1

(6.) 1 Sheppard signs a draft in the name of H. Turner, Junior, of Noah's Row, Hampton Court, there being no such place or person. The note is a false document.

(7.) 2 Thomas Brown authorizes B to sign a promissory note in the name of Thomas Brown, in order that it might be used as the note of a different and entirely fictitious Thomas Brown. This is a false document, whether B knew or not of the use for which the note was intended.

(8.) 3 B agrees to give A time for the payment of a debt, if A will get his mother-in-law, C. Watters (whose Christian name is unknown to B) to execute a promissory note. A gets his wife to sign the note in her maiden name, "A. Watters," and produces the note to B as the note of his mother-in-law. This is a false document.

(9.) 4 A, personating the Hon. A. A. Hope, the brother of the Earl of Hopetoun, draws a bill of exchange in the name of A. A. Hope on a person to whom he was known by that name, and who would have paid it if A had really been A. A. Hope, the brother of the Earl of Hopetoun. The bill is a false document, though the person on whom it was drawn knew and gave credit to the person who drew it.

(10.) 5 A gets B to make his mark to a deed by representing it to be a requisition to a person to stand for a seat in Parlia

ment. A does not make a false document.

(11.) A reads B a document by which an action is agreed to be settled for £9. B agrees to sign it and pays the £9. A, before B signs it, alters the 9 to 12. A does not make a false document.

(12.) In drawing up B's will, A omits legacy to C. A does not make a false document.

7

(13.) In drawing up B's will, A omits a devise of an estate for life to C, whereby the will operates to give D an estate in possession, and not in remainder, on B's death. A makes a false document.

1 Sheppard's Case, 1781, 1 Lea. 226.

2 R. v. Parkes, 1796, 2 Lea. 775.

3 R. v. Mahoney, 1854, 6 Cox, C. C. 487; 2 Russ. Cr. 635.

4 R. v. Hadfield, 1803, 2 Russ. Cr. 640. This is the well-known case

of the man who married the girl known as the Beauty of Buttermere.

5 R. v. Collins, 1843, 2 M. & R. 461. But see Mr. Greaves' remarks (2 Russ. Cr., 718, 4th ed. note). Mr. Greaves suggests, I think rightly, that this was a case of forgery by an innocent agent, B.

The

6 R. v. Chadwick, 1844, 2 M. & R. 545, and see 2 Russ. Cr. 626. case was decided on circuit by Rolfe, B. It is inconsistent with (b) and (c)

above, and seems unsatisfactory in itself.

71 Hawkins, P. C. 265. The distinction seems idle, as every omission of a legacy must increase the residue.

1

(14.) 1 A, personating B, draws a cheque in his assumed name of B, on a bank with which in his assumed name he had opened a genuine account by the actual payment of money to his credit. A does not make a false document.

2

(15.) A with intent to defraud, counterfeits the will of a living person. A is guilty of forgery.

(16.) 3 A, with intent to defraud, counterfeits a bill of exchange on unstamped paper, a stamp being necessary to the validity of such a bill. A commits forgery.

(17.) If a person is indicted for forging a bill of exchange, it must be shown that the document forged is a bill of exchange.

(18.) A is charged with forging a Bank of England note. If the resemblance of the forged to the real note is sufficient to deceive a common person, the conviction will not be quashed, because in certain important particulars the two documents differ.

6

(19.) A forges a note in these words, "I promise to pay for self and company of my bank in England." bank in England." A cannot be convicted of forging a Bank of England note.

1 Such, I submit, would be the law, though I know of no case in which the precise question has been determined. If the law is otherwise, a person passing by a false name would go half way to forgery every time he signed it. If a man passing by a false name drew many bills and regularly provided for them, and at last drew one for which he could not and ought to have known that he could not provide, I do not think he would be guilty of forgery any more than if he had used his own name. The use of a false name is no doubt a fact from which an intent to defraud may often be inferred, but which is a different matter. See the observations of Sir E. H. East on Aickles' Case, 1787, 2 East, P. C. 969. Since the first edition of this work was published the case of R. v. Martin, 1879, 5 Q. B. D. 34, has been decided, which, without going quite as far as Illustration (14), confirms the view suggested by it. In that case, Robert

Martin, for some reason which did not appear, drew in payment for a pony a cheque in the name of William Martin on a bank where he had ceased to have an account. This was held not to be forgery, though it was obtaining the pony by a false pretence. See, too, R. v. Dunn, 1765, 1 Leach, C. C. 59.

2 Murphy's Case, 1787, 2 East, P. C. 949.

3 Hawkeswood's Case, 1783, 2 East, P. C. 955.

4 See several cases collected in 2 Russ. Cr. 659-665, all of which turn on the question whether peculiarly worded instruments answer the statutory description given in the indictment.

