http://www.finds.org.uk/background/history.php, retrieved 14 April 2008 .
  67. ^ "Frequently asked questions about the Scheme", Portable Antiquities Scheme, Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2006, archived from the original on 1 May 2008, http://web.archive.org/web/20080501085407/http://www.finds.org.uk/involved/faq.php, retrieved 14 April 2008 .
  68. ^ Maev Kennedy (24 September 2009), "Largest ever hoard of Anglo-Saxon gold found in Staffordshire: First pieces of gold were found in a farm field by an amateur metal detector who lives alone on disability benefit", The Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/sep/24/anglo-saxon-treasure-hoard-gold-staffordshire-metal-detector ; "Anglo-Saxon gold: largest ever hoard officially declared treasure", The Daily Telegraph, 24 September 2009, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6225975/Anglo-Saxon-gold-largest-ever-hoard-officially-declared-treasure.html .
  69. ^ Treasure Act, s. 15(3).
  70. ^ Lord Patrick in Lord Advocate v. University of Aberdeen 1963 S.C. 533 at p. 554, Inner House, Court of Session, citing Sands v. Bell & Balfour (22 May 1810), F.C.; Lord Hunter in Lord Advocate v. University of Aberdeen, p. 549, Outer House, Court of Session, citing an earlier edition of George Joseph Bell; William Guthrie (1989), Principles of the Law of Scotland (10th, rev. and enl. ed.), Edinburgh; London: Law Society of Scotland; Butterworths, ISBN 9780406179036 , s. 1291(3).
  71. ^ Lord Mackintosh in Lord Advocate v. University of Aberdeen, p. 561, Outer House, citing an earlier edition of John Erskine of Carnock; James Badenach Nicolson (1989), An Institute of the Law of Scotland (8th ed.), Edinburgh: Law Society of Scotland, ISBN 9780406178978 , vol. 2, ch. 1, pp. 11–12.
  72. ^ Lord Hunter in Lord Advocate v. University of Aberdeen, p. 543, citing an earlier edition of Andrew MacDowall, Lord Bankton (1993), An Institute of the Laws of Scotland in Civil Rights: Vol. 1. with Observations upon the Agreement or Diversity between them and the Laws of England, Edinburgh: Stair Society, ISBN 9781872517056 , ch. 3, pp. 14–16 and 18.
  73. ^ Lord Hunter, Lord Advocate v. University of Aberdeen, p. 542, citing Thomas Craig; James Avon Clyde, transl. (1934), The Jus Feudale ... With an Appendix Containing the Books of the Feus, Edinburgh; London: William Hodge & Co., OCLC 15085710 , vol. 1, ch. 16, pp. 40 and 45; James Dalrymple, Viscount Stair; John S. More, ed. (1832), The Institutions of the Law of Scotland, Deduced from its Originals, and Collated with the Civil, Canon, and Feudal Laws, and with the Customs of Neighbouring Nations (2nd, rev., corr. & much enl. ed.), Edinburgh: Bell & Bradfute, OCLC 60714357 , vol. 2, ch. 3, p. 60, and vol. 3, ch. 3, p. 27; Bankton, An Institute of the Laws of Scotland in Civil Rights, vol. 1, ch. 3, p. 16; and Bell, Principles of the Law of Scotland, s. 1293.
  74. ^ Angus MacKay (29 March 2000), Justice and Home Affairs Committee Official Report [Meeting No 13, 2000], Scottish Parliament, archived from the original on 15 November 2005, http://web.archive.org/web/20051115202549/http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/historic/justice/or-00/ju00-1302.htm , col. 1010.
  75. ^ Lord Hunter in Lord Advocate v. University of Aberdeen, p. 548, Outer House, citing Bankton, An Institute of the Laws of Scotland in Civil Rights, vol. 1, ch. 8, p. 9.
  76. ^ Lord Mackintosh in Lord Advocate v. University of Aberdeen, p. 559, Inner House; see also Lord Patrick in the same case, p. 555.
  77. ^ Lord Mackintosh in Lord Advocate v. University of Aberdeen, pp. 559–560, Inner House.
  78. ^ Lord Hunter in Lord Advocate v. University of Aberdeen, p. 548, Outer House, citing More's notes to Stair, The Institutions of the Law of Scotland, vol. 1, p. cxlvi.
  79. ^ Lord Mackintosh in Lord Advocate v. University of Aberdeen, p. 559, Inner House.
  80. ^ a b c "What happens when a find is claimed as treasure trove?", Treasure Trove [Scotland], Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, http://www.treasuretrovescotland.co.uk/html/claimedfinds.asp, retrieved 13 April 2008 .
