forging such notes, these facts are prima facie evidence of his having forged the note described in the indictment. Spencer v. Com., 2 Leigh, 751. And in Perkins v. Com., 7 Gratt. 655–56, for the forgery of a negotiable note, it was said by Lomax, J. in delivering opinion of the Court, "It is abundantly proved that the note was forged; and that the note so forged was in the possession of the accused; and that he was seeking to utter it, and to derive benefit from it. When the forgery was detected, he offered no explanation whatsoever in regard to the paper-how or when it came to his hands-nor of any of the circumstances connected with the paper, or his possession of it. He made no attempt to offer any such explanation. By whom the forgery of the paper was committed, whether by the accused or some other person, was a question of fact for the jury to decide upon, after weighing all the proofs and circumstances of the case. It was so held by Story, J. in United States v. Britton, 2 Mason's R. 464; and seems to have been held in Spencer's case, 2 Leigh 751. The rule of evidence in such cases was laid down in the Supreme Court of North Carolina, in the case of The State v. Britt, 3 Dev. R. 122; and in the case of The State v. Morgan, 2 Dev. & Batt. 348. This case does not require the court to decide what is the degree of proof, or the character of the proof, as being presumptive or prima facie, which is furnished against the accused as the forger, by the mere circumstances that the instrument was forged and that he was endeavoring to utter or to use it for his own benefit. These circumstances it was the province of the jury to weigh, as important proofs against him; and to combine them in their consideration of the case, with the circumstances of the forged indorsement, and the total omission, on his part, to offer any exculpatory explanation whatsoever."

An indictment which charges that a prisoner did falsely make, forge and counterfeit, and did cause and procure to be falsely made, forged and counterfeited, and did willingly act and assist in the said false making, forging and counterfeiting, is sufficient, although all of these charges are contained in a single count; the words of the statute (1 Rev. Code of 1819, ch. 154, § 1,) being pursued in describing the offence. Rasnick v. Com., 2 Va. Cas. 356; Huffman v. Com., 6 Rand. 685. It cannot properly be objected to such a count, that it confounds principal and accessorial guilt. The “causing and procuring," which is charged, is causing and procuring the forgery to be committed by some other person in the presence of the prisoner, which renders him a principal felon in the second degree. So also, when the count charges the prisoner with "aiding and assisting" in the forgery, it contemplates his presence, and therefore charged him as principal. S. C., 6 Rand. 685.

A prisoner is committed for examination, is examined, and remanded by the examining court for trial, for "feloniously using and employing as true, for his own benefit, a certain counterfeit note, well knowing the same to be counterfeit." An indictment for forging the note is not warranted by the examination, and must be quashed. age v. Com., 9 Leigh, 683.

A prisoner is committed for examination, is examined, and remanded by

the examining court for trial, for felony in forging and uttering a promissory note purporting to be drawn by A. D., no intention to defraud A. D. or any other person being charged. The examination is sufficient, and well warrants an indictment for forging and uttering the note with intention to defraud A. D. Bogart v. Com., 10 Leigh 693.

A person examined in county court on a charge of forging an order, and committed by that court for trial in the circuit court for the forgery only, cannot be tried there for uttering and publishing the order. Therefore, if the indictment against the prisoner contains counts for the forgery and counts for uttering and publishing, the circuit court ought to quash these latter counts. Mowbray v. Com., 11 Leigh 643.

§ 1. In a criminal case against an Indian or a person of Indian descent, the proceedings shall be as against a white person. (Acts 1847-8, p. 124, ch. 11, § 37. 1866–7, p. 942, § 1.

§ 2. In a criminal case, a summons for a witness may be issued by the attorney for the Commonwealth. The twenty-first, twenty-second, twenty-third, twenty-fourth and twenty-fifth sections of chapter one hundred and seventy

1 If the attendance of a witness be desired before a grand jury, the summons for the witness may be issued by the attorney for the Commonwealth. Acts 1855-6, ch, 39, p. 35; 2 Mat. Dig. p. 52, § 20.

six2 shall, in other respects, apply to a criminal as well as a civil case, except that a witness in a criminal case shall be obliged to attend, and may be proceeded against for failing so to do, although there may not previously have been any payment, or tender to him, of any thing for attendance, mileage or tolls. (1 R. C. p. 608, § 29; Acts 1847-8, p. 152-3, § 46, 47. 1866-7, p. 942, § 2.)

Of Recognizances.

§ 3. A court or judge, letting any person to bail, shall require a recognizance to be given.'

§ 4. Recognizances in criminal cases shall be payable to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Every recognizance, under any chapter of this title, shall be in such sum as the court or officer requiring it may direct. If it be to answer for a misdemeanor, or if required of a witness, it shall be with or without surety, as the court or officer may direct; but in all other cases, shall be with surety deemed sufficient by the court or officer taking it. The condition, when it is taken of a person charged with a criminal offence, shall be, that he appear before the court, judge or justice before whom the proceeding on such charge will be, at such time as may be prescribed by the court or officer taking it, to

2 See C. V. ch. 176, § 20 to 24 inclusive; also to 2 Mat. Dig. ch. 7, § 20 to 24 inclusive, p. 52-54, for the section referred to in the second section of this chapter.

3 In all cases in which recognizances at the suit of the Commonwealth may have been, or shall hereafter be entered into, it shall be the duty of the clerk of the court in which or in the clerk's office of which any recognizance may be filed, to deliver to the bail, on his applying therefor, a bail piece, in substance as follows, viz: "A B, of the county (or corporation) ofis delivered to bail unto CD, of the county (or corporation) of at the suit of the Commonwealth. Given under my hand this Acts 1852, ch. 93, p. 77, § 1.

day of

in the year

4 The title here referred to, (title 55 of the Code of 1850,) embraces the following chapters in this work, viz: ch, 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 10, 16, 17, 22, 24, 25, 26,

answer for the offence with which such person is charged; and when it is taken of a witness in a case against any such person, shali be, that he so appear to give evidence on such charge; and in either case shall be, that the person or witness shall not depart thence without the leave of said court, judge or justice; when taken for any other purpose, than to appear so to answer or give evidence, it shall be with condition, that the person of whom it is taken shall keep the peace and be of good behavior for such time, not exceeding one year, as the court or officer requiring it may direct; and if such court or officer direct, it may, when taken of a person so charged, be with condition for so keeping the peace and being of good behavior, in addition to the other condition of his recognizance. (Acts 1842-3,

p. 22, ch. 18. 1866-7, p. 942, § 4.)

§ 5. A recognizance which would be taken of a person, but for his or her being insane, or a married woman or minor, may be taken of another person, and without further surety, if such other person be deemed sufficient. (Acts 1834-5, p. 45, ch. 63; 1847–8, p. 132, § 25; p.136, § 9; p. 137, § 4. 1866-7, p. 942, § 5.)

§ 6. A person not giving, and for whom no other person gives a recognizance required, shall be committed to jail. He shall be discharged therefrom when such recognizance is given, before the court or a conservator of the peace; or if it be to appear and give evidence, when such evidence is given; or if it be to keep the peace and be of good behavior, when the period for which it was required has elapsed; or in any case, when the discharge of such person is directed, by the court in whose jail he is. (Acts 1847-8, p. 128, § 13; p. 132, § 26; 1866-7, p. 943, § 6.)

§ 7. A person taking a recognizance, out of court, shall

* An infant prisoner being admitted to bail, his sureties were required to enter into the recognizance of bail, without his joining therein himself. Semmes' case, 11 Leigh 665.