United States v. Brown
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia
Indictment for knowingly uttering as true, and with intent to defraud E. M. Linthicum and'John Tayloe, the following forged order, namely: — “ Mr. E. M. Linthicum will please let the bearer, John Brown, have such articles as he may choo.se, on my account, to the value of thirty dollars; also twenty dollars in cash, and oblige his friend, Henry Tayloe. For Col. John Tayloe.
Read the full summary
Indictment for knowingly uttering as true, and with intent to defraud E. M. Linthicum and'John Tayloe, the following forged order, namely: — “ Mr. E. M. Linthicum will please let the bearer, John Brown, have such articles as he may choo.se, on my account, to the value of thirty dollars; also twenty dollars in cash, and oblige his friend, Henry Tayloe. For Col. John Tayloe. Washington City, 24th December, 1827.” The said Henry Tayloe was offered as a witness, to prove that it was not his signature. objected that the party, whose name is forged, is not a competent witness for the prosecution.…
1Opinion of the Court
The Court (Thruston, J., absent,) overruled the objection, on the authority of Bates’s case, in this Court, in June, 1810, (2 Cranch, C. C. 1); but told Mr. Bradley that he might avail himself of it, on motion in arrest of judgmént, when the point might be fully considered. Our. ad. vult.
At May term, 1828, the Court overruled the motion in arrest of judgment, and sentenced the prisoner to fine and imprisonment.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- United States v. BatesU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia · 1810
3Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. AndersonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia · 1834