5 Elliot's Case, 1777, 2 East, P. C. 951.

6 Jones's Case, 2 East, P. C. 952. He might however be convicted, if he changed such a document, of obtaining goods by false pretences.

The word document in Articles 384 and 385 does not include trade-marks or other signs, though they may be written or printed.

Illustrations.

(1.) A paints a picture, and intending to represent that it was painted by an eminent artist, writes that artist's name in the corner. This may be a cheat, but is not forgery.

(2.) 2 A prints a number of wrappers imitating advertisements in which egg powders were wrapped for sale by B their maker. He incloses spurious egg powders in the wrappers, and sells them. This is not forgery though it is obtaining money by false pretences.

1 R. v. Closs, 1858, D. & B. 460.

2 R. v. Smith, 1858, D. & B. 566. It would seem as if in this case the element wanting to complete the offence was the intent to defraud by means of the document, rather than the absence of a document capable of being forged; the offence lay in selling spurious as real powders. The wrappers without the powders could have no effect whatever. The essence of a forgery is, that the document itself should be made the instrument of fraud.

CHAPTER XLV

1 PUNISHMENT OF PARTICULAR FORGERIES

ARTICLE 387.

UTTER, RESEMBLE, FORGE."

2 IN this chapter the word "utter" includes " offer, dispose of and put off;" and when it is stated that any uttering is an offence, uttering with knowledge of the character of the thing uttered is intended.

The word "resembling" means " made or apparently intended to resemble."

The word "forge" includes "alter."

36 Having in possession" includes knowingly and wilfully having

(a.) in the possession or custody of any other person,

(b.) in any place for the use or benefit of the possessor or any other person.

13 Hist. Cr. Law, 180-8. The following forgeries among others have been made penal by the following statutes:--Forging certificates relating to quarantine, F. 6 Geo. 4, c. 78, s. 25; forging stamps on plate, F. 7 & 8 Vict. c. 22, s. 2; forging a seal, &c., purporting to be sealed, &c., under this Act, F. 8 & 9 Vict. c. 113, s. 4; forging a certificate under the Crown Cases Act, 1848, F. 11 & 12 Vict. c. 78, s. 6; forging a proclamation or certificate annexed thereto, &c., F. 31 & 32 Vict. c. 37, s. 4; forging certificates of transfer of stocks from England to Ireland, F. 33 & 34 Vict. c. 58, s. 6; forging a licence, &c., under the Explosives Act, 1875, M. 38 Vict. c. 17, s. 81; forging a statement in a certificate of competency under the Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1887 50 & 51 Vict. c. 58, s. 32.

2 These are mere drafting abridgments. In the Act the words "utter, offer, dispose of, and put off,” “resembling and made, or apparently intended to resemble," and "forge and utter are invariably coupled together. The meaning of the word "utter was much discussed in R. v. Ion, 1852, 2 Den. 475, in which it was held to be an uttering to produce a forged receipt for inspection, and in order to lead the person to whom it was produced to believe that the person producing it had paid his rents.

324 & 25 Vict. c. 98, s. 45, much abridged.

ARTICLE 388.

FORGERIES PUNISHABLE WITH PENAL SERVITUDE FOR LIFE.

Every one commits felony, and is liable upon conviction thereof to penal servitude for life, who

(a.) 1 forges, counterfeits, or utters any of the seals mentioned in the note 2 hereto; or

forges or counterfeits the stamp or impression of any such seal; or

utters any document or instrument whatsoever having thereon or affixed thereto :

(i.) the stamp or impression of any such forged or counterfeited seal; or

(ii) any forged or counterfeited stamp or impression resembling the stamp or impression of any of the seals mentioned in the note hereto; or

forges or utters any document or instrument having any of the said stamps or impressions thereon or affixed thereto; or

(b.) who forges or utters with intent to defraud,

3 any transfer of any stock mentioned in the note, any power of attorney for transferring any share or interest in any such stock, or for receiving dividends thereon;

5 any India bond, or any bond, debenture, or security issued or made under the authority of any Act of Parliament relating to India, or any indorsement thereon or assignment thereof;

1 24 & 25 Vict. c. 98, s. 1.

2 The Great Seal of the United Kingdom, Her Majesty's Privy Seal, any Privy Signet of Her Majesty, Her Majesty's Royal Sign Manual, any of Her Majesty's seals appointed by the 24th Article of the Union between England and Scotland, to be kept, used, and continued in Scotland, the Great Seal of Ireland and the Privy Seal of Ireland.

3 24 & 25 Vict. c. 98, s. 2.

4 66

Any share or interest of or in any stock, annuity, or other public fund which now is or hereafter may be transferable at the Bank of England, or at the Bank of Ireland, or of or in the capital stock of any body corporate, company, or society which now is or hereafter may be established by charter, or by, under, or by virtue of any Act of Parliament."

524 & 25 Vict. c. 98, s. 7.