Case ID: f-cas_28/html/0520-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "TEDS COURT", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Case No. 16,661.
    UNITED STATES v. WELLS.
    [2 Cranch, C. C. 43.] 
    
    Circuit Court, District of Columbia.
    June Term, 1812.
    Gaming—Indictment fob Cheating—“Money.”
    Bank notes are not money [within the meaning of an indictment charging defendant with cheating another of his “money” at cards].
    
      [Cited in U. S. v. Holly, Case No. 15,381.]
    Indictment for cheating one Hollingshead •of 80 dollars of his money at cards, (faro.) The evidence was that banknotes were won. Verdict, guilty. Motion for a néw trial.
    C, Lee and Mr. Morsel!, for defendant,
    contended that banknotes are not money, and cited Grigby v. Oakes, 2 Bos. & P. 526; U. S. v. Morgan [Case No. 15,808], in this court; Bast, Crown Law, 597-599.
    Mr. Jones, contra,
    cited Miller v. Race, 1 Burrows, 457; Rumball v. Murray, 3 Term R. 298; Wright v. Reed. Id. 554; Cousins v. Thompson, 6 Term R. 335.
   TEDS COURT

(nem. con.) was of opinion, that on- an indictment, evidence of banknotes is no evidence of money. No case has been shown in which it has been admitted. In the cases cited the question was what was the general understanding of the word in common acceptation; but in an indictment the words are to be construed according to their strict legal meaning.