Odger's English Common Law

WHAT IS A DOCUMENT. 389
Under the present law, then, it is a crime to forge any
"document." But the Act of 1913 does not contain any
express definition of the word "document," though most
documents which are at all likely to he forged are enumerated
in it. 1
The phrase " public document " is also used and not
defined. 2
It is no longer necessary that it should on the face of it
purport to convey some legal consequence, or that it is good
and valid for the purpose for which it was created. It is
sufficient " even if the document when forged is incomplete,
or is not or does not purport to be such a document as would
be binding or sufficient in law." 3
In 1896 the case of R. v. Riley 4 evoked considerable discussion as to
whether a telegram was a document which could be forged. In that case
the prisoner, who was a clerk in the head post office at Manchester,
heard that 11 horse named " Lord of Dale
:
' had
won the Newcastle
Handicap. He thereupon wrote and sent to a bookmaker a telegram which
purported to have been handed in at a branch post office in Manchester
before the race had been run. This telegram offered a bet on the horse,
which the bookmaker accepted and ultimately paid. In reality the telegram
was not handed in at the branch office, but was despatched by the
prisoner from the head office after the race had been run. It was held that
this telegram form was an instrument within the meaning of section 38 of
the Forgery Act, 1801, and that the prisoner was rightly convicted.
Merely writing down a lie is not forgery ; for iustauce,
fraudulently making a false entry in a book of account is not
forgery, nor is the fraudulent imitation of a trade mark. 5
It is not enough that the document tells a lie, " it must tell
a lie about itself." It need not exactly resemble the instrument
it pretends to be ; it is sufficient if it is capable of
deceiving persons using ordinary observation according to
their means of knowledge. But it is forgery either to make
a false document or fraudulently to alter a genuine document
in some material part.
A man can be guilty of forgery by writing even his own name. For
1 But it is still doubtful whether a picture is or is not a document within the
meaning of the Act. „ DDm - .
* See the definition given by Lord Blackburn, in Sturla v. ireccia, (1880), 6 App.
Cas. at p. 643.
8 S. 1 (3) (b). The case of R. v. Harper (1881), 7 Q. B. D. 78, is therefore no
longer law.
* [1896] 1 Q. B. 309.
« But see the provisions of the Merchandise Marks Act, referred to ante, p. 374