The Argo

15 U.S. 287, 4 L. Ed. 241, 2 Wheat. 287, 1817 U.S. LEXIS 404
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedMarch 11, 1817
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 15 U.S. 287 (The Argo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
The Argo, 15 U.S. 287, 4 L. Ed. 241, 2 Wheat. 287, 1817 U.S. LEXIS 404 (1817).

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Marshall

delivered the opinion of- the court.

*289 On considering the 30th section of the judiciary act of 1789, the court is of opinion that the proviSion, as to taking depositions ae bene esse, does not apply to cases pending in this court. In terms, the provision refers to cases in the district and circuit courts. Testimony, by depositions, can be regu-: larly taken for this court only under a commission issuing according to its rules. A practice has hir therto prevailed tó take depositions de bene esse in causes pending here, and, as no objection has been made at the bar, it has passed sub silentio. Under such circumstances we cannot say that the United States are in default in taking depositions according to the usual practice, We shall, therefore, continue this cause to the next term, to enable the parties, if they choose, to take testimony under commission^ issued under the rules prescribed by this .court.

Cause continued. a

a

See the rule of the present term as to the mode of taking depositions, by commission, out of this court, or the circuit courts, in causes of admiralty and- maritime jurisdiction.. This rule applies both to prize and instance causes. Farther proof is admissible in the latter as well as the former. (The William Wells, 7 Cranch. 22. The¡ Clarissa Claiborne, lb. 107.) But it must not be understood that instance or revenue causes stand on the same footing with prize causes, in respect to the inadmissibility of farther proof, until they are heard on the original evidence. Farther proof m.ay be-exhibited in these cases, in the first instance, and if the court have doubts on the hearing, still farther proof may be ordered.

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

Related

State v. Thaut
2004 MT 359 (Montana Supreme Court, 2004)
In RE WHITE v. Rhay
399 P.2d 522 (Washington Supreme Court, 1965)
J. T. Lunn Co. v. Cameron
55 F. 526 (Fifth Circuit, 1893)
Stegner v. Blake
36 F. 183 (U.S. Circuit Court, 1888)
Richter v. Jerome
25 F. 679 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan, 1885)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
15 U.S. 287, 4 L. Ed. 241, 2 Wheat. 287, 1817 U.S. LEXIS 404, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-argo-scotus-1817.