Bank of Columbia v. Wright
This text of 2 F. Cas. 647 (Bank of Columbia v. Wright) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
(nem. con.) said they felt bound by the decisions of the Maryland courts upon that statute, (1797, c. 118.) The witness cannot be permitted to testify on affirmation, unless he is a member of a society who profess to be conscientiously scrupulous of taking an oath. The parties agreed to continue the cause, to give time to apply to congress, to amend the law on that subject.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2 F. Cas. 647, 3 Cranch 216, 3 D.C. 216, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-columbia-v-wright-circtddc-1827.