FORGERY (derived through the French from Latin _fabricare_, to construct), in English law, "the fraudulent making or alteration of a writing to the prejudice of another man's right," or "the false making, or making _malo animo_, of any written instrument for the purpose of fraud or deceit." This definition, it will be seen, comprehends all fraudulent tampering with documents. "Not only the fabrication and false making of the whole of a written instrument, but a fraudulent insertion, alteration or erasure, even of a letter, in any material part of a true instrument whereby a new operation is given to it, will amount to forgery,--and this though it be afterwards executed by another person ignorant of the deceit" (Russell on _Crimes and Misdemeanours_, vol. ii.). Changing the word Dale into Sale in a lease, so that it appears to be a lease of the manor of Sale instead of the manor of Dale, is a forgery. And when a country banker's note was made payable at the house of a banker in London who failed, it was held to be forgery to alter the name of such London banker to that of another London banker with whom the country banker had subsequently made his notes payable. As to the fraud, "an intent to defraud is presumed to exist if it appears that at the time when the false document was made there was in existence a specific person, ascertained or unascertained, capable of being defrauded thereby; and this presumption is not rebutted by proof that the offender took or intended to take measures to prevent such person from being defrauded in fact, nor by the fact that he had or thought he had a right to the thing to be obtained by the false document" (Stephen's _Digest of the Criminal Law_). Thus when a man makes a false acceptance to a bill of exchange, and circulates it, intending to take it up and actually taking it up before it is presented for payment, he is guilty of forgery. Even if it be proved as a matter of fact that no person could be defrauded (as when A forges a cheque in B's name on a bank from which B had withdrawn his account), the intent to defraud will be presumed. But it would appear that if A knew that B had withdrawn his account, the absence of fraudulent intention would be inferred. A general intention to cheat the public is not the kind of fraud necessary to constitute forgery. Thus if a quack forges a diploma of the college of surgeons, in order to make people believe that he is a member of that body, he is not guilty of forgery.