addressed to any particular person,43 deeds, mortgages, and the like,44 depositions, 45 policies of insurance 46 and proofs of loss thereunder,47 receipts and other acquittances, 48 duplicate deposit slips, a cotton ticket,50 stay bonds 51 and bail bonds,52 railroad tickets and passes," books of account,54 letters of recommendation,55 subscriptions,56 cer

tified copies of instruments,57 a teacher's license,58 a bill of costs by a justice of the peace against a county,59 an instrument authorizing an attorney to consent to the entry of judgment in a pending case,60 powers of attorney, and the like,61 a waiver of a landlord's lien on his tenant's crop,62 a witness pay certificate, 63 and bounty certificates.64

Labels or trade-marks, 65 and ȧ writing purporting to give the value of property, without more,66 have been held not to be the subject of forgery.

In England a will may be the subject of forgery during the lifetime of the purported testator.67 But the contrary has been held to be true under the Texas statute.68

69

§ 562. - False entries in books of account. A person is not guilty of forgery in making false entries in his own books of account, though his purpose may be to defraud, except, perhaps, where the book is a book of original entry which is admissible in evidence to prove claims.70 Nor, in the absence of a statute to the contrary, is it forgery for a person to omit to make entries in his

obligatory" or "instrument of writ

ing. State v. Hazzard, 168 Ind. 163, 80 N. E. 149.

57 A certified copy of a decree of divorce with the court seal attached. Ex parte Finley, 66 Cal. 262, 5 Pac. 222.

58 Arnold v. State, 71 Ark. 367, 74 S. W. 513.

59 Luttrell v. State, 85 Tenn. 232, 1 S. W. 886, 4 Am. St. Rep. 760.

60 State v. Kerr, 117 Me. 254, 103 Atl. 585.

61 An instrument certifying that a person is the authorized representative of a newspaper, and has authority to make collections and receive payment for subscriptions and advertising, is within a provision making "any letter of attorney or other power to receive money" the subject of forgery. Leslie v. State, 10 Wyo. 10, 65 Pac. 849, 69 Pac. 2.

62 Dixon v. State, 81 Ala. 61, 1 So. 69; France v. State, 83 Miss. 281, 35 So. 313.

63 State v. Bullock, 54 S. C. 300, 32 S. E. 424.

64 A certificate entitling a person to the payment of bounty for the destruction of fish nets used illegally. People v. Filkin, 83 N. Y. App. Div. 589, 82 N. Y. Supp. 15, aff'd 176 N. Y. 548, 68 N. E. 1120.

65 Reg. v. Smith, 8 Cox C. C. 32.

They are not the subject of forgery either at common law or under the Illinois statute. White v. Wagar, 185 Ill. 195, 57 N. E. 26, 50 L. R. A. 60.

66 Burden v. State, 120 Ala. 388, 25 So. 190.

67 Rex v. Sterling, 2 East P. C. 950; Rex v. Murphy, 2 East P. C. 949; Rex v. Coogan, 2 East P. C. 948.

68 Huckaby v. State, 45 Tex. Cr. 577, 78 S. W. 942, 108 Am. St. Rep. 975.

69 State v. Young, 46 N. H. 266, 88 Am. Dec. 212.

70 See People v. Fallon, 202 N. Y. 456, 96 N. E. 96, aff'g 142 App. Div. 908, 126 N. Y. Supp. 1142.

72

own books, regardless of his intent, since at common law one may keep books of account of all or part of his transactions, or omit to keep any books, at his election.71 But it is forgery at common law to fraudulently make a false entry, or fraudulently alter an entry, in a bank pass book," or to falsify or make false entries in the books of a public officer,78 or for employees to fraudulently alter entries or make false entries in the books of their employers.74 And statutes in many states, in varying terms, make it forgery or a distinct offense for officers or employees of corporations, partnerships, associations, or individuals to falsify, make false entries in, or alter accounts, books of accounts, or records of their employers, or to wilfully omit to make true entries of material matters therein, with intent to defraud, or to conceal any larceny or misappropriation of property or money.75

71 People v. Fallon, 202 N. Y. 456, 96 N. E. 96, aff'g 142 App. Div. 908, 126 N. Y. Supp. 1142.

72 Barnum v. State, 15 Ohio 717, 45 Am. Dec. 601; Reg. v. Moody, 9 Cox C. C. 166, Leigh & C. 173; Reg. v. Smith, 9 Cox C. C. 162, Leigh & C. 168; Reg. v. Dodd, 18 Law Times (N. S.) 89.

