Excerpt: ...of his treasures, which would be a rifled case without it As is natural to one who will not do right, he began to argue the moral question, treating it as a point of casuistry that troubled the mind of the girl. "I don't know that, Dawtie " he said. "It is not likely that the person that has the cup, whoever he may be-that is, if the cup be still in existence-is the same who stole it; and it would hardly be justice to punish the innocent for the guilty?-as would be the case, if, supposing I had bought the cup, I had to lose the money I paid for it. Should the man who had not taken care of his cup have his fault condoned at my expense? Did he not deserve, the many might say, to be so punished, placing huge temptation in the path of the needy, to the loss of their precious souls, and letting a priceless thing go loose in the world, to work ruin to whoever might innocently buy it?" His logic did not serve to show him the falsehood of his reasoning, for his heart was in the lie. "Ought I or he," he went on, "to be punished because he kept the thing ill? And how far would the quixotic obligation descend? A score of righteous men may by this time have bought and sold the cup -is it some demon-talisman, that the last must meet the penalty, when the original owner, or some descendant of the man who lost it, chooses to claim it? For anything we know, he may himself have pocketed the price of the rumored theft Can you not see it would be a flagrant injustice?-fit indeed to put an end to all buying and selling It would annihilate transfer of property Possession would mean only strength to keep, and the world would fall into confusion." "It would be hard, I grant," confessed Dawtie; "but the man who has it ought at least to give the head of the family in which it had been the chance of buying it back at the price it cost him. If he could not buy it back-then the thing would have to be thought over." "I confess I don't see the thing," returned the...