a report, the indictment containing the words "whereby, by means of a false entry therein by him made." Id.

In alleging the willful misapplication of the funds of a bank by its president and agent, it is not necessary to say that the funds charged to have been misapplied had previously come into the defendant's possession as president and agent (United States v. Northway, 120 U. S. 327, 30 L. ed. 664); nor in charging a president with aiding and abetting F., the cashier of the bank, with the misapplication of its funds, to allege that the defendant then and there knew that said F. was such cashier. Id.

The words "willfully misapplies" have not, like the word " embezzles," a settled technical meaning, and must, therefore, be supplemented by further averments showing how the misappropriation was made, and that it was unlawful. Batchelor v. United States, 156 U. S. 426, 429, 39 L. ed. 478; Graves v. United States, 165 U. S. 323, 41 L. ed. 732; Agnew v. United States, Id. 36, 41 L. ed. 624. The property taken must be clearly specified, "funds" being too indefinite. United States v. Greve, 65 F. R. 488; see United States v. Jewett, 84 Id. 142.

An indictment following this section, charging that the accused was an officer; that, with intent to deceive, he made at a stated time and place a false entry on the books of the bank, which it describes, is sufficient, though it does not aver that the entry was made in the bank's due course of business and in one of its accounts, nor that interest was due from the person named in the entry, nor that an examining agent had then been appointed. United States v. Britton, 107 U. S. 655, 27 L. ed. 520. The death of the principal before indictment is not an obstacle to the prosecution and punishment of one charged with aiding and abetting. Gallot v. United States, 87 F. R. 446. Where an officer is charged with several offenses in making at different times false entries, the offenses may be charged in different counts of one indictment. United States v. Berry, 96 F. R. 842. If the offense is well described in any language, it seems sufficient; otherwise, if not well described, although the words of the statute are used. If the substance is there, the form is made

immaterial by § 1024. United States v. McClure, 107 F. R. 268. An averment in an indictment that certain money is lawful, legaltender money of the United States, is surplusage, and need not be proved. Porter v. United States, 91 F. R. 494. Upon an indictment charging an officer with the willful misapplication of certain money, etc., by using the same to discount the unsecured note of a person known to be insolvent, such note is not the subject-matter of the offense and need not be set out in haec verba. Rieger v. United States, 107 F. R. 916, 920.

An indictment charging the defendant as cashier with having made a false entry in a report with intent to deceive an officer of the association, need not describe the report with technical accuracy, and an averment of the date when made, and that it was a report made to the Comptroller of the Currency showing the resources and liabilities of the bank on a certain date, is sufficient to authorize the presumption that it was a report made by the association under § 5211. Harper v. United States, 170 F. R. 385. An indictment charging officers of a national bank with making a false entry in a report made by them "with intent to deceive an agent appointed to examine the affairs of the association, to wit, the Comptroller of the Currency of the United States," does not charge an offense under this section; and a general averment that a false entry charged to have been made by them in a report to the comptroller was made "with intent to injure and defraud the association" is also insufficient. United States v. Corbett, 162 F. R. 687. As to various points as to indictments, see United States v. Breese, 173 F. R. 402, 172 Id. 761, 765, 131 Id. 915; Geiger v. United States, 162 F. R. 844; United States v. Morse, 161 Id. 429, 164 Id. 1023, 168 Id. 49, 169 Id. 1021, 174 Id. 539; Harvey v. United States, 159 Id. 419; United States v. Smith, 152 Id. 542; Clement v. United States, 149 Id. 305; United States v. Martindale, 146 Id. 280, 289; United States v. Eastman, 132 Id. 551; Scott v. United States, 130 Id. 429.

A charge under § 5440 of conspiracy between officers of a national bank to embezzle, etc., its funds in violation of § 5209 is supported by evidence that, acting together with a common understanding,

the defendants largely overdrew their respective accounts with the bank, to such an extent that they were wholly unable to meet the same, as they must have known, and that, to cover up such overdrafts, by a common understanding, they placed worthless notes in the bank with the intent and result of injuring and defrauding the bank and impairing its capital. United States v. Breese, 173 F. R. 402, 131 Id. 915. See further, United States v. Dickinson, 213 U. S. 92, 95, 53 L. ed. 711; Ex parte Bain, 121 Id. 2, 30 L. ed. 850; Westbrook v. New York Assoc., 58 N. Y. App. Div. 562; Morse v. United States, 174 F. R. 539.

Failing to make report of dividends
Failing to make half-yearly return of
circulation

R. S., s. 5213.

R. S., s. 5215.

Jackson v. United States, 20 Ct. Cl. 298; 20 A. G. Op. 695, 704; 17 Id. 540; 16 Id. 173.

United States v. Ellsworth, 101 U. S. 170, 25 L. ed. 862.

The power given by § 3469 to the Secretary of the Treasury to compromise "any claim in favor of the United States" enables the Secretary to remit a forfeiture after judgment, though in suits brought under §§ 3490-3493 the prosecutor is liable for costs. 18 A. G. Op. 72. Such suit is essentially criminal; the defendant may show good character, and the government case must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Shapleigh, 54 F. R. 126; United States v. Griswold, 24 Id. 361. A paymaster's clerk in the army or in the navy is a person "in the military or naval forces of the United States." United States v. Bogart, 3 Ben. 257. The word "person" is restricted to individuals. United States v. Kansas Pac. R. Co., 4 Cent. L. J. 174.

TITLE XXXII

PUBLIC CONTRACTS

Officer making contract failing to make

return thereof

. R. S., s. 3746.

P. H. McLaughlin v. United States, 37 Ct. Cl. 150; St. Louis Hay Co. v. United States, Id. 281.

Employees of United States having interest

in Indian contracts, etc.

TITLE XXXIV

22 June, 1874, s. 10;

18 Stat. 177.

"The port of departure" is not the last port at which the vessel stops while bound for the United States, but the port from which she cleared. The Dago, 61 F. R. 986.

Violating safe-conduct or assaulting pub-
lic minister

Osborn v. United States Bank, 9 Wheat.

19 June, 1906, s. 4; 34 Stat. 300.

1 Aug.,1888 25 Stat. 355.

27 March, 1890, s. 1; 26 Stat. 31.

27 March, 1890, s. 2; 26 Stat. 31.

27 March, 1890, s. 3; 26 Stat. 32.

R. S., s. 4062.

738, 6 L. ed. 204; United States v. Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. S. 32; United States v. Hand, 2 Wash. C. C. 435; United States v. Lafontaine, 4 Cranch C. C. 173; United States v. Jeffers, Id. 704. Consuls are not entitled, by the law of nations, to the immunities and privileges of public ministers; they are only exempt from the jurisdiction of State courts. Gittings v. Crawford, Taney, 1; Commonwealth v. Kosloff, 2 Wheeler C. C. 622; St. Luke's Hospital v. Barclay, 3 Blatch. 265; United States v. Ravara, 2 Dall. 297, 1 L. ed. 388; Graham v. Stucken, 4 Blatch. 50; Bixby v. Jansen, 6 Id. 315; Re Dillon, 7 Sawyer, 561; Miller v.