Act of February 23, 1819—January 1, 1820. R. C. ch. 154. any coin, current within this commonwealth, whether made current by law‡‡ or usage; or any note or bill of the Bank of Virginia, or the Farmers Bank of Virginia, or any other bank which now is or hereafter may be chartered in Virginia;' or any note or bill of the Bank of the United States,(10) 'or any other bank which now is or hereafter may be chartered by the government of the United States, or by the government of any state, (2) territory or district thereof;' or shall falsely make or cause or procure to be made, or willingly act or assist in falsely making, any base coin; or any note purporting to be the note of a banking company, when there is no such banking company in existence;'(1) with intention to injure or defraud any person or persons, body po court were of opinion, that until the finishing touch was given to the metal by the counterfeiter-until every thing was done, that was by him deemed requisite to perfect the metal for circulation-it was in an incomplete state, and, therefore, were of opinion that the evidence did support the indictment. Rasnick v. The Com. gen. ct. June T. 1823, 2 Virg. Cas. 356. An indictment, charging a prisoner with the offences of falsely making, forging and counterfeiting; of causing and procuring to be falsely made, forged and counterfeited; and of willingly acting and assisting in the said false making, forging and counterfeiting, is good, though all of these charges are contained in a single count; the words of the act being pursued, and there being a general verdict of guilty, judgment ought not to be arrested on the ground that the offences are distinct. If the procurer or aiders are not present, they are accessaries, and must be indicted specifically as such; where they are present, they are principals in the second degree, and by the act, equally guilty with the principal in the first degree; and, therefore, there can be no objection to uniting in one count such an offence with that of principal in first degree. After verdict on such indictment, the count must be understood as charging the procurer and aiders as principals in the second degree. Ib. Brown's case, gen. ct. November T. 1830, 2 Leigh, 769. The possession of forged bank notes, together with the plates and other implements used in forging them, is prima facie evidence that the person so found in possession, did feloniously forge them. And such possession is prima facie evidence that the forgery was committed in the place where such possession was first discovered. Saml. D. Spencer's case, gen. court, November T. 1830, 2 Leigh, 751; and as to last point, see Britton's case, 2 Mason's R. 470, &c. In a case for uttering counterfeit coin, in order to prove the guilty knowledge,-evidence of the possession of other counterfeit coin, four days subsequent to the uttering, is admissible. Jno. Harrison's case, cor. Taunton, J. and Alderson, J. concurring. Hindmarsh, ed. Deacon's Cr. L. 2 vol. 1602. See U. States v. Moses, 4 Wash. C. C. R. 6 726, and U. States v. Craig, 4 Wash. C. C. R. 729. If several persons make distinct parts of a forged instrument, though none of them knows by whom the other parts are executed, every one is a principal. Rex v. Kirkwood, Moo. C. C. R. 304; Rex v. Dade, Moo. C. C. R. 307, and Bingley's case, Russ. & Ryan's Cro. C. R. 446. A person charged "with having feloniously forged and counterfeited, and passed a single bill or note purporting to be a note," &c., and sent on by examining court for said offence. In the superior court an indictment was found against him containing three counts. The 1st, that he "feloniously did falsely make, forge and counterfeit, and falsely did cause and procure to be falsely made, forged and counterfeited, and feloniously did willingly act and assist in the false making, forging and counterfeiting a certain false writing, &c. 2d, that he feloniously did utter and publish, and employ as true for his own benefit, a certain other false, forged, &c., with intent to injure W. D. 3d, like 2d, with intent to injure W. S.; on the prisoner's arraignment he moved to quash each count, and produced the record of the examining court. Motion overruled and sanctioned by gen. court, November T. 1828. Huffman v. The Com. 6 Rand. 685; Brown's case, gen. ct., November T. 1830, 2 Leigh, 769. See The State v. Antonio, 2 Const. R. (S. C.) 776, as to the state jurisdiction. (10) It is felony, under this act, to pass a counterfeit note of the bank of the United States, dated at a time when the bank existed, though at the time of passing the note, the charter of the bank had expired. John