1777. ELLIOT'S CASE. "No. 17. 73.—I PROMISE to pay to Mr. Joseph Crooke or "bearer, on demand, the sum of FIFTY "£. FIFTY. LONDON, the 20th day of June 1775. "For Govt. and Compy. of "ENT. C. Blewert. "the Bank of England. 66 THO. THOMPSON." THE second count charged it to be "a certain note in the form of a bank-note." The third count charged it to be "a certain promissory note for the payment of money.". There were also other counts, in which the offence was charged to have been committed with an intent to defraud the Governor and Company of the Bank of England. THE fifth count, which was that on which the Counsel for the Crown relied, charged, "that the said James Elliot, on "the 14th June 1777, feloniously did make, forge and coun“terfeit, and cause and procure to be falsely made, forged "and counterfeited, &c. a certain promissory note for the "payment of money, with the name of Thomas Thompson "thereunto subscribed, purporting to bear date, &c. and to "have been signed by one Thomas Thompson for the Governor and Company of the Bank of England, for the "payment of Fifty Pounds to Mr. Joseph Crooke or bearer, 66 on demand, the tenor of which &c. with intention to de"fraud the Governor and Company of Bank of England;" this count was admitted to be framed on the 31 Geo. II. c. 22. s. 78. which extends the subjects of forgery, enumerated in the 2 Geo. II. c. 25. to all corporations. 66 It appeared in evidence, that the prisoner had applied under the fictitious name of Pearce to one Mary Smith, who usually made the moulds for the Bank of England paper, to make him a pair of small moulds, finer than those which she made for the use of the Bank; but she refused to execute his order; that about two months previous to the finding of the indictment, the prisoner delivered to a Mr. Robert Ryland, a copper-plate printer, two copper-plates and a quantity of fine paper, desiring that he would strike off two dozen impressions from each plate by the next day, one of these plates being engraved for the sum of Twenty Pounds, the other for the sum of FIFTY POUNDS, both of them payable by the Gov". and Compa. of the Bank of England. Mr. Ryland struck off the impressions, pursuant to the order, and re-delivered them, with the plates, to the prisoner the next day at a public-house in Fleet Street. The prisoner was apprehended at Dover in the County of Kent, in which county the indictment was laid; and at the time of his apprehension impressions, of the above description, were found upon him, and produced in Court, together with the copper-plates, which had been found at an obscure lodging near Tower Hill, in consequence of information derived from the prisoner himself, who went there in custody of an officer, who broke open the chamber door, and took them out of a box directed for William Pearce. Among the printed impressions found upon the person of the prisoner at the time he was apprehended, was the forged instrument stated in the indictment. The plate from which it had been struck off was identified by Mr. Ryland; and the Officers of the Bank proved, that the note was in every respect both in paper and print similar to a bank-note, both in the written and printed parts of it, except, first, that the number was not filled up; secondly, that the word POUNDS was omitted in the body of the note; thirdly, that the texture of the paper was rather thicker than that used by the Bank; and fourthly, that in the fabrick of it, the water-mark, viz. the words BANK OF ENGLAND were not inserted but they said, that a bank-note, with the like omission of the word POUNDS in the body of it, being regular in other respects, would be paid by the usage of the Bank, after it had passed the Examiner's office. A real bank-note, of the same date and tenor, except as above excepted, was produced in evidence. But no evidence was given to prove that the forged instrument was forged in the County of Kent in which the indictment was laid. MORGAN, the prisoner's counsel, contended, First, That the word POUNDS being omitted in the body of the note, it was not a note for the payment of money; or if it was for the payment of money, it was totally uncertain what coin, whe 1777. ELLIOT'S CASE. 1777. ELLIOT'S ther pounds or shillings, and that upon such an uncertainty in a declaration the plaintiff would be nonsuited. To this objection it was answered, That the tenor of the note imported a promise to pay some money by a Company whose peculiar traffic is in cash, and whether for pounds or shillings would make no difference in the offence. Secondly, THAT this was no forgery upon the corporation of the Bank of England, because the water-mark which was essential to the notes of the Company was omitted in the note, and therefore it was not a note resembling a Bank-note, and therefore could not be a fraud upon them. To this it was answered, That whatever weight this objection might have upon the count for forging a bank-note, it had none upon the count charging it to be a note for the payment of money. It was clearly to be paid by that corporation, and a fraud upon them. A counterfeit need not be an exact counterpart. If made malá fide so similar as to have an aptness to impose, it is sufficient. The water-mark is not of the essence of a bank-note, since the Company are not obliged by any law to use it. They may drop it or use it as they see