Langlois

The defendants were found guilty of the crime of forgery and appeal to- this court from the order denying their motion for a new trial and the judgment of the court pronounced upon the verdict, finding them guilty of the offense charged in the information.

Two reasons are assigned for the reversal of the judgment and order above named; first, that the testimony is insufficient to sustain the verdict; secondly, that the court refused to give certain instructions asked for by defendants. The testimony shows that the defendants' passed the checks referred to in the information. The only question was whether the signature thereto was genuine or forged; and if forged, were the defendants responsible therefor. The defendant E. H. Langlois, during the time covered by the passing of the check, was the bookkeeper for the Eng Construction Company, and in such capacity was accustomed to make out cheeks for the payment of bills against the company, which checks were always signed by the superintendent of the company named J: W. Keate. The checks passed by the defendants, and especially the one in controversy in this action, appear to have been drawn in favor of one James Wise in payment of a…