Not forgery to fill up signed bill stamp. written be falsehood (1); or to fill up a bill-stamp, FORGERY. sometimes pro It may be mentioned here, that it is common to Minor forgeries prosecute cases in which forgeries are made and used, secuted as fraud. under the lower denominations of falsehood and fraud, where the fraud is not heinous. HOODS BY WRIT. II. FALSEHOODS BY THE USE OF WRIT, WHICH ARE MINOR FALSELESS HEINOUS THAN FORGERIES.-Such are false seisins by notaries (4), returns by messengers of executions Seisins. setting forth proceedings which never took place (5), Executions. signatures to executions by witnesses who were not present (6), or false certificates of marriage by clergy- Certificates of men, or of banns by session-clerks (7). Although, in age. such cases, where there is no false signature, the crime is not forgery, still the use of them is criminal (8). banns or marri deed. of summons. To antedate a deed for a fraudulent purpose (9), or Ante-dating to serve a pretended copy of a summons, there being Pretended copy no such summons in existence (10); or to use fabricated letters, certificates, or the like, though not signed, being written in the third person, e.g., "Mr Letters written "Brown begs to recommend the bearer as a deserving person. 1 Simon Fraser, H.C., Nov. 21st and Dec. 5th 1859; 3 Irv. 467 and 32 S. J. 148. 2 Alison i. 379, 380. 3 See Thomas Forgan, Inverness, April 25th 1871; 2 Couper 30 and 43 S. J. 427 and 8 S. L. R. 493. 4 Hume i. 158, 159, referring to 1540, c. 80, and to the cases of Innes: Cook: Norval: and Moscrop. 5 Hume i. 158, and case of Strachan there. in the third MINOR FALSE HOODS BY WRIT. Flash notes. UTTERING. object of charity" (1); or to pass off fictitious banknotes, though there be no signatures upon them (2), are all criminal acts. As regards both classes of false writings, it is essential to the completion of the crime of falsehood (except in certain statutory cases), that the writing be feloniously used as genuine (3). In practice the forgery or falsehood and the uttering are charged separately, but this is only to provide for the case of the utterUttering alone ing alone being proved (4); felonious uttering being sufficient to constitute guilt, though the origin of the forgery be unknown (5). is a crime. Any use is uttering. preservation is not. The uttering is complete by any attempt to use the document, however unsuccessful, or however soon But giving for it is withdrawn (6). Merely giving it to another for preservation, or to look at, is not uttering (7). But to offer a cheque for payment, or a bill to be discounted, either personally or by another hand (8), or to dispatch the writing by post (9), or to register it either for diligence, or in any case where Presenting cheque. Posting writ. 1 Hume i. 174, cases of Branan and others and Brown in note 1. -Alison i. 366, 367, and case of Hill there.-Robert Barclay, Nov. 8th 1833; Bell's Notes 49. 2 Alex. Lindsay and Rob. Struthers, H.C., Nov. 19th 1838; 2 Swin. 198 and Bell's Notes 64. 3 Hume i. 148, and case of Ramsay and Roy in note 3.-i. 154.Alison i. 401, 402, and cases of Anderson and Devlin there. - Geo. S. Edwards, Aberdeen, Nov. 19th 1827; Shaw 194. 4 Hume i. 149, 150.-Whether this practice is strictly logical may be doubted. 5 Hume i. 155, 156, and case of M'Haffee there, and cases of M'Cuillin : Bell: M'Neil and O'Neil: Hughan: Wood or Woods: M'Dougal: Macneil and Mackay: and Wilson or Moore in note 2.Alison i. 398. 6 Act 1621, c. 22.—Hume i. 153, 154, and cases of Mitchell: Sloan: and Heck or Affleck in note 1.Alison i. 402, 403. 7 See the case of John Reid, Sept. 23d 1841; Bell's Notes 58, where a person having forged another's name as joint acceptor on a bill-stamp, handed it to a third party, only in order that he might sign as drawer and endorser, and where the indictment was withdrawn, and a new one served, in which this proceeding was only set forth as part of the narrative. -See also John Allan, Perth, April 15th 1834; 6 S. J. 321. 8 John Reid, H.C., Jan. 8th 1842; 1 Broun 21 and Bell's Notes 57. 9 Will. Harvey, H.C., Feb. 22d 1835; 13 Shaw's Session Cases 1170 and Bell's Notes 57.-Will. Jeffrey, H.C., May 16th 1842; 1 Broun 337.John Smith, H.C., Jan. 16th 1871; 2 Couper 1 and 43 S. J. 225 and 8 S. L. R. 331. registration is required by law to give effect to UTTERING. the deed, completes the crime. It has not been Registration. decided whether registration for preservation consti tutes uttering (1). bill stamp with. It is uttering to present a blank bill stamp with Uttering blank forged signatures upon it, that the person to whom forged signature. it is delivered may fill up and discount the bill, or keep it as a security (2). But it has not been decided whether the crime is complete if it be merely handed to another to be written out (3); and it is difficult to see how this alone could complete the crime. another's reposi after his death. Producing ing innocent The uttering is complete if the writ be placed in Deed placed in another's repositories, and after his decease the person tories to be used who placed it there allow it to be used as a genuine deed (4), or if it be produced in a judicial process, Prgery in Court. whether this be done by the party interested, or by any one instructed by him (5). It is common for the Forger employguilty party to employ an innocent person to utter, person to utter. as by sending him to cash a forged cheque, or to change a false note. In all the cases that have occurred, the document was presented by the innocent agent, and accordingly the presentation has been set forth as part of the narrative of the uttering (6). But should the case arise of the innocent person being Is crime comstopped before he has actually presented it, or being forgery handed suspicious and handing it over to the authorities, it is person. thought that the giving of the forgery to the innocent person would be held sufficient uttering (7). 