occasion. It is sufficient that the tenor of the note imports a promise from the corporation of the Bank to pay. The case of a forgery by one Vaughan, tried at the Old Bailey in 1768, was cited, in which most of the letters of the water-mark were omitted in the substance of the paper; but as no authentic or accurate state of the case was produced, no stress was laid upon it. THE learned Judge left it with the Jury to consider whether the word FIFTY imported POUNDS; and the Jury found the prisoner Guilty upon the count which charged him with forging "a certain promissory note for the payment of money, "with intention to defraud the Bank of England," and acquitted him of the rest of the indictment. MORGAN, the prisoner's counsel, then moved the following objections in arrest of judgment: First, Ir is charged in the count upon which the prisoner is found guilty, to be a note for the payment of money, but in reciting the tenor of it it appears to be for the payment of FIFTY, and does not say PoUNDS. The recital therefore materially varies from the charge, by leaving out a description of the coin, whether pounds or shillings, for which the note purports to be drawn, and no other coin can be consi dered as money. Secondly, THAT it cannot be with an intention to defraud the Governor and Company of the Bank of England. The 31 Geo. II. c. 2. s. 78. whereon the count upon which he is convicted is grounded, relates, and the other, statutes relate, to notes for the payment of money; but the tenor of the note set forth is not for the payment of money, and therefore not within them. The note produced in evidence appears intended to resemble a bank-note; but all bank-notes have the words BANK OF ENGLAND visible in the substance of the paper, and the count charges the intention to defraud the Bank. There is not the least appearance of the words BANK OF ENGLAND in the substance of the note, and therefore it does not resemble a note of that corporation. 1777. ELLIOT'S CASE. Summer As Acc. IN Michaelmas Term 18 Geo. III. all the JUDGES except DE GREY Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, and SMYTHE C. B. being assembled at Symond's Inn, were unanimously of opinion, that the verdict was legal. For in forgery there See Rex v. need not be an exact resemblance; it is sufficient if the in- Hoost, Exeter strument is prima facie fitted to pass for a true instrument: sizes coram and the majority of the Judges inclined to think that the Le Blanc J. omission of the word "Pounds" in the body of the note, had nothing else appeared, would not have exculpated the prisoner; but it was matter to be left to the Jury, as it was done, whether it purported to be a note for fifty pounds or any other sum. But all the Judges agreed that the "£ FIFTY" in the margin of it removed every doubt, and shewed that the FIFTY in the body of the note was intended for FIFTY pounds. 2 East, 950, 1777. CASE XCI. the receipt of THE KING against JOHN HARRISON. An entry, of AT the Old Bailey in September Session 1777, John Harrison was tried before MR. JUSTICE BLACKSTONE upon an indictment framed on the statutes of 2 Geo. II. c. 25. 7 Geo. money or notes, made by a Cashier of the Bank of II. c. 22. and 31 Geo. II. c. 22. s. 78. England, in THE BANK ditor, is an accountable receipt for the payment of 66 ог THE 2 Geo. II. c. 25. enacts, "That whoever shall falsely BOOK of a cre- "make, forge or counterfeit, or shall cause or procure to be falsely made, forged or counterfeited, or shall wilfully aid assist in falsely making, forging, or counterfeiting any acquittance or receipt, either for money or goods, with intention to defraud any person or persons whatsoever, or “shall, with the like intent, knowingly utter or publish the same as true, shall suffer death without benefit of clergy." money within " the 7 Geo. II. c. 22.; and altering the principal sum, by prefixing a figure to in crease its nu capital forg ery; but that statute did not 66 66 THE 7 Geo. II. c. 22. enacts, "That whoever shall falsely meration, is a "make, alter, forge, or counterfeit, &c. the number or principal sum of any accountable receipt for any note, bill, or other security for the payment of money, or any warrant or "order for the payment of money or delivery of goods, with "intention to defraud any person or persons whatsoever, or "shall, with the like intent, utter or publish the same as true, shall suffer death without benefit of clergy." extend to cases where the offence was commit- tent to defraud S. C. 2 East, See the indictment in Cro. Cir. Ass. 280. THE 31 Geo. II. c. 22. s. 78. RECITES, "That whereas "doubts may arise whether the punishment inflicted by the "2 Geo. II. c. 25. extends to the commission of the like for"geries with an intention to defraud any corporation," AND ENACTS, "That if any person shall forge, &c. (inter alia) any acquittance or receipt, either for money or goods, with "intention to defraud any corporation, they shall suffer death "without clergy (a)." 66 THE indictment consisted of twenty-four counts. The first and second counts, framed on the statutes 2 Geo. II. c. 25. and 31 Geo. II. c. 22. s. 78. respectively charged the prisoner with forging and uttering a certain receipt for money purport (a) See 41 Geo. III. c. 39. by which the statutes 2 Geo. II. c. 25. 7 Geo. II. c. 22. and 31 Geo. II, c. 22 are altered and extended. |