
    Territory of Oklahoma v. Fred H. Wright et al.
    
    
      Indictment — Juror's Certificate — Forgery. A certificate issued by the clerk of a district court setting forth that a juror has attended a certain number of days and is entitled to a certain number of dollars as his pay therefor, is unauthorized, absolutely void and of no effect in law, and an indictment charging a forgery thereof fails to state facts sufficient to constitutute a public ofíense. (Territory v. Delana and Beacom followed )
    
      Appeal from the District Court of Canadian County.
    
    Prosecution for forgei-y. Indictment rendered December 22, 1894. Demurrer filed and sustained on March 6, 1895. Territory excepts and brings case here on appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion.
    Affirmed.
    
      C. A. Galbraith, Attorney General, Thomas li. Reid and A. J. Jennings, for the territory.
    
      John I. Dille and John Schmoolce, Jr., for appellees.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Scott, J.:

This is a prosecution by indictment against Fred H. Wright and Jerry O’Rourke, returned into the district court of Canadian county by the grand jury on the 22d day of December, 1894, charging the forgery of a certificate of attendance of a jui'or of the said district court, issued by the clex'k thereof. Upon arraignment on the 4th day of March, 1895, the defendants, Wright and O’Roui'ke, interposed-a demurrer to said indictment, alleging, first, that the indictment was not entitled in a court having authority to receive it; second, that it did not state the name of the court to which it was presented, and third, that the facts stated thex’ein did not constitute a public offense, axxd on the 6th day of March, 1895, said demurrer was sustained, the indictments dismissed and the defendaxxts held to await the actioxx of the xxext grand jury. The territory, feeling aggrieved at the action of the court, appeals to this coui-t and asks a reversal thereof.

This case presents the same questions as those decided by this court in the case of Territory v. John Delana and Charles W. Beacom, reported in this volume, p. 573, except that the indictment in this case alleges the forgery of another and different juror’s certificate, and upon the same reasoning and authority supporting our view of that case, the action of the lower court in this case will be affirmed.

By the Court: It is so oi'dei-ed.

Dale, C. J., having presided below, xxot sitting; all the other Justices concurring.  