FORGERY
136
FORGERT
tory of the Popes", tr. V, 351). Again the sub-
datarius, Francesco Canonici, called Mascabruno, was
condemned to death on 5 April, 1652, for many for-
geries discovered only on the eve of his elevation to
the cardinalate.
Canon law deals mainly with the attempt to put forgeries to a specific use. It connects forgery and the use of forged documents, on the presumption that he who would make use of such documents must be either the author or instigator of the forgery. In canon law, forgery consists not only in the fabrication or substitution of an entirely false document, "as when a false bulla, or seal, is affixed to a false letter" (Licet V, " De crimine falsi"), but even by partial sub- stitution, or by any alteration affecting the sense and bearing of an authentic document or any substantial point, such as names, dates, signature, seal, favour granted, by erasure, by scratching out or by writing one word over another, and the like. The classical and oft-commented text on this matter is the chapter Licet v, " De crimine falsi" in which Innocent III (1198) points out to the bishop and chapter of Milan nine species of forgery which had come under his notice. This famous instruction was given in order to enable his correspondents to guard against future fraud. Following his teaching the gloss on this chap- ter enumerates among the six points a judge should examine into in order to discover a forgery:
Forma, stylus, filum, membrana, litura, sigillum. Haec sex falsata dant scripturam valere pusillura.
In other words a document is suspect, ( 1) If its out^ ward appearance differs greatly from the usual ap- pearance of such documents. (2) If the style varies from the usual manner of the Curia. Chapter iv, " De crimine falsi ' ' gives us an example of this : Inno- cent III declares a Bull false wherein the pope ad- dresses a bishop as "Dear Son" and not as "Vener- able Brother", or in which any other person than a bishop is styled " Venerable Brother ' ' instead of "Dear Son", or in which the plural vos is used to ad- dress a single individual. (3) If the thread which ties the leaden seal to the Bull is broken. (4) If the parch- ment bears traces of a doubtful origin (just as we dis- tinguish the water-marks and letter-heads of modern documents). (5) If there are any erasures, or words scratched out. (6) If the seal is not intact, or is not clearly defined. If a judge discovers an evident for- gery he ought to repudiate the document and punish the guilty party; but in case he considers it merely doubtful he ouglit to make inquiries at the office of the Roman Curia which is supposed to have issued it.
Substitution of false documents and tampering with genuine ones was quite a trade in the Middle Ages. In the chapter Dura vi, "De crimine falsi", written in 1 198, (pars decisa). Innocent III relates that he had discovered and imprisoned forgers who had prepared a number of false Bulls, bearing forged signatures either of his pretlecessor or of himself. To obviate abuses, he orders uniler pain of excommunication or suspension that pontifical Bulls be received only from the hands of the pope or of the officials charged to deliver them. He orders bishops to investigate sus- picious letters, and to make known, to all those having forged letters, that they are boimd to destroy them, or to hand them over within twenty days, imder pain of excommunication. The same pope legislated severely against forgery and the use of forged docu- ments. In the chapter Ad falsariorum, vii, " De crim- ine falsi", written in 1201, forgers of Apostolic Let- ters, whether the actual criminals or their aiders and abetters, are alike excommunicated, and if clerics, are ordered to be degraded and given over to the secular arm.
Whoever makes use of Apostolic Letters is invited to assure himself of their authenticity, since to use forged letters is punished in the case of clerics by privation of lienefice and rank, and in the case of lay-
men by excommunication. The excommunication
threatened by Innocent III, and extended to the for-
gery of supplicas or pontifical dispensations, was in-
corporated in the Bull "In Coena Domini" (no. 6),
and passed thence with some modifications into the
constitution " Apostolicae Sedis," where it is number 9
among the excommunications latce sententice specially
reserved to the pope. It affects " all falsification of
Apostolic Letters, even in the form of Briefs, and sup-
plicas concerning favours sought ordispensations asked
for, which have been signed by the Sovereign Pontiff,
or the vice-chancellors of the Roman Church or their
deputies, or by order of the pope ' ', also all those who
falsely publish Apostolic Letters, even those in the
form of Brief; lastly, all those who falsely sign these
documents with the name of the Sovereign Pontiff,
the vice-chancellor or their deputies. The documents
in question here are of two sorts: (a) Apostolic Letters,
in which the pope himself speaks, whether they are in
the form of Bulls or Briefs (q. v.) ; (b) Supplicas or re-
quests addressed to the pope to obtain a favour, and
to which, in proof that the request is granted, the
pope or the vice-chancellor or some other official at-
taches his signature. It is from these supplicas thus
signed that the official document conveying the con-
cession is drawn up. Consecjuently rescripts of the
Roman Congregations and of other offices, which are
not signed by the pope or by his order, do not come
under this heading.
The acts of falsification herein punished by excom- munication are fewer than formerly. In the first place, the principal crime is the only one dealt with; the aiders and abettors of the forgery are not men- tioned. In the next place, by a strict interpretation, allowable in penal matters but certainly opposed to the spirit of the Decretals of Innocent III, recent canonists exempt from the ipso facto censure forgers of entire Apostolic Letters, and bring under it only those who seriously alter authentic documents. It is cer- tain, in any case, that the word jahricantes of the Bull "In Coena Domini" becomes publicantes in the Con- stitution "Apostolic^ Sedis". There are therefore three acts contemplated by the latter text; the falsifi- cation, in the strict sense of the word, of Apostolic Letters and supplicas; the publication of false Apos- tolic Letters; the forging of signatures to supplicas. The "publication" which incurs this censure is not the material divulgation of a document, but presup- poses that such document is offered as, and affirmed to be, authentic. Supplicas with forged signatures it would be useless to publish since they cannot take the place of the official document conveying the con- cession; but the officials issuing Apostolic Letters on the strength of such signed supplicas would have been misled by the false signature. It must be remem- bered that all other forms of forgery which escape the ipso facto excommunication are subject to penalties and censures " ferendce sententiw" according to the gravity of the case.
To have their full official weight before a tribunal, public documents must be presented either in the original, or in copies certified by some public officer. Hence the note of falsification does not attach to re- productions devoid of all guarantee of authenticity; nevertheless such reproductions are sometimes seri- ously criminal because of the perverse intention of their authors. Leitner ("Pra*!. Jur. Can." lib. V, tit. XX, in a note) gives two examples of fraudulent repro- ductions of this nature. Frederick II of Prussia forged a Brief of Clement XIII, and dated it 30 January, 1759, by which the pope was made to send his con- gratulations anil a blessed sword to the Austrian Mar- shal Daun, after the battle of Hoclikirch. A Bull purporting to be by Pius IX, dated 28 May, 1873, modifying the law in vigour for the election of a pope was forged, with the connivance at least, of the Prus- sian Government. Another false document, pub-
