Downing v. State
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR to thp circuit court of St. Louis county. 1st. That the facts do not shew the commission of any * indictable offence by the passing of the note in the indictment set forth, even if Downing is to be held responsible for the act of Conaut. - The single act of passing a note, is not a putting in circulation within the meaning of the first section of the act, the offence there prohibited being the original emission.
Read the full summary
ERROR to thp circuit court of St. Louis county. 1st. That the facts do not shew the commission of any * indictable offence by the passing of the note in the indictment set forth, even if Downing is to be held responsible for the act of Conaut. - The single act of passing a note, is not a putting in circulation within the meaning of the first section of the act, the offence there prohibited being the original emission. The facts do not show that the note was passed to Be-noist as a circulating medium, but to be handed to Mr. Mulligan as a form. To infer that the note was given'to Benoist for a…
1Opinion of the Court
Statement of the case and opinion of the court, delivered by
Tompkins, Judge.
Downing was found guilty on an indictment in the cir* cuit Court of St. Louis county, of putting in circulation as a circulating medium a certain note, contrary to the provJsJon^ 0f an act 0f Assembly, entitled “an act to1 suppress private bank notes,” and found guilty. He moved in arrest of judgment, and for a new tiial, and each of his motions was overruled. He now brings up the cause by a writ of error, to reverse the judgment of the circuit court.
On the trial of the cause, the State produced as a wit* ness Louis…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State v. PageSupreme Court of Missouri · 1853
- People v. WiseNew York Court of Sessions · 1885