Feliciana sentinel. [volume] (St. Francisville, La.) 1877-1892, 1878-03-30

certitics. If by any fraud or accident the
conIuissioncrs' returns DO fnlsified hero
is some check, and hero is fur: islled sonlo
this statement from that which the Re-
turning Board might make VIC uld lead to
inquiry and detection. The coseJefore tht'
court illustrates the raiue Of such a paper.
| The members Of tie Returning Board made a
I fraudulent return Of the persons chosen In
Veruon PARISH TO conceal their fraud they
forged and talsifed the supe,risors statement
/ cannot understand the argument that
] pronounces q nulity All official paper
| which the statute directs shall be made
and placed in the hands of public officers
| and being of no value or efficacy may be
altered, forged and f;,lsiied with irnpuni-
! ty. Tho paper would be admissible in
any contest tor office, among the candl-
dates il Vernon parish. 1t might, with
! other evidence, overthrow the certificates
of the Returning Board in favor ofa can :.
didate improperly returned or rotu rned;up-
on the forged or talsitied certificates. Nei-
ther the returns by the commissioners, nor
supervisor nor the Returning Board, arc
conclusive. The conte"tant may go back
to the ':allots Of the electors. But poll
cy has dictated that in the process OF tho
election there shall be separate and inde-
pend ndent action Of the com missioners, su.
pcrvisors and Rcturnir Board, and the
argument that denies validity or value
to tue acts of either undcrlnincs leSlsia.
tive authority End overrides ir. 1t il i'm
possible to admit that if the forgery OF
certificates y7the commissioners OF cleo
tion or the falsitication of their figures be
4 crime under the statue, or If the fAlsih-
cation or forgeryof the returns or figures
OF the Returning Board be crime, that
the forgery and Justification of the super
visors consolidated statement and report
IS harmless or innocent. They arc sepa-
rate and distinct acts i'll the course OF
proceedings, all tending to the same re
sult--the ascertainment Of the result OF
the election-all of these are under au-
thority. and each has some authority.
The statute requires thcifacts to he mall
ifested by official statements, and these
official statements are records. The fact
that they have this character establishes
that any forgery laiSihCatioi VI So""'"A
feiting would. he Il crime.
A civil cause in one of the district
courts is only prepared with tho assist
auce of a great numbi I of persons. There
are citation, petition, plea, depositions,
trial, Judgment, execution. The falslh-
cation of any one OF these authentic evil
,lences in the progress of the cauSe would
be forgery of record. Ola writ, Com
monwealth vs. Mycall, 2 Mass, 1856. or
the petition or of an indictment, Mad
Is; Hawk Pleas, chapter 20, section and
3. Of q deposition, tate VS.. kembalI, "o
Maine, 400, of a fe,1 facias, Chitty Or. L.
1O44
The court in such cases infer fraud
from the nature Of the act done.
There arc great number of eases IN
which the forgery Of papers is held to be
fraudulent, when it was quite impossible
that damage could result except IN res
pect to unwary persons. Tho forgery OF
wills for persons who have not had eX-
istcnce-the acceptance OF drafts III the
name of a fictitious or non-eNtstlnS hrm.
Regina vs.. Avery, 8 G. and r., $50; kes'-
nn vs. Rodgers, ibid,629.
Whether such papers were or how they
could he an instrument of frand was to-
be ascertained by the extrinsc circum-
stances. It is not sufficient to say
that the supervisors return was not
III, nauer that the members of tho Re
turning Board were to principally con-
slider, or that it was not tho best evil
dence. Bnt the paper was used, and the
naper was fraudulently altered and falsi-
fed that it might impose upon the pub
lie. The paper was successfully used
If this WAS used in connection with other
papers to produce fraudulent result IN
their count, and they returned upon It's
evidence and forged it for that purpose,
it makes case of forgery.
From the time of the decision III
"Wards case" (to be found in Lord Kay
monti's Reports, page 146l the rule was
established that, Mt common law, 'rrafen9s
of erery dcsc,iption-,chcther Of pnbf'e or
| ,,;yote nature, ,chether arrittcn or printed,
,rhethcr of record mnder sea-, or 6y parofe'
and whcther Invested ,ci'h LEGAL CHAR
.crE.s or not-are equally subjects Of for
rery. being equally within the definition
nna mischief of the crime. Sec Burns
Just. tit. forgery Forgery de-
fined by Savage, Ch. j., in The People
VS.. Fitch, Wcnd. Rep, 1913; I'd volume
Archibald Criminal Practice and Plead
ing, page 795 edition OF 1862
Tho question of fraudulent intent was
proper question for the jury. united
States VS. Wilcox, 4th Blatch {. {. $50.
I csnnot we'll understand tho position OF
the Court Ifyou had decided that the