State v. Page
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Criminal Court. The evidence did not sustain the indictment. The indictment charges the defendants with creating, putting in circulation, signing, countersigning and endorsing notes, bills, &c., purporting that money will be paid to the holder or receiver thereof, &c.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Criminal Court. The evidence did not sustain the indictment. The indictment charges the defendants with creating, putting in circulation, signing, countersigning and endorsing notes, bills, &c., purporting that money will be paid to the holder or receiver thereof, &c. The notes offered in evidence purported to be payable to hearer. . The word “ purporting” in the indictment and in the statute, is a word of technical import, and signifies that the notes, bills, &c., on their face are made payable to the receiver or holder. Archbold, 47. 2 Russell on Crimes, 343 to 349.…
1Opinion of the CourtRyland, Judge
In this case, the indictment charges that Daniel D. Page and Henry D. Bacon, being money brokers and exchange dealers, doing business under the name, style and firm of Page & Bacon, in St. Louis county, on, &c., at, &c., with force and arms, being unauthorized by law, and whilst they were money brokers and exchange dealers aforesaid, unlawfully did create and put in circulation, as a circulating medium, divers notes, bills, checks and tickets, purporting that money will be paid to the receiver, holder and bearer thereof, said notes, bills, checks and tickets to be then and there used as…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Downing v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1837
3Cited by2 opinions
- Fahy v. Springfield Grocer Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1894
- Deskin v. United States Reserve InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1927