
    Commonwealth versus Dexter Ward.
    An indictment for forging a promissory note need not allege the endorsement ol the note, though it be forged. It is no part of the note.
    The defendant was indicted at the last November term, in this county, for forging and uttering as true a promissory note, purporting to be the note of one Jonathan Ellis, payable to John Flanders, or order. Upon not guilty pleaded, he was tried before Parker, J., and convicted. The note produced on the trial appeared to be endorsed by Flanders, and, because the endorsement was not alleged in the indictment, G. Blake, of counsel for the defendant, objected to its going in evidence. His objection being overruled by the judge, he moves at this time for a new trial on the same ground.
    
      The Solicitor-General, Davis,
    
    said, the reason that the endorsement was not set forth was that the government officers | * 398 ] *did not know it to be forged. It might be the genuine signature of Flanders.
    
    
      Chief Justice. The endorsement is no part of the note, but an act presumed to be done after the note is completed. It need not be set out in the indictmént, if forged.
   The Court

unanimously overruled the motion. 
      
       Vide Commonwealth vs. Ross, ante, 373. — Rex vs. Testick, 1 East, 191.— Stark. Crim. Pl. 103, 104, 2d ed.—2 Russ. on Cr. 359, 360, 2d Lond. ed.
     