State v. Washington
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas
FORGERY. The indictment in this case was as fob Lws : “ The jurors of and for the district of Charleston an act of the general assembly of the said state, passed.
Read the full summary
FORGERY. The indictment in this case was as fob Lws : “ The jurors of and for the district of Charleston an act of the general assembly of the said state, passed. “ the 16th day of March, in the year of our Lord, 1783, “ and thereby obliging the said commissioners of the said “ treasury, on behalf of the said state of South-Carolina, “ to pay at the said treasury, to one Thomas Reynolds, his- “ executors, administrators, or assigns, the sum of 86/. i£ 2s, Ad. on demand, for one year’s interest on the principal 11 sum of 1,230/. 5s. 8d, sterling, in part of the said writing “ obligatory, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Rutledge, Ch, J.
The indictment against the prisoner is very specially drawn, and contains several counts. It charges him in the words of the act of assembly, with having falsely made, forged and counterfeited; with having caused and procured to be falsely made, forged and counterfeited ; and with having willingly assisted in the false making, forging, and counterfeiting a writing obligatory, which is commonly called, and well known by the name of an indent of this state ; the writing is set forth verbatim. It also charges him with having uttered as true, a forged and counterfeit writing…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State v. VarnerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1992
- Freedom From Religion v. MackCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2022