73 See § 564, infra.

74 People v. Fallon, 202 N. Y. 456, 96 N. E. 96, aff'g 142 App. Div. 908, 126 N. Y. Supp. 1142; People v. Phelps, 49 How. Pr. (N. Y.) 462; Biles v. Com., 32 Pa. St. 529, 75 Am. Dec. 568. And see People v. Herzog, 47 N. Y. Misc. 50, 93 N. Y. Supp. 357. 75 See the statutes of the various states and the following cases:

California. People v. Leonard, 103 Cal. 200, 37 Pac. 222; People v. Palmer, 53 Cal. 615.

Kansas. State v. Kennedy, 105 Kan. 347, 184 Pac. 734; State V. Chance, 82 Kan. 392, 108 Pac. 791, 20 Ann. Cas. 134.

Minnesota. State v. Goodrich, 67 Minn. 176, 69 N. W. 815.

Missouri. State v. Plotner, 283 Mo. 83, 222 S. W. 767.

New York. People v. Smith, 177

App. Div. 152, 163 N. Y. Supp. 283; People v. Corrigan, 129 App. Div. 75, 113 N. Y. Supp. 513; People v. Hegeman, 57 Misc. 295, 107 N. Y. Supp. 261; People v. Herzog, 47 Misc. 50, 93 N. Y. Supp. 357.

Texas. Pope v. State, 75 Tex. Cr. 50, 170 S. W. 150.

The pass book issued by a bank to a depositor is a book of accounts within the meaning of the Kansas statute. State v. Kennedy, 105 Kan. 347, 184 Pac. 734.

A book or record is falsified within such a provision only when by some alteration therein it is made to speak differently from what it did previously, or given a different effect in some material aspect, with a fraudulent and corrupt intent. Spilker v. Abrahams, 133 N. Y. App. Div. 226, 117 N. Y. Supp. 376.

The New York statute refers only to entries or omissions by a person who has a duty as an employee or in other similar capacity to keep true books of account of the business of his employer, and does not make it forgery for a person to omit entries from his own books of account for the purpose of defrauding his cred

§ 563. Recommendations and certificates of character. A letter recommending another as a person of financial standing and responsibility may impose a legal liability if false, and therefore such a letter is clearly the subject of forgery.76 In England it has been. held that it is forgery at common law to fraudulently make, in another's name, false certificates or testimonials of character, for the purpose of obtaining a situation as a police constable,77 or schoolmaster,78 or to forge a certificate of service, sobriety, and good conduct at sea, with intent to deceive and defraud.79 And vouchers required upon examination by the federal civil service commission, certifying to the character, physical capacity, etc., of the applicant, have been held to be within the federal statutes punishing the forging of any writing for the purpose of defrauding the United States.80

The false making of a mere complimentary letter of introduction, or of certificates of character which confer no right and impose no duty, is not forgery at common law.81 And a letter which is merely an assault upon the veracity, reputation and business standing of a person is not the subject of forgery, where it could not have the effect to defraud.82 But the making and presentation of false letters of introduction is forgery under some of the statutes.88

itors. People v. Fallon, 202 N. Y. 456, 96 N. E. 96, aff'g 142 App. Div. 908, 126 N. Y. Supp. 1142. It does not apply where the alteration is made by an employee by the direction or with the consent of his employer and without any personal profit or gain or the expectation thereof on the part of the employee. People v. Fish, 169 N. Y. App. Div. 22, 154 N. Y. Supp. 504. To sustain a conviction for omitting to make an entry with intent to conceal a larceny or misappropriation, it is not necessary to show that such larceny or misappropriation was by the defendant. People v. Curtiss, 118 N. Y. App. Div. 259, 103 N. Y. Supp. 395. .76 Ames' Case, 2 Greenl. (Me.) 365. 77 Reg. v. Moah, 7 Cox C. C. 503, Dears. & B. 550.

