¶1decided that this was not a warrant or order for the payment of money, and therefore not within the statute of Maryland ; but that the indictment was good as an indictment for forgery at common law, upon the following authorities; The King v. Ward, 2 Ld. Raym. 1461, and the cases there cited, namely, Rex v. Stocker, 5 Mod. 137; S. C. 1 Salk. 342, 371, which was an indictment at common law for forging a bill of lading, and which was adjudged bad on demurrer because the charge was in the alternative, namely, that he forged or caused to be forged; but no exception- was taken to it because the offence was not forgery at common law. Rex v. Ferrers, 1 Sid. 278. Forging an acquittance for £7. Farr's case, T. Raym. 81. A warrant of attorney. Dudley's case, 2 Sid. 71. The entry of a marriage in the register of marriages. Savage's case, Styles, 12. Letters of credence for collecting money. Rex v. Deakins, 1 Sid. 142, for counterfeiting a protection in the name of Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper, as a member of Parliament, when he was not. Regina v. Yarrington, 1 Salk. 406. For forging a letter. Rex v. Ward, 2 Ld. Raym. 1466. For forging an in-dorsement on the back of a certificate.
2 D.C. 520
United States v. Green
Decided December 15, 1824
Indictment for forging “ a certain paper-writing purporting to be a request or order upon one R. Woodward for the loan of money, and to be signed by one John Duley, with the name of the said John Duley thereunto affixed, the tenor of which paper-writing is as follows, to wit: ‘ Georgetown, October 19th, 1824. Mr. R. Woodard, Sir, would you Be so kind as To lend me ten or 15 Dollars And Eye will call And settle with you on the 20th.
Decided 1824-12-15