Perkins v. Commonwealth
General Court of Virginia
In April 1851, Henry T. Perkins was indicted for forgery, in the Circuit court of law for the county of Henrico. The first count of the indictment set out ^e paper which was charged to have been forged, which was as follows: “ $ 4000. Seven Islands, Fluvanah County, December 10th, 1850. Sixty days after date, for value received, I promised to pay to the order of William T. Hillous, 4 thousand dollars, without offset, negotiable and payable at the Bank of Virginia, at…
Read the full summary
In April 1851, Henry T. Perkins was indicted for forgery, in the Circuit court of law for the county of Henrico. The first count of the indictment set out ^e paper which was charged to have been forged, which was as follows: “ $ 4000. Seven Islands, Fluvanah County, December 10th, 1850. Sixty days after date, for value received, I promised to pay to the order of William T. Hillous, 4 thousand dollars, without offset, negotiable and payable at the Bank of Virginia, at Richmond. John H. Cocke.” There were two other counts which charged the forgery of the note. But none of the counts set out or…
1Opinion of the CourtLomax, J.
The Court is of opinion that, as this prosecution was only for forging the writing which purported to be a negotiable note, there was no necessity that the indictment should set out the endorsements, or any other matter written upon the same paper, constituting no part of the note itself, and not entering into the essential description of that instrument. It is enough to set out in the indictment the note itself, without any other extrinsic marks or writings upon the same paper. Commonwealth v. Ward, 2 Mass. R. 397; Simmons v. The State, (Ohio,) 7 Ham. R. pt. 1, 116. When the paper with these…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. WardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Commonwealth v. RossMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807