A rich landowner, proprietor of a large steam-mill, Buyanov by name, of whom some Chinese had hired a warehouse for their goods, when the owners of the property stored there had been drowned, put up a wooden hoarding between the warehouse and the next house to it, in order that he might possess himself of the dead men’s property unobserved by inquisitive eyes. Another man of property, also named Buyanov, and a cousin of the above, made a subterranean passage from his own dwelling to the shop of a Chinaman who had lived with him, and conveyed the property of the deceased to his own premises. And a tradesman named Prikastshikov simply had the wares of a Chinaman who had hired a shop from him carried on waggons through by-streets to his own shop in a different part of the town, having made use of a duplicate key which was in his possession. These two last cases came before the courts in Blagovèstshensk, and the perpetrators of the thefts were punished; but the great majority of these instances of plunder were never revealed, chiefly because the police and the authorities were themselves interested in shielding the guilty. After the drowning of the Chinese it was decided that the police should take charge of their property till legal heirship should be established, and this proved a source of much profit to the police officials, as may be guessed when the character of our police is taken into account, together with the fact that in the Chinese quarter were some hundreds of shops and warehouses containing valuables worth many millions. After the war the police authorities in a few cases surrendered property (for a substantial consideration, of course, sometimes amounting nearly to the value of the goods themselves,) to Chinese who proved themselves to be the owners, having fortunately survived, or their legitimate representatives; but it depended entirely upon the ransom offered whether the police would recognise or reject such claims, not upon any legal formalities. The calm way in which high officials appropriated property left in their charge was exemplified by the case of the deputy-_prìstav_ Shabanov, surprised by a gentleman, (a justice of the peace who had been appointed guardian of a Chinese property,) as he was in the act of removing several cartloads of the goods in question from the place where they were stored. Although this aroused considerable comment, and even came before the courts, the trial was without result, and Shabanov was not even removed from his position as deputy-_prìstav_. * * * * *