78 Reg. v. Sharman, 6 Cox C. C. 212, Dears. C. C. 285.

79 Reg. v. Toshack, 4 Cox C. C. 38, 1 Den. C. C. 492.

80 United States v. Plyler, 222 U. S. 15, 56 L. Ed. 70, 32 Sup. Ct. 6.

81 Mitchell v. State, 56 Ga. 171; Waterman v. People, 67 Ill. 91; Com. v. Hinds, 101 Mass. 209; Com. v. Chandler, Thach. C. C. (Mass.) 187; Foulke's Case, 2 Rob. (Va.) 836.

82 A letter addressed to the collector of customs for the purpose of influencing him against admitting a Chinaman. People v. Wong Sam, 117 Cal. 29, 48 Pac. 972.

83 It is within the New York statute making it forgery to utter a writing purporting to have been written or signed by another person, and by the uttering of which the sentiments, opinions, conduct, character, prospects, interest, or rights of such other person shall be misrepresented or otherwise injuriously affected,

§ 564. Falsifying or altering public records. It is forgery at common law to falsify entries in, or to make false entries in the books of a public officer with intent to defraud,84 or to falsely and fraudulently make or alter any matter of public record.85 And the alteration of, or the making of false entries in, public records or books of account is often made forgery,86 or a separate offense 87 by express provision of the statute. The forging or altering of any proceeding entered in court is specifically punished by some statutes.88 And statutes sometimes make it an offense to procure or offer any false or forged instrument to be filed, registered or recorded in any public office, which might be so filed, registered or recorded if genuine.89

§ 565.

Fraudulently procuring or using genuine signature. Forgery may be committed by procuring the genuine signature of another to an instrument with the fraudulent intent to pass the in

even though the person whose name is used is not injured thereby. People v. Abeel, 182 N. Y. 415, 75 N. E. 307, 1 L. R. A. (N. S.) 730, 3 Ann. Cas. 287, aff'g 100 App. Div. 516, 91 N. Y. Supp. 1107.

84 People v. Fallon, 202 N. Y. 456, 96 N. E. 96, aff'g 142 App. Div. 908, 126 N. Y. Supp. 1142.

85 State v. Stringfellow, 126 La. 720, 52 So. 1002.

86 State v. Van Auken, 98 Iowa 674, 68 N. W. 454; State v. Goodrich, 67 Minn. 176, 69 N. W. 815; Phelps v. People, 72 N. Y. 365, aff'g 6 Hun 428; State v. Zimmerman, 79 S. C. 289, 60 S. E. 680.

Valuation lists of town tax assessors. Com. v. Segee, 218 Mass. 501, 106 N. E. 173; Turbeville v. State, 56 Miss. 793.

"Duplicate of taxes' of a school district. Com. v. Beamish, 81 Pa. 389.

The forging of a name on a document subsequently filed as a public record is the forgery of a public record, as the forgery of the name of the defendant in a divorce suit to

an acceptance of service of the petition. State v. Stringfellow, 126 La. 720, 52 So. 1002.

In Ohio it has been held that a tax

duplicate is not a public record. Smith v. State, 18 Ohio St. 420.

Forgery of the records of a justice of the peace by the justice is not within a statute punishing forgery of the records of a court of record. State v. Floyd, 1 Houst. Cr. Cas. (Del.) 110.

87 People v. Tomalty, 14 Cal. App. 224, 111 Pac. 513; Harrington v. State, 54 Miss. 490.

A search warrant is not a public record within the Indiana statute. State v. Fleming, 184 Ind. 364, 111 N. E. 310.

88 An instrument purporting to authorize an attorney to consent to the entry of judgment comes within such a provision. State v. Kerr, 117 Me. 254, 103 Atl. 585.

89 A birth certificate is not an "instrument" within the meaning of such a provision. People v. Fraser, 23 Cal. App. 82, 137 Pac. 276.