  81. ^ "Rewards to finders of treasure trove", Treasure Trove [Scotland], Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, archived from the original on 24 May 2007, http://web.archive.org/web/20070524175430/http://www.treasuretrovescotland.co.uk/html/rewards.asp, retrieved 13 April 2008 .
  82. ^ In Favorite v. Miller 407 A. 2d 974 (Connecticut, 1978), the court stated that the "strict definition" that limited treasure trove to gold and silver objects was "well-established" in US law.
  83. ^ Terry v. Lock 37 S.W. 3d 202 at p. 206 (Arkansas, 2001).
  84. ^ Favorite v. Miller, at p. 978 n. 2 (the court held it was unnecessary to decide the issue definitively).
  85. ^ Hill v. Schrunk 292 P. 2d 141 at p. 143 (Oregon, 1956).
  86. ^ In Terry v. Lock, 11 years was held to be too little time, whereas in Benjamin v. Lindner Aviation, Inc. 534 N.W. 2d 400 at p. 407 (Iowa, 1995) and Ritz v. Selma United Methodist Church 467 N.W. 2d 266 at p. 269 (Iowa, 1991) the view was taken that periods of 35 and 59 years respectively might be sufficient.
  87. ^ John M. Kleeberg (PDF), Treasure Trove Law in the United States, Numismatik.org – Texte und Materialien zur Numismatik [Texts and Materials about Numismatics], pp. 15–16, http://www.muenzgeschichte.ch/downloads/laws-usa.pdf, retrieved 13 April 2008 .
  88. ^ William Blackstone; Wayne Morrison (ed.) (2001), Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, 2, London: Cavendish, p. 296, ISBN 9781859414828 (set) and James Kent (1873), Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., ed., Commentaries on American Law, 2 (12th ed.), Boston, Mass.: Cambridge [printed], pp. 357–358, OCLC 794522 , cited in Kleeberg, p. 17.
  89. ^ Corliss v. Wenner 34 P. 3d 1100 (Idaho C.A., 2001).
  90. ^ Morgan v. Wiser 711 S.W. 2d 220 (Tennessee Court of Appeals, 1985).
  91. ^ In re Escheat of $92,800 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1948): see "Note, Treasure Trove – History and Development", Temple Law Quarterly 22: 326 at pp. 339–341, 1948–1949 .
  92. ^ In re Rogers 62 A. 2d 900 at p. 903 (Philadelphia, 1949).
  93. ^ Kleeberg, p. 18.
  94. ^ See, for example, Alaska Statutes §12.36.045; California Civil Code §2050; New York Personal Property Law §254 (Consolidated, 1988); Wisconsin Statutes and Annotations §§170.07–11.
  95. ^ New Jersey Statutes Annotated §46:30C-4.
  96. ^ Indiana Code §32-34-8-9.
  97. ^ Vermont Statutes Annotated, title 27, §1105.
  98. ^ Maine Revised Statutes Annotated, title 33, §1056.
  99. ^ Kleeberg, pp. 18–19.
  100. ^ Kleeberg, p. 14.
  101. ^ Barker v. Bates 23 Am. Dec. 678 (Massachusetts, 1832); Mitchell v. Oklahoma Cotton Growers' Ass'n 235 P. 597 at p. 599 (Oklahoma, 1925); Niederlehner v. Weatherley 54 N.E. 2d 312 at p. 315 (Ohio C.A., 1943); Bishop v. Ellsworth 234 N.E. 2d 49 (Illinois C.A., 1968); Favorite v. Miller; Morgan v. Wiser, pp. 222–223.
  102. ^ Favorite, p. 977.
  103. ^ Kleeberg. p. 19.
  104. ^ See, for example, Ray v. Flower Hospital 439 N.E. 2d 942 (Ohio C.A., 1981).
  105. ^ Foster v. Fiduciary Safe Deposit Co. 145 S.W. 139 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1912); Dennis v. Nw. National Bank 81 N.W. 2d 254 (Minnesota, 1957).
  106. ^ McDonald v. Railway Express Agency, Inc. 81 S.E. 2d 525 (Georgia Court of Appeals, 1954).
  107. ^ Jackson v. Steinburg 200 P. 2d 376 (Oregon, 1948); Flax v. Monticello Realty Co. 39 S.E. 2d 308 (Virginia, 1946).
  108. ^ Kleeberg, pp. 20–22.
  109. ^ Arizona Revised Statutes §12-941; Florida Statutes §705.104; New York Personal Property Law §256 (Consolidated, 1988); Washington Revised Code §63.21.070; Wisconsin Statutes and Annotations §170.105; In re Funds in the Possession of Conemaugh Township Supervisors 724 A. 2d 990 (Philadelphia Commw. Ct., 1999); Pennsylvania v. $7,000.00 in U.S. Currency 742 A. 2d 711 (Philadelphia Commw. Ct., 1999).
  110. ^ Farrare v. City of Pasco 843 P. 2d 1082 (Washington Court of Appeals, 1992) (baggage examiner in airport).
  111. ^ Morrison v. US 492 F. 2d 1219 (Ct. Cl., 1974).
  112. ^ Kleeberg, pp. 21–22.
  113. ^ 16 United States Code §§470aa–mm (2000).
  114. ^ 25 United States Code §§3001–3013 at §3002.
  115. ^ Kleeberg, pp. 22–23.

