1831. REX บ. SMITH. a parchment to be used as an indenture, which would be liable to stamp duty when complete. The Jury found the prisoner guilty. In answer to the questions of the learned Judge, they said-1st. That they had no means of knowing whether the impressions were made before or since the 55th Geo. 3. 2nd. That they acquitted the prisoner of fraudulent intent at the time he cut the stamps from the skins at the stamp office. 3rd. That they found him guilty of fraudulent intent at the time he separated the blue paper from the small piece of parchment to which it was glued. 4th. That they found him guilty of intending to apply the stamp to a parchment which was intended to be used as an indenture. Mr. Justice BOSANQUET directed a verdict of guilty to be entered on the 5th and 6th counts, and reserved the case for the opinion of the Judges. Denman, A. G., Gurney, Alley, and R. Scarlett, for the prosecution. Adolphus, Manning, and C. Phillips, for the defence. [Attornies-Timms, and Harmer.] THIS case was afterwards considered by the Fifteen Judges, who held the conviction right. By the stat. 55 Geo. 3, c. 184, s. 7, it is enacted-" That if any person shall forge or counterfeit, or cause or procure to be forged or counterfeited, any stamp or die, or any part of any stamp or die, which shall have been provided, made, or used, in pursuance of this act, or in pursuance of any former act or acts relating to any stamp duty or duties, or shall forge, counterfeit, or resemble, or cause or procure to be forged, counterfeit. ed, or resembled, the impression or any part of the impression of any such stamp or die as aforesaid, upon any vellum, parchment, or paper, or shall stamp or mark, or cause or procure to be stamped or marked, any vellum, parchment, or paper, with any such forged or counterfeited stamp or die, or part of any stamp or die as aforesaid, with intent to defraud his Majesty, his heirs or successors, of any of the duties hereby granted, or any part thereof; or if any person shall utter or sell, or expose to sale, any vellum, parchment, or paper, having thereupon the impression of any such forged or counterfeited stamp or die, or part of any stamp or die, or any such forged, counterfeited, or resembled impression, or part of impression, as aforesaid, knowing the same respectively to be forged, counterfeited, or resembled; or if any person shall privately and secretly use any stamp or die which shall have been so provided, made, or used, as aforesaid, with intent to defraud his Majesty, his heirs, or successors, of any of the said duties, or any part thereof; or if any person shall fraudulently cut, tear, or get off, or cause or procure to be cut, torn, or got off, the impression of any stamp or die which shall have been provided, made, or used, in pursuance of this or any former act, for expressing or denoting any duty or duties under the care and management of the commissioners of stamps, or any part of such duty or duties, from any vellum, parchment, or paper whatsoever, with intent to use the same for or upon any other vellum, parchment, or paper, or any instrument or writing charged or chargeable with any of the duties hereby granted; then and in every such case every per son so offending, and every person knowingly and wilfully aiding, abetting, or assisting any person or persons in committing any such offence as aforesaid, and being thereof lawfully convicted, shall be adjudged guilty of felony, and shall suffer death as a felon, without benefit of clergy." And by the stat. 12 Geo. 3, c. 48, s. 1, it is enacted, "That if any person or persons, at any time after the 1st day of August, 1772, shall write or engross, or cause to be written or engrossed, either the whole, or any part of any writ, mandate, bond, affidavit, or other writing, matter, or thing whatsoever, in respect whereof any duty is or shall be payable by any act or acts made, or to be made, in that behalf, on the whole or any part of any piece of vellum, parchment, or paper, whereon there shall have been before written any other writ, bond, mandate, affidavit, or other matter or thing, in respect whereof any duty was or shall be payable as aforesaid, before such vellum, parchment, or paper, shall have been again marked or stamped, according to the said acts; or shall fraudulently erase or scrape out, or cause to be erased or scraped out, the name or names of any person or persons, or any sum, date, or other thing, written in such writ, mandate, affidavit, bond, or other writing, matter, or thing, as aforesaid; or fraudulently cut, tear, or get off, any mark or stamp, in respect whereof, or whereby, any duties are or shall be payable, or denoted to be paid or payable as aforesaid, from any piece of vellum, parchment, paper, playing ards, outside paper of any parcel 1831. REX v. SMITH. 