1 Hume i. 154.-Alison i. 403.More ii. 390. 2 Michael Steedman, H. C., Feb. 27th 1854; 1 Irv 360. -John Potter, Stirling, April 11th 1854; 1 Irv. 458. James Alexander, Inverness, Sept. 26th 1865 (unreported). 3 Case of Steedman, supra. 4 James Shepherd, Perth, April 26th 1842; 1 Broun 325 and Bell's Notes 58. Francis Adams, H.C., Sept. 1st a 1820; Shaw 21.-Jas. Bonella, 6 Jas. Aitchison, Jan. 26th 1835; 7 Mr Bell, in his notes, p. 57, quotes a case-Rob. Meldrum and Catherine Reid, May 8th 1838-as tending to show that a forger may utter to an accomplice who is in the knowledge of the deed being forged. But this is plainly incor pleted when to innocent UTTERING. Whether the giving or posting of the false writ to Giving to agent an agent, to be produced in a judicial proceeding, be to be produced in Court. Document must be put out of possession. had authority to utter as genuine? enough, is a more difficult question, and it would appear must be answered in the negative (1); as an agent is held to be the party himself, and therefore until he acts upon his instructions, there is no uttering. In uttering the writ must be put out of the possession of the delinquent. Where a person person in handing a bill to another, let it fall to the ground, and was apprehended before it could be taken up, the uttering was held incomplete (2). The uttering must be with fraudulent intent (3). Can person who A nice question was raised in one case (4), whether sign, feloniously a person can feloniously utter as genuine a document to which he has attached another person's signature, but with that person's authority, he intending to induce the person to whom it is uttered to receive it as having the genuine signature of the mandant upon it. Lord Cockburn's MSS. contain the following note:" But if the jury believe that both (5) gave "authority, was it a criminal uttering quoad the rect. Criminal uttering of a forgery 1 Francis Adams, Sept. 1st 1820; Shaw 21.-Alex. Baillie, March 14th 1825; Shaw 131.-Geo. Wilson junr., Aberdeen, May 1st 1861; 4 Irv. 42.-Alison i. 403, 404 contra. Sir Archibald Alison's statement of the cases of Adams and Baillie is not quite borne out by the reports as given by Hume and Shaw. He also erroneously states the case of Baillie to be unreported. 2 Alison i. 402, case of Devlin there. 3 Will. Waiters, Inverness, Sept. 23d 1836; 1 Swin. 273 and Bell's Notes 58. 4 David Ross, Inverness, April 18th 1844; (Lord Cockburn's MSS.) 5 There were two persons who were said to have given authority to sign. "Bank, which relied on the names being genuine? UTTERING. "I told the jury that if they believed that the prisoner had mistaken his rights and his duty, and "said nothing to the Bank innocently, then they "could not convict; but that if they thought that he was consciously misleading the Bank, then his having signed their names by their permission, was "defence." containing Although there must be a fraudulent intent, the uttering need not have the immediate effect of injuring another. Uttering by posting a letter containing Posting letter a false writ, is complete, though the letter never reach forgery. the addressee (1), or though the person to whom it is addressed does not use it (2). It might be a relevant defence that the sending of the document was for preservation, and not that it might be used, but the burden of proof of this would be on the accused. which forgery consequence. Lastly, it is not necessary that the writing should be Purpose for uttered for a purpose similar to that for which a docu- used of no ment such as it purports to be, is ordinarily used. In the case already noticed, of a forged diploma being used to disprove a charge of perjury, the objection that this use was not germane to the plain intent of the instrument, and that therefore it was not the uttering of a forgery, was repelled (3). Again, a bill was held uttered by being used to enable a creditor to concur with the accused in applying for sequestration (4). CHEATING. III. There are numberless cases of fraud and cheat- FRAUD AND ing which fall under the general names of Falsehood 1 Will. Hervey, H.C., Feb. 22d 1835; 13 Shaw's Session Cases 1170 and Bell's Notes 57.-Will. Jeffrey, H.C., May 16th 1842; 1 Broun 337 and Bell's Notes 57.-Daniel Taylor, H.C., May 16th 1853; 1 Irv. 230 and 25 S. J. 403 (Lord Cockburn's opinion.) 2 John Smith, H.C., Jan. 16th 1871; 2 Couper 1 and 43 S. J. 225 and 8 S. L. R. 331. 3 Jas. Myles, H.C., Jan. 7th 1848; Ark. 400. 4 Jas. Bonella, H.C., Feb. 13th 1843; 1 Broun 517 and Bell's Notes 59. |