Speer v. See Yup Co.

13 Cal. 73
California Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1859·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Terry, C. J. delivered the opinion of the Court

Field, J. concurring.

The only error assigned in this cause is the exclusion of a Chinese witness offered by plaintiff.

Section 394, of the Civil Practice Act, provides “ that no Indian or Negro shall be allowed to testify as a witness in any action in which white person is a party;” and.in the People v. Hall, (4 Cal. 339,) it was held that the term “ Indian,” as used in the statute, included the Chinese or Mongolian race; and upon the authority of that decision, the judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Speer v. See Yup Co., 13 Cal. 73 (Cal. 1859).

13 Cal. 73 (Speer v. See Yup Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pumphrey v. State
122 N.W. 19 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1909)
Bierhaus v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
34 N.E. 581 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1893)