¶1 Where a person is found in possession of goods 'which have recently been stolen, there is a presumption of law .that he is guilty of the theft; and it is not necessary for the •State to show that any other suspicious circumstance accompanied such possession.
¶2 This presumption may be rebutted by the defendant, but if ,he does not satisfactorily account for such possession, by show-ring that he received the goods honestly, a jury ought to c'on.vict him of larceny. Roscoe 18; State v. Williams, 9 Ire. 140.
¶3 The charge of his Honor in this case, was more liberal than the law allows toward the defendant; and he has no right to ■complain.
¶4 . Pee Curiam. Judgment affirmed.