1831. REX v. SMITH. or pack of playing cards, or any jesty's plantations beyond the seas, for a term not exceeding seven years, according to the laws in force for the transportation of felons: and if any such person or persons so convicted or transported shall voluntarily escape or break prison, or return from transportation before the expiration of the time for which he, she, or they shall be so transported as aforesaid, such person or persons, being thereof lawfully convicted, shall suffer death as a felon, without benefit of clergy, and shall be tried for such felony in the county where he, she, or they shall be apprehended." BEFORE THE HON. CHARLES EWAN LAW, COMMON SERJEANT. Dec. 11th. A forged paper was in the fol 11-4 superfine counterpanes. T. Da REX v. CULLen. THE prisoner was indicted for that he, on &c., at &c., feloniously did utter, dispose of, and put off to one John Smith, a certain forged request for the delivery of goods, which is as follows:-" Per bearer, two 11-4 suvis, E. Twell." perfine counterpanes. T. Davis, E. Twell," with intent to defraud John Lainson and others, he the said Charles Cullen well knowing the said request to be forged. The It was not ad dressed to any person-Held bythe 15Judges, that it was nei ther an order nor a request within the stat. indictment also contained a count, calling the instrument a forged order. 1 Will. 4, c. 66, s. 10, (the forgery consolidation act). The prisoner having been found guilty on this and on other charges of the same description, which, by the 1 Will. 4, c. 66, s. 10 (a), the act upon which the indictment was framed, rendered him liable to be transported for life. F. V. Lee, for the prisoner, objected, in arrest of judgment, that the instrument set out in the indictment was neither an "order" nor "request," within the terms of the act of Parliament. First, it was not an order, because it was not directed to any person; and to be so, it ought not only to purport to be signed by some person who might command the delivery of the goods; but it ought also to be directed to a person who was compellable to obey it. And he cited Rex v. Clinch (b), Rex v. Williams (c), Rex v. Mitchell (d). Secondly, it was not a request, for a request was the act of asking something from another, which, in this case, was not done, for although the act of presenting the paper, in effect, might be so, yet in words it was not; and he, therefore, submitted it fell within the principle of the above decisions. The prosecutor stated, that such orders were common in the trade. (a) By which it is enacted, "That if any person shall forge or alter, or shall offer, utter, dispose of, or put off, knowing the same to be forged or altered, any deed, bond, or writing obligatory, or any court-roll or copy of any court-roll relating to any copyhhold or customary estate, or any acquittance or receipt either for money or goods, or any accountable receipt either for money or goods, or for any note, bill, or other security for payment of money, or any warrant, order, or request for the delivery or transfer of goods, or for the de livery of any note, bill, or other (b) 2 East, P. C. 938. 1831. REX V. CULLEN. 1831. REX บ. CULLEN. The COMMON SERJEANT thought, upon the authority of the cases cited, that it was not an order; but he had some doubts whether it was not a request; and, as the point was new, and of some importance to commercial men, he said he would submit it to the Fifteen Judges; which he did, and they were of opinion that the conviction was improper, as the instrument was neither an order nor request within the 1 Will. 4, c. 60, s. 10. The prisoner was discharged. OLD BAILEY JULY SESSION, 1831, BEFORE MR. JUSTICE GASELEE AND MR. JUSTICE J. PARKE. July 2nd. On an indict REX . BACkler. FORGERY. The first count of the indictment charged ment for forging the prisoner with forging a check, with intent to defraud a check, pur porting to be drawn by G. A. is a fictitious Thomas Blackwell and another. There was a second count for uttering with the like intent; and two similar counts, charging the forgery and uttering to be with intent to defraud Samuel Jones Loyd and others. The check was as follows: 66 No. 24. No. 23, Lothbury, London, May 24, 1831. Messrs. Jones Loyd & Company, Pay to £10 0 0 Newman, Esq. or bearer, ten pounds. It appeared that the prisoner went to Mr. Blackwell, and asked change for the check for Mr. Newman of Soho Square, in whose service he stated himself to have been for three months. The prisoner also said, that Mr. New |
