The Queen v Helen Roberts

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 30 November 1857
• Date: 30 November 1857
• Court: Court of Criminal Appeal

Cr. Appeal.

THE QUEEN

and

HELEN ROBERTS.

Rex v. DickENR 1 Leach, C. C., 68.

Rex v. M'KayENR Russ. & Ry. 71.

Rex v. Kirkwood 1 Moo., C. C., 311.

Rex v. Goldstain 3 Bro. & B. 201.

Regina v. Fulton Jebb., C. C., 48.

Regina v. Dick 1 Leach., C. C., 68.

Rex v. M'Kay Russ. & Ry., C. C., 71.

Kirkwood's case 1 Moo., C. C., 311.

Ryland's case Old Bailey Rep. 316.

Mead v. YoungENR 4 T. R. 28.

COMMON ,LAW REPORTS. 325 M. T. 1857. Cr. Appeal. THE QUEEN v. HELEN ROBERTS.* Nov. 26, 30. FORGERY.-The following case was submitted for the opinion of The forging, in Ireland, of this Court by RICHARDS and GREENE, BB. :- an indorse ment upon The prisoner was convicted before Baron RICHARDs and me at a bill of ex change drawn the last Sitting of the Commission Court, upon an indictment, a abroad upon a resident person copy of which is hereunto annexed.t in Ireland, payable to the * Corant MONAHAN, C. J.; PIGOT, C. B. ; CRAMPTON, BALL and pordererson resident a ofident KEOGH, JJ.; and PENNEFATHER, RICHARDS and GREENE, BB. in Ireland, and also pay able in Ire land, is an f The first count of the indictment was as follows :-The jurors, &c., present, offence within then6339 AG. bill that Helen Roberts, late of Killucan, in the county of Westmeath, spinster, on the 6th of May, in the year of our Lord 18.57, at Kingstown, in the county of of exchange, Dublin, hiving in her custody and possession a certain bill of exchange, which set out in an said bill of exchange is as follows ; that is to say- for indictment the in- " No. 57,322. 1. 10s. Od. sterling. dorsement thereon, p 0 ur- .4 Philadelphia. 4th April, 1857. ported to be On demand, pay to Mary M'Carthy, or order, one pound, ten shil- drawn in rd lings, for value received, which charge to the account of, - a " Philadel r4 that the Court 1:4 P4 YOIITS, respectfully, ROBERT TAYLOR & Co. , phia. "-Held To Messrs. Corscadden & Co., Londonderry." - would not pre sume that She, the said Helen Roberts, afterwards, on the day and year aforesaid, at Philadelphia Kingstown, aforesaid, in the county of Dublin, aforesaid, feloniously did falsely was not the make, forge and counterfeit, on the said bill of exchange, an indorsement of the name of a palnadce. in Ire- said bill of exchange, which said falsely made, forged and counterfeited indorse- ment is as follows ; that is to say, " Mary M`Carthy," with intent thereby then and there to defraud, contrary to the form of the statute, in such case, &c., and against the peace, &c. The second count was for feloniously uttering the indorsement, knowing it to be forged. The third count was for forging an indorsement on a certain bill of exchange, purporting to be the indorsement of Mary M'Carthy. The fourth count was for uttering the indorsement, charged in the third count, knowing it to be forged. The fifth count was similar to the third count, but stating the indorsement to be that of " Anne Smith." The sixth count was similar to the fourth count, but stating the indorsement to be that of " Anne Smith." 326 COMMON LAW REPORTS. Curran, on behalf of the prisoner, moved to have judgment arÂÂrested, as far as related to the counts setting out the bill of exchange, and to have a verdict of acquittal directed upon the general counts, upon the ground that, according to the laws in force in Ireland, the fact, charged in the indictment, of forging, or uttering as genuine, a forged indorsement upon such a bill of exchange as was set out in the indictment and proved in evidence does not amount to a criminal offence. The indictment was grounded upon the Irish statute 39 G. 3, c. 3, which made the forging or uttering an indorsement upon " any bill of exchange " a capital felony. This statute is still in force, although the punishment has been mitigated, Bra, to transÂÂportation for life, or for seven years, or imprisonment, by 1 Vic., c. 84. The prisoner's Counsel...