Commonwealth v. Bailey

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Commonwealth v. Bailey

1 Mass. 62

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedSeptember 15, 1804

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Mass. 62 (Commonwealth v. Bailey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Commonwealth v. Bailey, 1 Mass. 62 (Mass. 1804).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court

(Dana, C. J., Strong, Sedgwick, and Thacher, justices) agreed to the principle contended for by the defendant’s counsel, but held that it did not apply to this case. They said that the number of the bill, and the words and figures in the [ * 63 ] margin, were not parts of the bill, but merely * marks superadded for the convenience of the bank, or of the holder of the bill, and, therefore, not necessary to be set out in an indictment in any case. The whole bill, all that is evidence of a contract, is set out; and set out truly and precisely.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The Court

(Dana, C. J., Strong, Sedgwick, and Thacher, justices) agreed to the principle contended for by the defendant’s counsel, but held that it did not apply to this case. They said that the number of the bill, and the words and figures in the [ * 63 ] margin, were not parts of the bill, but merely * marks superadded for the convenience of the bank, or of the holder of the bill, and, therefore, not necessary to be set out in an indictment in any case. The whole bill, all that is evidence of a contract, is set out; and set out truly and precisely.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Mass. 62, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-bailey-mass-1804.