Coins or money similar to the money stolen, found in the stockings of the accused soon after the theft, are competent to go in evidence as tending to identify the money charged to have been stolen.63

67 Com. vs. Riggs, 14 Gray (Ma6s.), 376. 58 State vs. Ditton, 48 Iowa, 677;

Yarbourough vs. State, 41

Ala. 405. 59 Robinson vs. State, 48 S. W.

(Tex. Cr. App.), 176; Hughes Cr. Law, Sec. 461. 60 3 Greenl. Ev.. Sec. 15; Shriedley vs. State, 23 Ohio St., 130. 61 Defrese vs. State, 3 Huisk (Tenn.), 53.

62 People vs. Hartman, 62 Cal., 562;

Barton vs. State, 18 Ohio, 221; Snapp vs. Com., 82 Ky., 173; Thorn vs. State (Tex. Cr. App.), 48 S. W., 622.

63 People vs. Piggott, 126 Cal., 509.

So also imitation jewelry, such as an imitation diamond ring, found in the valise of the accused may be introduced in evidence on a charge of the larceny of a diamond ring by substituting a cheap imitation, under the pretense of wanting to buy a diamond ring.64