Commonwealth v. Hayward
Opinion
This is a non-descript offence. It is not within [44]*44the provision of the law against altering bills, which means such an alteration as will increase the apparent value of the bill. If there is danger of the growth of this practice, the legislature will provide a statute to meet the evil. If the defendant had completed what maybe presumed to have been his intent, and had made an eighth bill, perhaps this would have been forgery.
Judgment arrested,
* The Attorney-General then moved the Court that the defendant should be held to recognize for his appearance to answer to a new indictment for forgery.
But the Court refused to sustain the motion, on the ground that the declaration of rights
[Smith vs. Brown, 1 Wend. 231.— Conn. vs. Smith, 7 Pick. 137 —F. II.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
10 Mass. 34 (Commonwealth v. Hayward) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.