as a punishment inflicted for a violation of some duty enjoined by law; whereas individuals can only make it a matter of contract.1 Provisions for forfeiture are regarded with disfavor and construed with strictness - when applied to contracts, and the forfeiture relates to a matter admitting of compensation or restoration; but there is no leaning against a forfeiture intended to secure the construction of public works where compensation cannot be made for the default, nor where the forfeiture is imposed by positive law.? The fraudulent making of a false writing, which, if genuine, would be apparently of some legal efficacy.1 May be committed as to any writing, which, if genuine, would operate as the foundation of another man's liability, or the evidence of his right.2 Imports a false making (which includes every alteration of or addition to a true inwritten instrument for the purpose of fraud and deceit: with intent to deceive. 3 Where an act works a forfeiture of goods, the gov- strument) -a making malo animo, of any ernment may at once seize them. Where an absolute forfeiture is the penalty, title accrues in the government when the penal act is committed. But where the forfeiture is in the alternative (property, or its value), title does not vest till an election is made.4 Where property is seized for condemnation for forfeiture, some notification of the proceedings, beyond the mere seizure, may be necessary. Failure to pay a premium of life insurance (q. v.) at the time specified involves an absolute forfeiture, for which, unless waived by the company, relief cannot be had. See WAR. Forfeitures for common-law offenses have been generally abolished. See ATTAINDER; BOND; CHARTER, 2; CONDITION; DOWER; FELONY; LAND, Public; PARDON; PENALTY; RECOGNIZANCE; SEARCH-WARRANT. 1. A mechanical contrivance by which iron is made or manufactured from the ore. But a blacksmith's forge is not a "forge or furnace for manufacturing iron." 8 2. To make in the likeness of something else. Compare FABRICATE. Forger. A person guilty of forgery. Forgery. At common law, the fraudulent making or alteration of a writing to the prejudice of another man's right.10 "The word is taken metaphorically from the smith, who beateth upon his anvil and forgeth what fashion and shape he will." 11 In common speech, also, the altered instrument itself. 1 Maryland v. Baltimore, &c. R. Co., 3 How. 552 (1845), Taney, C. J. 2 Farnesworth v. Minnesota, &c. R. Co., 92 U. S. 68 (1875), Field, J.; 2 Story, Eq. § 1326. 3 Henderson's Spirits, 14 Wall. 56 (1871), cases; Thatcher's Spirits, 103 U. S. 682 (1880). The Mary Celeste, 2 Low. 356 (1874), cases. 5 Windsor v. McVeigh, 93 U. S. 274 (1876). New York Life Ins. Co. v. Statham, 93 U. S. 24, 30 (1876): 100 Pa. 180. As to fire insurance, see Smith v. St. Paul Fire & Mar. Ins. Co., 3 Dak. T. 80 (1882). F. forge: L. fabrica, a workshop; faber, a workman, smith: fa-, to make. * [Rogers v. Danforth, 9 N. J. E. 296 (1853). State v. McKenzie, 42 Me. 394 (1856). 104 Bl. Com. 247; L. R., 1 C. C. R. *203. 113 Coke, Inst. 169. In general terms, forgery is the false making or material alteration of, or addition to, a written instrument for the purpose of fraud and deceit. It may be - the making of a false writing purporting to be that of another; the alteration in some material particular of a genuine instrument by a change of its words or figures; the addition of some material provision to an instrument otherwise genuine; the appending of a genuine signature to an instrument for which it was not intended. The false writing may purport to be the instrument of a person or firm existing or fictitious; or of a person having the same name as the accused. As a rule, it must purport to be the writing of another than the person who made it.4 May be committed by making a note in the name of a fictitious person, in an assumed name, or in the name of a bank which does not exist. It is not necessary that the note be one which, if genuine, would be a valid and binding obligation. It is sufficient that the instrument purports to be good. To relieve from the character of forgery, the want of validity must appear upon the face of the paper itself. It is immaterial whether the forgery is committed by means of printing, stamping, an engraved plate, or by writing with a pen. 12 Bishop, Cr. L. §§ 524, 523, note. 23 Greenl. Ev. § 103, cases. 3 Rex v. Coogan, 2 East, P. C. 852-53 (1803): Commonwealth v. Ayer, 3 Cush. 152 (1849); Garner v. State, 5 Lea, 215 (1880); Statev. McKiernan, 17 Nev. 228 (1882). 4 Commonwealth v. Baldwin, 11 Gray, 198 (1858), Thomas, J. United States v. Turner, 7 Pet. *134 (1833); United States v. Mitchell, Baldw. 366 (1831); 11 F. R. 55. • Benson v. McMahon, 127 U. S. 467-71 (1888), cases. Benson, by falsely representing himself in the City of Mexico as Marcus Meyer, agent for Henry E. Abbey, under whom Adelina Patti was to appear at the Teatro Nacional, in December, 1886, sold $25,000 to $30,000 worth of tickets of admission. In February, 1888, Benson was arrested in the city of New York, and committed for his return to Mexico, in accordance with the extradition treaty of 1861, the circuit court having refused to release him upon a writ of habeas corpus. "About the only contest" made by him before the Supreme Court was that the tickets were not forgeries, mainly because the name of Mr. Abbey, who was represented as having authorized their issue and sale, was not "in writing," i. e., made in script, by the use of a pen. Ib. 464-65.