References

General

Cases

Further reading

Articles

United Kingdom

United States

Books

United Kingdom

External links

Look up treasure trove in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

This article incorporates text from the article "Treasure trove" by F.W.A., in the Encyclopædia Britannica, Eleventh Edition, a publication now in the public domain.

Categories: Personal property law of the United Kingdom | Personal property law of the United States | Roman law | Treasure troves | Treasure troves in the United Kingdom

 

The above information uses material from Wikipedia and is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
Some facts may not have been fully verified for accuracy. [Disclaimers]
This page was last archived by our server on Wed Jul 28 05:10:17 2010. [ refresh local cache ]
Displaying this page or its contents does not use any Wikimedia Foundation's resources.
The owners of this site proudly support the Wikimedia Foundation.

[Hide]▼
'Treasure Trove' News
The Let Out: SBTRKT & Cubic Zirconia - The FADER (blog)
thefader.com
The Let Out: SBTRKT & Cubic Zirconia - The FADER (blog)
Fri, 25 Jun 2010 21:03:26 GMT+00:00
The FADER (blog) Bubbling British producer/DJ SBTRKT's SoundCloud is a treasure trove of outre beats and flippy club bangers (listen to the awesome, bleeding-edge house ...
Google News Search: Treasure trove,
Sun Jun 27 15:06:13 2010
'Treasure Trove' Images
Treasure Trove 3D
wara.ru
Treasure Trove 3D
450px x 336px | 36.90kB

[source page]

Riba

Yahoo Images Search: Treasure trove,
Sat Jul 17 14:34:50 2010
'Treasure Trove' Blogs
Treasure trove | oracle
oracle.wordpress.com
Treasure trove | oracle

*su

Wed, 28 Jul 2010 03:58:57 GM

Treasure trove. . Posted on July 28, 2010 by *su. while packing my singapore room the other day, i chanced upon a little box of goodies . well, i must have thought them to be relatively worthy (to be kept) the last time i moved because i ...

Google Blogs Search: Treasure trove,
Wed Jul 28 04:52:27 2010
'Treasure Trove' Answers
Why is it OK for US to have a treasure trove of nuclear WEAPONS,but not others(US starts more wars than anyone?
Q. I dont get it, the US starts more wars and invades more countries than anyone else, shouldnt other countries sanction the US to DISARM its nuclear facilities? I think the US tries to make other countries disarm, so that way they will be the only country able to use nuclear weapons to threaten countries. I am a US citizen, but dont agree at all the way the country is going(into the SHI*TER) What do you think about this double standard?(no BLIND "American pride" talk or bravado) Yeah, they dont say it..."your leaders" just go ahead and do it then use the media outlets to cram it down citizens throats(sugar coated nice and easy) My God, listen to my fellow US citizens, they completely miss the point(unbelievable) What I am saying is WE… [cont.]
Asked by Gary - Fri Apr 2 01:04:34 2010 - - 11 Answers - 0 Comments

A. I agree with this part: "I dont get it, the US starts more wars and invades more countries than anyone else, shouldnt other countries sanction the US to DISARM its nuclear facilities? I think the US tries to make other countries disarm, so that way they will be the only country able to use nuclear weapons to threaten countries." It's so easy to fight and win with other countries that can't throw bombs(that they don't have) back at you.
Answered by 2Blunt4U - Fri Apr 2 01:19:18 2010

Yahoo Answers Search: Treasure trove,
Sun Jul 18 14:30:33 2010
[Hide]▲