Commonwealth v. Bailey

Decided September 15, 1804

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1804-09-15

The defendant was indicted for uttering a forged and counterfeit bill of the Maine Bank, of five dollars. In this case it was alleged in the indictment that the forged bill was in the words and figures following, viz.— B. No. 237. FIVE DOLLARS. The President, Directors, and Company of the Maine t* Bank, promise to pay N. Shaw, or bearer, FIVE 5 DOLLARS on demand.—Portland, the 7th day of * Feb. 1803. D. Hale, Cash'r. Sam.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1804-09-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1917

9 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

The Court

¶1(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. (1)

¶2 Vide ante, p. 54, Commonwealth vs. Stow; post, p. 203, Commonwealth vs. Stevens.