
    United States v. Wells.
    Bank-notes are not money.
    Indictment for cheating one Hollingshead of 80 dollars of his money-at cards, - (Faro.) The evidence was that bank-notes were won. Verdict, guilty — motion for a new trial.
    
      Mr. C. Lee, and Mr. Morsell, for the defendant,
    contended that bank-notes are not money; and cited Grigsby v. Oakes, 2 B. & P. 436; United States v. Morgan, in ^his Court, [1 Craneb, C. C. 278;] East, Cr. Law, 597, 598, 599.
    
      Mr. Jones, contra,
    
    cited Miller v. Race, 1 Burr. 457; Rumball v. Murray, 3 T. R. 298; Wright v. Read, 3 T. R. 554; Cousins v. Thompson, 6 T. R. 335.
   The Court

(item, con.) was of opinion, that on an indictment, evidence of bank-notes is no evidence of money. No case has been shown in which it has been admitted. In the cases cited the question was what was the general understanding of the word in common acceptation; but in an indictment the words are to be construed according to their strict legal meaning.  