About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Cornett v. Williams U.S. 226 (1874)

handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0477 and id is 1 raw text is: Syllabus. to amend their pleadings, and if need be to take further proofs. Error was also committed by the Circuit Court in affirming the decree of the District Court, as it is plain it should have been reversed. For these reasons the decree of the Circuit Court is in all thiings REVERSED, and the cause remanded for further proceedings IN CONFORMITY TO THIS OPINION. CORNETT V. WILLIAMS. 1. Under the act of July 2d, 1864, providing that in civil actions in courts of the United States there shall- be no exclusion of any witness, 1 be- cause he is a party to or interested in the issue tried ; witnesses may, other things allowing, testify (without any order of court) by deposi- tion. And if not satisfied with a deposition which they have given, have a right, without order of court, to give a second one. 2. What evidence so far tended to prove, on the part of a person who, dur- ing the late rebellion, removed his slaves from loyal parts of the country to parts in rebellion, a purpose to sell them in these last, and justified a charge on an assumption of possibility, that the jury might find the purpose to have existed. This matter passed upon. 3. Whei, under the what is known in Texas as its 1 Sequestration Act, a person has brought suit to recover land, and the marshal, in pursuance of the writ of sequestration, takes possession of the land, it is in the cus- tody of the law. But when replevied (as the said act allows it to be), it passes from the possession of the law into the possession of the party re- plevying. 4. The rule established by this court as to the introduction of secondary evidence-that it must'be the best which the party has it in his power to produce-is to be so applied as to promote the ends of justice and guard against frauds, surprise, and imposition. The courthas not gone to the length of the English adjudications, that there are no degrees in second.ary evidence. Hence, where the records of a court were all burnt 'during the rebellion, whatappeared to be a copy of an officially certified copy was held properly received; the certified copy, if any existed, not being in the party's custody or plain control, and there being no positive evidence that it existed, though there was evidence tending to showi that it did. There is nothing in the act of Congress of M1arch 3d, 1871 (16 Stat. at Large, 474), providing for putting in a permanent form proof of the contents of judicial records, nor in the statute of .Texas of 11th 226 CORNETT V. WILLIAMS. [Sup. Ct.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most