Buckland's case, 8 Leigh, 732. (2) The false uttering of a forged bank note of another state or district, may be prosecuted as the false uttering of a “promissory note for the payment of money," under the stat. of 1794. Com. v. Step. Hensley, gen. ct., June T. 1819, 2 Virg. Ĉas. 149. (1) See The Com. v. Speer, gen. ct., June T. 1817, 2 Virg. Cases, 65. A note of an unchartered bank is not embraced by the 1st sec. of act 23d February 1819, but is clearly embraced by the 4th sec. Murray's case, 5 Leigh, 720. Act of February 23, 1819—January 1, 1820. R. C. ch. 154. litic or corporate; (a) or shall with the like intent, pass(e) or tender, or offer to pass or exchange, or cause or procure(d) to be offered to be passed or exchanged, any such false, forged, counterfeited, base or altered coin,(f) bill or note,(11) knowing the same to be false, forged, counterfeited, base or altered:(b) every such person shall be deemed guilty of felony; and, on being thereof lawfully convicted, shall be punished by confinement in the public jail and penitentiary, for not less than ten nor more than twenty years.(g) 1792, c. 133, R. C.; 1796, c. 200, R. C.; 1805, c. 55, ed. 1808; Oct. 24, 1814, c. 21; 1 Rus. 109, 112; 15 Geo. 2, c. 28, § 2; and Wooldridge's case, 1 Leach, 307. (a) With having falsely, feloniously forged and counterfeited, at, &c., certain bank notes, purporting to be the bank notes of the president directors and company of the Bank of Virginia, a bank duly chartered by the commonwealth of Virginia, with intent to injure and defraud the said P. D. and Co. against, &c. See U. S. v. Turner, 7 Peters, 132. An indictment charging that the prisoner passed to a slave a counterfeit note, &c., with intent to defraud the bank, &c., is good. Brown's case (supra) and Mary Mazagora's case, Rus. & Ry. Cro. Cas. Res. 291. (e) Giving a forged note to another person, whether an accomplice or not, in order that the latter may pass it, is a disposing of, and putting it away. Rex v. Giles, 1 Ry. & M. C. C. R. 166. It seems, that in a prosecution for passing a counterfeit coin, the prosecutor is at liberty to prove the fact of the passing, and the counterfeit character of the coin, without either producing the coin or accounting for its non-production. Kirk v. Comth. 9 Leigh, 627. In a prosecution for passing a counterfeit coin to a person who resides in another state, if a subpæna for such person as a witness has been issued and returned not found, the fact of the passing, and the counterfeit character of the coin, may be proved without producing the coin at the trial. S. C. (d) 'Tis not essential to set out in the indictment, whom the prisoner caused or procured, to offer the notes; or how, or in what manner, or by what means, he caused or procured them to be offered, &c. Brown's case, gen. ct., November T. 1830, 2 Leigh, 760. (f) In a prosecution for passing counterfeit money, the jury should be satisfied that the resemblance of the forged to the genuine piece, is such as might deceive a person using ordinary caution. U. States v. Morrow, 4 Wash. C. C. R. 733. (11) A prisoner is committed for examination, is examined and remanded by the examining court for trial, for " feloniously using and employing as true, for his own benefit, a certain counterfeit note, well knowing the same to be counterfeit:" Held, an indictment for forging the note is not warranted by the examination, and must be quashed. Page v. The Com. 9 Leigh, 683. (b) With having feloniously passed off and put away, at in the county aforesaid, certain, &c., forged and counterfeit notes, purporting to be the notes of the president directors and company of the Bank of Virginia, knowing the same to be forged and counterfeited, with intent to defraud the said P. D. and Co., contrary, &c, Utter and publish. See Searle's case, 2 Bin. 339. In a prosecution for uttering counterfeit money, or notes, evidence that the accused had, about the same period, passed other counterfeit money or notes of the like kind, is admissible, as tending to prove the scien ter. Abner Martin's case, gen. court, November T. 1830. If a second uttering be made the subject of a distinct indictment, it cannot be given in evidence, to shew a guilty knowledge in a former uttering. Rex v. Smith, 2 Carr & Payne, 633. On the trial of an indictment for passing a counterfeit bank note or check, after evidence that the prisoner passed the note, and that it was counterfeit; evidence that the prisoner had in his possession, and attempted to pass other counterfeit notes of the same kind to other persons, the day after he passed those in the indictment mentioned, is admissible to prove the scienter. Hendrick's case, 5 Leigh, 707, 714; see Smith's case, 4 C. & P. 411, and note (a). As to receiving stolen goods. See R. & M. 146, 6 C. & P. It is not essential that the bank officers should be produced to prove the notes counterfeit. Testimony of other persons well acquainted with the notes of the bank, is competent evidence to be weighed by the jury. Ibid. What circumstances, sufficient to shew joint interest and confederation in passing and uttering counterfeit notes? Ib. Reported in 2 Leigh, 745. (g) "Not less than five nor more than twenty years," act March 19, 1836, c. 68, Ses. Acts p. 46, as to coin and bank notes of banks of Virginia. And extended to all offences mentioned in this section by act passed March 17, 1838, c. 109, Ses. Acts p. 85. Act of February 23, 1819—January 1, 1820. R. C. ch. 154. 50. § 2. If any free person shall falsely make,' forge or counterfeit, 'or procure to be falsely made, forged or counterfeited, or willingly act' or assist in 'falsely making,' forging or counterfeiting, or keep or conceal, or aid in keeping or concealing, any instrument, for the purpose of 'falsely making,' forging or counterfeiting, the seal of the president, directors and company of the Bank of Virginia, or Farmers Bank of Virginia, or of any other chartered banking company, which now is or hereafter may be in Virginia; or the official seal of the register of the land office; or the seal of any other public office, or body politic or corporate, in this commonwealth;' such person shall be deemed guilty of felony; and, on being lawfully convicted of any such of fence, in relation to the seal of any banking company aforesaid, shall be punished by confinement in the public jail and penitentiary, for not less than five nor more than fifteen years; and, on being lawfully convicted of any such offence, in relation to any other seal aforesaid, shall be punished by confinement in the public jail and penitentiary, for not less than one nor more than Dec. 1806, c. 91, ed. 1808; 1792, c. 133, R. C. ten years. 51 § 3. If any free person shall falsely make, forge or counterfeit, alter or erase, or cause or procure to be falsely made, forged or counterfeited, altered or erased, or shall willingly act or assist in falsely making, forging, counterfeiting, altering or erasing, any post note, check or order, on the Bank of Virginia, or Farmers Bank of Virginia, or of any of their offices of discount and deposit; or on any other chartered bank, which now is or hereafter may be in Virginia, or on any office or branch of any such bank; or on any office or branch of the Bank of the United States, which now is, or hereafter may be in Virginia; or shall fraudulently obtain, or aid or assist in obtaining any bank or post note, or money from any such bank, office or branch, as is aforesaid, by means of any such false, forged, counterfeit, altered, or erased post note, check or order, knowing the same to be false, forged, counterfeited, altered or erased; or shall utter or publish as true, or use or employ as true, for his own benefit, or for the benefit of another, any such false, forged, counterfeit, altered or erased post note, check or order, knowing the same to be false, forged, counterfeit, altered or erased; such person shall be deemed guilty of felony; and, on being lawfully convicted thereof, shall be punished by confinement in the public jail and penitentiary, for not less than two nor more than ten years. Dec. 31, 1806, c. 91, ed. 1808; 1814, c. 21. 52. § 4. If any free person shall falsely make, forge, or counterfeit, alter or erase, or cause or procure to be falsely made, forged or counterfeited, altered or erased, or willingly act or assist in falsely making, forging, counterfeiting, altering or erasing any land warrant or other warrant, issued under the authority of this state, or of the United States; any paper bill of credit, issued under the authority of the United States; any certificate, manifest or receipt of any public inspector of flour, hemp, tobacco, or other thing; any loan of fice certificate; certificate of the stock of this state, or of the United States, or of any bank, or chartered company, or any other certificate, issued under the authority of this state, or the United States; or any record of any court, or public office, or of any body politic or corporate; or any will, testament or codicil; any deed,(a) bond, writing or note;(2) any bill of exchange, draft or (a) A deed-what? See this question fully examined in the case of The King v. Fauntleroy, 2 Bing. 413, 1 Ryan & Moody's Cro. Cas. Re. 52. (2) A note of an unchartered bank is within this section. And it is not necessary to allege in the indictment that there is no such bank, or that it was passed "to the prejudice of another's right," or "for the prisoner's own benefit, or for the benefit of another." The words, "to the prejudice of another's rights," relate only to the forging of other writings not particularly named; and the words, "for his own benefit, or for the benefit of another," refer, not to the ac. tual uttering and publishing as true of coun Act of February 24, 1819—January 1, 1820. R. C. ch. 154. order; any acceptance of a bill of exchange, draft or order; any assignment, transfer or endorsement; any defeasance, acquittance or receipt; or any letter of credit, or other writing, to the prejudice of another's right;(1) (except the bank notes, and bills, post notes, checks and orders on banks, their branches and offices, in this act before mentioned;) with intention to injure or defraud any person or persons, body(b) politic or corporate; or shall, with the like intent, utter or publish as true, or attempt in any manner, to use or employ as true, for his own benefit, or for the benefit of another, any false, forged, counterfeit, altered or erased paper or writing, as is aforesaid, knowing the same to be false, forged, counterfeit, altered or erased; such person shall be deemed guilty of felony; and, on being lawfully convicted thereof, shall be punished by confinement in the public jail and penitentiary, for not less than one(12) nor more than ten years. Nov. 1789, c. 19, 13 Stat. Larg. 27; 1792, c. 133; 1794, c. 171, R. C.; Oct. 24, 1814, c. 21; Jan. 10, 1815, c. 17; 2 Geo. 2, c. 24; 31 Geo. 2, c. 22, § 78; 7 Geo. 2, c. 22; 45 Geo. 3, c. 88. 53. § 5. If any free person shall falsely make, forge or counterfeit, alter or erase, or procure to be falsely made, forged or counterfeited, altered or erased, or shall willingly act or assist in falsely making, forging, counterfeiting, altering or erasing, the stamp, brand or mark, of any inspector of tobacco, upon any cask or hogshead of tobacco; or shall export from this commonwealth, or remove from any inspection, or sell, or cause, or procure to be so exported, removed or sold, or shall willingly act or assist in so exporting, removing or selling, any hogshead or cask of tobacco, having thereon, any such false, forged, counterfeited, altered or erased stamp, brand or mark, knowing the same to be false, forged, counterfeit, altered or erased; with intention to injure or defraud any person or persons, body politic or corporate; such person shall be deemed guilty of felony; and, on being lawfully convicted thereof, shall be punished by confinement in the public jail and penitentiary, not less. than one, nor more than ten years. Ibid. 54. § 6. If any free person shall voluntarily, wilfully and of purpose, destroy or conceal the last will and testament of any decedent, or any codicil to such last will and testament; or shall wilfully aid or assist in the destroying or concealing any such last will and testament, or any codicil thereto, with in terfeit notes, &c., but to the mere attempt to use or employ them and the other writings mentioned. Murray's case, 5 Leigh, 720. (1) See The Comth. v. Quann, 2 Virg. Cas. 89. The provisions of this act are as various and broad as the rights of property which may be prejudiced, by forging or uttering as true any forged paper writing whatever, knowingly and with fraudulent intent, therefore, on an indictment for passing a counterfeit check or order of a president of a branch of the bank of the United States, on the cashier of the bank, payable to T. R. or order, and endorsed by T. R. to bearer; it was held, that whether the charter of the bank of the U. S. be constitutional or not, and whether the charter authorizes the issue of such checks or orders or not, the counterfeiting or passing counterfeits of such checks or orders is felony, under this sec. of the act. Hendrick's case, 5 Leigh, 707, 712. (b) In a prosecution for uttering counterfeit bank notes, knowing them to be counterfeit, evidence proving that the prisoner endeavoured to engage a person to procure for him counterfeit money, from a place where counterfeiting was carried on that he declared his intention to cultivate the acquaintance of a counterfeiter, and for that purpose to remove to a place near his residence, is admissible evidence to prove the scienter; the guilty knowledge. William R. Finn's case, in error, from S. ct. of Kanawha, gen. ct. November T. 1827, 5 Rand. 701. Showing a person an instrument, the uttering of which would be criminal, though with an intent of raising a false idea in him of the party's substance, is not an uttering or publishing within the stat. of 13 Geo. III. c. 79, § 2. To bring it within the act, the instrument should be parted with or tendered, or offered or used in some way to get credit or money on it. Shukard's case, Russ. & Ry. Cro. Cas. 200. (12) See post. same tit. No. 67, note (2). Act of February 23, 1819-January 1, 1820. R. C. ch. 154. tent to prevent the probat thereof, or to defraud any devisee or legatee under such last will and testament, or codicil thereto : he or she so offending, being legally convicted thereof, shall be deemed guilty of felony; and shall be sentenced to undergo a confinement in the jail and penitentiary-house, for a period not less than one, nor more than ten years. Feb. 7, 1809, c. 23, ed. 1812, c. 25. 55. § 7. Any slave who shall be guilty of any of the offences in this act before mentioned, shall be deemed a felon, and be punished accordingly; and if convicted of any of the offences of falsely making, forging, counterfeiting or altering, in the first section of this act enumerated, or of acting or assisting therein, he shall suffer death without benefit of clergy. Rev. 1819. Act of November 18, 1789, ch. 15, 13 Stat. Larg. 22. R. C. ch. 153. Whereas many evil-disposed persons have falsely and deceitfully contrived, devised and imagined privy tokens and counterfeit letters in other men's names, unto divers persons, their special friends and acquaintances, for the obtaining of money, goods and chattels of the same persons, their friends and acquaintances, by colour whereof, the said evil-disposed persons have deceitfully and unlawfully obtained and gotten great substance of money, goods and chattels into their hands and possession, contrary to right and conscience: therefore, 56. § 2. If any person or persons shall falsely and deceitfully obtain or get into his or their hands or possession, any money,(tt) goods or chattels of any other person or persons, by colour and means of any such false token or counterfeit letter,(1) made in any other man's name, as is aforesaid, every such person and persons so offending, and being thereof lawfully convicted in the court. (tt) See The Com. v. Swinney, (two cases,) Virg. Cas. 146, 150. One indictment charged the prisoner with having obtained, by means of a counterfeit check, one hundred dollars in a note of the Bank of Virginia, from the teller of said bank, of the goods and chattels and moneys of the president, directors, &c. The other indictment charged the prisoner with having obtained, by the means before-mentioned, fifty dollars in money current in the said commonwealth of Virginia." The prisoner was found guilty on both indictments. It was moved in arrest of judgment: that the offence was not within the act; the court arrested judgment on the first indictment, but refused to arrest it on the second. On the ground, (it is presumed by Jud. B. & H.) that the obtaining a bank note, as charged in the indictment, is not the obtaining of "money" in the sense in which it is used in the act; on the contrary, it was deemed insufficient to arrest the second judgment, because it did not apply, the defendant having been charged in the indictment with obtaining "fifty dollars in money current," &c., which could not be intended to mean a bank note of that amount. And see Hill's case, Russ. & Ryan's Cro. Cas. 190; The People v. Stone, 9 Wend. 182; see the explanatory note of the principles of these decisions by judges Brock. and Holm. p. 151. (1) Falsely passing, as a true note, a false and forged note, purporting to be a note of a bank, (which bank never existed,) and The An acquittal of the felony of forging a writing, "purporting to be a bill of exchange, and uttering the same as true," (on the ground that the writing offered in support of the indictment was not a bill of exchange,) is no bar to a prosecution for the misdemeanour of fraudulently obtaining goods by means of a false privy token, and counterfeit letter, the said privy token being the same writing of the forgery, and uttering of which he had been acquitted. Gen. ct. March T. 1817, 2 Virg. Cas. 89. A pretence that the party would do an act he did not mean to do, (as a pretence to pay for goods on delivery,) is not a false pretence within the act of 30 Geo. II. c. 24, sec. 1. It being merely a promise for future conduct, and common prudence and caution would have prevented any injury arising from the breach of it. Russ. & Ry. Cro. C. 461. And this case seems not to be within the act of 1789. And see Parker's case, 2 Leach. Cro. C. 614; James Conger's case, Mar. 1819, 4 C. H. R. 65; Dalton's case, 2 W. C. L. C. 161. Goodhall's case, |