Commonwealth v. Hayward

10 Mass. 34
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided March 15, 1813·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

By the Court.

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,

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

Commonwealth v. Hayward, 10 Mass. 34 (Mass. 1813).

10 Mass. 34 (Commonwealth v. Hayward) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Martin v. Collester
38 N.H. 455 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1859)