Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

The London Packet

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1817
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/78769

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
15 U.S. 371
Subject
MRTP

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

MRTP

Key legal issue
MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

The London Packet

Excerpt

.....was the nature of the evidence which existed, to clear away any former doubts in the cause. mr. chief justice marshall. the court is of opinion that the affidavit transmitted from the circuit court may be now read. but as to the new proof now offered by the claimant, it is the practice of this court to hear the cause in the first instance upon the evidence transmitted from the circuit court, and to decide upon that evidence whether it is proper to allow further proof. the new proof cannot, therefore, be now read; but as the opposite party wishes it, the counsel may state the nature of the proof, though not the contents thereof in detail. if the page 15 u. s. 373 case shall ultimately appear entitled to further proof, an order will be made for that purpose. farther proof was ordered in the cause. mr. d. b. ogden, for the claimant, offered to read affidavits, as further proof, which had not been taken under a commission. but they were rejected by the court, the cause was continued to the next term, and the further proof ordered to be taken under a commission, according to the rule of court of the present term. cause continued.

Full Judgment

The London Packet - 15 U.S. 371 (1817)
U.S. Supreme Court The London Packet, 15 U.S. 371 (1817)

The London Packet

15 U.S. 371

SYLLABUS

It is the practice of this Court in prize causes to hear the cause; in the first instance upon the evidence transmitted from the circuit court and to decide upon that evidence whether it is proper to allow further proof.

Affidavits to be used as further proof in causes of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction in this Court must be taken by a commission.

Page 15 U. S. 371

In the argument of this cause, Mr. Winder, for the claimant, stated that there was an affidavit annexed to the record which was taken under the order for further proof in the court below, but which, not arriving until after the decree of condemnation was pronounced, was ordered by the circuit court, to be transmitted de bene esse for the consideration of this Court. He further stated that he had additional proofs, taken since that time, to be used in this Court, and he asked whether he should now be permitted to read these proofs in order to show what was the nature of the evidence which existed, to clear away any former doubts in the cause.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE MARSHALL.

The Court is of opinion that the affidavit transmitted from the circuit court may be now read. But as to the new proof now offered by the claimant, it is the practice of this Court to hear the cause in the first instance upon the evidence transmitted from the circuit court, and to decide upon that evidence whether it is proper to allow further proof. The new proof cannot, therefore, be now read; but as the opposite party wishes it, the counsel may state the nature of the proof, though not the contents thereof in detail. If the

Page 15 U. S. 373

case shall ultimately appear entitled to further proof, an order will be made for that purpose.

Farther proof was ordered in the cause.

Mr. D. B. Ogden, for the claimant, offered to read affidavits, as further proof, which had not been taken under a commission. But they were rejected by the Court, the cause was continued to the next term, and the further proof ordered to be taken under a commission, according to the rule of Court of the present term.

Cause continued.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial