single rig, a good one,-and oblige. I will § 9. Ratification. bring it back myself. [Signed] George Waiver or ratification of altered instrument, Clinger," is the subject of forgery, as it is not only an order or request for the delivery of chattels over which Clinger had no control, but is also a writing obligatory, within the meaning of Neb. Crim. Code, § 145. Hickson v. State, 54 L.R.A. 327, 61 Neb. 763, 86 N. W. 509. § 7.-label or trademark. a. Labels and trademarks are not the subject of forgery at common law, at least where the trademark or label cannot be made the basis for a suit against the alleged issuer for deceit or warranty. White v. Wagar, 50 L.R.A. 60, 185 Ill. 195, 57 N. E. 26. § 8. What constitutes uttering and publishing. a. An offer by one in possession of a forged check, to pass it to another person as a genuine instrument, constitutes an uttering and publishing of the check, although the offer was not accepted and he did not exhibit the forged instrument. Walker v. State, 8 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1175, 127 Ga. 48, 56 S. E. 113. see ALTERATION OF INSTRUMENTS, § 24. a. A forged instrument is not merely voidable, but absolutely void, and there can be no ratification of a forgery that will make the instrument valid. Shinew v. First Nat. Bank, 36 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1006, 84 Ohio St. (Annotated) 297, 95 N. E. 881. a. It is no defense to a prosecution for or considered himself, justly entitled to forgery that the person committing it was, what he would obtain by means thereof. State v. Webster, 32 L.R.A. (N.S.) 337, 88 S. C. 56, 70 S. E. 422. b. That an attempt at forgery is crude and not calculated to deceive one making careful inspection of the signature is no defense to a charge of forgery, under a statute providing that if anyone shall utter a forged bill, note, draft, or check, knowing the same Fenwick, L.R.A.1918B, 1189, 177 Ky. 685, to be forged, he shall be punished. Com. v. 198 S. W. 32. (Annotated) c. That one who forges a receipt in full on a payment on account has in fact paid his indebtedness in full will not prevent his liability to indictment for the forgery. Gordon v. Com. 57 L.R.A. 744, 100 Va. 825, (Annotated) 40 S. E. 746. |