United States v. Dodge

25 F. Cas. 881, 2 Gall. 313
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts·Decided October 15, 1814·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We cannot receive any collateral evidence as to the offence, but if the respondent, by his affidavit, and answers on oath to interrogatories proposed by the district attorney, discharges himself of the contempt, no further proceedings can be had against him on the attachment. If, from any collateral evidence, it should appear, that there is reason to believe the respondent has perjured himself, we will recognise him to answer, at the next term of the court, to such matters as may be found against him. See, as to con-tempts and practice thereon, Vin. Abr. “Con-tempts.’’ A, B; Prac. Reg. 99, 100; Gilb. Com. PI. 20, 21; 12 Mod. 511; Mod. Cas. 73; Com. Dig. “Chancery,” D, 3;' Salk. 321; 4 Bl. Comm. 283; Rex v. Horsley, 5 Term R. 362; 3 Hawk. P. C. bk. 2, c. 22, §§ 1, 32-34; 1 W. Bl. 640; Wyatt’s Reg. 138; 2 Burrows, 796: Doug. 516; Bac. Abr. “Attachment,” B.

The respondent was discharged.

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

United States v. Dodge, 25 F. Cas. 881, 2 Gall. 313 (circtdma 1814).

25 F. Cas. 881 (United States v. Dodge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Boyd v. Glucklich
116 F. 131 (Eighth Circuit, 1902)
In re Purvine
96 F. 192 (Fifth Circuit, 1899)
United States v. Anonymous
21 F. 761 (U.S. Circuit Court, 1884)
In re May
1 F. 737 (E.D. Michigan, 1880)
Bates's Case
55 N.H. 325 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1875)
State v. Matthews
37 N.H. 450 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1859)