Baird

The defendant was indicted for the

crime of forgery, the indictment alleging that he did, on or about August 20, 1891, “ fraudulently, falsely, and feloniously” “ make and forge a certain promissory note,” bearing date June 20,1891, and which promissory note is set out in the indictment.

The defendant was convicted of the offense charged, and appeals from the judgment and an order denying his motion for a new trial.

Upon the trial the district attorney, for the purpose of showing guilty intent upon the part of the defendant, offered in evidence various other alleged forged notes, thirty-one in number, bearing different dates between May 29, 1891, and June 19, 1891, together with proof that they were uttered by the defendant during the latter month and near its close. The only evidence tending to show that these notes were forgeries consisted of proof of the extrajudicial admissions of defendant to that effect. The defendant objected to the admission in evidence of one of the notes referred to, dated May 29, 1891, upon the ground that he was under indictment for its forgery, and that the note itself was not an act “ done at or about the time of the alleged transaction in this…