UNITKD STATES V. YATES. 863- �It was punishaMe as a cheat at common law, but not other- wise. 1 EusS. on Crimes, 76. �The statute (16 Geo. II, c. 28) made it a statutory offence to utter or tender in payment counterfeit coin in gold or eilver, aud this statute, after reciting that "whereas the uttering of false liaoney, knowing it to be false, is a crime fre- quently committed ail over the kingdom, and the offenders therein are not deterred by reason that it is only a misde- meanor and the punishment often but small," provides that the offender, for the first offence, shall suffer six months' im- prisonment and give sureties for good behavior during six. months; that upon conviction a second time fora like offence the offender shall suffer two years' imprisonment and give sureties for good behavior during two years; and that apon& third conviction for a like offence the offender shall be deemed a felon. The provisions of this statute, tak«n in connection •with the prier condition of the law upon this subject in Eng- land, are sufficient to show that at the time of the adoption of the fif th amendment the act of passing counterfeit coin was not, by the laws of England, included among infamous crimes.^ Jndging from the law of England as it was understood to be at the time of the adoption of the fifth amendment, the con- clusion wonld therefore be that the act of passing counterfeit coin was not intended to be included among infamous crimes within the meaning of the fifth amendment. The same con~ clusion is reached by applying the principles of the common law to the act here charged against the defendant. The rulfr of the common law by which to determine whether an act was infamous or not is given in V. S. v. Block, 4 Saw^ 214, where it is said that at common law a crime involving a charge of falsehood, must, to be infamous, not only involve a falsehood of such a nature and purpose as makes it prob- able that the party committing it is devoid of truth and insensible to the obligation of an oath, but the falsehood must be calculated to injuriously affect the public adminis- tration of justice. Tried by this test, the act of passing coun- terfeit coin with intent to defraud is, manifestly, not infamous. �The rule of the common law, as above stated, seems to b& ��� �
